Abstract
Different ideas are proposed all the time in archaeology. These often rise or fall based on how well they predict objective, measureable characteristics of the archaeological record. But other ideas are more paradigmatic, concerned with how we think about the archaeological record rather than the record itself. What determines which ideas rise or fall? This essay considers the specific question of why Lewis Binford’s middle-range approach became more prevalent over the very similar formation-process approach of Michael Schiffer in the 1970s and 1980s. It is hypothesized that while an approach’s ability to predict objective characteristics of the archaeological record is one selective factor, in this particular case, other factors, including personality and, especially, the association between Binford’s approach and significant, long-standing problems of prehistory, were also significant selective factors.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Ascher, R. (1961). Analogy in archaeological interpretation. Southwestern Journal of Anthropology, 17, 317–325.
Binford, L. R. (1962). Archaeology as anthropology. American Antiquity, 28, 217–225.
Binford, L. R. (1978). Nunamiut ethnoarchaeology. New York: Academic Press.
Binford, L. R. (1981a). Bones, ancient men and modern myths. New York: Academic Press.
Binford, L. R. (1981b). Behavioral archaeology and the “Pompeii premise”. Journal of Anthropological Research, 3, 195–208.
Binford, L. R. (1983). In pursuit of the past. London: Thames and Hudson.
Flannery, K. (1982). The Golden Marshalltown: a parable for archaeology of the 1980s. American Anthropologist, 84, 265–278.
Kelly, R. L., & Thomas, D. H. (2010). Archaeology. Belmont: Wadsworth/Cengage.
O’Brien, M. J., Lyman, R. L., & Schiffer, M. B. (2005). Archaeology as a process: processualism and its progeny. Salt Lake City: University of Utah Press.
Schiffer, M. B. (1976). Behavioral archeology. New York: Academic Press.
Schiffer, M. B. (1981). Some issues in the philosophy of archaeology. American Antiquity, 46, 899–908.
Schiffer, M. B. (1985). Is there a “Pompeii Premise” in archaeology? Journal of Anthropological Research, 41, 18–41.
Schiffer, M. B. (1991). The portable radio in American life. Tucson: University of Arizona Press.
Schiffer, M. B. (1992). Technological perspectives on behavioral change. Tucson: University of Arizona Press.
Schiffer, M. B. (1996). Formation processes of the archaeological record. Salt Lake City: University of Utah Press.
Schiffer, M. B. (Ed.). (2000). Social theory in archaeology. Salt Lake City: University of Utah Press.
Schiffer, M. B. (Ed.). (2001). Anthropological perspectives on technology. Salt Lake City: University of Utah Press.
Schiffer, M. B. (2003). Draw the lightning down: Benjamin Franklin and electrical technology in the age of enlightenment. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Schiffer, M. B., & Miller, A. (1999). The material life of human beings: artifacts, behavior, and communication. London: Routledge.
Schiffer, M. B., Butts, T. C., & Grimm, K. K. (1994). Taking charge: the electric automobile in America. Washington D.C.: Smithsonian Institution Press.
Taylor, W. W. (1948). A Study of Archeology. Memoirs of the American Anthropological Association 69. Menasha.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Kelly, R.L. Why Did Binford's Middle-Range Program Outcompete Schiffer's Formation Process Program?. J Archaeol Method Theory 18, 284–290 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10816-011-9111-6
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10816-011-9111-6