This paper both expands and reconceptualizes our knowledge about the early (January 1947 to January 1948) and formative responses of American archaeologists and anthropologists to word and rumor about W. F Libby's 14C dating system. Drawing principally from primary sources for the first time, integrated with literature from the history and sociology of science, new and interpretative information is offered relative to several topics. They include: (1) the profession's inefficient communication networks and their influence on the year-long course of truncated dialogue about purported radioactive dating investigations afoot; (2) the divergent ways in which competing factions of elite specialists labored to formulate strategies to address the perceived implications of Libby's novel technique; (3) the particularly important roles in this period assumed by Chicago's Robert Redfield and Fred Eggan, the R. S. Peabody Foundation's Frederick Johnson, and the Viking Fund's Paul Fejos, among others; (4) the degree and manner in which the effort to grapple with the 14C dating proposal was integrally connected to an ongoing campaign to enhance the professional standing of American archaeology; and (5) clear indications that some archaeologists exhibited ambivalence, if not resistance, to the prospect of "physics" intruding into their domain.

The compatibility of processual and postprocessual archaeology has been heavily debated. This discussion is frequently phrased in terms of scientific vs. nonscientific/humanistic archaeology. We suggest that the "postprocessual debate" is based on a mischaracterization of science that is pervasive in archaeology, and is largely unnecessary when a more reasonable view of the nature of science is considered. To demonstrate this point, we begin our discussion by identifying several commonalities within most postprocessual approaches to provide a foundation for our discussion. We then consider the two classic criteria used to differentiate science and nonscience, Baconian inductivism and falsification, and demonstrate why these views lead to an incomplete and inaccurate understanding of science. We next examine seven attributes that are commonly accepted as characteristics of science in order to provide a more accurate view of the nature and workings of science. Based on this discussion, we argue that much postprocessual research is in fact scientific, and we ultimately conclude that postprocessual approaches as currently applied can contribute to a scientific understanding of the archaeological record.

It is generally assumed that life expectancy in antiquity was considerably shorter than it is now. In the limited number of cases where skeletal or dental age-at-death estimates have been made on adults for whom there are other reliable indications of age, there appears to be a clear systematic trend towards overestimating the age of young adults, and underestimating that of older individuals. We show that this might be a result of the use of regression-based techniques of analysis for converting age indicators into estimated ages. Whilst acknowledging the limitations of most age-at-death indicators in the higher age categories, we show that a Bayesian approach to converting age indicators into estimated age can reduce this trend of underestimation at the older end. We also show that such a Bayesian approach can always do better than regression-based methods in terms of giving a smaller average difference between predicted age and known age, and a smaller average 95-percent confidence interval width of the estimate. Given these observations, we suggest that Bayesian approaches to converting age indicators into age estimates deserve further investigation. In view of the generality and flexibility of the approach, we also suggest that similar algorithms may have a much wider application.

The question of Fire-Cracked Rock (FCR) in Woodland contexts has become an important and controversial topic in Western Great Lakes archaeology. There are no clear and widely accepted criteria for distinguishing FCR when the rocks show no observable characteristics associated with fire (heating and cooling). To help overcome this shortcoming, we analyzed both the thermoluminescence (TL) and the optically stimulated luminescence (OSL) of alkali feldspar grains from a series of six samples of FCR from the Hannaford site in northern Minnesota. A geologic unheated specimen from the same geographic area was used as a control sample. A comparison of the luminescence (TL and OSL) intensities of both natural and natural plus artificial dose signals allowed us to demonstrate that the six selected samples of FCR had been effectively heated at the time of archaeological settlement. The good agreement between the TL and OSL results suggests that the OSL method is a viable alternative to TL for the identification of FCR. The OSL method requires less material, can be applied to a large number of samples, and is more cost-effective.

Despite the importance attributed to the study of storage behavior, little research has been conducted to determine whether it is even possible to distinguish storage áreas from refuse áreas. Archaeologists routinely separate storage pits from trash pits, but few have systematically investigated the defining characteristics of each. This study suggests that there is an archaeologically visible signature that can help researchers correctly interpret these loci. Research at occupied and recently abandoned camps among the now sedentary residents of Kutse in the Kalahari Desert of Botswana shows that refuse areas have a more homogeneous artifact inventory, regardless of the number of objects present. In contrast, non-trash activity areas at the same camps have a more heterogeneous, or diverse, inventory. The applicability and utility of this finding to the archaeological record is evaluated through the analysis of a Pueblo II Anasazi archaeological site from the southwestern United States. Patterns first recognized ethnoarchaeologically also appear to be recognizable in the archaeological record using the same methods. The results indicate that the statistical tests described here are applicable to distinguishing trash from other activity areas at archaeological sites.

Radiocarbon dates for the terminal Pleistocene are about 2,000 years too young. Furthermore, because of significant carbon perturbations that are manifest as plateaus or abrupt jumps in age, radiocarbon dates of ca. 12,500 to 10,000 B.P. [14C] must be critically evaluated. The first successful human colonization of the Americas occurred not 11,500 but about 13,500 years ago. This basic chronological revision has important implications for models of Paleoindian colonization, population expansion, and genetic and linguistic divergence.

To fully understand prehistoric land use patterns, we must define how prehistoric peoples used particular places on the landscape over longer periods of time. Factors influencing the multi-year use of particular places include human modifications to the landscape as a result of previous occupations. The construction of relatively elaborate and costly facilities for anticipated reuse is one type of modification associated with the repeated occupation of specific locations. Slab-lined cylindrical basins of southwest Wyoming are an example of that type of facility. The archaeological evidence indicates that prehistoric hunter-gatherers repeatedly reused some of these basins on a periodic basis over periods as long as 500 years and reoccupied some locales containing such facilities over a period of more than 2,000 years. The construction of such facilities and the repeated occupation of those locales were apparently related to the procurement and processing of a stable, predictable resource. Biscuitroot was the most likely target resource procured and processed at these locales.

Methods of empirical Bayesian statistical inference can help archaeologists deal with problems inherent in variably-sized and, particularly, small artifact samples. The desirability of systematically controlling random effects of sampling error when mapping estimates of artifact type proportions is emphasized in this paper, and concrete examples are provided using ceramic data from the Central Mexican city of Teotihuacan. A Bayesian approach also may be beneficial for pretreating data destined for other kinds of quantitative analysis, such as exploratory multivariate analysis. Correspondence analysis using observed proportions of different types of pottery in assemblages pertaining to the Xolalpan and Metepec phases produces vague results that suggest little in the way of interpretable structure. However, a parallel analysis using posterior estimates of proportions reveals meaningful associations of ceramic categories that appear to relate to more general dimensions of behavioral variability.

To promote a dialogue between competing but potentially compatible approaches in American archaeology, Schiffer (1996) examined the relationships between two distinct research programs: "behavioral" archaeology and evolutionary archaeology. An approach grounded in evolutionary ecology was not included in that analysis. In this paper, we reply to Schiffer's call for dialogue by outlining the relationships, as we see them, between evolutionary ecology, selectionist archaeology, and behavioral archaeology. We conclude that evolutionary ecology holds the greatest promise as a scientific approach for the investigation of important problems in human behavioral evolution.

In their comment on Schiffer (1996), Broughton and O’Connell perpetuate several common misconceptions about behavioral archaeology. This brief reply clarifies the character and goals of behavioral archaeology and indicates that this vigorous program is now beginning to produce "social" theory beyond the explanation of variability in artifact designs.