Revitalising artefact analysis

Abstract

[Conclusion]: In retrospect it is clear that Hayden's (1977) paper was part of the general re-expression of perspectives that had been discussed earlier in the century. The elements of this reexpression contain many of the features of the propositions espoused by New Archaeology in the 1970s (cf.Binford 1989). For example, the rejection of mentalist descriptions of implement form, and of assemblage variation, the attempt to formulate interpretative principles through ethnoarcheological investiations, the focus on observations that were apparently anomalous in respect to traditional propositions ('surprises'), and the emphasis of economic/ecological/evolutionary mechanisms, are all features pronounced in the New Archaeology perspective. It is certainly possible to see a direct influence of this paper on some authors in the early 1980s (e.g. Byrne 1980; Hiscock 1983). However, while Hayden's paper was influential, it also epitomises a broader perspective that continues to revitalise the interpretation of Australian artefacts. Show more