This thesis explores the nature and emergence of early body ornamentation, which has long been at the forefront of the debate on modern human origins. According to most prehistorians, ornamental shell beads are unequivocal proxies for behavioural and cognitive "modernity", for they are considered the arbitrary products of symbolically-capable brains. In my dissertation, I argue against the "symbolic" dictum of reducing material signification to linguistic terms, and attributing its creation to a representational mechanism. For one, the significative meaning of material culture is not entirely arbitrary, because concepts can be founded on physical properties and affordances. Moreover, material signification is not the epiphenomenal product of innate cognitive modules, for the mind is not a computational device that processes internal representations before externalising them through behaviour. I thus suggest that these theoretical fallacies about the nature and emergence of material signification can be overcome by combining a pragmatic semiotic approach with an enactive theory of cognition. Briefly put, a pragmatic semiotic theory describes the nature of material signification by recognising that significative concepts can be founded on physical qualities and relations, whereas an enactive theory of cognition accounts for the emergence of material signification by explaining how significative concepts are brought forth via the constitutive entwinement of mind and matter. Through the synergistic fusion of these theoretical tenets, the origins of early body ornamentation can be examined from a developmental perspective that treats the generation of significative meaning as the emergent product of material engagement. In its light, the preoccupation of most evolutionary archaeologists with the notion of "modernity" appears to be inherently problematic. It is therefore ultimately proposed that the dominant symbolic interpretation of material signification need be replaced with a pragmatic and enactive theory of cognitive semiotics that is suitably geared to trace the evolution of prehistoric material signs.

This paper concerning the regional architectural term known as the Tjust Empire style analyses manor houses built in the Tjust area by the east coast of Småland in the period 1810-1860. The term Tjust Empire style was invented in 1937 by PhD. Manne Hofrén in his dissertation on architecture in Kalmar län in the period 1650-1850. The aim of the paper is firstly to determine whether there is a distinct difference between the regional Tjust Empire style in architecture and the common Swedish empire style or as its Swedish equivalent is known; the Karl Johan style. Secondly, the paper strives to analyse why and how the Empire style became so popular in the area during this period, focusing on architecture as a means to express social identity and status. My disposition is grounded in an ethnological viewpoint on architecture where culture is seen as created by and part of human existence. In order to give my analysis substance two case studies have been done of two manor houses in the area; Casimirsborg and Blekhem, in order to compare these with architecture representative of the Swedish Empire/Karl Johan style. The manor houses have been chosen partly because they represent the architectural style of the period well and partly due to them being accessible. As material concerning the construction of the two buildings, such as plans and sketches is sparse the opportunity to examine and analyse them at the spot has been invaluable. When I have been able to, I have used plans and fire insurance documents available. For a general view of the architecture during the period I have had to rely on material already written concerning the architecture of the time, the patrons, their architects and master builders. This has shown that the Tjust Empire style is in fact very closely tied to the common Swedish Empire or Karl Johan style and that it directly strives to commit to it. I have also been able to show that the the reason for the Tjust Empire style being so popular in the area in the period lies in a unique economic and social situation at the time; as well as, a relationship between the patrons and their favoured architects.