Advances in Archaeological Method and Theory, Vol. 8 PDF
Preview Advances in Archaeological Method and Theory, Vol. 8
Advisory Board MARGARET W. CONKEY COLIN RENFREW Department of Anthropology Department of Archaeology State University of New York Cambridge University Binghamton, New York Cambridge, England DON E. DUMOND STANLEY SOUTH Department of Anthropology Institute of Archeology and University of Oregon Anthropology Eugene, Oregon University of South Carolina Columbia, South Carolina ROBERT C. DUNNELL Department of Anthropology STUART STRUEVER University of Washington Department of Anthropology Seattle, Washington Northwestern University Evanston, Illinois GEORGE J. GUMERMAN Department of Anthropology DAVID HURST THOMAS Southern Illinois University Department of Anthropology Carbondale, Illinois American Museum of Natural History WILLIAM A. LONGACRE New York, New York Department of Anthropology University of Arizona ROBERT WHALLON, JR. Tucson, Arizona Museum of Anthropology University of Michigan FRED PLOG Ann Arbor, Michigan Department of Sociology and Anthropology J. PETER WHITE New Mexico State University Department of Anthropology Las Cruces, New Mexico University of Sydney Sydney, New South Wales WILLIAM R. RATHJE Australia Department of Anthropology University of Arizona Tucson, Arizona Advances in ARCHAEOLOGICAL METHOD AND THEORY Volume 8 Edited by MICHAEL B. SCHIFFER Department of Anthropology University of Arizona Tucson, Arizona 1985 ACADEMIC PRESS, INC. Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, Publishers Orlando San Diego New York London Toronto Montreal Sydney Tokyo COPYRIGHT © 1985, BY ACADEMIC PRESS, INC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. NO PART OF THIS PUBLICATION MAY BE REPRODUCED OR TRANSMITTED IN ANY FORM OR BY ANY MEANS, ELECTRONIC OR MECHANICAL, INCLUDING PHOTOCOPY, RECORDING, OR ANY INFORMATION STORAGE AND RETRIEVAL SYSTEM, WITHOUT PERMISSION IN WRITING FROM THE PUBLISHER. ACADEMIC PRESS, INC. Orlando, Florida 32887 United Kingdom Edition published by ACADEMIC PRESS INC. (LONDON) LTD. 24-28 Oval Road, London NW1 7DX ISSN 0162-8003 ISBN 0-12-003108-6 PRINTED IN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 85 86 87 88 987654321 Contributors Numbers in parentheses indicate the pages on which the authors' contributions begin. Ian Hodder (1), Department of Archaeology, University o fCambridge, Cambridge CB2 3DZ, England Eileen Johnson (157), The Museum, Texas Tech University, Lubbock, Texas 79409 Linda E. Patrik (27), Department of Philosophy, Union College, Schenectady, New York 12308 Janet E. Rafferty (113), Cobb Institute of Archaeology, Mississippi State University, Mississippi State, Mississippi 39762 Polly Schaafsma (237), Rt. 2 Box 300, Santa Fe, New Mexico 87501 David W. Stahle (279), Department of Geography, University of Arkansas, Fayetteville, Arkansas 72701 Daniel Wolfman (279), Arkansas Archeological Survey, Arkansas Tech University, Russellville, Arkansas 72801 Alison Wylie1 (63), Department of Philosophy, Washington University, St. Louis, Mis- souri 63130 •Present address: Department of Philosophy, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta T2N 1N4, Canada. ix Contents of Previous Volumes Volume 1 Optimizing Strategies for Evaluating Archaeological Significance Michael J. Moratto and Roger E. Kelly The Concept of Carrying Capacity in the Study of Culture Process Michael A. Glassow Demographic Archaeology Fekri A. Hassan Mortuary Practices and the Study of Prehistoric Social Systems Joseph A. Tainter Social Interaction and Stylistic Similarity: A Reanalysis Stephen Plog Inference and Evidence in Archaeology: A Discussion of the Conceptual Problems Alan P. Sullivan Independent Dating in Archaeological Analysis Jeffrey S. Dean Advances in Archaeological Seriation William H. Marquardt A Survey of Disturbance Processes in Archaeological Site Formation W. Raymond Wood and Donald Lee Johnson Decision Making in Modern Surveys Stephen Plog, Fred Plog, and Walter Wait Subject Index Volume 2 Modern Material Culture Studies William L. Rathje The Cross-Cultural Method in Archaeology Charles W. McNett, Jr. XI xii CONTENTS OF PREVIOUS VOLUMES Breaking Down the System: Recent Ecological Approaches in Archaeology Michael A. Jochim The Method and Theory of Site Catchment Analysis: A Review Donna C. Roper Three Locational Models: An Epistemological Assessment for Anthropology and Archaeology Carole L. Crumley Archaeologically, What Constitutes an Early Domestic Animal? Stanley J. Olsen On the Quantification of Vertebrate Archaeofaunas Donald K. Grayson The Role of Archaeometry in American Archaeology: Approaches to the Evaluation of the Antiquity of Homo sapiens in California R. E. Taylor and Louis A. Pay en Paleoethnobotany in American Archaeology Richard I. Ford Subject Index Volume 3 Cult Archaeology and Unscientific Method and Theory John R. Cole Evolutionary Theory and Archaeology Robert C. Dunnell The Archaeological Study of Adaptation: Theoretical and Methodological Issues Patrick V. Kirch The Use of General Ecological Principles in Archaeology Donald L. H ar de sty Explanatory/Predictive Models of Hunter-Gatherer Adaptation Robert L. Bettinger An Optimum Diet Model, Coastal Variability, and Hunter-Gatherer Behavior Stephen M. Perlman Toward a General Model of Agricultural Systems Stanton W. Green Vicissitudes and Overkill: The Development of Explanations of Pleistocene Extinctions Donald K. Grayson Obsidian Hydration Dating: A Coming of Age Joseph W. Michels and Ignatius S. T. Tsong Index Volume 4 Archaeoastronomy Anthony F. Ave ni Explaining the Evolution of Cultural Complexity: A Review Robert J. Wenke xiii CONTENTS OF PREVIOUS VOLUMES Archaeology, Ethnohistory, and Ethnology: Interpretive Interfaces Thomas H. Charlton Seasonality Studies Gregory G. Monks Isotopic Discrimination and Correction Factors in Radiocarbon Dating David L. Browman The Expanding Role of Surface Assemblages in Archaeological Research Dennis E. Lewarch and Michael J. O'Brien Developments and Directions in Geoarchaeology Bruce G. Gladfelter Taphonomy and Paleoecology: A Critical Review of Archaeology's Sister Disciplines Diane P. Gifford Index Volume 5 Cultural Resources Management Don D. Fowler The Study of Impacts on Archaeological Sites Leslie E. Wilde sen Advances in Urban Archaeology Edward Staski Avenues of Inquiry in Historical Archaeology Kathleen Deagan Archaeological Applications of Computer Graphics J. Barto Arnold III Quantifying Archaeological Research G. A. Clark Ceramic Compositional Analysis in Archaeological Perspective Ronald L. Bishop, Robert L. Rands, and George R. Holley Archaeofaunas and Subsistence Studies R. Lee Lyman Nutritional Inference from Paleopathology Rebecca Huss-Ashmore, Alan H. Goodman, and George J. Armelagos Index Volume 6 The Antiquity of Man and the Development of American Archaeology David J. Meltzer Investigating the Diffusion of Stylistic Innovations Dave D. Davis Breaking Down Cultural Complexity: Inequality and Heterogeneity Randall H. McGuire XÏV CONTENTS OF PREVIOUS VOLUMES Subsistence and Complex Societies: The Case of the Maya Frederick M. Wiseman The Role of Palynology in Archaeology Vaughn M. Bryant, Jr., and Richard G. Holloway Plant Opal Phytolith Analysis: Major Advances in Archaeobotanical Research Irwin Rovner The Siteless Survey: A Regional Scale Data Collection Strategy Robert C. Dunnell and William S. Dancey Regional Sampling in Archaeological Survey: The Statistical Perspective Jack D. Nance Index Volume 7 Archaeology and the Study of Gender Margaret W. Conkey and Janet Spector Too Many Types: An Overview of Prestate Societies in the Americas Gary Feinman and Jill Neitzel The Nature of Organization of Intrasite Archaeological Records and Spatial Analytic Approaches to Their Investigation Christopher Carr Discovering Sites Unseen Francis P. McManamon Remote Sensing Applications in Archaeology James I. Ebert Geomagnetic Dating Methods in Archaeology Daniel Wolfman Index 1 Postprocessual Archaeology IAN HODDER This essay draws some outlines for theories of social change in which material culture is seen as actively and meaningfully produced, and in which the indi- vidual actor, culture, and history are central. It is not, therefore, intended to argue for an archaeology of the symbolic order. The importance of the work of, for example, Deetz (1977), Glassie (1975), Wobst (1977), Leori-Gourhan (1967), and Hall (1977) to the development of symbolic archaeology has been outlined by Leone (1982). The concern in this essay, however, is more with the social and historical context of symbolic production and with an attempt to identify the implications of the notion of the unity of meaning (belief) and action. The sources for this latter interest are primarily outside archaeology, in particular Giddens (1979) and Bourdieu (1977). Other varied ideas taken from, for exam- ple, Piaget (1972), Geertz (1973), Turner (1969), Sperber (1975), and Douglas (1966) underline the difficulty of writing a review in which an established ap- proach or school is identified with its own archaeological tradition. Rather a number of emerging trends in archaeology and material culture studies are noted and their potential implications within archaeology assessed. INTRODUCTION The conception of humanity underlying the behaviorism that dominates the social sciences, and archaeology to a greater extent than most, can be described as passive. The key words within this viewpoint are that people react to external 1 ADVANCES IN ARCHAEOLOGICAL Copyright © 1985 by Academic Press, Inc. METHOD AND THEORY, VOL. 8 All rights of reproduction in any form reserved. ISBN 0-12-003108-6 2 IAN HODDER stimuli such that their behavior reflects the rules and goals of the wider society to which the individual is subordinate so their culture serves the function of adapta- tion within and between systems. I attempt below to justify these statements in relation to archaeology by reference to particular authors, but for the moment it may be helpful to identify some contrasts, despite the oversimplification that is involved. The first characteristic of an alternative viewpoint is that people are seen as active. They actively negotiate social rules, creating and transforming the social structure that is constructed by the individual. These various contrasts (behavior/social action, reflection/transformation, reaction/construction, soci- ety/individual) are based on the passive/active distinction and are closely linked to another, that between function and meaning. The attempt to break down the split made in archaeology and the social sciences between function and meaning, process and norm, system and culture is the second characteristic of an alternative viewpoint. In the behaviorist model, the reasons given by people for their actions often appear irrelevant and in archaeology a materialist bias at times emerges (see for example, Binford 1982; Gould 1978). What people think is disregarded because the search is for cross- cultural behavioral generalizations to which the individual is subordinate. The functions of social institutions with respect to their environments are discussed without reference to meaning and cultural context. The behavioral position ap- pears to suggest that one can understand behavior, be it of humans or dogs, without going through any cognitive processes that are supposed to lie in the actors. Within the contextual alternative this split is denied because actions are seen as involving intentions and an everyday knowledgeability that may be tacit or unexpressed, but is nevertheless culturally constructed. The fact that an item or institution functions to achieve an end necessitates that an end exists (so involving human choice of goals), and necessitates monitoring and judgement of the suitability of the item or institution for its tasks. The unity of meaning (belief) and action is claimed because, following Geertz (1973:45-46), the individual is innately given only extremely general response capacities that allow him/her great plasticity, complexity, and effectiveness, but that lead to a dependence on culture to organize human thought and existence. Without the constructed, cul- tural world, behavior is seen by Geertz as being virtually ungovernable, a mere chaos of pointless acts and exploding emotions. 'There is no such thing as a human nature independent of culture" (1973:49). Linked to the dichotomy set up between function and meaning is that between objectivity and subjectivity. It is assumed within the materialist conception of humanity that cross-cultural generalizations can validly refer only to the visible products of adaptive systems. Fact and theory are divorced and opposed (Ren- frew 1982). But it can be claimed (Leone 1982; Renfrew 1983) that we can make valid generalizations about how individuals act meaningfully. Indeed, all state- ments about human behavior necessarily involve reference to cultural attitudes,
The list of books you might like
