Processual archaeology and post-processual archaeology are two key approaches in archaeological theory, and they differ in several important ways:
1. Theoretical Foundations:
- Processual Archaeology: This approach emerged in the 1960s and is often associated with scholars like Lewis Binford. It is heavily influenced by scientific methods and positivism. Processual archaeologists focus on understanding past human behavior through objective, scientific analysis. They emphasize material culture, environmental factors, and technological advancements as the driving forces of societal change.
- Post-Processual Archaeology: This perspective emerged in the 1980s as a reaction to the perceived limitations of processual archaeology. Prominent figures like Ian Hodder were central to the development of post-processual archaeology. It challenges the idea of archaeology as a purely scientific discipline and emphasizes the importance of human agency, subjectivity, and cultural contexts. Post-processual archaeologists argue that archaeology is not just a study of material culture but also involves interpreting symbols, beliefs, and ideologies.
2. Focus on Objectivity vs. Subjectivity:
- Processual Archaeology: Advocates for objectivity in interpreting archaeological data. It emphasizes that archaeology should be based on empirical evidence and that interpretations should be as unbiased and scientific as possible.
- Post-Processual Archaeology: Emphasizes subjectivity, recognizing that interpretations are influenced by the archaeologist’s own perspectives, biases, and cultural backgrounds. It argues that multiple interpretations of the past are valid, and that cultural and social factors should be considered when analyzing material culture.
3. Role of Culture and Human Agency:
- Processual Archaeology: Sees culture as something that is shaped primarily by environmental and economic factors. Human behavior is often seen as predictable and influenced by ecological, technological, and adaptive needs.
- Post-Processual Archaeology: Focuses more on human agency and the active role individuals play in shaping culture. It recognizes that people make choices, have agency, and are influenced by ideologies, power dynamics, and social structures.
4. Interpretation of Material Culture:
- Processual Archaeology: Interprets material culture primarily through a functionalist lens, emphasizing how objects and practices are used to adapt to environmental and social needs. Material culture is often seen as evidence of adaptive strategies and societal structures.
- Post-Processual Archaeology: Views material culture as embedded with meaning and symbolic significance. It stresses that artifacts should be interpreted within their social, political, and ideological contexts. Material culture is seen as a way to understand not only the material conditions but also the beliefs, power relations, and identities of past societies.
5. Methodology:
- Processual Archaeology: Often relies on quantitative methods, such as statistical analysis and formal models. It favors large-scale data collection, scientific techniques, and the search for generalizable patterns in human behavior.
- Post-Processual Archaeology: Tends to use more qualitative methods, such as narrative analysis and interpretation of symbolism, myth, and ritual. It emphasizes understanding the complexity and diversity of human experiences rather than seeking broad generalizations.
6. Epistemology:
- Processual Archaeology: Adopts a more positivist epistemology, which believes in discovering objective truths about the past through scientific methods.
- Post-Processual Archaeology: Adopts a more relativist and interpretivist epistemology, recognizing that all knowledge is socially constructed and that there is no single “truth” about the past. Different people may interpret the same archaeological evidence in different ways.