Lars E Fogelin

Interests

No activities entered.

Courses

Scholarly Contributions

Books

• Fogelin, L. E. (2019). An Unauthorized Companion to American Archaeological Theory.
• Fogelin, L. E. (2015). An Archaeological History of Indian Buddhism. Oxford University Press.
  More info

  Fogelin, Lars (2015) An Archaeological History of Indian Buddhism.Oxford University Press, New York.
• Fogelin, L. E. (2013).

  The Place of Veneration in Early South Asian Buddhism

  . doi:10.1093/OXFORDHB/9780199569069.013.0013
• Fogelin, L. E. (2008).

  Religion, archaeology, and the material world

  . Center for Archaeological Investigations, Southern Illinois University Carbondale.

Chapters

• Fogelin, L. E. (2013). The Place of Veneration in Buddhist Mortuary Sites. In The Oxford Handbook of the Archaeology of Death and Burial. Oxford University Press.
  More info

  In Oxford Handbook of the Archaeology of Death and Burial, edited by S. Tarlow and L. Nilsson-Stutz. Oxford University Press, Oxford.;Your Role: Sole Author;
• Fogelin, L. E. (2008). Delegitimizing Religion: The Archaeology of Religion as...Archaeology. Left Coast Press.
  More info

  ;Full Citation: Lars Fogelin (2008) Delegitimizing Religion: The Archaeology of Religion as...Archaeology. In Belief in the Past: Theoretical Approaches to the Archaeology of Religion, edited by D. Whitley and K. Hayes-Gilpin. Left Coast Press, Walnut Creek. ;
• Fogelin, L. E. (2008). Methods for the Archaeological Investigation of Religion and Ritual. Center for Archaeological Investigations.
  More info

  ;Full Citation: Lars Fogelin (2008) Methods for the Archaeological Investigation of Religion and Ritual. In Religion, Archaeology, and the Material World, edited by L. Fogelin. Center for Archaeological Investigations, Southern Illinois University, Carbondale, IL. ;
• Fogelin, L. E. (2007).

  History, Ethnography, and Essentialism:: The Archaeology of Religion and Ritual in South Asia

  . In The Archaeology of Ritual. Cotsen Institute of Archaeology Press. doi:10.2307/J.CTVDJRR7S.7

Journals/Publications

• Fogelin, L., & Fogelin, L. (2020).

  Brad H. Koldehoff & Timothy R. Pauketat (ed.). 2018. Archaeology and ancient religion in the American Midcontinent. Tuscaloosa: University of Alabama Press; 978-0-8173-1996-0 hardback £34.

  . Antiquity, 94(374), 543-545. doi:10.15184/aqy.2020.54
• Fogelin, L., & Fogelin, L. (2019).

  Archaeology and Buddhism in South Asia by Himanshu Prabha Ray (review)

  . Asian Perspectives, 58(2), 404-406. doi:10.1353/asi.2019.0022
• Fogelin, L. E., & Schiffer, M. B. (2015). Rites of Passage in the Life History of Artifacts. Cambridge Archaeology Journal.
• Fogelin, L. (2014). Material Practice and the Metamorphosis of a Sign: Early Buddhist Stupas and the Origin of Mahayana Buddhism. Asian Perspectives, 51(2), 278-310. doi:10.1353/asi.2014.0005
  More info

  From at least the third century b.c. , Buddhist ritual focused on stupas , stylized replicas of the mounds of earth in which early Buddhists interred relics of the Buddha. Beginning in the first century b.c. , Buddhist monks in western India began manipulating the physical shape of monastic stupas to make them appear taller and more massive than they actually were. Buddhist monks used these manipulations to help assert authority over the Buddhist laity. Employing theories of practice, materiality, and semiotics, I argue that physical manipulations of the shape of stupas by Buddhist monks led to the progressive detachment of the primary signs of Buddhism from their original referents. Where earlier stupas were icons and indexes of the Buddha encased within indexes of his presence, later stupas were symbols of the Buddha and Buddhist theology. This change in the material practice of Buddhism reduced stupas ’ emotional immediacy in favor of greater intellectual detachment. In the end, this shift in the meaning ascribed to stupas created the preconditions from which the Buddhist image cult and Mahayana Buddhism emerged in the first through fifth centuries a.d . The development of Mahayana Buddhism and Buddha images signified a return to iconic worship of the Buddha.
• Fogelin, L. E. (2012). Material Practice and the Metamorphosis of a Sign: Early Buddhist Stupas and the Origin of Mahayana Buddhism.
  More info

  ;Full Citation: Fogelin, Lars (in rev.) Material Practice and the Metamorphosis of a Sign: Early Buddhist Stupas and the Origin of Mahayana Buddhism. Submitted to Asian Perspectives.;Status: Submitted But Not Yet Accepted;
• Fogelin, L. E. (2011). Ignoring the Problem: Spatial Strategies for Ameliorating Social Contradictions in Early South Asian Buddhism.. Journal of Social Archaeology.
  More info

  ;Your Role: Sole author;Full Citation: Fogelin, Lars (2011) Ignoring the Problem: Spatial Strategies for Ameliorating Social Contradictions in Early South Asian Buddhism. Journal of Social Archaeology 11(2):194-211.;
• Fogelin, L. (2007).

  Inference to the Best Explanation: A Common and Effective Form of Archaeological Reasoning

  . American Antiquity, 72(4), 603-625. doi:10.2307/25470436
  More info

  Processual and postprocessual archaeologists implicitly employ the same epistemological system to evaluate the worth of different explanations: inference to the best explanation. This is good since inference to the best explanation is the most effective epistemological approach to archaeological reasoning available. Underlying the logic of inference to the best explanation is the assumption that the explanation that accounts for the most evidence is also most likely to be true. This view of explanation often reflects the practice of archaeological reasoning better than either the hypothetico-deductive method or hermeneutics. This article explores the logic of inference to the best explanation and provides clear criteria to determine what makes one explanation better than another. Explanations that are empirically broad, general, modest, conservative, simple, testable, and address many perspectives are better than explanations that are not. This article also introduces a system of understanding explanation that emphasizes the role of contrastive pairings in the construction of specific explanations. This view of explanation allows for a better understanding of when, and when not, to engage in the testing of specific explanations.
• Fogelin, L. (2007).

  The archaeology of religious ritual

  . Annual Review of Anthropology, 36(1), 55-71. doi:10.1146/annurev.anthro.36.081406.094425
  More info

  Archaeologists traditionally assumed that rituals were understood best in light of religious doctrines, beliefs, and myths. Given the material focus of archaeology, archaeologists believed that ritual was a particularly unsuitable area for archaeological inquiry. In the past 25 years, archaeologists have increasingly started to address ritual in their research. Some archaeologists with access to extensive historical or ethnohistorical sources continue to see rituals as the enactment of religious principles or myths. Other archaeologists have adopted a more practice-oriented understanding of ritual, arguing that ritual is a form of human action. In emphasizing ritual practice, archaeologists reject a clear dichotomy between religious and nonreligious action or artifacts, focusing instead on the ways that the experience of ritual and ritual symbolism promotes social orders and dominant ideologies.
• Fogelin, L. (2007). The archaeology of religious ritual. Annual Review of Anthropology, 36(1), 55-71. doi:10.1146/annurev.anthro.36.081406.094425
  More info

  Archaeologists traditionally assumed that rituals were understood best in light of religious doctrines, beliefs, and myths. Given the material focus of archaeology, archaeologists believed that ritual was a particularly unsuitable area for archaeological inquiry. In the past 25 years, archaeologists have increasingly started to address ritual in their research. Some archaeologists with access to extensive historical or ethnohistorical sources continue to see rituals as the enactment of religious principles or myths. Other archaeologists have adopted a more practice-oriented understanding of ritual, arguing that ritual is a form of human action. In emphasizing ritual practice, archaeologists reject a clear dichotomy between religious and nonreligious action or artifacts, focusing instead on the ways that the experience of ritual and ritual symbolism promotes social orders and dominant ideologies.
• Fogelin, L. (2003). Ritual and Presentation in Early Buddhist Religious Architecture. Asian Perspectives, 42(1), 129-154. doi:10.1353/asi.2003.0021
  More info

  The physical organization and layout of Buddhist reliquary mounds, stupas, provides a window into the forms of ritual practiced by Buddhists in the first few centuries B.C. through the end of the second century A.D. Specifically, the manner in which stupas were architecturally presented informs upon the differences in ritual presentation by the clergy and the laity. Attempts by the Buddhist clergy to direct worship and establish a privileged position in regard to the Buddha were resisted by the laity; in contrast, the laity attempted to preserve the egalitarian aspects of Buddhism. Traces of the laity's resistance can be identified in the architectural layouts of ritual spaces of the early Buddhists. The organization of ritual within stupa complexes also illustrates the methods used by early Buddhists to foster group cohesion within a highly individualistic religious tradition.

Presentations

• Fogelin, L. E. (2020).

  Signaling Retreat: Buddha Images and the Collapse of Indian Buddhism

  . Invited LectureStanford Archaeology Center, Stanford University, Palo Alto..
• Fogelin, L. E. (2019).

  Material Practice and the Collapse of Indian Buddhism

  2018        “Material Practice and Metamorphosis of a Sign: Early Buddhist Stupas and the Origin of Mahayana Buddhism,” Invited lecture, Imagining the Divine Conference, Jan 12, Oxford University, Oxford, UK.

  . Invited LectureCenter for Buddhist Studies, University of Arizona, Tucson..
• Fogelin, L. E. (2018, January). Material Practice and Metamorphosis of a Sign: Early Buddhist Stupas and the Origin of Mahayana Buddhism. Imagining the Divine Conference. Oxford, UK.: Oxford University.
• Fogelin, L. E. (2015, April). Discussant: Untangling the Intangible: Reconstructing Ideologies, Beliefs, and Religion in the Past. Society for American Archaeology Annual Meeting.
• Fogelin, L. E. (2015, May). What Isn't A Ritual Landscape. Invited Lecture. Toronto, CA: University of Toronto, Department of Anthropology.
• Fogelin, L. E. (2015, November). Resonance or Pablum: Applying Deloria’s Metaphysics to the Study of South Asian Archaeology. American Anthropology Association Annual Meeting.
• Fogelin, L. E. (2014, April). Hindu/Buddhist Syncretism and the Collapse of Monastic Buddhism in South Asia. 6th Annual Workshop on South Asian Archaeology. New York, NY.
• Fogelin, L. E. (2011, 2011-04-01). Prayer in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction: Tibetan Prayer Wheels and the Technologies of Authentic Ritual. Society of American Archaeologists. Sacramento, CA.
  More info

  ;Refereed: Yes;Type of Presentation: Academic Conference;
• Fogelin, L. E. (2011, 2011-10-01). The Archaeology of Material Icons: The Origin of Buddha Images in South Asia. School of Human Evolution and Social Change, ASU. Tempe, AZ.
  More info

  ;Invited: Yes;Type of Presentation: Invited/Plenary Speaker;
• Fogelin, L. E. (2010, 2010-01-01). Ignoring the Problem: Spatial Solutions for Ameliorating the Stress of Social Contradictions. School of Anthropology. University of Arizona.
  More info

  ;Type of Presentation: University;
• Fogelin, L. E. (2010, 2010-04-01). The Subject Matter of Science. Society for American Anthropology. St. Louis, MO.
  More info

  ;Type of Presentation: Academic Conference;
• Fogelin, L. E. (2009, 2009-05-01). Material Practice and the Metamorphosis of a Sign: Early Buddhist Stupas and the Origin of Buddha Images. Theoretical Archaeology Group. Stanford, CA.
  More info

  ;Type of Presentation: Academic Conference;
• Fogelin, L. E. (2009, 2009-07-01). Material Practice and the Metamorphosis of a Sign: Early Buddhist Stupas and the Origin of Buddha Images. Invited Lecture, Dept. of Anthropology. Hanover, NH.
  More info

  ;Type of Presentation: University;
• Fogelin, L. E. (2009, 2009-10-01). Ignoring the Problem: The Individual and Group in Early Buddhism. The Annual Conference on South Asia. Madison, WI.
  More info

  ;Submitted: Yes;Interdisciplinary: Yes;Type of Presentation: Academic Conference;
• Fogelin, L. E. (2008, 2008-01-01). Material Symbols in the Archaeological Study of Buddhism in South Asia. Univ. of Arizona, Dept. of Anthropology.
  More info

  ;Invited: Yes;Type of Presentation: Job Talk;

Poster Presentations

• Fogelin, L. E., & Fladd, S. (2012, 2012-04-01). Building a Hindu Temple from Buddhist Bricolage. Society of American Anthropologists. Memphis, TN.
  More info

  ;Collaborative with graduate student: Yes;Type of Presentation: Professional Organization;

Reviews

• Fogelin, L. E. (2020.

  Archaeology and Ancient Religion in the American Midcontinent, edited by Brad H. Koldehoff and Timothy R. Pauketat. 

  . Antiquity 94(374):543-545..
• Fogelin, L. E. (2019.

  Archaeology of Buddhism in South Asia, by Himanshu Prabha Ray.

  . Asian Perspectives 58(2):404-406..

Others

• Fogelin, L. E. (2008). Religion, Archaeology, and the Material World.
  More info

  ;Full Citation: Lars Fogelin, editor (2008) Religion, Archaeology, and the Material World. Center for Archaeological Investigations, Southern Illinois University, Carbondale, IL.;