Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-rcrh6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-26T01:37:16.774Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Whose rationality? A response to Fekri Hassan

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 January 2015

Ian Hodder
Ian Hodder*
Affiliation:
Department of Archaeology, University of Cambridge, Downing Street, Cambridge CB2 3DZ, England
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

In December 1997 we published Fekri Hassan's comments on Ian Hodder's ‘Reflexive excavation methods’ (ANTIQUITY 71: 1020–25). Ian Hodder responds here to the criticisms and defends his position.

Type
Notes
Information
Antiquity , Volume 72 , Issue 275 , March 1998 , pp. 213 - 217
Copyright
Copyright © Antiquity Publications Ltd. 1998

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

Anyon, R., Ferguson, T.J., Jackson, L. & Lane, L. 1996. Native American oral traditions and archaeology, Society for American Archaeology Bulletin 14(2): 14–16.Google Scholar
Binford, L.R. 1987. Debating archaeology. New York (NY): Academic Press.Google Scholar
Binford, L.R. & Sabloff, J.A. 1982. Paradigms, systematics and archaeology, Journal of Anthropological Research 38: 137–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Denzin, N.K. & Lincoln, Y.S. 1994. Handbook of qualitative research. London: Sage.Google Scholar
Gero, J. 1996. Archaeological practice and gendered encounters with field data, in Wright, R. (ed.), Gender and archaeology: 251–80. Philadelphia (PA): University of Pennsylvania Press.Google Scholar
Hassan, F. 1997. Beyond the surface: comments on Hodder’s ‘reflexive excavation methodology’, Antiquity 71: 1020–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hesse, M. 1995. Past realities, in Hodder, I., Shanks, M et al. (ed.), Interpreting archaeology: 45—7. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Hobsbawm, E. 1994. The age of extremes. London: Michael Joseph.Google Scholar
Hodder, I. 1992. Theory and practice in archaeology. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Hodder, I. (Ed.). 1996. On the surface. London: British Institute of Archaeology at Ankara and Cambridge: McDonald Institute.Google Scholar
Hodder, I. 1997. ‘Always momentary, fluid and flexible’: towards a reflexive excavation methodology, Antiquity 71: 691—700.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Humphrey, C. & Onon, U. 1996. Shamans and elders. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Knapp, A.B. & Meskell, L. 1997. Bodies of evidence in Cypriot prehistory, Cambridge Archaeological Journal 7/2: 183–204.Google Scholar
Latour, B. & Woolgar, S. 1979. Laboratory life: the social construction of scientific facts. London: Sage.Google Scholar
Renfrew, C. & Bahn, P. 1991. Archaeology. London: Thames & Hudson.Google Scholar
Yates, T. 1993. Frameworks for an archaeology of the body, in Tilley, C. (ed.), Interpretative archaeology: 31–72. London: Berg.Google Scholar