Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-2plfb Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-30T14:58:41.495Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Basic Incompatibilities between Evolutionary and Behavioral Archaeology

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

Michael J. O'Brien ,
R. Lee Lyman  and
Robert D. Leonard
Michael J. O'Brien
Affiliation:
Department of Anthropology, University of Missouri, Columbia, MO 65211
R. Lee Lyman
Affiliation:
Department of Anthropology, University of Missouri, Columbia, MO 65211
Robert D. Leonard
Affiliation:
Department of Anthropology, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, NM 87131
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Schiffer (1996) recently proposed that, despite some incompatibilities, considerable common ground exists between behavioral archaeology and evolutionary, or selectionist, archaeology. He concludes that there is no fundamental reason why the two approaches cannot work in concert to explain human behavioral change. There are, however, several important reasons why the two programs, at least as currently conceived, cannot work together in any thoroughly integrated fashion. Although both programs employ inference, behavioral archaeology conflates the distinct roles of configurational and immanent properties, searches for nomothetic answers to questions about human behavior, overlooks historical contingency when inferring and explaining the nature of past behavior, and in some cases seems to fall back on vitalism as the mechanism of change. Evolutionary archaeology employs immanent properties inferentially, explicitly acknowledges the importance of the historical contingencies of configurational properties, explains human behavior as being time- and spacebound, and calls upon selection and drift (transmission) as the mechanisms of change. Any attempt to integrate the two approaches must begin by addressing these basic differences.

Résumé

Résumé

Schiffer (1996) recientemente ha propuesto que, a pesar de algunas incompatibilidades, existen considerables puntos en común entre la arqueología conductual y la arqueología evolucionista, o seleccionista. Concluye que no existen razones fundametales por las que estas dos perspectivas no puedan trabajar en conjunto para explicar los cambios del comportamiento humano. Existen, a pesar de todo, varias razones importantes por lo cual estas dos escuelas, al menos como se les ha concebido hasta ahora, no pueden trabajar juntas bajo ningún planteamiento integrado. Aunque las dos escuelas emplean inferencias, la arqueología conductual conjuga el papel distintivo de las propiedades configuracionales e imanentes, busca respuestas nomotéticas a las preguntas sobre el comportamiento humano, pasa por alto las contingencias históricas al inferir y explicar la naturaleza del comportamiento pasado, y en algunas casos parece recaer en el vitalismo como mecanismo del cambio. La arqueología evolucionista emplea inferencialmente las propiedades inmanentes, reconoce explicitamente la importancia de las contingencias históricas en la configuración de las propiedades, explica el comportamiento humano como único en un tiempo y espacio determinado, y considera a la selección y la transmisión como los mecanismos responsables del cambio. Cualquier intento de integral' estas dos escuelas debe comenzar por resolver estas diferencias básicas.

Type
Comment
Information
American Antiquity , Volume 63 , Issue 3 , July 1998 , pp. 485 - 498
Copyright
Copyright © The Society for American Archaeology 1998

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

References Cited

Beatty, J. 1995 The Evolutionary Contingency Thesis. In Concepts, Theories, and Rationality in the Biological Sciences, edited by Wolters, G. and Lennox, J.G. pp. 45–81. University of Pittsburgh Press, Pittsburgh.Google Scholar
Boone, J. L., and Smith, E. A. 1998 Is It Evolution Yet? A Critique of Evolutionary Archaeology. Current Anthropology 39 : S141—S173.Google Scholar
Bowler, P. J. 1990 Charles Darwin : The Man and His Influence. Blackwell, Oxford.Google Scholar
Boyd, R., and Richerson, P. J. 1985 Culture and the Evolutionary Process. University of Chicago Press, Chicago.Google Scholar
Brandon, R. N. 1994 Theory and Experiment in Evolutionary Biology. Synthese 99 : 59–73.Google Scholar
Cavalli-Sforza, L. L., and Feldman, M. W. 1981 Cultural Transmission and Evolution : A Quantitative Approach. Princeton University Press, Princeton. New Jersey.Google Scholar
Dawkins, R. 1990 The Extended Phenotype : The Long Reach of the Gene. Oxford University Press, Oxford.Google Scholar
Dunnell, R. C. 1978 Style and Function : A Fundamental Dichotomy. American Antiquity 43 : 192–202.Google Scholar
Dunnell, R. C. 1980 Evolutionary Theory and Archaeology. In Advances in Archaeological Method and Theory, vol. 3, edited by Schiffer, M. B., pp. 35–99. Academic Press, New York.Google Scholar
Dunnell, R. C. 1982 Science, Social Science, and Common Sense : The Agonizing Dilemma of Modern Archaeology. Journal of Anthropological Research 38 : 1–25.Google Scholar
Dunnell, R. C. 1989 Aspects of the Application of Evolutionary Theory in Archaeology. In Archaeological Thought in America, edited by C. C. Lamberg-Karlovsky, pp. 35–49. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dunnell, R. C. 1992a Archaeology and Evolutionary Science. In Quandaries and Quests : Visions of Archaeology's Future, edited by Wandsnider, L., pp. 209–224. Occasional Paper No. 20. Center for Archaeological Investigations, Southern Illinois University, Carbondale.Google Scholar
Dunnell, R. C. 1992b Is a Scientific Archaeology Possible? In Metaarchaeology, edited by Embree, L., pp. 75–97. Boston Studies in the Philosophy of Science, vol. 147. Kluwer, Dortrecht, The Netherlands.Google Scholar
Dunnell, R. C. 1995 What Is It That Actually Evolves? In Evolutionary Archaeology : Methodological Issues, edited by Teltser, P. A., pp. 33–50. University of Arizona Press, Tucson.Google Scholar
Dunnell, R. C. 1996a Foreword. In Evolutionary Archaeology : Theory and Application, edited by O'Brien, M. J., pp. vii-xii. University of Utah Press, Salt Lake City.Google Scholar
Dunnell, R. C. 1996b Natural Selection, Scale, and Cultural Evolution : Some Preliminary Considerations. In Evolutionary Archaeology : Theory and Application, edited by O'Brien, M. J., pp. 24–29. University of Utah Press, Salt Lake City.Google Scholar
Dunnell, R. C., and Feathers, J. K. 1991 Later Woodland Manifestations of the Maiden Plain, Southeast Missouri. In Stability, Transformation, and Variation : The Late Woodland Southeast, edited by Nassaney, M. S. and Cobb, C.R. pp. 21^45. Plenum Press, New York.Google Scholar
Dunnell, R. C., and Leonard, R. D. (editors) 1998 Explanation of Change : Case Studies in Evolutionary Archaeology. Manuscript on file, Department of Anthropology, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque.Google Scholar
Dunnell, R. C, and Wenke, R. J. 1980 Cultural and Scientific Evolution : Some Comments on The Decline and Rise of Mesopotamian Civilization, by N. Yoffee. American Antiquity 45 : 605–609.Google Scholar
Eldredge, N., and Gould, S. J. 1972 Punctuated Equilibria : An Alternative to Phyletic Gradualism. In Models in Paleobiology, edited by M, T. J.. Schopf, pp. 82–115. Freeman, Cooper, San Francisco.Google Scholar
Endler, J. A. 1986 Natural Selection in the Wild. Princeton University Press, Princeton. New Jersey.Google Scholar
Ereshefsky, M. 1992 The Historical Nature of Evolutionary Theory. In History and Evolution, edited by Nitecki, M. H. and Nitecki, D.V. pp. 81–99. State University of New York Press, Albany.Google Scholar
Flannery, K. V. 1967 Culture History v. Cultural Process : A Debate in American Archaeology. Scientific American 217(2) : 119–122.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gans, C. 1988 Adaptation and the Form-Function Relation. American Zoologist 28 : 681–697.Google Scholar
Gans, C. 1993 On the Merits of Adequacy. American Journal of Science 293A : 391-466.Google Scholar
Gingerich, P. D. 1991 Fossils and Evolution. In Evolution of Life : Fossils, Molecules, and Culture, edited by Osawa, S. and Honjo, T., pp. 3–20. Springer-Verlag, Tokyo.Google Scholar
Gould, S. J. 1965 Is Uniformitarianism Necessary? American Journal of Science 263 : 223–228.Google Scholar
Gould, S. J. 1980 Paleontology. In The Evolutionary Synthesis : Perspectives on the Unification of Biology, edited by Mayr, E. and Provine, W.B. pp. 153–172. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts.Google Scholar
Gould, S. J. 1989 A Developmental Constraint in Cerion, with Comments on the Definition and Interpretation of Constraint in Evolution. Evolution 43 : 516–539.Google Scholar
Gould, S. J. 1991 Exaptation : A Crucial Tool for an Evolutionary Psychology. Journal of Social Issues 47(3) : 43–65.Google Scholar
Gould, S. J. 1995a A Task for Paleobiology at the Threshold of Majority. Paleobiology 21 : 1–14.Google Scholar
Gould, S. J. 1995b Tempo and Mode in the Macroevolutionary Reconstruction of Darwinism. In Tempo and Mode in Evolution, edited by Fitch, W. M. and Ayala, F.J. pp. 125–144. National Academy Press, Washington, D.C. Google Scholar
Gould, S. J. 1997 The Exaptive Excellence of Spandrels as a Term and Prototype. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 94 : 10750–10755.Google Scholar
Gould, S. J., and Eldredge, N. 1993 Punctuated Equilibrium Comes of Age. Nature 366 : 223–227.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gould, S. J., and Lewontin, R. C. 1979 The Spandrels of San Marco and the Panglossian Paradigm : A Critique of the Adaptationist Programme. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London series B, 205 : 581–598.Google Scholar
Gould, S. J., and Vrba, E. S. 1982 Exaptation—A Missing Term in the Science of Form. Paleobiology 8 : 4–15.Google Scholar
Hull, D. L. 1965 The Effect of Essentialism on Taxonomy—Two Thousand Years of Stasis. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 15 : 314–326; 16 : 1–18.Google Scholar
Jacobs, F. 1977 Evolution and Tinkering. Science 196 : 1161–1166.Google Scholar
LaPorte, J. 1997 Essential Membership. Philosophy of Science 64 : 96–112.Google Scholar
LaPorte, L. F. 1983 Simpson's Tempo and Mode in Evolution Revisited. Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society 127 : 365–17.Google Scholar
Lawrence, D. R. 1971 The Nature and Structure of Paleoecology. Journal of Paleontology 45 : 593–607.Google Scholar
Leonard, R. D., and Jones, G. T. 1987 Elements of an Inclusive Evolutionary Model for Archaeology. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 6 : 199–219.Google Scholar
Leonard, R. D., and Reed, H. E. 1993 Population Aggregation in the Prehistoric American Southwest : A Selectionist Model. American Antiquity 58 : 648–661.Google Scholar
Leonard, R. D., and Reed, H. E. 1996 Theory, Models, Explanation, and the Record : Response to Kohler and Sebastian. American Antiquity 61 : 603–608.Google Scholar
Lewontin, R. C. 1974 The Genetic Basis of Evolutionary Change. Columbia University Press, New York.Google Scholar
Lipo, C, Madsen, M., Dunnell, R. C., and Hunt, T. 1997 Population Structure, Cultural Transmission, and Frequency Seriation. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 16 : 301–333.Google Scholar
Lyman, R, L., and O'Brien, M. J. 1997 The Concept of Evolution in Early Twentieth-Century Americanist Archaeology. In Rediscovering Darwin : Evolutionary Theory in Archaeological Explanation, edited by Barton, C. M. and Clark, G.A. pp. 21^48. Archeological Papers No. 7. American Anthropological Association, Arlington, Virginia.Google Scholar
Lyman, R, L., and O'Brien, M. J. 1998 The Goals of Evolutionary Archaeology : History and Explanation. Current Anthropology 39, in press.Google Scholar
Lyman, R, L., and O'Brien, M. J. 1997 The Rise and Fall of Culture History. Plenum, New York.Google Scholar
McKellar, J. A. 1983 Correlates and the Explanation of Distributions. Atlatl, Occasional Papers No. 4. Anthropology Club, University of Arizona, Tucson.Google Scholar
Maschner, H. D. G. (editor) 1996 Darwinian Archaeologies. Plenum, New York.Google Scholar
Mayr, E. 1959 Darwin and the Evolutionary Theory in Biology. In Evolution and Anthropology : A Centennial Appraisal, edited by Meggers, B. J., pp. 1–10. Anthropological Society of Washington, Washington, D.C. Google Scholar
Mayr, E. 1961 Cause and Effect in Biology. Science 134 : 1501–1506.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mayr, E. 1973 Populations, Species, and Evolution. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts.Google Scholar
Mayr, E. 1987 The Ontological Status of Species : Scientific Progress and Philosophical Terminology. Biology and Philosophy 2 : 145–166.Google Scholar
Mayr, E. 1991 One Long Argument : Charles Darwin and the Genesis of Modern Evolutionary Thought. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts.Google Scholar
Mayr, E. 1996 What Is a Species, and What Is Not? Philosophy of Science 63 : 262–277.Google Scholar
Neiman, F. 1995 Stylistic Variation in Evolutionary Perspective : Inferences from Decorative Diversity and Interassemblage Distance in Illinois Woodland Ceramic Assemblages. American Antiquity 60 : 7–36.Google Scholar
Neiman, F. 1992 History and Evolution. State University of New York Press, New York.Google Scholar
O'Brien, M. J. 1996a>The Historical Development of an Evolutionary Archaeology. In Darwinian Archaeologies, edited by G, H. D.. Maschner, pp. 17–32. Plenum, New York.Google Scholar
O'Brien, M. J. (editor) 1996b Evolutionary Archaeology : Theory and Application. University of Utah Press, Salt Lake City.Google Scholar
O'Brien, M. J., and Dunnell, R. C. (editors) 1998 Changing Perspectives on the Archaeology of the Central Mississippi Valley. University of Alabama Press, Tuscaloosa.Google Scholar
O'Brien, M. J., and Holland, T. D. 1990 Variation, Selection, and the Archaeological Record. In Archaeological Method and Theory, vol. 2, edited by Schiffer, M. B., pp. 31–79. University of Arizona Press, Tucson.Google Scholar
O'Brien, M. J., and Holland, T. D. 1992 The Role of Adaptation in Archaeological Explanation. American Antiquity 57 : 36–59.Google Scholar
O'Brien, M. J., and Holland, T. D. 1995a The Nature and Premise of a Selection-based Archaeology. In Evolutionary Archaeology : Methodological Issues, edited by Teltser, P. A., pp. 175–200. University of Arizona Press, Tucson.Google Scholar
O'Brien, M. J., and Holland, T. D. 1995b Behavioral Archaeology and the Extended Phenotype. In Expanding Archaeology, edited by Skibo, J. M., Walker, W. H., and Nielsen, A. E., pp. 143–161. University of Utah Press, Salt Lake City.Google Scholar
O'Brien, M. J., Holland, T. D., Hoard, R. J., and Fox, G. L. 1994 Evolutionary Implications of Design and Performance Characteristics of Prehistoric Pottery. Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory 1 : 259–304.Google Scholar
O'Hara, R. J. 1988 Homage to Clio, or, Toward an Historical Philosophy for Evolutionary Biology. Systematic Zoology 37 : 142–155.Google Scholar
Paine, R. T. 1983 On Paleoecology : An Attempt to Impose Order on Chaos. Paleobiology 9 : 86–90.Google Scholar
Peterson, C. H. 1983 The Pervasive Biological Explanation. Paleobiology 9 : 429–136.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Phillips, P. 1955 American Archaeology and General Anthropological Theory. Southwestern Journal of Anthropology 11 : 246–250.Google Scholar
Reid, J. J., Rathje, W. L., and Schiffer, M. B. 1974 Expanding Archaeology. American Antiquity 39 : 125–126.Google Scholar
Reid, J. J., Schiffer, M. B., and Rathje, W. L. 1975 Behavioral Archaeology : Four Strategies. American Anthropologist 77 : 864–869.Google Scholar
Richards, R. I. 1992 Evolution. In Keywords in Evolutionary Biology, edited by Keller, E. F. and Lloyd, E.A. pp. 95–105. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts.Google Scholar
Rindos, D. 1985 Darwinian Selection, Symbolic Variation, and the Evolution of Culture. Current Anthropology 26 : 65–88.Google Scholar
Rindos, D. 1986 The Evolution of the Capacity for Culture : Sociobiology, Structuralism, and Cultural Selection. Current Anthropology 27 : 315–332.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rosenberg, M. 1994 Pattern, Process, and Hierarchy in the Evolution of Culture. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 13 : 307–340.Google Scholar
Schiffer, M. B. 1972 Archaeological Context and Systemic Context. American Antiquity 37 : 156–165.Google Scholar
Schiffer, M. B. 1976 Behavioral Archeology. Academic Press, New York.Google Scholar
Schiffer, M. B. 1990 The Influence of Surface Treatment on Heating Effectiveness of Ceramic Vessels. Journal of Archaeological Science 17 : 373–381.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schiffer, M. B. 1995a Behavioral Archaeology : First Principles. University of Utah Press, Salt Lake City.Google Scholar
Schiffer, M. B. 1995b Social Theory and History in Behavioral Archaeology. In Expanding Archaeology, edited by Skibo, J. M., Walker, W. H., and Nielsen, A. E., pp. 22–35. University of Utah Press, Salt Lake City.Google Scholar
Schiffer, M. B. 1996 Some Relationships between Behavioral and Evolutionary Archaeologies. American Antiquity 61 : 643–662.Google Scholar
Schiffer, M. B. and Skibo, J. M. 1987 Theory and Experiment in the Study of Technological Change. Current Anthropology 28 : 595–622.Google Scholar
Schiffer, M. B., Skibo, J. M., Boelke, T. C., Neupert, M. A., 1994 New Perspectives on Experimental Archaeology : Surface Treatments and Thermal Response of the Clay Cooking Pot. American Antiquity 59 : 197–217.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shea, J. H. 1982 Twelve Fallacies of Uniformitarianism. Geology 10 : 455–160.Google Scholar
Simms, S. R. 1992 Ethnoarchaeology : Obnoxious Spectator, Trivial Pursuit, or the Keys to a Time Machine? In Quandaries and Quests : Visions of Archaeology's Future, edited by Wandsnider, L., pp. 186–198. Occasional Paper No. 20. Center for Archaeological Investigations, Southern Illinois University, Carbondale.Google Scholar
Simpson, G. G. 1937a Notes on the Clark Fork, Upper Paleocene, Fauna. American Museum Novitates No. 954. American Museum of Natural History, New York.Google Scholar
Simpson, G. G. 1937b Patterns of Phyletic Evolution. Geological Society of America Bulletin 48 : 303–314.Google Scholar
Simpson, G. G. 1937c Super-Specific Variation in Nature and in Classification from the View-Point of Paleontology. American Naturalist 71 : 236–267.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Simpson, G. G. 1944 Tempo and Mode in Evolution. Columbia University Press, New York.Google Scholar
Simpson, G. G. 1960 The History of Life. In Evolution after Darwin, vol. 1 : The Evolution of Life, edited by Tax, S., pp. 117–180. University of Chicago Press, Chicago.Google Scholar
Simpson, G. G. 1961 Principles of Animal Taxonomy. Columbia University Press, New York.Google Scholar
Simpson, G. G. 1963 Historical Science. In The Fabric of Geology, edited by Albritton, C. C., Jr., pp. 24-48. Freeman, Cooper, Stanford, California.Google Scholar
Simpson, G. G. 1970 Uniformitarianism : An Inquiry into Principle, Theory, and Method in Geohistory and Biohistory. In Essays in Evolution and Genetics in Honor of Theodosius Dobzhansky, edited by Hecht, M. K. and Steere, W.C. pp. 43–96. Appleton, New York.Google Scholar
Simpson, G. G. 1975 Recent Advances in Methods of Phylogenetic Inference. In Phylogeny of Primates : A Multidisciplinary Approach, edited by Luckett, W. P. and Szalay, F.S. pp. 3–19. Plenum, New York.Google Scholar
Skibo, J. M., Schiffer, M. B., and Reid, K. C. 1989 Organic Tempered Pottery : An Experimental Study. American Antiquity 54 : 122–146.Google Scholar
Skibo, J. M., Walker, W. H., and Nielsen, A. E. (editors) 1995 Expanding Archaeology. University of Utah Press, Salt Lake City.Google Scholar
Sober, E. 1980 Evolution, Population Thinking, and Essentialism. Philosophy of Science 47 : 350–383.Google Scholar
Sober, E. 1992 Models of Cultural Evolution. In Trees of Life, edited by Griffiths, P., pp. 17–39. Kluwer, Dordrecht, The Netherlands.Google Scholar
Spencer, C. S. 1997 Evolutionary Approaches in Archaeology. Journal of Archaeological Research 5 : 209–264.Google Scholar
Stahl, A. B. 1993 Concepts of Time and Approaches to Archaeological Reasoning in Historical Perspective. American Antiquity 58 : 235–260.Google Scholar
Steward, J. H. 1956 Cultural Evolution. Scientific American 194(5) : 69–80.Google Scholar
Szalay, F. S., and Bock, W. J. 1991 Evolutionary Theory and Systematics : Relationships between Process and Pattern. Zeitschrift fiir Zoologische Systematik und Evolutionsforschung 29 : 1–39.Google Scholar
Thomason, J. J. 1995 Functional Morphology in Vertebrate Paleontology. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
Vaz Pinto, I., Schiffer, M. B., Smith, S., and Skibo, J. M. 1987 Effects of Temper on Ceramic Abrasion Resistance : A Preliminary Investigation. Archeomaterials 1 : 119–134.Google Scholar
Watson, R. A. 1966 Discussion : Is Geology Different : A Critical Discussion of “The Fabric of Geology.” Philosophy of Science 33 : 172–185.Google Scholar
White, L. A. 1943 Energy and the Evolution of Culture. American Anthropologist 45 : 335–356.Google Scholar
Willey, G. R. 1953 Archaeological Theories and Interpretation : New World. In Anthropology Today, edited by Kroeber, A. L., pp. 361–385. University of Chicago Press, Chicago.Google Scholar