Evidential Reasoning in Archaeology

Abstract

How do archaeologists actually work with the forms of data they identify as a record of the cultural past? How are these data collected and construed as evidence? What is the impact on archaeological practice of new techniques of data recovery and analysis (especially those that originate in the physical and life sciences)? To answer these questions, the authors identify key examples of evidential reasoning in archaeology that are widely regarded as successful, as pivotal to the development of the field, or as instructive failures, and build nuanced analyses of the forms of reasoning they exemplify. They look at how archaeologists work with old evidence in pursuit of new interpretations, and how they adjudicate conflicting evidential claims based on the same or overlapping bodies of data. This case-based approach is predicated on a conviction that archaeological practice is a repository of considerable methodological wisdom, embodied in tacit norms and skilled

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 176 citations exist upstream.