3.3 Post-Processual Archaeology

Post-processual archaeology emerged in the 1980s as a critical response to processual archaeology. It emphasizes individuals, symbolism, and context, rejecting the notion of a single objective truth in favor of multiple interpretations.

This approach focuses on individual agency, symbolism in material culture, and historical context. While it offers a nuanced understanding of the past, it can lead to relativism and challenges in testing hypotheses.

Post-Processual Archaeology

Development of post-processual archaeology

Top images from around the web for Development of post-processual archaeology

• 

  After Virtual Archaeology. Summary. Beale and Reilly. Internet Archaeol. 44. View original

  Is this image relevant?

• 

  Internet Archaeol. 31. Review of Archaeological Methods [Website] View original

  Is this image relevant?

• 

  Internet Archaeol. 40. Bonacchi and Moshenska. Where does digital public archaeology sit within ... View original

  Is this image relevant?

• 

  After Virtual Archaeology. Summary. Beale and Reilly. Internet Archaeol. 44. View original

  Is this image relevant?

• 

  Internet Archaeol. 31. Review of Archaeological Methods [Website] View original

  Is this image relevant?

1 of 3

Top images from around the web for Development of post-processual archaeology

• 

  After Virtual Archaeology. Summary. Beale and Reilly. Internet Archaeol. 44. View original

  Is this image relevant?

• 

  Internet Archaeol. 31. Review of Archaeological Methods [Website] View original

  Is this image relevant?

• 

  Internet Archaeol. 40. Bonacchi and Moshenska. Where does digital public archaeology sit within ... View original

  Is this image relevant?

• 

  After Virtual Archaeology. Summary. Beale and Reilly. Internet Archaeol. 44. View original

  Is this image relevant?

• 

  Internet Archaeol. 31. Review of Archaeological Methods [Website] View original

  Is this image relevant?

1 of 3

• Emerged in the 1980s as a critical response to the limitations and assumptions of processual archaeology
  • Processual archaeology emphasized systems, processes, and the search for general laws governing human behavior and cultural change
  • Post-processual archaeology highlighted the importance of individuals, symbolism, and historical and cultural context in shaping the archaeological record
• Critiqued processual archaeology's heavy reliance on scientific methods and claims of objectivity
  • Argued that archaeology is inherently subjective and shaped by the archaeologist's own biases, theoretical perspectives, and cultural background
  • Emphasized the role of interpretation in archaeological practice and the existence of multiple, equally valid interpretations of the past
• Rejected the notion of a single, objective truth in archaeological interpretations
  • Embraced the idea of multivocality, or the inclusion of diverse voices and perspectives in archaeological narratives (indigenous communities, marginalized groups)
• Drew from a wide range of disciplines and theoretical frameworks to inform archaeological interpretations
  • Incorporated ideas from anthropology, sociology, philosophy, and literary theory
  • Engaged with theories such as structuralism, post-structuralism, hermeneutics, and Marxism

Emphasis in post-processual interpretations

• Individual agency
  • Focuses on the active role of individuals in shaping their social, cultural, and material worlds
  • Recognizes that people in the past had their own motivations, beliefs, and choices that influenced their actions and interactions
  • Emphasizes the ways in which individuals create, manipulate, and negotiate material culture to express identity, status, and social relationships (personal adornment, architecture)
• Symbolism
  • Explores the symbolic and ideological dimensions of material culture and the built environment
  • Considers how artifacts, sites, and landscapes are imbued with cultural meanings and used to communicate social messages (religious iconography, monumental architecture)
  • Recognizes that the meaning and significance of objects can vary depending on the specific cultural context and the individuals involved
• Context
  • Stresses the importance of situating archaeological remains within their specific historical, social, and cultural contexts
  • Argues that the meaning and significance of artifacts and sites can only be fully understood when considered in relation to the broader cultural milieu in which they were produced and used
  • Rejects the search for universal laws and generalizations in favor of more particularistic and historically contingent interpretations (regional variation, cultural specificity)

Strengths vs weaknesses of post-processual approaches

• Strengths
  • Encourages a more nuanced, contextualized, and multifaceted understanding of the past
  • Recognizes the complexity and diversity of past societies and the individuals who comprised them
  • Incorporates a wider range of theoretical perspectives and interdisciplinary approaches, enriching archaeological interpretations
  • Emphasizes the role of interpretation in archaeological practice and the importance of acknowledging multiple viewpoints and alternative narratives
• Weaknesses
  • Can lead to a form of relativism in which all interpretations are considered equally valid, regardless of their empirical basis or logical coherence
  • May prioritize individual agency and symbolic meaning at the expense of considering larger-scale processes, structures, and environmental factors
  • Can be difficult to operationalize and test hypotheses derived from post-processual theories, as they often rely on subjective and contextual factors
  • May rely heavily on the archaeologist's own interpretations and be less amenable to scientific testing, replication, and falsification (experimental archaeology, quantitative methods)