The paradigm concept in archaeology

References

• Adams, R. McC. 1968. “Archaeological Research Strategies: Past and Present.” Science 160 (3833): 1187–1192.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Agamben, G. 2009. “What is a Paradigm?” In The Signature of All Things. On Method, edited by G. Agamben, 9–32. New York: Zone Books.
   Google Scholar
• Binford, L. 1972. “Contemporary Model Building: Paradigms and the Current State of Palaeolithic Research.” In Models in Archaeology, edited by D. Clarke, 109–166. London: Methuen.
   Google Scholar
• Binford, L. 1982. “Objectivity-Explanation-Archaeology-1981.” In Theory and Explanation in Archaeology, edited by C. Renfrew, M. J. Rowlands, and B. Segraves, 125–138. New York: Academic Press.
   Google Scholar
• Binford, L., and J. Sabloff. 1982. “Paradigms, Systematics and Archaeology.” Journal of Anthropological Research 38 (2): 137–153. doi:10.1086/jar.38.2.3629594.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bintliff, J. 2011. “The Death of Archaeological Theory?” In The Death of Archaeological Theory, edited by J. Bintliff and M. Pearce, 7–22. Oxford: Oxbow Books.
   Google Scholar
• Cedarbaum, D. G. 1983. “Paradigms.” Studies in History and Philosophy of Science 14 (3): 173–213.
   Google Scholar
• Clarke, D. 1972. “Models and Paradigms in Contemporary Archaeology.” In Models in Archaeology, edited by D. Clarke, 1–60. London: Methuen.
   Google Scholar
• Collins, H., R. Evans, and M. Gorman. 2007. “Trading Zones and Interactional Expertise.” Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 38: 657–666. doi:10.1016/j.shpsa.2007.09.003.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Galison, P. 1997. Image and Logic. A Material Culture of Microphysics. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Gibbon, G. 1989. Explanation in Archaeology. Oxford: Blackwell.
   Google Scholar
• Gorman, M., ed. 2010. Trading Zones and Interactional Expertise. Cambridge: MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Gutting, G., ed. 1980. Paradigms and Revolutions. Applications and Appraisals of Thomas Kuhn’s Philosophy of Science. Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame Press.
   Google Scholar
• Hides, S. 1996. “The Generalogy of Material Culture and Cultural Identity.” In Cultural Identity and Archaeology: The Construction of European Communities, edited by P. Graves-Brown, S. Jones, and C. Gamble, 25–47. London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Hodder, I. 1982. “Theoretical Archaeology: A Reactionary View.” In Symbolic and Structural Archaeology, edited by I. Hodder, 1–16. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Hodder, I. 1986. Reading the Past. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Hodder, I. 1993. “The Narrative and Rhetoric of Material Culture Sequences.” World Archaeology 25: 268–282. doi:10.1080/00438243.1993.9980243.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hodder, I. 1995. “Material Culture in Time.” In Interpreting Archaeology: Finding Meaning in the Past, edited by I. Hodder, M. Shanks, A. Alexandri, V. Buchli, J. Carman, J. Last, and G. Lucas, London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Hodder, I. 2012. “Introduction. Contemporry Theoretical Debate in Archaeology.” In Archaeological Theory Today, edited by I. Hodder, 1–14. Cambridge: Polity.
   Google Scholar
• Kelley, J., and M. Hanen. 1988. Archaeology and the Methodology of the Science. Albuquerque: University of New Mexico Press.
   Google Scholar
• Koselleck, R. 2004. Futures Past. On the Semnantics of Historical Time. New York: University of Columbia Press.
   Google Scholar
• Kristiansen, K. 2011. “Theory Does Not Die It Changes Direction.” In The Death of Archaeological Theory, edited by J. Bintliff and M. Pearce, 72–79. Oxford: Oxbow Books.
   Google Scholar
• Kristiansen, K. 2014. “Towards a New Paradigm? The Third Science Revolution and Its Possible Consequences in Archaeology.” Current Swedish Archaeology 22: 11–34.
   Google Scholar
• Kuhn, T. 1970. The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. 2nd ed. Chicago: Chicago University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Kuhn, T. 1977. “Second Thoughts on Paradigms.” In The Essential Tension. Selected Studies in Scientific Tradition and Change, edited by T. Kuhn, 293–319. Chicago: Chicago University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Latour, B. 1987. Science in Action: How to Follow Scientists and Engineers through Society. Milton Keynes: Open University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Leone, M. 1972. “Issues in Anthropological Archaeology.” In Contemporary Archaeology, edited by M. Leone, 14–27. Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Lucas, G. 2015. “The Mobility of Theory.” Current Swedish Archaeology 23: 13–82.
   Google Scholar
• Martin, P. 1971. “The Revolution in Archaeology.” American Antiquity 36 (1): 1–8. doi:10.2307/278018.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Masterman, M. 1970. “The Nature of a Paradigm.” In Criticism and the Growth of Knowledge, edited by I. Lakatos and A. Musgrave, 59–89. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Meltzer, D. J. 1979. “Paradigms and the Nature of Change in American Archaeology.” American Antiquity 44 (4): 644–657. doi:10.2307/279104.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Meltzer, D. J. 1981. “Paradigms Lost. Paradigms Found?” American Antiquity 46 (3): 662–665. doi:10.2307/280615.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moore, H. 1999. “Anthropological Theory at the Turn of the Century.” In Anthropological Theory Today, edited by H. Moore, 1–23. Cambridge: Polity Press.
   Google Scholar
• Moore, H. 2004. “Global Anxieties: Concept-Metaphors and Pre-Theoretical Commitments in Anthropology.” Anthropological Theory 4 (1): 71–88. doi:10.1177/1463499604040848.
   Google Scholar
• Morris, I. 1994. “Archaeologies of Greece.” In Classical Greece. Ancient Histories and Modern Archaeologies, edited by I. Morris, 8–47. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Pearce, M. 2011. “Have Rumours of the ‘Death of Theory’ Been Exaggerated?” In The Death of Archaeological Theory, edited by J. Bintliff and M. Pearce, 80–89. Oxford: Oxbow Books.
   Google Scholar
• Perl-Rosenthal, N. 2012. “Comment: Generational Turns.” The American Historical Review 117 (3): 804–813. doi:10.1086/ahr.117.3.804.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Purvis, T., and A. Hunt. 1993. “Discourse, Ideology, Discourse, Ideology, Discourse, Ideology.” The British Journal of Sociology 44 (3): 473–499. doi:10.2307/591813.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Renfrew, C. 1982. “Explanation Revisited.” In Theory and Explanation in Archaeology, edited by M. J. R. Renfrew and B. Segraves, 5–24. New York: Academic Press.
   Google Scholar
• Rodden, J. 1981. “The Development of the Three Age System: Archaeology’s First Paradigm.” In Towards a History of Archaeology, edited by G. Daniel, 51–68. London: Thames and Hudson.
   Google Scholar
• Rorty, R. 1967. The Linguistic Turn. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Sahlins, M. 2002. Waiting for Foucault, Still. Chicago: Prickly Paradigm Press.
   Google Scholar
• Sawyer, R. K. 2002. “A Discourse on Discourse: An Archaeological History of an Intellectual Concept.” Cultural Studies 16 (3): 433–456. doi:10.1080/09502380210128324.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schuyler, R. 1971. “The History of American Archaeology: An Examination of Procedure.” American Antiquity 36 (4): 383–409. doi:10.2307/278460.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shanks, M., and C. Tilley. 1987. Re-Constructing Archaeology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Sterud, G. 1973. “A Paradigmatic View of Prehistory.” In The Explanation of Culture Change. Models in Prehistory, edited by C. Renfrew, 3–18. London: Duckworth.
   Google Scholar
• Strathern, M. 1988. The Gender of the Gift. Berkeley: University of California Press.
   Google Scholar
• Surkis, J. 2012. “When Was the Linguistic Turn? A Genealogy.” The American Historical Review 117 (3): 700–722. doi:10.1086/ahr.117.3.700.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Thomas, J. 2015. “Why ‘The Death of Archaeological Theory’?” In Debating Archaeological Empiricism. The Ambiguity of Material Evidence, edited by C. Hillerdal and J. Siapkas, 11–36. London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Tilley, C. 1989. “Interpreting Matrerial Culture.” In The Meaning of Things (One World Archaeology Series), edited by I. Hodder, 185–194. London: Unwin Hyman.
   Google Scholar
• Trigger, B. 1989. A History of Archaeological Thought. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Turnbull, D. 2000. Masons, Tricksters and Cartographers. London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• VanPool, C., and T. VanPool. 2003. “Introduction: Method, Theory and the Essential Tension.” In Essential Tensions in Archaeological Method and Theory, edited by T. VanPool and C. VanPool, 1–4. Salt Lake City: University of Utah Press.
   Google Scholar
• White, H. 1973. Metahistory: The Historical Imagination in Nineteenth-Century Europe. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Wray, K. B. 2011. “Kuhn and the Discovery of Paradigms.” Philosophy of the Social Sciences 41 (3): 380–397.
   Google Scholar
• Wylie, A. 2002. Thinking from Things. Essays in the Philosophy of Archaeology. Berkeley: University of California Press.
   Google Scholar
• Zubrow, E. 1973. “Environment, Subsistence and Society: The changing Archaeological Perspective.” Annual Review of Anthropology 1: 179–206. doi:10.1146/annurev.an.01.100172.001143.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zubrow, E. 2015. “Paradigm Lost: The Rise, Fall and Eventual Recovery of Paradigms.” In Paradigm Found. Archaeological Theory Past, Present and Future, edited by K. Kristiansen, L. Smejda, and J. Turek, 167–176. Oxford: Oxbow Books.
   Google Scholar