Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-jkksz Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-05T13:04:06.438Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Science in Archaeology: The Saints Go Marching In

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

Don E. Dumond
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The New Archaeology has been said to involve a new view of culture and a heightened appreciation of the way to do science. By way of examining these claims, a review is made of three well known studies in which archaeologists popularly assigned to that movement attempt to relate the distributions of archaeological materials to patterns of post-marital residence. One of the studies is found to be possibly successful, the others probably unsuccessful, and the conclusion is that no such relationship is demonstrated. Although the conceptual framework of the studies is impressive, at least two of them are found to suffer from an insufficiency of rigor in testing their hypotheses. It is suggested that the conceptual framework is not peculiar to the New Archaeology, and that the shortcomings in testing relate to a misapprehension of scientific method.

Type
Articles
Information
American Antiquity , Volume 42 , Issue 3 , July 1977 , pp. 330 - 349
Copyright
Copyright © Society for American Archaeology 1977 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Allen, William L., and Richardson, James B. III 1971 The reconstruction of kinship from archaeological data: the concepts, the methods. American Antiquity 36:41-53.Google Scholar
Bayard, Donn T. 1969 Science, theory, and reality in the “new archaeology.” American Antiquity 34:376-84.Google Scholar
Binford, Lewis R. 1965 Archaeological systematics and the study of culture process. American Antiquity 31:203-10.Google Scholar
Flannery, Kent V. 1968a Archaeological perspectives. In New perspectives in archeology, edited by Binford, S. R. and Binford, L. R., pp. 5-32. Aldine, Chicago.Google Scholar
Flannery, Kent V. 1968b Methodological considerations of the archaeological use of ethnographic data. In Man the hunter, edited by Lee, R. B. and DeVore, I., pp. 268–73. Aldine, Chicago.Google Scholar
Bonham-Carter, G. F. 1967 Fortran IV program for Q-mode cluster analysis of nonquantitative data using IBM 7090 computers. State Geological Survey Computer Contribution 17. University of Kansas, Lawrence.Google Scholar
Cohen, Yehudi A., ed. 1968 Man in adaptation (3 vols.). Aldine-Atherton, Chicago.Google Scholar
Cohen, Yehudi A., ed. 1971Google Scholar
Cronin, Constance 1962 An analysis of pottery design elements, indicating possible relationships between three decorated types. In Chapters in the prehistory of eastern Arizona, I, by Martin, Paul S., Rinaldo, John B., Longacre, W. A., Cronin, Constance, Freeman, Leslie G. Jr., and Shoenwetter, James, pp. 105-14. Fieldiana: Anthropology, vol. 53.Google Scholar
Deetz, James 1965 The dynamics of stylistic change in Arikara ceramics. Illinois Studies in Anthropology 4.Google Scholar
Deetz, James 1968 The inference of residence and descent rules from archeological data. In New perspectives in archeology, edited by Binford, S. R. and Binford, L. R., pp. 41-48. Aldine, Chicago.Google Scholar
Dixon, Roland B. 1928 The building of cultures. C. Scribner's Sons, New York.Google Scholar
Doran, J. E., and Hodson, F. R. 1975 Mathematics and computers in archaeology. Harvard University Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
Dumond, Don E. 1974 Some uses of R-mode analysis in archaeology. American Antiquity 39:253-70.Google Scholar
Flannery, Kent V. 1976 The early Mesoamerican village. Academic Press, New York.Google Scholar
Freeman, Leslie G. Jr., and Brown, James A. 1964 Statistical analysis of Carter Ranch pottery. In Chapters in the prehistory of eastern Arizona, II, by Martin, P. S., Rinaldo, J. B., Longacre, W. A., Freeman, L. G. Jr., Brown, J. A., Hevly, R. H., and Cooley, M. E., pp. 126–54. Fieldiana: Anthropology, Vol. 55.Google Scholar
Hempel, Carl G. 1966 Philosophy of natural science. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey.Google Scholar
Hill, James A. 1966 A prehistoric community in eastern Arizona. Southwestern Journal of Anthropology 22:9-30.Google Scholar
Flannery, Kent V. 1970a Broken K Pueblo: prehistoric social organization in the American southwest. University of Arizona, Anthropological Papers 18.Google Scholar
Flannery, Kent V. 1970b Prehistoric social organization in the American southwest: theory and method. In Reconstructing prehistoric pueblo societies, edited by Longacre, William A., pp. 11-58. University of New Mexico Press, Albuquerque.Google Scholar
Kuhn, Thomas S. 1962 The structure of scientific revolutions. University of Chicago Press, Chicago.Google Scholar
Kuhn, Thomas S. 1970 Postscript-1969. In The structure of scientific revolutions, 2d. ed., by Kuhn, T. S., pp. 174-210. University of Chicago Press, Chicago.Google Scholar
Lischka, Joseph J. 1975 Broken K revisited: a short discussion of factor analysis. American Antiquity 40:220-27.Google Scholar
Longacre, William A. 1964 Archeology as anthropology: a case study. Science 144:1454-55.Google Scholar
Longacre, William A. 1968 Some aspects of prehistoric society in east-central Arizona. In New perspectives in archeology, edited by Binford, S. R. and Binford, L. R., pp. 89-102. Aldine, Chicago.Google Scholar
Longacre, William A. 1970 Archaeology as anthropology, a case study. University of Arizona, Anthropological Papers 17.Google Scholar
Mueller, John H., and Schuessler, Karl F. 1961 Statistical reasoning in sociology. Houghton Mifflin, Boston.Google Scholar
Nie, Norman H., Hull, C. H., Jenkins, J. G., Steinbrenner, K., and Bent, D. H. 1975. Statistical package for the social sciences, 2d. ed. McGraw-Hill, New York.Google Scholar
Northrop, F. S. C. 1956 Man's relation to the earth in its bearing on his aesthetic, ethical, and legal values. In Man's role in changing the face of the earth, edited by Thomas, William L. Jr., pp. 1052–67. University of Chicago Press, Chicago.Google Scholar
Rummel, R. J. 1970 Applied factor analysis. Northwestern University Press, Evanston.Google Scholar
Schiffer, Michael B. 1975 Behavioral chain analysis: activities, organization, and the use of space. In Chapters in the prehistory of eastern Arizona, IV, by Martin, Paul S., Zubrow, Ezra B. W., Hanson, D. C., Schiffer, M. B., Wilcox, D. R., pp. 103–19. Fieldiana: Anthropology, vol. 65.Google Scholar
Sokal, Robert R., and Sneath, Peter H. A. 1963 Principles of numerical taxonomy. W. H. Freeman, San Francisco.Google Scholar
Spaulding, Albert C. 1968 Explanation in archeology. In New perspectives in archeology, edited by Binford, S. R. and Binford, L. R., pp. 33-39. Aldine, Chicago.Google Scholar
Spindler, Louise, and Spindler, George 1958 Male and female adaptations in culture change. American Anthropologist 60:217-33.Google Scholar
Stanislawski, Michael B. 1973 Review of Archaeology as anthropology: a case study, by William A. Longacre. American Antiquity 38:117-21.Google Scholar
Whallon, Robert Jr. 1968 Investigations of late prehistoric social organization in New York State. In New perspectives in archeology, edited by Binford, S. R. and Binford, L. R., pp. 223–44. Aldine, Chicago.Google Scholar
White, Leslie A. 1959 The evolution of culture. McGraw-Hill, New York.Google Scholar