Abstract
Recent literature reflects continuing concern with problems such as explanation, skepticism, and objective knowledge. Some authors urge archaeologists to abandon “positivism” in favor of new “philosophical” approaches, such as feminism, Marxism, hermeneutics, and critical theory. Ethical issues have received increased attention as archaeologists have become involved in determining public policy with regard to disposition of artifacts and uncovering of human burials.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References cited
Adams, W. Y., and Adams, E. W. (1991).Archaeological Typology and Practical Reality: A Dialectical Approach to Artifact Classification and Sorting, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Bell, J. (1991). Anarchy and archaeology. In Preucel, R. (ed.),Processual and Postprocessual Archaeologies: Multiple Ways of Knowing the Past, Center for Archaeological Investigations, Southern Illinois University at Carbondale, Occasional Paper No. 10, pp. 71–82.
Bell, J. (1992). Universalization in archaeological explanation. In Embree, L. (ed.),Metaarchaeology, Kluwer Academic, Dordrecht, pp. 143–164.
Binford, L. (1989).Debating Archaeology, Academic Press, San Diego.
Conkey, M., and Gero, J. (eds.) (1991).Engendering Archaeology: Women and Prehistory, Blackwell, Oxford.
Davidson, D. (1980).Essays on Actions and Events, Oxford University Press, Oxford.
Davis, W. (1992). The deconstruction of intentionality in archaeology.Antiquity 66: 343–347.
Dincauze, D. (1992). Exploring career styles in archaeology. In Reyman, J. (ed.),Rediscovering Our Past: Essays on the History of American Archaeology, Avebury, Aldershot, UK, pp. 131–136.
Drennan, R. D. (1992). What is the archaeology of chiefdoms about? In Embree, L. (ed.),Metaarchaeology, Kluwer Academic, Dordrecht, pp. 53–74.
Dunnell, R. (1971).Systematics in Prehistory, Free Press, New York.
Dunnell, R. (1989). Philosophy of science and archaeology. In Pinsky, V., and Wylie, A. (eds.),Critical Traditions in Contemporary Archaeology, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp. 1–4.
Dunnell, R. (1992a). What is it that actually evolves? Symposium paper presented at 57th Annual Meeting of the Society for American Archaeology, Pittsburgh.
Dunnell, R. (1992b). Archaeology and evolutionary science. In Wandsnider, L. (ed.),Quandaries and Quests: Visions of Archaeology's Future, Center for Archaeological Investigations, Southern Illinois University at Carbondale, Occasional Paper No. 20, pp. 209–224.
Dunnell, R. (1992c). Is scientific archaeology possible? In Embree, L. (ed.),Metaarchaeology, Kluwer Academic, Dordrecht, pp. 75–98.
Embree, L. (1989). The structure of American theoretical archaeology. In Pinsky, V., and Wylie, A. (eds.),Critical Traditions in Contemporary Archaeology, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp. 28–37.
Embree, L. (1992a). Phenomenology of a change in archaeological observation. In Embree, L. (ed.),Metaarchaeology, Kluwer Academic, Dordrecht, pp. 165–194.
Embree, L. (ed.) (1992b).Metaarchaeology, Kluwer Academic, Dordrecht.
Gadamer, H. (1975).Truth and Method, Continuum, New York.
Gibbon, G. (1989).Explanation in Archaeology, Blackwell, Oxford and New York.
Goldstein, L., and Kintigh, K. (1990). Ethics and the reburial controversy.American Antiquity 55: 585–591.
Gould, R. (1990).Recovering the Past, University of New Mexico Press, Albuquerque.
Hanen, M., and Kelley, J. (1989). Inference to the best explanation in archaeology. In Pinsky, V., and Wylie, A. (eds.),Critical Traditions in Contemporary Archaeology, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp. 14–17.
Hanen, M., and Kelley, J. (1992). Gender and archaeological knowledge. In Embree, L. (ed.),Metaarchaeology, Kluwer Academic, Dordrecht, pp. 195–226.
Hastdorf, C., and Johannessen, S. (1991). Understanding changing people/plant relationships in the prehispanic Andes. In Preucel, R. (ed.),Processual and Postprocessual Archaeologies: Multiple Ways of Knowing the Past, Center for Archaeological Investigations, Southern Illinois University at Carbondale, Occasional Paper No. 10, pp. 140–158.
Hill, J. (1991). Archaeology and the accumulation of knowledge. In Preucel, R. (ed.),Processual and Postprocessual Archaeologies: Multiple Ways of Knowing the Past, Center for Archaeological Investigations, Southern Illinois University at Carbondale, Occasional Paper No. 10, pp. 42–53.
Hodder, I. (ed.) (1987).Archaeology as Long-Term History, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Hodder, I. (1991a). Interpretive archaeology and its role.American Antiquity 56: 7–18.
Hodder, I. (1991b). Postprocessual archaeology and the current debate. In Preucel, R. (ed.),Processual and Postprocessual Archaeologies: Multiple Ways of Knowing the Past, Center for Archaeological Investigations, Southern Illinois University at Carbondale, Occasional Paper No. 10, pp. 30–41.
Johnsen, H., and Olsen, B. (1992). Hermeneutics and archaeology: On the philosophy of contextual archaeology.American Antiquity 57: 419–436.
Kelley, J. (1992). Being and becoming. In Reyman, J. (ed.),Rediscovering Our Past: Essays on the History of American Archaeology, Avebury, Aldershot, UK, pp. 81–90.
Knudson, R. (1991). The archaeological public trust in context. In Smith, G., and Ehrenhard, J. (eds.),Protecting the Past, CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL, pp. 3–8.
Kohl, P. (1985). Symbolic, cognitive archaeology: A new loss of innocence.Dialectical Anthropology 9: 105–117.
Kosso, P. (1989). Science and objectivity.Journal of Philosophy 86: 245–257.
Kosso, P. (1991). Method in archaeology: Middle-range theory as hermeneutics.American Antiquity 56: 621–627.
Mason, C. (1992). From the other side of the looking glass: Women in American archaeology in the 1950s. In Reyman, J. (ed.),Rediscovering Our Past: Essays on the History of American Archaeology, Avebury, Aldershot, UK, pp. 91–102.
Mathien, F. (1992). Women of Chaco: Then and now. In Reyman, J. (ed.),Rediscovering Our Past: Essays on the History of American Archaeology, Avebury, Aldershot, UK, pp. 103–130.
McGuire, J. (1992). Scientific change: Perspectives and proposals. In Salmon, M.,et al. (eds.),Introduction to the Philosophy of Science: A Text by Members of the Department of the History and Philosophy of Science, Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ, pp. 132–178.
McGuire, R. (1992).A Marxist Archaeology, Academic Press, San Diego.
Meltzer, D. (1990). Review ofSocial Theory and Archaeology.American Antiquity 55: 186–187.
Muller, J. (1991). The new Holy Family: A polemic on bourgeois idealism in archaeology. In Preucel, R. (ed.),Processual and Postprocessual Archaeologies: Multiple Ways of Knowing the Past, Center for Archaeological Investigations, Southern Illinois University at Carbondale, Occasional Paper No. 10, pp. 251–264.
Murphy, J., and Coleman, J. (1984).Philosophy of Law, Rowman and Allanheld, Totowa, NJ.
Murray, T. (1989). The history, philosophy and sociology of archaeology: The case of the Ancient Monuments Protection Act (1882). In Pinsky, V., and Wylie, A. (eds.),Critical Traditions in Contemporary Archaeology, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp. 55–67.
Pinsky, V., and Wylie, A. (eds.) (1989).Critical Traditions in Contemporary Archaeology, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Preucel, R. (1991a). The philosophy of archaeology. In Preucel, R. (ed.),Processual and Postprocessual Archaeologies: Multiple Ways of Knowing the Past, Center for Archaeological Investigations, Southern Illinois University at Carbondale, Occasional Paper No. 10, pp. 1–29.
Preucel, R. (ed.) (1991b).Processual and Postprocessual Archaeologies: Multiple Ways of Knowing the Past, Center for Archaeological Investigations, Southern Illinois University at Carbondale, Occasional Paper No. 10.
Reyman, J. (ed.) (1992).Rediscovering Our Past: Essays on the History of American Archaeology, Avebury, Aldershot, UK.
Sabloff, J. (1992). Interpreting the collapse of Classic Maya civilization: A case study of changing archaeological perspectives. In Embree, L. (ed.),Metaarchaeology, Kluwer Academic, Dordrecht, pp. 99–120.
Sabloff, J., Binford, L., and McAnany, P. (1987). Understanding the archaeological record.Antiquity 61: 203–209.
Salmon, M. (1989a). Efficient explanations and efficient behavior. In Pinsky, V., and Wylie, A. (eds.),Critical Traditions in Contemporary Archaeology, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp. 5–9.
Salmon, M. (1989b). Explanation in the social sciences. In Kitcher, P., and Salmon, W. (eds.),Scientific Explanation, University of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis, pp. 384–409.
Salmon, M. (1990). On the possibility of lawful explanation in archaeology.Crítica XXII: 87–114.
Salmon, M. (1992). Philosophy of the social sciences. In Salmon, M., Earman, J., Glymour, C., Lennox, J., Machamer, P., McGuire, J., Norton, J., Salmon, W., and Schaffner, K. (eds.),Introduction to the Philosophy of Science: A Text by Members of the Department of the History and Philosophy of Science, Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ, pp. 404–425.
Salmon, M., Earman, J., Glymour, C., Lennox, J., Machamer, P., McGuire, J., Norton, J., Salmon, W., and Schaffner, K. (1992).Introduction to the Philosophy of Science: A Text by Members of the Department of the History and Philosophy of Science, Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ.
Salmon, W. (1992). Explanation in archaeology: An update. In Embree, L. (ed.),Metaarchaeology, Kluwer Academic, Dordrecht, pp. 243–254.
Schiffer, M. (1990). Review ofArchaeology as Long-term History.American Antiquity 55: 423–424.
Shanks, M., and Tilley, C. (1987).Re-constructing Archeology. Theory and Practice, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Shanks, M., and Tilley, C. (1988).Social Theory and Archaeology, New Mexico University Press, Albuquerque.
Shanks, M., and Tilley, C. (1989). Archaeology into the 1990s.Norwegian Archaeological Review 22: 1–54.
Smith, G., and Ehrenhard, J. (eds.) (1991).Protecting the Past, CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL.
Spencer-Wood, S. (1992). A feminist program for nonsexist archaeology. In Wandsnider, L. (ed.),Quandaries and Quests: Visions of Archaeology's Future, Center for Archaeological Investigations, Southern Illinois University at Carbondale, Occasional Paper No. 20, pp. 98–114.
Wandsnider, L. (ed.) (1992).Quandaries and Quests: Visions of Archaeology's Future, Center for Archaeological Investigations, Southern Illinois University at Carbondale, Occasional Paper No. 20.
Watson, P. (1991). A parochial primer: The new dissonance as seen from the midcontinental United States, In Preucel, R. (ed.),Processual and Postprocessual Archaeologies, Center for Archaeological Investigations, Southern Illinois University at Carbondale, Occasional Paper No. 10, pp. 265–274.
Watson, R. (1990). Ozymandias, King of Kings: Postprocessual radical archaeology as critique.American Antiquity 55: 673–689.
Watson, R. (1992). The place of archaeology in science. In Embree, L. (ed.),Metaarchaeology, Kluwer Academic, Dordrecht, pp. 255–268.
Winch, P. (1958).The Idea of a Social Science and Its Relation to Philosophy, Routledge & Kegan Paul, London.
Wylie, A. (1989a). The interpretive dilemma. In Pinsky, V., and Wylie, A. (eds.),Critical Traditions in Contemporary Archaeology, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp. 18–28.
Wylie, A. (1989b). Archaeological cables and tacking: The implications of practice for Bernstein's “Options beyond Objectivism and Relativism.”Philosophy of the Social Sciences 19: 1–18.
Wylie, A. (1991). Archaeology and the antiquities market: The use of looted material. Brief presented to the Executive Board, Society for American Archaeology, New Orleans, April.
Wylie, A. (1992a). Skepticism, philosophy, and archaeological science.Current Anthropology 33: 209–214.
Wylie, A. (1992b). The interplay of evidential constraints and political interests: Recent archaeological research on gender.American Antiquity 57: 15–35.
Wylie, A. (1992c).On “Heavily Decomposing Red Herrings”: Scientific Method in Archaeology and the Ladening of Evidence with Theory, Kluwer Academic, Dordrecht, pp. 269–288.
Wylie, A. (1993). On a hierarchy of purposes: Typological theory and practice.Current Anthropology (in press).
Bibliography of recent literature
Carman, J. (1991). Beating the bounds: Archaeological heritage, management as archaeology, archaeology as a social science.Archaeological Review from Cambridge 10: 175–184.
Carver, M. (1989). Digging for ideas.Antiquity 63: 666–674.
Connah, G. (1989). American historical archaeology and the search for “meaning.”Antiquity 63: 370–371.
Cook, B. (1991). The archaeologist and the art maker: Policies and practice.Antiquity 65: 533–537.
Dunnell, R. (1993). Review ofArchaeological Typology and Practical Reality: A Dialectical Approach to Artifact Classification and Sorting.American Antiquity 58: 165–166.
Englestad, E. (1991). Images of power and contradiction: Feminist theory and post-processual Archaeology.Antiquity 65: 502–514.
Gallay, A. (1989). Logicism: French archaeological theory.Antiquity 63: 27–39.
Gilchrist, R. (1991). Women's archaeology? Political feminism, gender theory and historical revision.Antiquity 65: 495–501.
Graves, P. (1991). Relative values? Criticisms of critical theory.Archaeological Review from Cambridge 10: 86–93.
Greenfield, J. (1989).The Return of Cultural Treasures, Cambridge University Press, New York.
Hall, J. (1991). Practising post-processualism? Classics and archaeological theory.Archaeological Review from Cambridge 10: 155–163.
Hedlund, A. (ed.) (1989).Perspectives on Anthropological Collections from the American Southwest, Anthropological Research Papers No. 40, Arizona State University, Tempe.
Hodder, I. (1989). This is not an article about material culture as text.Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 8: 250–269.
Hodder, I. (ed.) (1989).The Meaning of Things: Material Culture and Symbolic Expression, Unwin Hyman, Boston.
Hodder, I. (1991).Reading the Past: Current Approaches to Interpretation in Archaeology, 2nd ed., Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Lamberg-Karlovsky, C. (ed.) (1989).Archaeological Thought in America, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Leone, M., and Potter, P. (1992). Legitimation and the classification of archaeological sites.American Antiquity 57: 137–145.
MacDonald, K. (ed.) (1991). Interpreting archaeological science. A discussion with Colin Renfrew and Ian Hodder.Archaeological Review from Cambridge 10: 70–85.
Messenger, P. (ed.) (1989).The Ethics of Collecting Cultural Property: Whose Culture? Whose Property? University of New Mexico Press, Albuquerque.
Mithen, S. (1989). Evolutionary theory and post-processual archaeology.Antiquity 63: 483–494.
O'Brien, M., and Holland, T. (1990). Variation, selection and the archaeological record. In Schiffer, M. (ed.),Archaeological Method and Theory 2: 31–80.
O'Brien, M., and Holland, T. (1992). The role of adaptation in archaeological explanation.American Antiquity 57: 36–59.
Patterson, T. (1990). Some theoretical tensions within and between the processual and postprocessual archaeologies.Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 9: 189–200.
Read, D. (1989). Intuitive typology and automatic classification: Divergence or full circle?Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 8: 158–188.
Saitta, D. (1989). Dialectics, critical inquiry and archaeology. In Pinsky, V., and Wylie, A. (eds.),Critical Traditions in Contemporary Archaeology, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp. 38–43.
Salmon, M. (1992). Philosophical models for postprocessual archaeology. In Embree, L. (ed.),Metaarchaeology, Kluwer Academic, Dordrecht, pp. 227–242.
Smith, L., and duCros, H. (in press).Women in Archaeology, Occasional Papers, Australian National University, Canberra.
Sommer, U. (1991). Frontiers of discourse: The nature of theoretical discussion in German archaeology.Archaeological Review from Cambridge 10: 202–216.
Stutt, A., and Shennan, S. (1990). The nature of archaeological arguments.Antiquity 64: 766–777.
Thomas, J. (1991). Science or anti-science?Archaeological Review from Cambridge 10: 27–36.
Tilley C. (ed.) (1990).Reading Material Culture: Structuralism, Hermeneutics, and Post-Structuralism, Blackwell, Cambridge.
Tilley, C. (1992). Review ofDebating Archaeology.American Antiquity 57: 164–166.
Trigger, B. (1989).A History of Archaeological Thought, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Watson, P. (1992).Explanation in Archaeology: Reactions and rebuttals. In Embree, L. (ed.),Metaarchaeology, Kluwer Academic, Dordrecht, pp. 121–140.
Watson, P., and Fotiadis, M. (1990). The razor's edge: Symbolic and structuralist archaeology and the expansion of archaeological inference.American Anthropologist 92: 613–629.
Watson, R. (1991). What the new archaeology has accomplished.Current Anthropology 32: 275–291.
Watson, R. (1992). Reply to “On Skepticism, Philosophy, and Archaeological Science.”Current Anthropology 33: 213.
Wylie, A. (1989). Matters of fact and matters of interest. In Shennan, S. (ed.),Archaeological Approaches to Cultural Identity, pp. 94–109.
Wylie, A. (1991). Gender theory and the archaeological record. In Conkey, M., and Gero, J. (eds.),Engendering Archaeology: Women and Prehistory, Blackwell, Oxford, pp 31–54.
Wylie, A. (1992). Review ofRe-Constructing Archaeology: Theory and Practice by M. Shanks and C. Tilley.International Studies in Philosophy 24: 135–136.
Wylie, A. (1992). Review ofWomen in Prehistory by M. Ehrenberg, andWomen in Roman Britain by L. Allason-Jones.Journal of Field Archaeology 18: 501–507.
Wylie, A. (1993). A proliferation of new archaeologies: Skepticism, processualism, and post-processualism. In Sherrat, A., and Yoffee, N. (eds.),Archaeological Theory: Who Sets the Agenda? Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Wylie, A. (in press). Feminist theories of social power: Some implications for a processual archaeology.Norwegian Archaeological Review.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Salmon, M.H. Philosophy of archaeology: Current issues. J Archaeol Res 1, 323–343 (1993). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01418109
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01418109