314:
524:
in that period often felt, understandably, obliged to maintain a distinct opposition. While it is certainly the case that these presentations had occurred before our views had even begun to settle down, and that they were excessively aggressive, they played an important role in the process of enquiry and reformulation. In particular, the contrasts which were set up by us and by outside scholars allowed the views of the seminar group, and the differences of viewpoint within the group, to be clarified. The opposition highlighted our own opinion but also threw the spotlight on the blind alleys down which there was a danger of straying. Our aggression resulted from the conviction that we were doing something new. This, too, was important. In the initial period there was a clear idea of what was wrong with existing approaches and there was a faith that something else could be done.
258:(1908–2009), and held to the idea that "cultural patterns need not be caused by anything outside themselves… underlying every culture was a deep structure, or essence, governed by its own laws, that people were unaware of but which ensured regularities in the cultural productions that emanate from it." At the centre of his structuralist theory, Lévi-Strauss held that "all human thought was governed by conceptual dichotomies, or bilateral oppositions, such as culture/nature, male/female, day/night, and life/death. He believed that the principle of oppositions was a universal characteristic inherent in the human brain, but that each culture was based on a unique selection of oppositions". This structuralist approach was first taken from anthropology and applied into forms of archaeology by the French archaeologist
499:. Having been influenced by the "New Geography" and the work of the processualist David Clarke, as his research progressed, he became increasingly sceptical that such models and simulations actually tested or proved anything, coming to the conclusion that a particular pattern in the archaeological record could be produced by a number of different simulated processes, and that there was no way to accurately test which of these alternatives was correct. In effect, he came to believe that even using the processual approach to understanding archaeological data, there were still many different ways that that data could be interpreted, and that therefore radically different conclusions could be put forward by different archaeologists, despite processualism's claim that using the
241:
reject the 'rational' view of 'landscape-as-a-set-of-resources' as that of our own society and one that is ideologically loaded in its own way, loaded towards ideas of commodity and exploitation found in our own society. They suggest that ancient peoples would have had different views of what was 'real' in that landscape. On the other hand, an exclusively idealist view of landscape does not work either. Postprocessualists like to stress that such an understanding of landscape was not formed in the abstract—that the way people moved around and used that landscape affected their understanding of it.
147:
bias is political in nature. Post-processualist Daniel Miller believed that the positivist approach of the processualists, in holding that only that which could be sensed, tested and predicted was valid, only sought to produce technical knowledge that facilitated the oppression of ordinary people by elites. In a similar criticism, Miller and Chris Tilley believed that by putting forward the concept that human societies were irresistibly shaped by external influences and pressures, archaeologists were tacitly accepting
548:. As such its primary influence was critical theory, as opposed to the French Marxist anthropology which had been the primary influence upon their British counterparts. Many American archaeologists had begun to recognise issues of bias within the scientific community, and within the processual movement itself which attempted to be scientific. They also began to notice elements of ethnic prejudice within archaeology, particularly in regards to
305:
436:), an archaeological alternative to processual archaeology had begun to develop during the 1970s. Some had already anticipated the theory's emergence, with the social anthropologist Edmund Leach informing the assembled archaeologists at a 1971 discussion on the topic of "The Explanation of Culture Change" held at the
597:
In their article "Processual
Archaeology and the Radical Critique" (1987), Timothy K. Earle and Robert W. Preucel examined the post-processual movement's "radical critique" of processualism, and while accepting that it had some merit and highlighted some important points, they came to the conclusion
407:
movement began to argue that women in the archaeological record had been ignored by archaeologists up until that time. According to archaeologist Sam Lucy, "The agendas of feminist archaeology and post-processualism highlighted the importance of social and political factors on supposedly 'objective'
589:
noted, "For its most severe critics, , while making a number of valid criticisms, simply developed some of the ideas and theoretical problems introduced by . To these critics it brought in a variety of approaches from other disciplines, so that the term "postprocessual," while rather neatly echoing
523:
During the early period of exploration and development of ideas, premature conference presentations and individual seminars were given by various members of the
Cambridge group in other archaeological departments in England and abroad. Individual scholars who were invited to talk to us in Cambridge
503:
it could gain objective fact from the archaeological record. As a result of this, Hodder grew increasingly critical of the processualist approach, developing an interest in how culture shaped human behaviour. He was supported in this new endeavour by many of his students, including
Matthew Spriggs.
240:
or early farming groups. This leads one to turn, for example, to optimal foraging theory and other economic models for an understanding of how people exploited the landscape 'rationally'. Postprocessualists like to argue that landscapes are always viewed in different ways by different peoples. They
163:
stated that archaeologists had no right to interpret the prehistories of other ethnic or cultural groups, and that instead they should simply provide individuals from these groups with the ability to construct their own views of the past. While Hodder's viewpoint was not universally accepted among
146:
Due to the fact that they believe archaeology to be inherently subjective, post-processualists argue that "all archaeologists... whether they overtly admit it or not", always impose their own views and biases into their interpretations of the archaeological data. In many cases, they hold that this
344:
and processual, "the individual is lost", and humans are therefore portrayed as "passive dupes who blindly follow social rules." Post-processualists instead argue that humans are free agents who in many cases act in their own interests rather than simply following societal rules, and by accepting
212:
had, by contrast, been idealists, the post-processualists argued that past societies should be interpreted through both materialist and idealist ideas. As
Johnson noted, "Many postprocessualists claim that we should reject the whole opposition between material and ideal in the first place." While
137:
rather than objective, and that what truth could be ascertained from the archaeological record was often relative to the viewpoint of the archaeologist responsible for unearthing and presenting the data. As the archaeologist
Matthew Johnson noted, "Postprocessualists suggest that we can never
34:
of archaeological interpretations. Despite having a vague series of similarities, post-processualism consists of "very diverse strands of thought coalesced into a loose cluster of traditions". Within the post-processualist movement, a wide variety of theoretical viewpoints have been embraced,
191:, undermined "archaeology's claims to be an authoritative source of knowledge about the past", thereby "encourag people to question and resist all forms of authority… This position was hailed by its supporters as democratizing archaeology and purging it… of elitist pretensions".
353:
theory, many post-processualists accepted that most human beings, while knowing and understanding the rules of their society, choose to manipulate them rather than following them obediently. In turn, by bending the societal rules, these rules eventually change.
221:) in both interpreting their world and influencing their behaviour. Examples of this can be seen in the work of Bernard Knapp, who examined how the social elite manipulated ideology to maintain their political and economic control, and of
474:, postmodernist thinking had begun to develop within archaeology. The third influence identified by Trigger was the New cultural anthropology movement within the cultural anthropological discipline, which had arisen after the collapse of
454:-inspired social anthropology that had developed in France during the 1960s and already had influenced British social anthropology." This, Trigger noted, "had its roots not in orthodox Marxism but in efforts to combine Marxism and
556:
bias in the archaeological interpretation and in the discipline as a whole, as women had been largely marginalised. The 1980s saw archaeological studies finally being published that dealt with this issue, namely through
491:(born 1948), a former processualist who had made a name for himself for his economic analysis of spatial patterns and early development of simulation studies, particularly relating to trade, markets and urbanization in
486:
Post-processual archaeology began in
Britain during the late 1970s, spearheaded by a number of British archaeologists who had become interested in aspects of French Marxist anthropology. Most prominent among these was
93:, and which had become dominant in Anglophone archaeology by the 1970s. Post-processualism was heavily critical of a key tenet of processualism, namely its assertion that archaeological interpretations could, if the
108:, while in the United Kingdom, they remain largely thought of as separate and opposing theoretical movements. In other parts of the world, post-processualism has made less of an impact on archaeological thought.
213:
recognizing that past societies would have interpreted the world around them in a partially materialistic way, the post-processualists argue that many historic societies have also placed a great emphasis on
271:
Within the post-processual movement, Ian Hodder became "the leading exponent of a structuralist approach". In a 1984 article, he looked at the similarities between the houses and the tombs of
478:. The new cultural anthropologists "denounced studies of cultural evolution as being ethnocentric and intellectually and morally untenable in a multicultural, postcolonial environment."
151:. Many post-processualists took this further and criticised the fact that archaeologists from wealthy, western countries were studying and writing the histories of poorer nations in the
450:, a Canadian archaeologist who produced a seminal study of archaeological theory, identified the existence of three main influences upon post-processualism. The first of these was "the
573:(those who study the archaeology of the historic, or literate period of the past), that such investigation into marginalised classes such as workers and slaves took place.
552:
peoples, who had commonly not had a chance to participate in their own heritage management up until the 1990s. Many
American archaeologists also began to take note of a
133:
statements about past societies based upon the evidence. Post-processual archaeology, however, questioned this stance, and instead emphasized that archaeology was
437:
1522:
462:, which "emphasized the subjective nature of knowledge and embraced extreme relativism and idealism". Having originated among the disciplines of
565:
and Janet
Spector's paper on "Archaeology and the Study of Gender" (1984). Among the post-processualists, less emphasis was put on correcting
313:
569:
biases in the
American archaeological record than had been put into studying gender and ethnic differences. Instead, it was mostly among
54:
The post-processual movement originated in the United
Kingdom during the late 1970s and early 1980s, pioneered by archaeologists such as
85:. Parallel developments soon followed in the United States. Initially post-processualism was primarily a reaction to and critique of
236:
On the one hand, a materialist view of landscape tends to stress how it may be seen in terms of a set of resources, for example for
279:(1990), to use structuralist ideas to come up with his theory that within Neolithic Europe, there was a dichotomy between field (
121:
The post-processualists' approach to archaeology is diametrically opposed to that of the processualists. The processualists, as
228:
Using an example to explain this belief in materialist-idealist unity, the archaeologist Matthew Johnson looked at the idea of
1353:
1323:
1269:
1226:
1200:
1158:
432:
Although it would not be actually termed "post-processual archaeology" until 1985 (by one of its most prominent proponents,
1515:
1474:
Lucy, Sam (1997). Moore, J.; Scoot, E. (eds.). "Housewives, warriors and slaves? Sex and gender in Anglo-Saxon burials".
594:" in literary studies, was a shade arrogant in presuming to supersede what it might quite properly claim to complement."
205:
1059:(1983). "Gender bias in archaeology: a cross-cultural perspective". In Gero, J. M.; Lacy, D. M.; Blakey, M. L. (eds.).
549:
458:
by anthropologists such as Maurice Godelier, Emmanuel Terray, and Pierre-Phillipe Rey". The second main influence was
275:, and used a structuralist approach as a basis for his ideas on their symbolism. He then went on, in his seminal book
1557:
1451:
1248:
444:, which was then popular among social anthropologists, would soon make its way into the archaeological community.
598:
that on the whole, the post-processual approach was flawed because it failed to produce an explicit methodology.
373:
have however argued that human agency is not a useful aspect for looking at past societies, thereby accepting a
254:
in understanding historical societies. Structuralism itself was a theory developed by the French anthropologist
1600:
1547:
1508:
1427:
1407:
1279:
346:
341:
209:
180:
59:
173:
385:
Post-processualism places great emphasis on encouraging marginalised groups to interact with archaeology.
1064:
48:
1605:
1479:
1435:
1419:
1345:
1291:
1218:
1150:
516:
544:
Post-processual archaeology developed largely independently among the archaeological community in the
345:
these ideas, post-processualists argue that society is conflict-driven. Influenced by the sociologist
1487:
Thomas, Julian (2000). M. B. Schiffer (ed.). "Reconfiguring the social, reconfiguring the material".
129:
should and could apply to archaeological investigation, therefore allowing archaeologists to present
1492:
130:
98:
1574:
1564:
1372:
Earle, Timothy K.; Preucel, Robert W. (1987). "Processual Archaeology and the Radical Critique".
441:
225:, who asserted that tools were just as much a product of ideology as were a crown or a law code.
1569:
570:
463:
417:
105:
86:
1236:
259:
255:
104:
In the United States, archaeologists widely see post-processualism as an accompaniment to the
1531:
82:
27:
1374:
508:
475:
404:
400:
374:
8:
1552:
753:
366:
337:
222:
330:
were influential figures in the development of post-processual ideas about human agency.
1411:
1391:
1338:
1315:
1283:
772:
528:
Bruce Trigger considered this book to be "a postprocessual showcase and counterpart to
467:
394:
184:
63:
1476:
Invisible People and Processes: Writing Gender and Childhood into European Archaeology
1447:
1395:
1349:
1319:
1265:
1222:
1196:
1154:
776:
500:
126:
94:
1439:
1383:
762:
492:
471:
272:
148:
561:'s paper on "Gender bias in archaeology: a cross-cultural perspective" (1983) and
365:
was the force for this social change. In this manner they share similarities with
1542:
1443:
1261:
1176:
562:
327:
237:
1430:(1984). Miller and Tilley (ed.). "Modernism and suburbia as material ideology".
1308:
1078:
Conkey, Margaret; Spector, Janet (1984). "Archaeology and the Study of Gender".
362:
767:
748:
1594:
1462:
1333:
1299:
1173:
The Domestication of Europe: Structure and Contingency in Neolithic Societies
582:
545:
533:
496:
459:
455:
447:
370:
350:
251:
90:
78:
36:
262:(1911–1986), who used it to interpret prehistoric symbols in his 1964 work,
1192:
566:
152:
138:
confront theory and data; instead, we see data through a cloud of theory."
134:
74:
31:
250:
Many, although not all post-processualists have adhered to the theory of
169:
156:
44:
40:
1500:
1403:
1210:
1184:
1168:
1142:
744:
591:
488:
433:
188:
160:
122:
67:
55:
340:, arguing that in other theoretical approaches to archaeology such as
1303:
1215:
Reading the Past: Current Approaches to Interpretation in Archaeology
1056:
586:
558:
358:
357:
Other post-processualists have instead taken the view of sociologist
323:
229:
1414:(eds.). "Burials, houses, men and women in the European Neolithic".
89:, a paradigm developed in the 1960s by 'New Archaeologists' such as
1387:
218:
214:
451:
71:
172:
and professional elitism within the discipline that in 1986 the
553:
165:
336:
Post-processualists have also adopted beliefs regarding human
507:
In 1980 these early post-processualists held a conference at
515:(1982), which was edited by Hodder himself and published by
536:(1931–2011) that helped to launch the processual movement.
304:
164:
post-processualists, there was enough support for opposing
1037:
984:
972:
795:
1102:
1015:
1013:
1011:
924:
890:
888:
837:
725:
660:
648:
1114:
679:
677:
675:
1467:
The Explanation of Culture Change: Models in Prehistory
612:
1090:
1008:
912:
900:
885:
849:
825:
783:
519:. In his introduction to the book, Hodder noted that:
22:, which is sometimes alternatively referred to as the
1025:
960:
701:
689:
672:
636:
948:
936:
861:
713:
539:
532:", the 1968 book written by American archaeologist
287:), with this duality being mediated by a boundary (
1337:
1307:
873:
1592:
194:
1516:
1235:
1077:
843:
380:
369:. A minority of post-processualists, such as
1371:
1278:
1120:
1080:Advances in Archaeological Method and Theory
731:
263:
1298:
1108:
511:, from which a book was produced, entitled
199:
1523:
1509:
1310:Archaeology: Theories, Method and Practice
111:
1530:
766:
411:
204:Whereas the processualists had been firm
179:A number of post-processualists, such as
1402:
1332:
1255:
1096:
1043:
1019:
990:
978:
966:
918:
906:
894:
867:
855:
831:
801:
789:
743:
707:
695:
683:
666:
654:
642:
618:
1593:
1486:
1426:
1258:Archaeological Theory: An Introduction
1167:
1141:
1031:
930:
879:
719:
232:among past societies. He argued that:
1504:
1460:
954:
481:
388:
1473:
1055:
942:
1340:A History of Archaeological Thought
1147:Symbolic and Structural Archaeology
513:Symbolic and Structural Archaeology
26:by its adherents, is a movement in
16:Theoretical paradigm in archaeology
13:
14:
1617:
1061:The Socio-Politics of Archaeology
210:culture-historical archaeologists
141:
43:, as have a variety of different
1249:Presses Universitaires de France
540:Development in the United States
312:
303:
245:
97:was applied, come to completely
70:, who were influenced by French
1241:Les Religions de la Préhistoire
1129:
1071:
1049:
996:
816:
807:
737:
530:New Perspectives in Archaeology
294:
265:Les Religions de la Préhistoire
116:
1432:Ideology, Power and Prehistory
1416:Ideology, Power and Prehistory
1288:Ideology, Power and Prehistory
822:Pearson, Mike Parker. 1984:61.
624:
1:
1465:(ed.). "Concluding address".
1344:(Second ed.). New York:
601:
427:
174:World Archaeological Congress
1489:Social Theory in Archaeology
1444:10.1017/CBO9780511897443.005
606:
576:
403:emerged as adherents of the
195:Understanding past societies
24:interpretative archaeologies
7:
1314:(Fourth ed.). London:
1217:(3rd ed.). Cambridge:
1189:Archaeological Theory Today
1065:University of Massachusetts
277:The Domestication of Europe
20:Post-processual archaeology
10:
1622:
1480:Leicester University Press
1436:Cambridge University Press
1420:Cambridge University Press
1346:Cambridge University Press
1292:Cambridge University Press
1247:] (in French). Paris:
1219:Cambridge University Press
1209:
1183:
1151:Cambridge University Press
1002:
630:
517:Cambridge University Press
422:
415:
392:
381:Marginalised archaeologies
83:sociocultural anthropology
1538:
1256:Johnson, Matthew (1999).
768:10.1017/S0003598X00055940
571:historical archaeologists
1493:University of Utah Press
1213:; Hutson, Scott (2003).
1121:Earle & Preucel 1987
732:Miller & Tilley 1984
399:In the 1960s and 1970s,
200:Materialism and idealism
1478:. London and New York:
1382:(4). Chicago: 501–538.
1245:Religions of Prehistory
1109:Renfrew & Bahn 2004
438:University of Sheffield
112:Approach to archaeology
581:As the archaeologists
464:comparative literature
442:cultural structuralism
418:Indigenous archaeology
412:Indigenous archaeology
375:culturally determinist
367:Marxist archaeologists
264:
87:processual archaeology
81:and similar trends in
1601:Archaeological theory
1532:Archaeological theory
1461:Leach, E. R. (1973).
749:"Archaeology in 1984"
28:archaeological theory
1469:. London: Duckworth.
1375:Current Anthropology
1237:Leroi-Gourhan, André
1005:. pp. 102–103.
509:Cambridge University
476:Boasian anthropology
405:second wave feminist
401:feminist archaeology
349:(born 1938) and his
125:, believed that the
47:techniques, such as
30:that emphasizes the
1412:Tilley, Christopher
1316:Thames & Hudson
1284:Tilley, Christopher
1046:, pp. 456–458.
993:, pp. 448–449.
981:, pp. 446–448.
933:, pp. 149–150.
804:, pp. 467–468.
669:, pp. 451–452.
657:, pp. 477–478.
342:cultural-historical
260:André Leroi-Gourhan
256:Claude LĂ©vi-Strauss
223:Mike Parker Pearson
106:processual movement
1570:Processual ("New")
1548:Culture-historical
1491:. Salt Lake City:
844:Leroi-Gourhan 1964
482:Origins in Britain
468:literary criticism
395:Gender archaeology
389:Gender archaeology
185:Christopher Tilley
64:Christopher Tilley
1606:Postmodern theory
1588:
1587:
1365:Academic Articles
1355:978-0-521-60049-1
1334:Trigger, Bruce G.
1325:978-0-500-28441-4
1271:978-0-631-20296-7
1228:978-0-521-52884-9
1202:978-0-7456-2269-9
1160:978-0-521-03550-7
621:, pp. 98–99.
501:scientific method
361:(1818–1883) that
176:was established.
127:scientific method
95:scientific method
1613:
1543:Neo-evolutionary
1525:
1518:
1511:
1502:
1501:
1496:
1483:
1470:
1457:
1423:
1399:
1359:
1343:
1329:
1313:
1295:
1275:
1252:
1232:
1206:
1180:
1164:
1124:
1118:
1112:
1106:
1100:
1094:
1088:
1087:
1075:
1069:
1068:
1053:
1047:
1041:
1035:
1029:
1023:
1017:
1006:
1000:
994:
988:
982:
976:
970:
964:
958:
952:
946:
940:
934:
928:
922:
916:
910:
904:
898:
892:
883:
877:
871:
865:
859:
853:
847:
841:
835:
829:
823:
820:
814:
811:
805:
799:
793:
787:
781:
780:
770:
741:
735:
729:
723:
717:
711:
705:
699:
693:
687:
681:
670:
664:
658:
652:
646:
640:
634:
628:
622:
616:
472:cultural studies
408:investigation".
316:
307:
273:Neolithic Europe
267:
238:hunter-gatherers
217:(which included
149:social injustice
1621:
1620:
1616:
1615:
1614:
1612:
1611:
1610:
1591:
1590:
1589:
1584:
1580:Post-processual
1534:
1529:
1499:
1454:
1362:
1356:
1326:
1272:
1229:
1203:
1161:
1132:
1127:
1119:
1115:
1107:
1103:
1095:
1091:
1076:
1072:
1054:
1050:
1042:
1038:
1030:
1026:
1018:
1009:
1001:
997:
989:
985:
977:
973:
965:
961:
953:
949:
941:
937:
929:
925:
917:
913:
905:
901:
893:
886:
878:
874:
866:
862:
854:
850:
842:
838:
830:
826:
821:
817:
813:Knapp, B. 1988.
812:
808:
800:
796:
788:
784:
742:
738:
730:
726:
718:
714:
706:
702:
694:
690:
682:
673:
665:
661:
653:
649:
641:
637:
629:
625:
617:
613:
609:
604:
579:
563:Margaret Conkey
550:Native American
542:
484:
430:
425:
420:
414:
397:
391:
383:
347:Anthony Giddens
334:
333:
332:
331:
328:Anthony Giddens
319:
318:
317:
309:
308:
297:
248:
202:
197:
144:
119:
114:
17:
12:
11:
5:
1619:
1609:
1608:
1603:
1586:
1585:
1583:
1582:
1577:
1572:
1567:
1562:
1561:
1560:
1550:
1545:
1539:
1536:
1535:
1528:
1527:
1520:
1513:
1505:
1498:
1497:
1484:
1471:
1463:Renfrew, Colin
1458:
1452:
1428:Miller, Daniel
1424:
1408:Miller, Daniel
1400:
1388:10.1086/203551
1368:
1367:
1366:
1361:
1360:
1354:
1330:
1324:
1300:Renfrew, Colin
1296:
1280:Miller, Daniel
1276:
1270:
1253:
1233:
1227:
1207:
1201:
1187:, ed. (2001).
1181:
1165:
1159:
1145:, ed. (1982).
1138:
1137:
1136:
1135:Academic Books
1131:
1128:
1126:
1125:
1113:
1101:
1099:, p. 460.
1089:
1070:
1048:
1036:
1034:, p. vii.
1024:
1022:, p. 450.
1007:
995:
983:
971:
959:
957:, p. 763.
947:
945:, p. 153.
935:
923:
921:, p. 469.
911:
909:, p. 105.
899:
897:, p. 104.
884:
872:
860:
858:, p. 464.
848:
836:
834:, p. 463.
824:
815:
806:
794:
792:, p. 452.
782:
761:(222): 25–32.
736:
724:
712:
710:, p. 467.
700:
698:, p. 103.
688:
686:, p. 102.
671:
659:
647:
645:, p. 101.
635:
623:
610:
608:
605:
603:
600:
578:
575:
541:
538:
526:
525:
483:
480:
429:
426:
424:
421:
416:Main article:
413:
410:
393:Main article:
390:
387:
382:
379:
363:class conflict
321:
320:
311:
310:
302:
301:
300:
299:
298:
296:
293:
247:
244:
243:
242:
201:
198:
196:
193:
181:Michael Shanks
143:
142:Interpretation
140:
118:
115:
113:
110:
45:archaeological
15:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
1618:
1607:
1604:
1602:
1599:
1598:
1596:
1581:
1578:
1576:
1573:
1571:
1568:
1566:
1563:
1559:
1556:
1555:
1554:
1551:
1549:
1546:
1544:
1541:
1540:
1537:
1533:
1526:
1521:
1519:
1514:
1512:
1507:
1506:
1503:
1494:
1490:
1485:
1481:
1477:
1472:
1468:
1464:
1459:
1455:
1453:9780521255264
1449:
1445:
1441:
1437:
1434:. Cambridge:
1433:
1429:
1425:
1421:
1418:. Cambridge:
1417:
1413:
1409:
1405:
1401:
1397:
1393:
1389:
1385:
1381:
1377:
1376:
1370:
1369:
1364:
1363:
1357:
1351:
1347:
1342:
1341:
1335:
1331:
1327:
1321:
1317:
1312:
1311:
1305:
1301:
1297:
1293:
1290:. Cambridge:
1289:
1285:
1281:
1277:
1273:
1267:
1263:
1259:
1254:
1250:
1246:
1242:
1238:
1234:
1230:
1224:
1220:
1216:
1212:
1208:
1204:
1198:
1194:
1191:. Cambridge:
1190:
1186:
1182:
1178:
1174:
1170:
1166:
1162:
1156:
1152:
1149:. Cambridge:
1148:
1144:
1140:
1139:
1134:
1133:
1122:
1117:
1111:, p. 44.
1110:
1105:
1098:
1093:
1085:
1081:
1074:
1066:
1062:
1058:
1052:
1045:
1040:
1033:
1028:
1021:
1016:
1014:
1012:
1004:
999:
992:
987:
980:
975:
969:, p. 44.
968:
963:
956:
951:
944:
939:
932:
927:
920:
915:
908:
903:
896:
891:
889:
881:
876:
869:
864:
857:
852:
845:
840:
833:
828:
819:
810:
803:
798:
791:
786:
778:
774:
769:
764:
760:
756:
755:
750:
746:
740:
733:
728:
722:, p. 38.
721:
716:
709:
704:
697:
692:
685:
680:
678:
676:
668:
663:
656:
651:
644:
639:
632:
627:
620:
615:
611:
599:
595:
593:
590:the epithet "
588:
584:
583:Colin Renfrew
574:
572:
568:
564:
560:
555:
551:
547:
546:United States
537:
535:
534:Lewis Binford
531:
522:
521:
520:
518:
514:
510:
505:
502:
498:
497:Roman Britain
494:
490:
479:
477:
473:
469:
465:
461:
460:postmodernism
457:
456:structuralism
453:
449:
448:Bruce Trigger
445:
443:
439:
435:
419:
409:
406:
402:
396:
386:
378:
376:
372:
371:Julian Thomas
368:
364:
360:
355:
352:
351:structuration
348:
343:
339:
329:
325:
322:Sociologists
315:
306:
292:
290:
286:
283:) and house (
282:
278:
274:
269:
266:
261:
257:
253:
252:structuralism
246:Structuralism
239:
235:
234:
233:
231:
226:
224:
220:
216:
211:
207:
192:
190:
186:
182:
177:
175:
171:
167:
162:
158:
154:
150:
139:
136:
132:
128:
124:
109:
107:
102:
101:conclusions.
100:
96:
92:
91:Lewis Binford
88:
84:
80:
79:postmodernism
76:
73:
69:
65:
61:
60:Daniel Miller
57:
52:
50:
49:phenomenology
46:
42:
38:
37:structuralism
33:
29:
25:
21:
1579:
1488:
1475:
1466:
1431:
1415:
1379:
1373:
1339:
1309:
1287:
1257:
1244:
1240:
1214:
1193:Polity Press
1188:
1172:
1146:
1130:Bibliography
1116:
1104:
1097:Trigger 2007
1092:
1083:
1079:
1073:
1060:
1051:
1044:Trigger 2007
1039:
1027:
1020:Trigger 2007
1003:Johnson 2010
998:
991:Trigger 2007
986:
979:Trigger 2007
974:
967:Trigger 2007
962:
950:
938:
926:
919:Trigger 2007
914:
907:Johnson 1999
902:
895:Johnson 1999
875:
868:Hodder 1984b
863:
856:Trigger 2007
851:
839:
832:Trigger 2007
827:
818:
809:
802:Trigger 2007
797:
790:Trigger 2007
785:
758:
752:
739:
734:, p. 2.
727:
715:
708:Trigger 2007
703:
696:Johnson 1999
691:
684:Johnson 1999
667:Trigger 2007
662:
655:Trigger 2007
650:
643:Johnson 1999
638:
631:Johnson 2010
626:
619:Johnson 1999
614:
596:
580:
543:
529:
527:
512:
506:
485:
446:
431:
398:
384:
356:
335:
295:Human agency
288:
284:
280:
276:
270:
249:
227:
206:materialists
203:
178:
157:third worlds
145:
120:
117:Subjectivism
103:
75:anthropology
53:
32:subjectivity
23:
19:
18:
1575:Behavioural
1565:Conjunctive
1404:Hodder, Ian
1211:Hodder, Ian
1185:Hodder, Ian
1169:Hodder, Ian
1143:Hodder, Ian
1063:. Amherst:
1032:Hodder 1982
931:Thomas 2000
880:Hodder 1990
745:Hodder, Ian
720:Miller 1984
170:colonialism
123:positivists
41:Neo-Marxism
1595:Categories
1495:: 143–155.
1482:: 150–168.
1304:Bahn, Paul
1260:. Oxford:
1175:. Oxford:
1057:Gero, Joan
955:Leach 1973
602:References
592:postmodern
489:Ian Hodder
434:Ian Hodder
428:Precedents
377:position.
208:, and the
189:Peter Ucko
161:Ian Hodder
135:subjective
68:Peter Ucko
56:Ian Hodder
35:including
1438:: 37–50.
1406:(1984b).
1396:147115343
1262:Blackwell
1177:Blackwell
943:Lucy 1997
777:163788037
754:Antiquity
747:(1984a).
633:. p. 105.
607:Footnotes
587:Paul Bahn
577:Criticism
559:Joan Gero
359:Karl Marx
324:Karl Marx
230:landscape
131:objective
99:objective
1422:: 51–68.
1336:(2007).
1306:(2004).
1286:(1984).
1239:(1964).
1171:(1990).
493:Iron Age
219:religion
215:ideology
1553:Marxist
1086:: 1–38.
452:Marxist
423:History
72:Marxist
1558:Social
1450:
1394:
1352:
1322:
1268:
1225:
1199:
1157:
775:
554:gender
338:agency
281:agrios
166:racism
153:second
1392:S2CID
1243:[
773:S2CID
567:class
440:that
289:foris
285:domus
1448:ISBN
1350:ISBN
1320:ISBN
1266:ISBN
1223:ISBN
1197:ISBN
1155:ISBN
585:and
495:and
470:and
326:and
187:and
155:and
66:and
39:and
1440:doi
1384:doi
763:doi
291:).
1597::
1446:.
1410:;
1390:.
1380:28
1378:.
1348:.
1318:.
1302:;
1282:;
1264:.
1221:.
1195:.
1153:.
1082:.
1010:^
887:^
771:.
759:58
757:.
751:.
674:^
466:,
268:.
183:,
168:,
159:.
77:,
62:,
58:,
51:.
1524:e
1517:t
1510:v
1456:.
1442::
1398:.
1386::
1358:.
1328:.
1294:.
1274:.
1251:.
1231:.
1205:.
1179:.
1163:.
1123:.
1084:7
1067:.
882:.
870:.
846:.
779:.
765::
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.