Jennifer Glasman
3/23/14
SBS 355
Johnson, M. (2010). Archaeological Theory: An introduction. Malden, MA: Blackwell
Publishing Ltd. (307)
Archaeologists can use many different theories and methods to conduct research. The
type of method that is used can depend on the kind of research. It also can depend on what the
researcher prefers and believes about science, humanity, etc. The fact that theory is such an
important aspect to archaeology is not apparent to most people. Even some archaeologists
believe that they do not need use it in that discipline. However, theories allow this field of study
to have a set of rules for all archaeologists to keep in mind. Another reason why theory is critical
is that it allows a pathway for archaeologists to follow. Unfortunately, one of the biggest issues
with theory is finding the right one to use. Matthew Johnson’s Archaeological Theory: An
Introduction presents many different theories and methods archaeologists have been using before
New Archaeology in the 1960’s. The following paragraphs will include several of the more
influential and debatable methods discussed in the book.
Culture history also uses artifacts as data for their research projects. They use these items
to draw conclusions of how these past cultures lived. These artifacts can represent the cultural
norms in that society and defines who the culture is. A problem that comes with this type of
thinking is the thought that the more data the better. Some archaeologists believe that each item
is a representation of a culture and adds more to its story. In order to turn this object into data the
researcher must create an assumption about the society. (Johnson, 2010, p. 15-19). I would not
use this type of reasoning because I do not see the items themselves as hard evidence. Some
artifacts can show certain cultural ideas, however previous knowledge of the culture is vital
before drawing any conclusions. This allows the researcher to be able to understand why the
society decided to have these items represent their culture.
Cultural evolution is one of the most important features when studying archaeology. This
view shows that cultures do not just start randomly. There is some sort of change that has
occurred from previous generations. This idea also makes it possible for archaeologists to be able
to compare cultures using an evolutionary scale (Johnson, 2010, p. 23-24). The most basic form
of this type of method means that each culture follows the same steps when they evolve.
However, many archaeologists believe that cultures are unique from each other. This is one of
the major cons of this way of thinking. Fortunately, this led to archaeologists developing other
types of cultural evolution techniques (Johnson, 2010, p. 154-155).
One theory that is discussed is the Middle-Range Theory. This theory suggests that the
relationship between the statics, the data, and the historical dynamics can be a critical piece of
evidence of the past. This type of method needs some assumptions when collecting data.
Knowledge of the culture is an important skill when working with this technique. The MiddleRange Theory allows the researcher to compare the activity that was done in the past with the
present (Johnson, 2010, p. 51-54). I personally would not choose to use this method when
conducting archaeological research. It is so easy to compare past cultures with present and be
able to understand how they feel. However, cultures are unique from each other. This type of
thinking can lead to incorrect results for this reason.
Matthew Johnson’s Archaeological Theory: An Introduction has discussed the more
popular ideas and methods used by archaeologists before and after New Archaeology was
created in the 1960’s. Archaeologists before this time did not have one set of theories and
techniques to use to conduct their research. They were able to choose from the theories that were
currently being used, create their own theories, or even use theories from other disciplines. There
are many routes that archaeologists can take when studying past cultures. Choosing the right one
is difficult. The type of results that are wanted should show the researcher which type of method
should be used. Context is everything when picking a theory or a technique (Johnson, 2010, p.
120).