CHAPTER SEVEN - Theory Building in Archaeology

Abstract

Widespread agreement exists that archaeology lacks well developed theories that command acceptance. This chapter discusses several issues related to the development of a theory of archaeology. Attempts based on reforms of definitions or revisions of classificatory schemes are examined and criticized for their neglect of some complexities in the problem of formulating adequate definitions. In particular, the view that providing clear definitions is a necessary preamble to theory construction has been rejected in light of the strong interdependence between these two activities. In theory construction, one should be especially attentive to definitions, sometimes rejecting or revising old definitions, sometimes formulating new ones. But it is not feasible to resolve definitional problems first and then persevere with theory building. The two activities should proceed simultaneously. Another approach to theory building claims that it is both possible and advantageous to construct formal or axiomatic theories of archaeology. Any set of sentences with a specified vocabulary that meets certain formal criteria constitutes a formal theory. Although formal theories that deal with archaeological subject matter, such as the relation between habitation area and population size, are constructible, no case has been made for their explanatory value.