Alberti, B., 2016: Archaeologies of ontology, Annual Review of Anthropology 45, 163–179. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-anthro-102215-095858 CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Andrews, G., Barrett, J.C. and Lewis, J.S.C., 2000: Interpretation not record. The practice of archaeology, Antiquity, 74(285), 525–530. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0003598X00059871 CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Atalay, S 2014: Engaging Archaeology. Positivism, objectivity, and rigour in activist archaeology, in Atalay, S., Clauss, L.R. and McGuire, R.H. (eds.), Transforming Archaeology. Activist practices and prospects, Walnut Creek, 45–60.Google Scholar

Barad, K., 2003: Posthumanist performativity. Toward an understanding of how matter comes to matter, Signs 28(3), 801–831. https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/full/10.1086/345321 CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Barad, K., 2007: Meeting the universe halfway. Quantum physics and the entanglement of matter and meaning, London.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Barrett, J.C., 1988. Fields of discourse. Reconstituting a social archaeology, Critique of Anthropology 7(3), 5–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Barrett, J.C., 1994. Fragments from antiquity, Oxford.Google Scholar

Barrett, J.C., 2014: The material constitution of humanness, Archaeological Dialogues 21(1), 65–74. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1380203814000105 CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Barrett, J.C., 2021: Archaeology and its discontents. Why archaeology matters, London.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Barrett, J.C., and Boyd, M.J., 2019: From Stonehenge to Mycenae. The challenges of archaeological interpretation, London.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Barrett, J.C., in press: Towards an archaeology of ‘Social life’, in Kienlin, T.L. and Bußmann, R. (eds.), Sozialität – Materialität – Praxis/Sociality – Materiality – Practice. Cologne contributions to archaeology and cultural studies, Bonn.Google Scholar

Barrett, J.C., Freeman, P.W.M and Woodward, A., 2000: Cadbury Castle, Somerset. The later prehistoric and early historic archaeology, London.Google Scholar

Bennett, J., 2010: Vibrant Matter. A political ecology of things, Durham NC.Google Scholar

Berggren, Å., 2001. Swedish archaeology in the perspective and the possibility of reflexivity, Current Swedish Archaeology 9, 9–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Berggren, Å., and Hodder, I., 2003: Social practice, method, and some problems of field archaeology, American Antiquity 68, 421. https://doi.org/10.2307/3557102.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Berggren, Å., and Nilsson Stutz, L., 2010: From spectator to critic and participant. A new role for archaeology in ritual studies, Journal of Social Archaeology 10(2), 171–197. https://doi.org/10.1177/1469605310365039 CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Binford, L.R., 1962: Archaeology as anthropology, American Antiquity 28(2), 217–225.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Binford, L.R., 1981: Behavioral archaeology and the “Pompei premise”, Journal of Anthropological Research 37(3), 198–208.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Bintliff, J., 2011: The death of archaeological theory? in Bintliff, J. and Pearce, M. (eds.), The death of archaeological theory?, Oxford, 6–22.Google Scholar

Boyd, M., Campbell, R., Doonan, R.C.P., Douglas, C., Gavalas, G., Gkouma, M., Halley, C., Hartzler, B., Herbst, J.A., Indgjerd, H.R., Krijnen, A., Legaki, I., Margaritis, E., Meyer, N., Moutafi, I., Iliou, N.P., Wylie, D.A. and Renfrew, C., 2021: Open area, open data. Advances in reflexive archaeological practice, Journal of Field Archaeology 46(2), 62–80. https://doi.org/10.1080/00934690.2020.1859780 CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Bryant, L., 2014: Onto-cartoraphy. An ontology of machines and media, Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Butler, J.C., 1988: Performative acts and gender constitution. An essay in phenomenology and feminist theory, Theatre Journal 40(4), 519–531.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Carver, M., 2009: Archaeological investigation, London.Google Scholar

Catapoti, D., and Relaki, M., 2021: ‘Fields of discourse’ revisited. A Simondonian perspective, in Boyd, M.J. and Doonan, R.C.P. (eds.), Far from equilibrium. An archaeology of energy, life and humanity, Oxford, 191–208.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Childe, V.G., 1951: Social evolution, London.Google Scholar

Childe, V.G., 1956: Piecing together the past, London.Google Scholar

Crellin, R., 2020: Change and archaeology, London: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Crossland, Z., 2014. Encounters with ancestors in Highland Madagascar. Material signs and traces of the dead, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Crossland, Z., 2021: ‘Contextual archaeology’ revisited. Reflections on archaeology, assemblages and semiotics, in Boyd, M.J. and Doonan, R.C.P. (eds.), Far from Equilibrium. An archaeology of energy, life and humanity, Oxford, 85–102.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Crossland, Z., and Bauer, A., 2016: Im/materialities. Things and signs, Semiotic Review 4 (S.I.), 1–18.Google Scholar

Cullen, J., 2021: Deleuze and ethology. A philosophy of entangled life, London.Google Scholar

Cunliffe, B., 1984b: Iron Age Wessex. Continuity and change, in Cunliffe, B. and Miles, D., (eds.), Aspects of the Iron Age in Central Southern Britain, Oxford, 12–45.Google Scholar

Cunliffe, B., 1984a: Danebury. An Iron Age hillfort in Hampshire, volumes 1 and 2, London.Google Scholar

Cunliffe, B., 1995: Danebury. An Iron Age hillfort in Hampshire, volume 6 (a hillfort community in perspective), London.Google Scholar

Cunliffe, B., 2000: The Danebury Environs Programme. The prehistory of a Wessex landscape, volume 1, Oxford.Google Scholar

Cunliffe, B., and Poole, C., 1991: Danebury. An Iron Age hillfort in Hampshire, volumes 4 and 5, London.Google Scholar

Cunliffe, B., and Poole, C., 2000: The Danebury Environs Programme. The prehistory of a Wessex landscape, volume 2 (7 parts), Oxford.Google Scholar

Darwin, C., 2009 (1859): On the origin of species by means of natural selection or the preservation of favoured races in the struggle for life, London, (edited by W. Bynum).CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Day, J., (ed.), 2013: Making senses of the past. Toward a Sensory Archaeology, Carbondale, IL: Center for Archaeological Investigation, Southern Illinois University. https://doi.org/10.1080/00438243.1993.9980235 Google Scholar

Downes, J., 1997: The shrine at Cadbury Castle. Belief enshrined?, in Gwilt, A. and Haselgrove, C. (eds.), Reconstructing Iron Age societies, Oxford, 145–152.Google Scholar

Driessen, J., 2002: ‘The king must die’. Some observations on the use of Minoan court compounds, in Driessen, J., Schoep, I. and Laffineur, R. (eds.), Monuments of Minos. Rethinking the Minoan places, Liège, 1–14.Google Scholar

Dupré, J., 2012: Processes of life. Essays in the philosophy of biology, Oxford.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Duwe, S, and Preucel, R. (eds.), 2019: The continuous path. Pueblo movement and the archaeology of becoming, Tucson.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Eagleton, T., 1990: The significance of theory. The Bucknell lectures in literary theory, Oxford.Google Scholar

Edgeworth, M., 2012: Follow the cut, follow the rhythm, follow the material. Norwegian Archaeological Review 45(1), 76–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Ferguson, T.J., Koyiyumptewa, S.B. and Hopkins, M.P., 2015: Co-creation of knowledge by the Hopi Tribe and archaeologists, Advances in Archaeological Practice 3(3), 249–262.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Fletcher, R., 1995: The limits of settlement growth. A theoretical outline, Cambridge.Google Scholar

Foley, D., 2003: Indigenous epistemology and standpoint theory, Social Alternatives 22(1), 44–52.Google Scholar

Fried, M., 1967: The evolution of political society. An essay in political anthropology, New York.Google Scholar

Garcia-Rovira, I., 2015: What about us? On archaeological objects (or the objects of archaeology), Current Swedish Archaeology 23, 85–108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Gibson, C., 2021: ‘Ode to a treethrow’ and other reflexive thoughts. Multivocal engagements at Heathrow airport, in Boyd, M.J. and Doonan, R.C.P. (eds.), Far from equilibrium. An archaeology of energy, life and humanity, Oxford, 211–224.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Gilman, A., 1991: Trajectories towards social complexity in the later prehistory of the Mediterranean, in Earle, T. (ed.), Chiefdoms. Power, economy and ideology, Cambridge, 146–168.Google Scholar

Goody, J., 1976: Production and reproduction. A comparative study of the domestic domain, Cambridge.Google Scholar

Govier, E., and Steel, L., 2021: Beyond the thingification of worlds. New materialisms for the archaeologist, Journal of Material Culture 26(3), 298–317.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Govier, E., (2022): Pre-critical archaeology. Second wave symmetrical archaeology and speculative realism, Archaeological Dialogues 29 (2).CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Govier, E., 2017: Creative practice. How communities were “made” at Çatalhöyük. Thesis (PhD). University of Wales.Google Scholar

Govier, E., 2019: Bodies that co-create. The residues and intimacies of vital materials, in: Attala, L. and Steel, L. (eds.), Body matters exploring the materiality of the human body, Cardiff: University of Wales Press, 19–38.Google Scholar

Govier, E., 2020: Power and all its guises. Environmental determinism and locating the ‘Crux of the Matter’, Archaeological Dialogues 27(2), 173–176.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Graeber, D., and Wengrow, D., 2021: The Dawn of everything. A new history of humanity, Dublin.Google Scholar

Grant, A., 2002: Scales of reference. Archaeozoological approaches to the study of behaviours and change, in Dobney, K. and O’Connor, T. (eds.), Bones and the Man. Studies in honour of Don Brothwell, 78–87, Oxford.Google Scholar

Graves-Brown, P., 2014: Internet, in Smith, C. (ed.), Encyclopedia of global archaeology, New York, 4002–4006.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Grosz, E., 1994: Volatile bodies. Toward a corporeal feminism, Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar

Grosz, E., 2017: The Incorporeal. Ontology, Ethics, and the Limits of Materialism. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar

Hamilakis, Y., 2011: Archaeologies of the senses, in: Insoll, T. (ed.), The Oxford handbook on the archaeology of ritual and religion, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 208–225.Google Scholar

Hamilakis, Y., 2021: From fields of discourse to fields of sensoriality. Rethinking the archaeological record, in Boyd, M.J. and Doonan, R.C.P. (eds.), Far from equilibrium. An archaeology of energy, life and humanity, Oxford, 239–257.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Hamilakis, Y., and Jones, A.M., 2017: Archaeology and assemblage, Cambridge Archaeological Journal 27, 77–84. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0959774316000688 CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Harman, G., 2018: Object-oriented ontology. A new theory of everything, London: Penguin Random House.Google Scholar

Harrison, R., and Schofield, J., 2010: After modernity. Archaeological approaches to the contemporary past, Oxford.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Heidegger, M., 1962: Being and time, London: Blackwell.Google Scholar

Heidegger, M, 1978: Basic writings, London: Routledge, Kegan and Paul.Google Scholar

Hillerdal, C., Karlström, A. and Ojala, C-G. (eds), 2017: Archaeologies of ‘us’ and ‘them’. Debating history, heritage and indigeneity, London.Google Scholar

Hodder, I., 1992: Theory and practice in archaeology, London: Routledge.Google Scholar

Hodder, I., (ed.) 1982: Symbolic and structural archaeology, Cambridge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Hodder, I., 1999: The archaeological process. An introduction, Oxford.Google Scholar

Hodder, I., 2012: Entangled. An archaeology of the relationships between humans and things, Oxford.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Hoffmeyer, J., 2008: Biosemiotics. An examination into the signs of life and the life of signs, Scranton, IL (Translated by Hoffmeyer, J. & Favareau, D.).Google Scholar

Holbraad, M., 2009: Ontology, ethnography, archaeology. An afterword on the ontography of things, Cambridge Archaeological Journal 19, 431–441. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0959774309000614 CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Hoopes, J., 1991: Peirce on signs. Writings on semiotic by Charles Sanders Peirce, Chapel Hill.Google Scholar

Huggett, J., 2020: Is big digital data different? Towards a new archaeological paradigm Journal of Field Archaeology 45(Sup.1), s8–s17. https://doi.org/10.1080/00934690.2020.1713281 CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Ingold, T., 1993: The temporality of landscape, World Archaeology 25(2), 152–174.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Ingold, T., 2000: The perception of the environment. Essays in livelihood, dwelling and skill, London.Google Scholar

Inomata, T., 2006: Plazas, performers and spectators. Political theaters of the Classic Maya, Current Anthropology 47(5), 805–842. https://doi.org/10.1086/506279 CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Jervis, B., 2019: Assemblage thought and archaeology, London.Google Scholar

Kapp, E., 1877 (2015): Grundlinien einer Philosophie der Technik. Zur Entstehungsgeschichte der Kultur aus neuen Gesichtspunkten, Hamburg: Meier Felix Verlag GmbH.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Kirby, V., 1997: Telling flesh. The substance of the corporeal, London.Google Scholar

Ko, I., 2021: Towards an ‘archaeology of the conditions of possibility’, in Boyd, M.J. and Doonan, R.C.P. (eds.), Far from equilibrium. An archaeology of energy, life and humanity, Oxford, 177–190.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Kockelman, P., 2012: Agent, person, subject, self. A theory of ontology, interaction and infrastructure, Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Kohn, E., 2013: How forests think. Toward an anthropology beyond the human, Berkeley, CA.Google Scholar

Kryder-Reid, E., Foutz, J., Wood, E. and Zimmerman, L., 2017: ‘I just don’t ever use that word’. Investigating stakeholders’ understanding of heritage, International Journal of Heritage Studies https://doi.org/10.1080/13527258.2017.1339110.Google Scholar

Law, J., 2004: After method. Mess in social science research, London.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Lucas, G., 2012: Understanding the archaeological record, Cambridge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Malafouris, L., 2013: How things shape the mind. A theory of material engagement, Cambridge, MA.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Marshall, Y., and Alberti, B., 2014: A matter of difference. Karen Barad, ontology and archaeological bodies, Cambridge Archaeological Journal 24, 19–36. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0959774314000067.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

McFadyen, L., 2006: Building technologies, quick architecture and early Neolithic long barrow sites in southern Britain, Archaeological Review from Cambridge 21(1), 117–134.Google Scholar

McFadyen, L., 2008: Temporary spaces in the Mesolithic and Neolithic, in Pollard, J. (ed.), Prehistoric Britain, Chichester: Wiley Blackwell, 121–134.Google Scholar

McFadyen, L., 2013: Designing with living. A contextual archaeology of dependent architecture, in Alberti, A., Jones, A.M. and J. Pollard (eds.), Archaeology after interpretation. Returning materials to archaeological theory, Walnut Creek: Left Coast Press.Google Scholar

McFadyen, L., 2016: Actions in time. After the breakage of pottery and before the construction of walls at the site of Castelo Velho de Freixo de Numão. Estudos do Quaternário/Quaternary Studies 15, 71–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

McGinn, C., 2015: Prehension. The hand and the emergence of humanity, Cambridge, MA.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Miller, D., and Tilley, C. (eds.), 1984: Ideology, power and prehistory, Cambridge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Morgan, D., 2005: The sacred gaze. Religious visual culture in theory and practice, Berkeley.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Moro, C., 2016: To encounter, to build the world and to become a human being. Advocating for a material-cultural turn in developmental psychology, Integrative Psychological and Behavioral Sciences 50, 586–602.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Nicholas, G.P., and Andrews, T.D., 1997: Indigenous archaeology in the modern world, in Nicholas, G. P. and Andrews, T. D. (eds.), Archaeology at a crossroads. Archaeology and first peoples in Canada, Burnaby, 1–18.Google Scholar

Nilsson Stutz, L., 2003: Embodied rituals and ritualized bodies. Tracing ritual practices in Late Mesolithic Burials. Stockholm: Almqvist and Wiksell Intl.Google Scholar

Noble, W., and Davidson, I., 1996: Human evolution, language and mind. A psychological and archaeological inquiry, Cambridge.Google Scholar

Olsen, B., 2003: Material culture after text. Re-membering things, Norwegian Archaeological Review 36(2), 87–104. https://doi.org/10.1080/00293650310000650 CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Olsen, B., 2010: In defense of things, Lanham: Altamira Press.Google Scholar

Olsen, B., and Witmore, C., 2015: Archaeology, symmetry, and the ontology of things. A response to critics, Archaeological Dialogues 22(2), 187–197. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1380203815000240 CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Olsen, B., Shanks, M., Webmoor, T. and Witmore, C., 2012: Archaeology. The discipline of things, Berkeley: University of California Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Outram, A.K., and Bogaard, A., 2019: Subsistence and society in prehistor. New directions in economic archaeology, Cambridge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Palmer, T., 1984: Danebury, an Iron Age hillfort in Hampshire. An aerial photographic interpretation of its environs, London.Google Scholar

Patrik, L., 1985: Is there an archaeological record? Advances in Archaeological Method and Theory 8, 27–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Peirce, C. S., 1991: Peirce on signs, Chapel Hill: The University of North Carolina Press.Google Scholar

Peirce, C.S., 1878. How to make our ideas clear, Popular Science Monthly 12, 286–302.Google Scholar

Pollard, P., Smith, C., Willika, J., Copley, V., Wilson, C., Poelina-Hunter, E. and Ah Quee, J., 2021: Indigenous views on the future of public archaeology in Australia, Online Journal in Archaeology 10, 31–52. Available at: http://revistas.jasarqueologia.es/index.php/APJournal/article/view/293/256.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Porr, M, 2018: Country and relational ontology in the Kimberley, Cambridge Archaeological Journal 28, 3, 395–409.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Porr, M., and Matthews, J., 2016: Thinking through story. Archaeology and narratives. Hunter Gatherer Research 2(3), 249–274.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Preucel, R.W., 2006: Archaeological semiotics, Oxford.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Preucel, R.W., 2016: Pragmatic archaeology and semiotic mediation, Semiotic Review 4 (SI), Available at: https://www.semioticreview.com/ojs/index.php/sr/article/view/11 (accessed 25 May 2021).Google Scholar

Ralph, J., and Smith, C. 2014: ‘We’ve got better things to do than worry about whitefella politics’. Contemporary Indigenous graffiti and recent government interventions in Jawoyn Country, Australian Archaeology 78, 75–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Redman, C.L., Berman, M.J., Curtin, E.V., W.T. Langhorne, Jr., N.M. Versaggi and J.C. Wanser (eds.), 1978: Social archaeology. Beyond subsistence and dating, New York.Google Scholar

Renfrew, C., 1984: Approaches to social archaeology, Edinburgh.Google Scholar

Renfrew, C., 1973: Social archaeology. An inaugural lecture, Southampton.Google Scholar

Renfrew, C., and Bahn, P., 2004: Archaeology. Theories, methods and practice, London. (4th edition.Google Scholar

Renfrew, C., Rowlands, M.J. and Segraves, B.A., (eds.), 1982: Theory and explanation in archaeology. The Southampton Conference, London.Google Scholar

Ribeiro, A., 2019: Archaeology and the new metaphysical dogmas. Comments on ontologies and reality, Forum Kritische Archäologie 8, 25–38. https://doi.org/10.6105/journal.fka.2019.8.2.Google Scholar

Roosevelt, C.H., Cobb, P., Moss, E., Olson, B.R. and Ünlüsoy, S., 2015: Excavation is destruction digitization. Advances in archaeological practice, Journal of Field Archaeology 40(3), 325–346. https://doi.org/10.1179/2042458215Y.0000000004 CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Roskams, S., 2001: Excavation, Cambridge.Google Scholar

Rovelli, C., 2021: Helgoland, London.Google Scholar

Saussure, F., 1916 (1998): Course in general linguistics, Chicago, Illinois: Open Court.Google Scholar

Schiffer, M.B., 1976: Behavioral archaeology, London.Google Scholar

Schoep, I., 2021: Fragments from Minoan Crete. Social practice at the EM IIA-MM IB (2650-1875 BCE) court building at Knossos, in M.J. Boyd and R.C.P. Doonan, (eds.), Far from equilibrium. An archaeology of energy, life and humanity, Oxford, 131–153.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Schutz, A., and Luckmann, T., 1973: The structures of the life-world, volume 1, Evanston: Northwestern University Press.Google Scholar

Schutz, A., and Luckmann, T. 1983: The structures of the life-world, volume 2, Evanston: Northwestern University Press.Google Scholar

Service, E.R., 1971: Primitive social organization. An evolutionary perspective, New York. (2nd edition)Google Scholar

Shanks, M., and Tilley, C., 1987: Social theory and archaeology, Cambridge.Google Scholar

Sharples, N., 2010: Social relations in later prehistory. Wessex in the first millennium BC, Oxford.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Smith, C., 2017: The social and political sculpting of archaeology globally (and vice versa), Pyrenae 48(1), 7–44.Google Scholar

Smith, C., and Wobst, H.M. (eds.), 2005: Indigenous archaeologies. Decolonising theory and practice, London.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Smith, C., Ralph, J., Pollard, K. and de Leiuen, C., 2022: Social justice. Material culture as a driver of inequality, in de Cunzo, L.A. and Dann Roebers, C. (eds.), Handbook of material culture studies, Cambridge, 100–127.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Smith, C., V. Copley, Sr., and Jackson, G. 2018: Intellectual soup. On the reformulation and repatriation of Indigenous knowledge, in Apaydin, V. (ed.), Shared knowledge, shared power. Local and Indigenous heritage, New York, 1–28.Google Scholar

Soar, K., 2014: Sects and the city. Factional ideologies in representations of performance from Bronze Age Crete, World Archaeology 46(2), 224–241. https://doi.org/10.1080/00438243.2014.885850 CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Society for American Archaeology (SAA), 2022: What is Archaeology? Available at: https://www.saa.org/about-archaeology/what-is-archaeology (accessed 7 August, 2022).Google Scholar

Soja, E.W., 1989: Postmodern geographies. The reassertion of space in critical social theory, London.Google Scholar

Stopford, J., 1987: Danebury. An alternative view, Scottish Archaeological Review 4(2), 70–75.Google Scholar

Supernant, K, Baxter, J. E., Lyons, N. and Atalay, S. (eds.), 2020: Archaeologies of the heart, New York.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Székely, T., Moore, A.J. and Komdeur, J., 2010: Social behaviour. Genes, ecology and evolution, Cambridge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Thomas, J., 1993: The hermeneutics of megalithic space, in C. Tilley (ed.), Interpretative archaeology, Oxford, 73–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Thomas, J., 2009: On the ocularcentrism of archaeology, in J. Thomas and V. Jorge (eds.), Archaeology and the politics of vision in a post-modern context, Cambridge: Cambridge Scholar’s Press, 1–12.Google Scholar

Thompson, E., 2007: Mind in life. Biology, phenomenology, and the sciences of mind, Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar

Tilley, C., 1990. Reading material culture. Structuralism, hermeneutics and post-structuralism, Oxford: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar

Tomkins, P., 2012: Behind the horizon. Reconsidering the genesis and ‘first palace’ at Knossos (final Neolithic IV-Middle Minoan IB), in I. Scheop, P. Tomkins and J. Driessen, (eds.), Back to the beginning. Reassessing social and political complexity on Crete during the early and middle Bronze Age, Oxford, 32–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Tsoraki, C., Barton, H., Crellin, R.J. and Harris, O.J.T., 2021: Making marks meaningful. New materialism and the microwear assemblage, World Archaeology. https://doi.org/10.1080/00438243.2021.1898462 Google Scholar

Turner, E., 2012: Communitas. The anthropology of joy, New York: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar

Uexküll, J., von, 1957: A stroll through the worlds of animals and men. A picture book of invisible worlds, in C.H. Schiller, (ed.), Instinctive behavior. The development of a modern concept, New York.Google Scholar

United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation (UNESCO) 2003: What is intangible cultural heritage? Available at: https://ich.unesco.org/en/what-is-intangible-heritage-00003 (accessed 7 August 2022).Google Scholar

Venkatesan, S., (ed.), 2010: Ontology is just another word for culture. Motion tabled at the 2008 meeting of the group for debates in anthropological theory, University of Manchester, Critique of Anthropology 30(2), 152–200. https://doi.org/10.1177/0308275X09364070 Google Scholar

Webmoor, T., and Witmore, C.L., 2008: Things are us! A commentary on human/things relations under the banner of a ‘social’ archaeology, Norwegian Archaeological Review 41(1), 53–70. https://doi.org/10.1080/00293650701698423 CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Wendrich, W., (ed.), 2013: Archaeology and apprenticeship. Body knowledge, identity, and communities of practice. Tucson: University of Arizona Press.Google Scholar

Wenger, E., 1998: Communities of practice. Learning, meaning, and identity, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Witmore, C. L., 2007: Symmetrical archaeology. Excerpts of a manifesto, World Archaeology 39(4), 546–562.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Witmore, C.L., 2014: Archaeology and the new materialisms, Journal of Contemporary Archaeology 1(2), 203–246. https://doi.org/10.1558/jca.v1i2.16661 CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Wittengstein, L., 1958: Philosophical investigations, Oxford.Google Scholar

Wittgenstein, L., 1922 (2001): Tractatus logico-philosophicus, London: Routledge.Google Scholar