Writers: of of Insofar Issues For and Real Het

Archoeology and the Methodology ofScience does not intended to be a history of archaeology.
The history it is concerned with is

the history of the philosophy of science, and that only insofar as its presentation clarifies meanings and issues in contemporary
understanding of the nature of science. For a reader unfamiliar with the history of science, the book will be helpful, although Guy
Gibbon's 1989 Explanation in Archaeology is a more focused critique, and a more sophisticated (and demanding) level. What
makes Archoeology and the Methodology ofScience directly relevant to the history of archaeology is Kelley's device of illumi
nating Hanen' s expositions ofphilosophy by presenting capsule cases of real archaeological work or controversies. Two chap
ters, c'The Social Context of Archaeology," and "Some Critical Archaeological Cases," are built on these candid discussions
drawn from Kelley's level-headed observation of her colleagues. and from het own work. The "interests" approach from sociol
ogy of science, that personal background and career interests make the pursuit of science a less than rational business, is clearly
supported by KeUey's case studies.
No one will read Archaeology and the Methodology ofScience for pleasure, but as one finishes it, a quiet pleasure ensues: how
pleasant to read so solid, careful a presentation of how to think as a scientist should. The book contrasts with the programmatic
scientism, relying on a couple of philosophers either obsolete or limited to the physical sciences, that purports to be philosophy of
science in the New Archaeology. We sincerely hope that Kelley and Hanen are earning a place in the history of archaeology as
the eminently qualified writers who pulled archaeology back to contemporary philosophy of science.
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5334/bha.02212
A Marxist Archaeology, by Randall H. McGuire, Academic Press, San Diego, 1992, xviii + 326 pp., index, bibliography. 1 table,
4 figures. No Price Usted
by
Alice B. Kehoe
Marquette University
McGuire, an archaeologist working primarily in the desert Southwest, presents a critical overview of major theoretical approaches
in contemporary archaeology. comparing them to a Marxist perspective be derives principally from BetteD OIlman. (In a foot- .
note, McGuire describes his parent's divon:e catapulting him from midd1e-to-wor1cing-class status as a sigllificant factor in his
own search for a view of history compatible with his personal experiences.)
Intended to clarify and argue for his particular Marxist approach, McGuire's discussions on various archaeological views of
his� and society are more or less cursory as history of archaeology. The book does give a synopsis. and is valuable for its
inclusion of the usually neglected Latin American theorists. McGuire is more radical a Marxist than Trigger, so his critiques tend
to be sharper and are w<ll1h the consideration of serious students of theory in archaeology.
The last third of McGuire's book includes a case study in Hohokam arehaeology. the site of La Ciudad in present-day Phoenix,
Arizona. McGuire looks for evidence of social principles, ideology, and conflict, and fmds an earlier. Yuman-like egalitarian
ideology eventually yielding to an openly class-structured community. He is not abashed to use ethnographic analogy in reading
.
his data.
Overall, McGuire has covered the Marxist archaeology literature reasonably well, and offers an informed rather than trendy
Marxist approach, emphasizing the dialectic of social history even as it now encompasses American Indians together with .
arehaeologists. For methodology of science, McGuire intelligently relies principally on Kelley and Hanen (1988). One lacuna is
any reference to Guy Gibbon's brilliant 1989 Explanation in Archaeology. We should also mention careless copy-editing
confusing some sentences and misspeledl several names. Overall, the book is a useful, often sbmp, critique.
VU. Activities of Various Academic Gatherings Related to tbe History of

Archaeology
Carolyn Kirdahy presented her paper "Functions of Museums and the Museum of Science. Boston at a recent meeting of the New
England Archivists. The paper under the same title. has been published in the most recent issue of the Museum Archivist (pp. 11-
.
14).
Alain Blain read his paper "Documenting �s as Institutions and as Purveyors ofCulture: Records. Papers. and Special
Collections" during the 1992 annual meeting of the Society for American Archivists. Historians of archaeological science may
find his paper interesting and useful. Included in his paper are the text and the results of museum archives surveys completed in
1983-1984 in 1991- and in the 1989 Association of Museum survey. The paper has been published in the most recent issue of the
Museum Archivist (pp. 14-17).
The Gender and Archaeology Conference was held at Appalachian State University in Boone. North Carolina. 1(j..17 October
1992. Papers were given by Susan J. Bender (Skidmore) and Nancy Parezo (Arizona Stafn Museum) "Paths Through the Profes
sion: Women in Archaeology 1900-1960"; Mary Ann Levine (University of Massachuset:s-Amherst) "Creating Their Own
Pagc 23

Writers: of of Insofar Issues For and Real Het

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Writers: of of Insofar Issues For and Real Het

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Writers: of of Insofar Issues For and Real Het

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Archoeology and the Methodology ofScience does not intended to be a history of archaeology.

The history it is concerned with is

VU. Activities of Various Academic Gatherings Related to tbe History of

You might also like