Strong Theoretical Archaeology Programs

[landscrape]

In your opinion, what schools are doing the most interesting work in the "theoretical" aspects of archaeology. I have seen a lot of posters who are bio-arch, but I am curious as to what other Arch applicants think. Where should one apply if they want to focus more on the humanities/social science aspect of archaeology? I know UChicago has a historical emphasis on theoretical approaches, but I am curious to hear others. I would love to hear which professors are pushing theoretical boundaries as well.

[pears]

Hmm, that's a really interesting question actually. My focus is in mortuary archaeology, so I'm an arch/bioarch fence-sitter of sorts. Admittedly, I have a big ol' soft spot for theory: learning about theories, debating theories, critiquing them, & so forth. It's amazing how much overlap with philosophy (of science, among other things) there can be.

 

My two first thoughts were Michelle Hegmon, who's at ASU, & Ian Hodder, who's at Stanford. Hegmon coined the idea of "processual-plus" theory, that is, the blending of processual & post-processual theory that seems to be en vogue in American archaeology. I'm interested to see where the whole processual-plus perspective goes, & there are many thoughtful critiques & criticisms of it out there, namely from scholars who lean in the feminist and Marxist direction — that is, theories that make a point of examining something specific in its own right (women/gender, economics/social struggle) & are also politically charged. Hodder is very much a post-processualist, so I'm not sure he's quite on the cutting edge of theory anymore, but he is a theoretical heavy-hitter f'sho. I now Barb Voss is also at Stanford, & she does some cool theoretically-bent work on ethnogenesis & gender in archaeology. Not sure what the rest of the Stanford faculty is like.

 

Pretty good timing, actually: I had a reading-based discussion in a seminar today about the role of ontology in anthropology, which seems to be a very new niche of interest, but a super interesting one (to me, at least!). Martin Holbraad, who's at UCL, came up often, as did Severin Fowles, who's at Columbia through Barnard College. Columbia's faculty has lots of familiar names for me that rang a "theory!" bell in my brain, but I think most are cultural in focus. Hmm. Otherwise, the other names that came up belong to people who are in Denmark, Brasil, & other places where language may be a barrier. The link that clicking Holbraad's name leads to may offer other people, too!

 

Theory is so, so broad, even in archaeology alone.. it just depends on what kind of theory you're interested in, I guess. Not sure how helpful I was, but, as I said, I love all kinds of theory chitchat, so I'm interested to see what other names & programs pop up!

[AKJen]

I'm not archy, but I'm in a four-field program and our core course in archaeology was theory heavy. Our prof was Robert Preucel, who is now at Brown. He worked with Ian Hodder and has done a lot of work on archaeological semiotics and community partnerships.  I'm a big fan of Ian Hodder. Tim Ingold also does really interesting work, but he's in the UK.

[NoSleepTilBreuckelen]

You might might also want to look and see which programs are well represented in the Theoretical Archaeology Group: http://www.tag-usa.org

 

I imagine you could even contact students involved in the group to get their take on the theory offerings in their department.

[DigDeep(inactive)]

If you can get your hands on one of these:

 

http://www.amazon.com/Handbook-Archaeological-Theories-Alexander-Bentley/dp/0759100330/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1394736204&sr=8-1&keywords=handbook+of+archaeological+theory

 

I would suggest perusing through that, paying close attention to authors/co-authors whereabouts (and references, of course).

Edited March 13, 2014 by DigDeep

[pears]

If you can get your hands on one of these:

 

http://www.amazon.com/Handbook-Archaeological-Theories-Alexander-Bentley/dp/0759100330/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1394736204&sr=8-1&keywords=handbook+of+archaeological+theory

 

I would suggest perusing through that, paying close attention to authors/co-authors whereabouts (and references, of course).

 

Couldn't agree more! I swear by that book. If it can't give you the answer you're looking for, it will probably lead you to it.