Hostname: page-component-5c6d5d7d68-wbk2r Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-08-11T09:18:50.215Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Thinking about archaeological excavation in reflexive terms

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  06 August 2009

Patricia A. McAnany  and
Ian Hodder
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

We thank the four commentators – Åsa Berggren, Barbara Helwing, Barbara Mills, and Allan Maca – for their thoughtfully critical comments and cannot help but feel encouraged by the passion displayed in their comments. To an extent underrealized in our initial formulation, the recording and interpretation of stratigraphy forms the jugular vein of archaeological practice. Although accused by some of the commentators of not offering anything new, creating a straw man, or ignoring artefacts, we note that our discussion of social stratigraphy encouraged reflexivity about archaeological practice in all four commentaries. Our initial pulling together of social practices that might be expressed in patterns of depositing and cutting also sparked extremely productive and creative dialogue regarding the documentation and interpretation of stratigraphy, a virtual (and highly successful) simulation that employed our proposed ‘toolkit’, and worrisome questions regarding the lack of fit between social theory and archaeological technique within the Americanist tradition. We address these topics, particularly in light of commentators' demonstration of the importance of reflexive practices within archaeology.

Type
Discussion
Information
Archaeological Dialogues , Volume 16 , Issue 1 , June 2009 , pp. 41 - 49
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2009

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

Abu El-Haj, N., 2001: Facts on the ground. Archaeological practice and territorial self-fashioning in Israeli society. Chicago.Google Scholar
Agurcia Fasquelle, R., and Fash, B.W., 2005: The evolution of Structure 10L-16, heart of the Copán Acropolis, in Andrews, E.W. and Fash, W.L. (eds), Copán. The history of an ancient kingdom, Santa Fe, NM, 201–37.Google Scholar
Appadurai, A., 1986: Introduction. Commodities and the politics of value, in Appadurai, A. (ed.), The social life of things. Commodities in cultural perspective, Cambridge, 3–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ashmore, W., 2004: Social archaeologies of landscape, in Meskell, L. and Preucel, R.W. (eds), A companion to social archaeology, Malden, MA, 255–71.Google Scholar
Ashmore, W., and Knapp, A.B. (eds), 1999: Archaeologies of landscape. Contemporary perspectives, Malden, MA.Google Scholar
Balme, J., and Paterson, A. (eds), 2000: Archaeology in practice, Malden, MA.Google Scholar
Barrett, J.C., 1994: Fragments from antiquity, Oxford.Google Scholar
Barrett, J.C., 2001: Agency, the duality of structure, and the problem of the archaeological record, in Hodder, I. (ed.), Archaeological theory today, Cambridge, 141–64.Google Scholar
Bartu Candan, A., Sert, G. and Bağdatlı, M., 2007: Developing educational programmes for prehistoric sites. The Catalhöyük case, in Hodder, I. and Doughty, L. (eds), Mediterranean prehistoric heritage. Training, education and management, Cambridge (McDonald Institute Monograph), 95–104.Google Scholar
Bell, E., Canuto, M. and Sharer, R. (eds), 2004: Understanding early Classic Copan, Philadelphia.Google Scholar
Berggren, Å., 2009: Evaluation of a reflexive attempt – the Citytunnel Project in retrospect, Archaeological review from Cambridge 24 (1), 23–37.Google Scholar
Berry, K., and McAnany, P.A., 2007: Reckoning with the wetlands and their role in ancient Maya society, in Scarborough, V.L. and Clark, J.E. (eds), The political economy of ancient Mesoamerica. Transformations during the Formative and Classic periods, Albuquerque, 149–62.Google Scholar
Bintliff, J. (ed.), 1991: The Annales school and archaeology, New York.Google Scholar
Bintliff, J. (ed.), 1997: Recent developments in the history and archaeology of central Greece, Oxford (BAR International Series 666).Google Scholar
Boucher de Perthes, M.J., 1847: Antiquités celtiques et antidiluviennes. Mémoire sur L'industrie primitive et les arts à leur origine, Paris.Google Scholar
Bracco Baksar, R., 2006: Montículos de la Cuenca de la Laguna Merín. Tiempo, Espacio y Sociedad, Latin American Antiquity 17 (4), 511–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bradley, R., 1990: The passage of arms. An archaeological analysis of prehistoric hoards and votive deposits, Cambridge.Google Scholar
Bradley, R., 2002: The past in prehistoric societies, London.Google Scholar
Bradley, R., 2003: A life less ordinary. The ritualization of the domestic sphere in later prehistoric Europe, Cambridge archaeological journal 13 (1), 5–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brady, J.E., 1997: Settlement configuration and cosmology. The role of caves at Dos Pilas, American anthropologist 99, 602–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Braswell, G.E., 1992: Obsidian hydration dating, the Coner phase, and revisionist chronology at Copan, Honduras, Latin American antiquity 3 (2), 130–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
BrownM.R., III M.R., III, and Harris, E.C., 1993: Interfaces in archaeological stratigraphy, in Harris, E.C., Brown, M.R. III and Brown, G.J. (eds), Practices of archaeological stratigraphy, London, 7–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brück, J., 1999: Ritual and rationality. Some problems of interpretation in European archaeology, European journal of archaeology 2 (3), 313–44.Google Scholar
Canuto, M.A., and Fash, W.L., 2004: The blind spot. Where the elite and non-elite meet, in Golden, C. and Borgstede, G. (eds), Continuity and change in Maya archaeology. Perspectives at the millennium, New York and London, 51–76.Google Scholar
Carver, M., 1990: Digging for data. Archaeological approaches to data definition, acquisition and analysis, in Francovich, R. and Manacorda, D. (eds), Lo Scavo Archeologico. Dalla Diagnosi All'edizione, Florence, 45–120.Google Scholar
Cessford, C., and Near, J., 2005: Fire, burning and pyrotechnology at Çatalhöyük, in Hodder, I. (ed.) Çatalhöyük perspectives. Themes from the 1995–1999 seasons, Cambridge (McDonald Institute for Archaeological Research/British Institute of Archaeology at Ankara Monograph), 171–82.Google Scholar
Colwell-Chanthaphonh, C., and Ferguson, T.J. (eds), 2008: Collaboration in archaeological practice. Engaging descendant communities, Lanham, MD.Google Scholar
Connerton, P., 1989: How societies remember, Cambridge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
De la Torre, M. (ed.), 1997: The conservation of archaeological sites in the Mediterranean region, Los Angeles.Google Scholar
Diehl, R.A., 2004: The Olmecs. America's first civilization, London.Google Scholar
Dobres, M.A., and Robb, J.E. (eds), 2000: Agency in archaeology, London.Google Scholar
Dörpfeld, W., 1902: Troia und Ilion. Ergebnisse der Ausgrabungen in den vorhistorischen und historischen Schichten von Ilion 1870–1894, Athens.Google Scholar
Echt, R., 1984: Kamid el-Loz 5. Die Stratigraphie, Bonn (Saarbrücker Beiträge zur Altertumskunde 34).Google Scholar
Eichmann, R., 1989: Uruk. Die Stratigraphie. Grabungen 1912–1977 in den Bereichen ‘Eanna’ und ‘Anu-Ziqqurat’. Ausgrabungen in Uruk-Warka. Endberichte 3, Mainz am Rhein.Google Scholar
Esin, U., and Harmanakaya, S., 1999: Aşıklı in the frame of Central Anatolian Neolithic, in Özdogan, M. and Basgelen, N. (eds), Neolithic in Turkey. The cradle of civilization: new discoveries, Istanbul, 115–32.Google Scholar
Evans, C., and Hodder, I., 2006: A woodland archaeology. Neolithic sites at Haddenham, Cambridge (The Haddenham Project, Volume 1).Google Scholar
Fash, B., Lane, S., Larios, R., Schele, L., Stomper, J., Stuart, D. and Fash, W., 1992: Investigations of a classic Maya council house at Copán, Honduras, Journal of field archaeology 19 (4), 419–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fash, B.W., 1992: Late Classic architectural sculpture themes in Copan, Ancient Mesoamerica 3 (1), 89–104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fash, W.L., 1994: Changing perspectives on Maya civilization, Annual review of anthropology 23, 181–208.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fash, W.L., and Sharer, R.J., 1991: Sociopolitical developments and methodological issues at Copán, Honduras. A conjunctive perspective, Latin American antiquity 2 (2), 166–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Flannery, K.V., 2001: ‘There were giants in those days’: Richard Stockton MacNeish, 1918–2001, Ancient Mesoamerica 12 (2), 149–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gansum, T., 2004: Hauger som konstruksjoner. Arkeologiske forventninger gjennom 200 år. Göteborg.Google Scholar
Gasche, H., and Tunca, Ö., 1983: Guide to archaeostratigraphic classification and terminology. Definitions and principles, Journal of field archaeology 10, 325–35.Google Scholar
Giddens, A., 1979: Central problems in social theory. Action, structure, and contradiction in social analysis, London.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goldberg, P., and MacPhail, R., 2006: Practical and theoretical geoarchaeology, Malden, MA.Google Scholar
Golden, C., and Borgstede, G. (eds), 2004: Continuities and changes in Maya archaeology. Perspectives at the millenium, New York.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Golden, C.W., 2002: Bridging the gap between archaeological and indigenous chronologies. An investigation of the Early Classic/Late Classic divide at Piedras Negras, Guatemala, Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Anthropology, University of Pennsylvania.Google Scholar
Gould, S.J., 1987: Time's arrow, time's cycle. Myth and metaphor in the discovery of geological time, Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
Hachmann, R., 1969: Vademecum der Grabung Kamid-el-Loz, Bonn (Saarbrücker Beiträge zur Altertumskunde 5).Google Scholar
Hammond, N., 1984: Two roads diverged A brief comment on ‘Lowland Maya archaeology at the crossroads’., American antiquity 49 (4), 821–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harris, E.C., 1979: Principles of archaeological stratigraphy, London.Google Scholar
Harrison-Buck, E., 2004: Nourishing the animus of lived space through ritual caching, in McAnany, P.A. (ed.), K'axob. Ritual, work, and family in an ancient Maya village, Los Angeles (Monumenta Archaeologica 22), 65–85.Google Scholar
Hawkes, C., 1954: Archaeological theory and method. Some suggestions from the old world, American anthropologist 56, 155–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hendon, J.A., 2000: Having and holding. Storage, memory, knowledge, and social relations, American anthropologist 102 (1), 42–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hill, J.D., 1995: Ritual and rubbish in the Iron Age of Wessex. A study on the formation of a specific archaeological record, Oxford (British Archaeological Report Series 242).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hobsbawm, E., and Ranger, T., 1983: The invention of tradition, Cambridge.Google Scholar
Hodder, I., 1982: Symbols in action, Cambridge.Google Scholar
Hodder, I. (ed.), 1987: Archaeology as long-term history, Cambridge.Google Scholar
Hodder, I., 1990: The domestication of Europe: Structure and contingency in Neolithic societies, Oxford and Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
Hodder, I., 2000: Towards reflexive method in archaeology. The example at Çatalhöyük, Cambridge (McDonald Institute Monographs/British Institute of Archaeology at Ankara Monograph 28).Google Scholar
Hodder, I., 2006: Çatalhöyük. The leopard's tale, London.Google Scholar
Holland, D., Lachiotte, W. Jr., Skinner, D. and Cain, C., 1998: Identity and agency in cultural worlds. Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
Ingwald, J., Koch, H. and Lövgren, K., 2002: Delområde 2. Reflexivt tänkande på en undersökning med förhistoriska och medeltida lämningar, in Berggren, Å. and Burström, M. (eds), Reflexiv fältarkeologi? Återsken av ett seminarium, Stockholm and Malmö, 78–83.Google Scholar
Ingwald, J., and Löfgren, K., 2009: Sociala rum och ekonomiska aspekter på en medeltida gård – ett exempel från Bunkeflo, in Hadevik, C. and Steineke, M. (eds), Spåren i marken – tematisk rapportering från Citytunnelprojektet, Malmö, 465–540 (Malmö Kulturmiljö rapport 48).Google Scholar
Joyce, R., 2008: Practice in and as deposition, in Mills, B.J. and Walker, W.H. (eds), Memory work. Archaeologies of material practices, Santa Fe, 25–39.Google Scholar
Joyce, R.A., and Gillespie, S.D. (eds), 2000: Beyond kinship. Social and material reproduction in house societies, Philadelphia.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kane, S. (ed.), 2003: The politics of archaeology and identity in a global context, Boston.Google Scholar
Kidder, A.V., 1924: An introduction to the study of southwestern archaeology with a preliminary account of the excavations at Pecos, New Haven.Google Scholar
Killion, T.W., Sabloff, J.A. and Tourtellot, G., 1989: Intensive surface collection of residential clusters at Terminal Classic Sayil, Yucatan, Mexico, Journal of field archaeology 16 (3), 273–94.Google Scholar
Knapp, A.B., ed., 1992: Archeology, annales and ethnohistory, Cambridge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kopytoff, I., 1986: The cultural biography of things. Commoditization as process, in Appadurai, A. (ed.), The social life of things, Cambridge, 64–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kotsakis, K., 2006: Settlement of discord. Sesklo and the emerging household, in Tasic, N. and Grozdanoiv, C. (eds), Homage to Milutin Garasanin, Belgrade, 207–20.Google Scholar
Larios, R., Stuart, D. and Fash, W.L., 1994: Architectural stratigraphy and epigraphic dating of Copan structure 10L- 22. An exercise in the conjunctive approach, in Fields, V. (ed.), Seventh Palenque Roundtable, 1989, Pre-Columbian Art Research Institute, San Francisco, 69–77.Google Scholar
Larsson, S., 2004: Digging for dirt in Sweden. An historical explanation for the longevity of arbitrary excavation methods in Swedish urban archaeology, in Carver, G. (ed.) Digging in the dirt. Excavations in the new millenium, Oxford, 151–60 (BAR International Series).Google Scholar
Larsson, S., 2008: Theoretical and methodological directions in urban archaeology in Sweden, speech given at the ‘Discourse, theory and archaeological excavation’ seminar of the Nordic Graduate School in Archaeology, 20 October.Google Scholar
Latour, B., 2005: Reassembling the social. An introduction to actor-network theory, Oxford.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
López Luján, L., 1993: Las Ofrendas del Templo Mayor de Tenochtitlan, México, D.F.Google Scholar
Lucas, G., 2005: The archaeology of time, London.Google Scholar
Maca, A.L., 2009: Walter Taylor's conjunctive approach in Maya archaeology, in Maca, A.L., Reyman, J.E. and Folan, W. (eds), Prophet, pariah, and pioneer. Walter W. Taylor and dissension in American archaeology, Boulder, CO.Google Scholar
Maca, A.L., Reyman, J.E., and Folan, W. (eds), 2009: Prophet, pariah, and pioneer. Walter W. Taylor and dissension in American archaeology, Boulder, CO.Google Scholar
McAnany, P.A., 1995: Living with the ancestors. Kinship and kingship in ancient Maya society, Austin, TX.Google Scholar
McAnany, P.A. (ed.), 2004: K'axob. Ritual, work and family in an ancient Maya village, Los Angeles (Monumenta Archaeologica 22).Google Scholar
McEachern, C., 1998: Mapping the memories. Politics, place and identity in the District 6 Museum, Cape Town, Social identities 4 (3), 499–521.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
MacNeish, R.S., 1958: Preliminary archaeological investigations in the Sierra de Tamaulipas, Philadelphia.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
MacNeish, R.S., 1960: Rejoinder to Taylor, American antiquity 25 (4), 591–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
MacNeish, R.S., 1964: El origen de la civilization mesoamericana visto desde Tehuacan, Philadelphia.Google Scholar
MacNeish, R.S., 1978: The science of archaeology? North Scituate, MA.Google Scholar
Manahan, T.K., 2004: The way things fall apart. Social organization and the Classic Maya collapse of Copan, Ancient Mesoamerica 15, 107–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marcus, J., 1983: Lowland Maya archaeology at the crossroads, American antiquity 48 (3), 454–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marcus, J., 1995: Where is lowland Maya archaeology headed? Journal of archaeological research 3 (1), 3–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Matthews, W., 2006: Micromorphological and microstratigaphic traces of uses and concepts of space, in Hodder, I. (ed.), Inhabiting Çatalhöyük. Reports from the 1995–1999 seasons, Cambridge (McDonald Institute for Archaeological Research/British Institute of Archaeology at Ankara Monograph).Google Scholar
Meskell, L., 2004: Object worlds in ancient Egypt. Material biographies past and present, London.Google Scholar
Miller, D. (ed.), 2005: Materiality, Durham, NC.Google Scholar
Mills, B.J., and Vega-Centeno, R., 2005: Sequence and stratigraphy, in Maschner, H.D.G. and Chippindale, C. (eds), Handbook of archaeological methods, Vol. 1, Lanham, MD, 176–215.Google Scholar
Mills, B.J., and Walker, W.H. (eds), 2008: Memory work. Archaeologies of material practices, Santa Fe.Google Scholar
Mock, S.B. (ed.), 1998: The sowing and the dawning. Termination, dedication, and transformation in the archaeological record of Mesoamerica, Albuquerque, NM.Google Scholar
Monaghan, J., 2000: Theology and history in the study of Mesoamerican religions, in Handbook of Middle American Indians, Supplement 6: Ethnology, Austin, TX, 24–49.Google Scholar
Muller, S., 1888–95: Ordning af Danmarks oldsaker, Kopenhagen.Google Scholar
Myers, F. (ed.), 2001: The empire of things. Regimes of value and material culture, Santa Fe.Google Scholar
Özdogan, A., 1999: Çayönü, in Özdogan, M. and Basgelen, N. (eds), Neolithic in Turkey. The cradle of civilization: new discoveries, Istanbul, 35–63.Google Scholar
Pauketat, T., and Alt, S.M., 2005: Agency in a postmold? Physicality and the archaeology of culture-making, Journal of archaeological method and theory 12, 213–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pauketat, T.R., and Alt, S.M., 2003: Mounds, memory, and contested Mississippian history, in Van Dyke, R.M. and Alcock, S.E. (eds), Archaeologies of memory, Malden, MA, 150–79.Google Scholar
Petrie, W.M.F., 1904: Methods and aims in archaeology, New York (reissued in 1972).Google Scholar
Pilgrim, C. v., 1996: Elephantine XVIII. Untersuchungen in der Stadt des Mittleren Reiches und der Zweiten Zwoschenzeit, Mainz (Archäologische Veröffentlichungen 91).Google Scholar
Pitt-Rivers, A.H.L.-F., 1887–98: Excavations in Cranborne Chase, privately printed in England.Google Scholar
Plank, S.E., 2004: Maya dwellings in hieroglyphs and archaeology. An integrative approach to ancient architecture and spatial cognition, Oxford (British Archaeological Reports 1324).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pollard, J., 2008: Deposition and material agency in the Early Neolithic of southern Britain, in Mills, B.J. and Walker, W.H. (eds), Memory work. Archaeologies of material practices, Santa Fe, 41–59.Google Scholar
Reyman, J.E., 1999: Walter W. Taylor, 1913–1997, in Murray, T.A. (ed.), Encyclopedia of archaeology. The great archaeologists, Vol. 2, Santa Barbara, 681–700.Google Scholar
Richards, C., and J. Thomas, J., 1984: Ritual activity and structured deposition in Later Neolithic Wessex, in Bradley, R. and Gardiner, J. (eds), Neolithic studies. A review of some current research, Oxford (British Archaeological Reports Series 133), 189–218.Google Scholar
Roosevelt, C.H., 2006: Tumulus survey and museum research in Lydia, Western Turkey. Determining Lydian- and Persian-period settlement patterns, Journal of field archaeology 31 (1), 61–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Roskams, S., 2001: Excavation, Cambridge.Google Scholar
Rowlands, M., 1993: The role of memory in the transmission of culture, World archaeology 25, 141–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sabloff, J.A., 2004: Looking backward and looking forward. How Maya studies of yesterday shape today, in Golden, C.W. and Borgstede, G. (eds), Continuities and changes in Maya archaeology. Perspectives at the millennium, New York, 13–20.Google Scholar
Scarborough, V.L., 2003: The flow of power. Ancient water systems and landscapes, Santa Fe.Google Scholar
Schiffer, M.B., 1976: Behavioral archaeology, New York.Google Scholar
Schiffer, M.B., 1987: Formation processes of the archaeological record, Albuquerque, NM.Google Scholar
Schmidt, D., 2001: Refuse archaeology. Virchow – Schliemann – Freud, Perspectives on science 9 (2), 210–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shanks, M., and Tilley, C., 1987: Social archaeology, Oxford.Google Scholar
Sharer, R.J., and Golden, C.W., 2004: Kingship and polity. Conceptualizing the Maya body politic, in Golden, C.W. and Borgstede, G. (eds), Continuities and changes in Maya Archaeology. Perspectives at the millennium, New York, 23–50.Google Scholar
Sherwood, S.C., 2007: The geoarchaeology of Mississippian platform mounds and the classification of mound stratigraphy, Austin, TX, poster presented at the 72nd annual meeting of the Society for American Archaeology.Google Scholar
Shott, M.J., 1998: Status and role of formation theory in contemporary archaeological practice, Journal of archaeological research 6, 299–329.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stahl, A., 2008: Dogs, pythons, pots, and beads, The dynamics of shrines and sacrificial practices in Banda, Ghana, 1400–1900 CE, in Mills, B.J. and Walker, W.H. (eds), Memory work. Archaeologies of material practices, Santa Fe, 159–86.Google Scholar
Steadman, S.R., 2000: Spatial patterning and social complexity on prehistoric Anatolian tell sites. Models for mounds, Journal of anthropological archaeology 19, 164–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stein, J.K., 1992: Interpreting stratification of a shell midden, in Stein, J.K. (ed.), Deciphering a shell midden, New York, 71–93.Google Scholar
Stevanovic, M., 1997: The age of clay. The social dynamics of house construction, Journal of anthropological archaeology 16, 334–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stomper, J., 2001: A model for late Classic community structure at Copan, Honduras, in Koontz, R., Taylor, K. and Headrick, A. (eds), Landscape and power in ancient Mesoamerica, Boulder, CO, 197–230.Google Scholar
Stuart, D., 1998: ‘The fire enters his house’. Architecture and ritual in Classic Maya texts, in Houston, S.D. (ed.), Function and meaning in Classic Maya architecture, Washington, DC, 373–425.Google Scholar
Taylor, W.W., 1948: A study of archeology, Menasha, WI (American Anthropologist Memoir 69).Google Scholar
Taylor, W.W., 1960a: Review of Preliminary archaeological investigations in the Sierra de Tamaulipas, Mexico by Richard S. MacNeish, American antiquity 25 (3), 434–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Taylor, W.W., 1960b: Reply to MacNeish, American antiquity 26 (2), 263–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Taylor, W.W., 1972: Old wine and new skins, A contemporary parable, in Leone, M.P. (ed.), Contemporary archaeology. A guide to theory and contributions, Carbondale, IL, 28–33.Google Scholar
Thomas, J., 1996: Time, culture and identity, Cambridge.Google Scholar
Tilley, C., 1994: A phenomenology of landscape, Oxford.Google Scholar
Trigger, B., 1989: A history of archaeological thought, Cambridge.Google Scholar
Trigger, B.G., 2003: Archaeological theory. The big picture, Salt Lake City.Google Scholar
Trigger, B.G., 2006: A history of archaeological thought, Cambridge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tringham, R., 2000: The continuous house. A view from the deep past, in Joyce, R. and Gillespie, S.D. (eds), Beyond kinship. Social and material reproduction in house societies, Philadelphia, 115–34.Google Scholar
Van Dyke, R., and Alcock, S. (eds), 2003: Archaeologies of memory. Malden, MA.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Verhoeven, M., 1999: An archaeological ethnography of a neolithic community. Space, place and social relation in the burnt village at Tell Sabi Abyad, Syria, Leiden (Publications de l'Institut historique-archéologique néerlandais de Stamboul 83).Google Scholar
Wachtel, P.L., 2003: The surface and the depths, Contemporary psychoanalysis 39, 5–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wagner, E., 1998: An alternative view of the meaning and function of Structure 10L-22A, Copan, Honduras. Paper presented at the 3rd European Maya Conference, 18–22 November, Hamburg, Germany.Google Scholar
Walker, W.H., 2002: Stratigraphy and practical reason. American anthropologist 104 (1), 159–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Walker, W.H., LaMotta, V.M. and Adams, C.E., 2000: Katsina and Kiva abandonment at Homol'ovi. A deposit-oriented perspective on religion in southwest prehistory, in Hegmon, M. (ed.) The archaeology of regional interaction, Boulder, CO, 341–60.Google Scholar
Watson, P.J., 1990: Review of Social archaeology by M. Shanks and C. Tilley, Journal of field archaeology 17, 19–221.Google Scholar
Webster, D., and Freter, A., 1990: Settlement history and the Classic collapse at Copan. A redefined chronological perspective, Latin American antiquity 1 (1), 66–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wells, E.C., 2004: Investigating activity patterns in Prehispanic plazas. Weak acid-extraction ICP-AES analysis of anthrosols at Classic period El Coyote, northwestern Honduras, Archaeometry 46 (1), 67–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wheeler, S.M., 1954: Archaeology from the earth, Oxford.Google Scholar
Whittle, A., 1996: Europe in the Neolithic. The creation of new worlds, Cambridge.Google Scholar
Yoffee, N., 2005: Myths of the archaic state. Evolution of the earliest cities, states, and civilizations, Cambridge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar