30th June 2011, 02:50 PM
I think you've hit the nail on the head when say its both.....but i think you could go further. The best way that I ever heard anyone describe theory in archaeology was like a 'tool-kit'. There are so many difffernt theoretcial perspectives out there because there are so many diverse site types. The theory is a reflection of the archaeology that is being excavated or assessed and must be suited to each specific situation, hence using the theory that best fits the situation. I'm not much one for evolutionary perspectives myself but it does appear to lend itself to Paleolithic and Neolithic analysis.
What I would disagree with is that theory has little place on site. It is on the excvation where the analysis of the site formulates and it is through the theoretical perpsctive that people (by which i mean diggers and supervisors) take thats shapes the interpreatation of each individual feature/area excavated!
What I would disagree with is that theory has little place on site. It is on the excvation where the analysis of the site formulates and it is through the theoretical perpsctive that people (by which i mean diggers and supervisors) take thats shapes the interpreatation of each individual feature/area excavated!