Fleming, A. (2006). Post-processual landscape archaeology:. Cambridge Archaeol J 16 (3). Vol 16(3), pp. 267-280.

Title
Title
The title of the publication or report
Title:
Post-processual landscape archaeology:
Subtitle
Subtitle
The sub title of the publication or report
Subtitle:
a critique
Issue
Issue
The name of the volume or issue
Issue:
Cambridge Archaeol J 16 (3)
Series
Series
The series the publication or report is included in
Series:
Cambridge Archaeological Journal
Volume
Volume
Volume number and part
Volume:
16 (3)
Page Start/End
Page Start/End
The start and end page numbers.
Page Start/End:
267 - 280
Biblio Note
Biblio Note
This is a Bibliographic record only.
Biblio Note
The ADS have no files for download on this page but further information is available online, normally as an electronic version maintained by the Publisher, or held in a larger collection such as an ADS Archive. Please refer to the DOI or URI listed in the Relations section of this record to locate the information you require. In the case of non-ADS resources, please be aware that we cannot advise further on availability.
Publication Type
Publication Type
The type of publication - report, monograph, journal article or chapter from a book
Publication Type:
Journal
Abstract
Abstract
The abstract describing the content of the publication or report
Abstract:
The author contends that post-processual theorists have characterized landscape archaeology as practised in the second half of the twentieth century as over-empirical; that they have asserted that the discipline is sterile, in that it deals inadequately with the people of the past, and is also too preoccupied with vision-privileging and Cartesian approaches; and that they have argued that it is therefore necessary to `go beyond the evidence' and to develop more experiential approaches, `archaeologies of inhabitation'. The article argues that such a critique is misguided, notably in its rejection of long-accepted modes of fieldwork and argument and in its annexation of Cosgrove's rhetoric. `Post-processual' landscape archaeology has involved the development of phenomenological approaches to past landscapes and the writing of hyper-interpretive texts (pioneered by Tilley and Edmonds respectively). It is argued that phenomenological fieldwork has produced highly questionable `results'. Some of the theoretical and practical consequences of adopting post-processual landscape archaeology are discussed; it is concluded that the new approaches are more problematic than their proponents have allowed, and that although new thinking should always be welcomed, it would not be advisable to abandon the heuristic, argument-grounded strengths of conventional landscape archaeology.
Author
Author
The authors of this publication or report
Author:
Andrew Fleming
Year of Publication
Year of Publication
The year the book, article or report was published
Year of Publication:
2006
Locations
Locations
Any locations covered by the publication or report. This is not the place the book or report was published.
Subjects / Periods:
Twentieth Century (Auto Detected Temporal)
Source
Source
Where the record has come from or which dataset it was orginally included in.
Source:
Source icon
BIAB (The British & Irish Archaeological Bibliography (BIAB))
Relations
Relations
Other resources which are relevant to this publication or report
Relations:
URI: http://journals.cambridge.org/action/displayJournal?jid=CAJ
Created Date
Created Date
The date the record of the pubication was first entered
Created Date:
03 Nov 2006