Bibliography for ARCL2044: Theory and Methods for the Archaeology of the Ancient World: Kris Lockyear BETA

1

Johnson M. Common sense is not enough. In: Archaeological theory: an introduction. Chichester: : Wiley-Blackwell 2010. 1–12.https://contentstore.cla.co.uk/secure/link?id=017e9e8d-0208-e811-80cd-005056af4099

2

Morris I. Archaeologies of Greece. In: Archaeology as cultural history: words and things in Iron Age Greece. Malden, Mass: : Blackwell 2000. 37–76.

3

Whitley J. Introduction: Classical Archaeology and its objects. In: The archaeology of ancient Greece. Cambridge: : Cambridge University Press 2001. 3–16.https://contentstore.cla.co.uk//secure/link?id=1bc8b1eb-5b36-e711-80c9-005056af4099

4

Snodgrass A. The health of a discipline. In: An archaeology of Greece: the present state and future scope of a discipline. Berkeley: : University of California Press 1987. 1–36.

5

Biers WR. Art, artefacts, and chronology in classical archaeology. London: : Routledge 1992.

6

Hodder I. Introduction: Contemporary Theoretical Debate in Archaeology. In: Archaeological theory today. Cambridge: : Polity 2012. 1–14.http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&AuthType=ip,shib&db=nlebk&AN=1101335&site=ehost-live&scope=site&ebv=EK&ppid=Page-__-1

7

Hodder I, Hudson S. The problem. In: Reading the past : current approaches to interpretation in archaeology / Ian Hodder and Scott Hutson.1–19.http://www.vlebooks.com/vleweb/product/openreader?id=UCL&isbn=9780511562136

8

Hodder I. Crises in Global Archaeology. In: The archaeological process: an introduction. Oxford: : Blackwell 1999. 1–19.https://contentstore.cla.co.uk/secure/link?id=aa824ea4-5e36-e711-80c9-005056af4099

9

Morris I. Periodization and the heroes: Inventing a dark age. In: Inventing ancient culture: historicism, periodization and the ancient world. London: : Routledge 1997. 96–131.https://contentstore.cla.co.uk//secure/link?id=0e127228-5236-e711-80c9-005056af4099

10

Hawkes C. Archaeological theory and method: some suggestions from the Old World. American Anthropologist 1954;56:155–68. doi:10.1525/aa.1954.56.2.02a00660

11

Osborne R, Alcock S. Introduction. In: Classical archaeology. Malden, MA: : Blackwell 2007. 1–8.https://contentstore.cla.co.uk//secure/link?id=a34f9f92-5f36-e711-80c9-005056af4099

12

Terrenato N. The innocents and the sceptics: ANTIQUITY and classical archaeology. Antiquity 2002;76:1104–11.https://search.proquest.com/docview/217558742?accountid=14511

13

Shanks M. Cities and sanctuaries, art and archaeology: roots in the past. In: Classical archaeology of Greece: experiences of the discipline. London: : Routledge 1995. 21–51.

14

Dyson SL. The role of ideology and institutions in shaping classical archaeology in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries. In: Tracing archaeology’s past: the historiography of archaeology. Carbondale, Ill: : Southern Illinois University Press 1989. 127–35.https://contentstore.cla.co.uk//secure/link?id=bfc0d84c-6e36-e711-80c9-005056af4099

15

Kurtz DC. Beazley and the connoisseurship of Greek vases. In: Greek vases in the J. Paul Getty Museum: Vol.2. Malibu, Calif: : J. Paul Getty Museum 1985. 237–50.

16

Whitley J. Beazley as theorist. Antiquity 1997;71:40–7. doi:10.1017/S0003598X00084520

17

Ceserani G. Wilamowitz and stratigraphy in 1873. A case study in the history of archaeology’s ‘Great Divide’. In: Archives, ancestors, practices: archaeology in the light of its history. New York: : Berghahn Books 2008. 75–87.https://contentstore.cla.co.uk//secure/link?id=d3623eb4-8536-e711-80c9-005056af4099

18

Childe VG. What happened in history. London: : M. Parrish 1960.

19

Clarke D. Archaeology: the loss of innocence. Antiquity 1973;47:6–18. doi:10.1017/S0003598X0003461X

20

Dyson SL. In pursuit of ancient pasts: a history of classical archaeology in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries. New Haven: : Yale University Press 2006. https://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt1npzcm

21

Momigliano A. Ancient History and the Antiquarian. Journal of the Warburg and Courtauld Institutes 1950;13:285–315. doi:10.2307/750215

22

Sparkes BA. The red and the black: studies in Greek pottery. London: : Routledge 1996.

23

Schnapp A. The discovery of the past: the origins of archaeology. London: : British Museum Press 1996.

24

Michael Vickers. Value and Simplicity: Eighteenth-Century Taste and the Study of Greek Vases. Past & Present;:98–137.http://www.jstor.org/stable/650882

25

Dyson SL. A Classical Archaeologist’s Response to the ‘New Archaeology’. Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research 1981;242:7–13. doi:10.2307/1356543

26

Johnson M. The ‘New Archaeology’. In: Archaeological theory: an introduction. Chichester: : Wiley-Blackwell 2010. 12–34.https://contentstore.cla.co.uk//secure/link?id=c030bb34-7a36-e711-80c9-005056af4099

27

Clarke D. Archaeology: the loss of innocence. Antiquity 1973;47:6–18. doi:10.1017/S0003598X0003461X

28

Shanks M. Rudiments of a social archaeology (Chapter 5). In: Classical archaeology of Greece: experiences of the discipline. London: : Routledge 1995. 118–53.

29

Snodgrass AM. The New Archaeology and the Classical Archaeologist. American Journal of Archaeology 1985;89:31–7. doi:10.2307/504768

30

Binford L. Archaeological perspectives. In: New perspectives in archaeology. Chicago: : Aldine 1968. 78–104.https://contentstore.cla.co.uk//secure/link?id=6c608edf-4b36-e711-80c9-005056af4099

31

Ian Hodder. Theoretical archaeology: a reactionary view. In: Hodder I, ed. Symbolic and Structural Archaeology. Cambridge: : Cambridge University Press 1982. 1–16. doi:10.1017/CBO9780511558252

32

Johnson M. Culture as system. In: Archaeological theory: an introduction. Oxford: : Blackwell 1999. 64–84.

33

Morgan C, Whitelaw T. Pots and Politics: Ceramic Evidence for the Rise of the Argive State. American Journal of Archaeology 1991;95:79–108. doi:10.2307/505158

34

Morris I. Burial and ancient society: the rise of the Greek city-state. Cambridge: : Cambridge University Press 1987. http://hdl.handle.net/2027/heb.01457

35

Renfrew C. The multiplier effect in action. In: Approaches to social archaeology. Cambridge, Mass: : Harvard University Press 1984. 283–308.https://contentstore.cla.co.uk//secure/link?id=fd5ffdf7-5f36-e711-80c9-005056af4099

36

Snodgrass, Anthony M. Archaic Greece: the age of experiment. Berkeley, Calif: : University of California Press 1980.

37

Schiffer MB. Archaeological Context and Systemic Context. American Antiquity 1972;37:156–65. doi:10.2307/278203

38

Trigger BG. Current trends in American archaeology. In: Time and traditions: essays in archaeological interpretation. Edinburgh: : Edinburgh University Press 1978. 2–18.https://contentstore.cla.co.uk//secure/link?id=17761142-7136-e711-80c9-005056af4099

39

Whitley, James. Style and society in dark age Greece: the changing face of a pre-literate society, 1100-700 B.C. Cambridge: : Cambridge University Press 1991.

40

James Whitley. Social Diversity in Dark Age Greece. The Annual of the British School at Athens 1991;86:341–65.http://www.jstor.org/stable/30102882

41

Cherry J. Power in space: archaeological and geographical studies of the state. In: Landscape and culture: geographical and archaeological perspectives. Oxford: : Basil Blackwell 1987. 146–72.https://contentstore.cla.co.uk//secure/link?id=90501fdd-5d36-e711-80c9-005056af4099

42

Thomas J. Archaeologies of place and landscape. In: Archaeological theory today. Cambridge: : Polity 2001. 165–86.http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&AuthType=ip,shib&db=nlebk&AN=1101335&site=ehost-live&scope=site&ebv=EK&ppid=Page-__-85

43

Horden, Peregrine, Purcell, Nicholas. The corrupting sea: a study of Mediterranean history. Malden, Mass: : Blackwell 2000.

44

Alcock SE, Cherry JF, Davies JL. Intensive survey, agricultural practices and the classical landscape of Greece. In: Classical Greece: ancient histories and modern archaeologies. Cambridge: : Cambridge University Press 1994. 137–70.

45

Alcock, Susan E., Cherry, John F. Side-by-side survey: comparative regional studies in the Mediterranean World. Oxford: : Oxbow 2004.

46

Bintliff JL. Settlement and territory. In: Companion encyclopedia of archaeology. London: : Routledge 1999. 505–45.https://contentstore.cla.co.uk//secure/link?id=2585e681-5136-e711-80c9-005056af4099

47

Cunliffe B. Hill-Forts and oppida in Britain. In: Problems in economic and social archaeology. London: : Duckworth 1976. 343–58.https://contentstore.cla.co.uk//secure/link?id=33962b5c-6436-e711-80c9-005056af4099

48

Fitzjohn M. A cognitive approach to an upland landscape. In: Uplands of ancient Sicily and Calabria: the archaeology of landscape revisited. London: : Accordia Research Institute 2007. 143–55.https://contentstore.cla.co.uk//secure/link?id=572135d9-8e36-e711-80c9-005056af4099

49

Higgs ES, Vita-Finzi C. Prehistoric Economies: a territorial approach. In: Papers in economic prehistory: studies by members and associates of the British Academy Major Research Project in the Early History of Agriculture. London: : Cambridge University Press 1972. 27–36.https://contentstore.cla.co.uk/secure/link?id=ce479ae8-0608-e811-80cd-005056af4099

50

Knapp AB, Ashmore W. Archaeological Landscapes: Constructed, Conceptualized, Ideational. In: Archaeologies of landscape: contemporary perspectives. Malden, Mass: : Blackwell Publishers 1999. 1–30.https://contentstore.cla.co.uk//secure/link?id=ad4ce8e9-5e36-e711-80c9-005056af4099

51

Rackham O. Ancient landscapes. In: The Greek city: from Homer to Alexander. Oxford: : Clarendon Press 1991. 85–111.https://contentstore.cla.co.uk//secure/link?id=ef0e44c9-4c36-e711-80c9-005056af4099

52

Renfrew AC. Space, time and polity. In: The evolution of social systems: proceedings of a meeting of the Research Seminar in Archaeology and Related Subjects held at the Institute of Archaeology, London University. NW1 [i.e. London]: : Duckworth 1977. 89–112.https://contentstore.cla.co.uk//secure/link?id=ab131751-6436-e711-80c9-005056af4099

53

Tilley C. Space, place, landscape and perception: phenomenological perspectives. In: A phenomenology of landscape: places, paths, and monuments. Oxford: : Berg 1994. 7–34.https://contentstore.cla.co.uk//secure/link?id=c375a3b7-8b36-e711-80c9-005056af4099

54

Dyson SL. From New to New Age Archaeology: Archaeological Theory and Classical Archaeology-A 1990s Perspective. American Journal of Archaeology 1993;97:195–206. doi:10.2307/505656

55

Johnson, Matthew. Archaeological theory: an introduction. 2nd ed. Chichester: : Wiley-Blackwell 2010.

56

Morris I. Archaeology as cultural history. In: Archaeology as cultural history: words and things in Iron Age Greece. Malden, Mass: : Blackwell 2000. 3–36.

57

Morris I. The past, the east and the hero of Lefkandi. In: Archaeology as cultural history: words and things in Iron Age Greece. Malden, Mass: : Blackwell 2000. 195–256.

58

Shanks M, Hodder I. Processual, postprocessual and interpretive archaeologies. In: Interpreting archaeology: finding meaning in the past. London: : Routledge 1994. 3–28.https://www.taylorfrancis.com/books/9781317799467

59

Hodder I. Contextual archaeology. In: Reading the past: current approaches to interpretation in archaeology. 2003. 156–205.http://www.vlebooks.com/vleweb/product/openreader?id=UCL&isbn=9780511562136

60

Shanks M. Style and the design of a perfume jar from an Archaic Greek city state. In: Contemporary archaeology in theory: [a reader]. Cambridge, Mass: : Blackwell 1996. 364–93.https://contentstore.cla.co.uk//secure/link?id=32a31a7d-5e36-e711-80c9-005056af4099

61

M. Shanks, C. Tilley. Ideology, Symbolic Power and Ritual Communication: A Reinterpretation of Neolithic Mortuary Practices. In: Hodder I, ed. Symbolic and Structural Archaeology. Cambridge: : Cambridge University Press 1982. 129–61. doi:10.1017/CBO9780511558252

62

Shanks, Michael, Tilley, Christopher Y. Re-constructing archaeology: theory and practice. Cambridge: : Cambridge University Press 1987.

63

Snodgrass A. The first figure scenes in Greek art. In: An archaeology of Greece: the present state and future scope of a discipline. Berkeley: : University of California Press 1987. 132–69.

64

Interpretative Archaeology. Bloomsbury Academic 1993. doi:10.5040/9781474214995

65

Thomas J. Where are we now? Archaeological theory in the 1990s. In: Theory in archaeology: a world perspective. London: : Routledge 1994. 343–62.https://contentstore.cla.co.uk//secure/link?id=db055f42-5236-e711-80c9-005056af4099

66

Patty Jo Watson and Michael Fotiadis. The Razor’s Edge: Symbolic-Structuralist Archeology and the Expansion of Archeological Inference. American Anthropologist;92:613–29.http://www.jstor.org/stable/680338

67

d’Agostino B. The Italian perspective on theoretical archaeology. In: Archaeological theory in Europe: the last three decades. London: : Routledge 1991. 52–64.

68

Kotsakis K. The powerful past: theoretical trends in Greek archaeology. In: Archaeological theory in Europe: the last three decades. London: : Routledge 1991. 65–90.https://contentstore.cla.co.uk//secure/link?id=a58826a0-5136-e711-80c9-005056af4099

69

Bérard, Claude. A city of images: iconography and society in ancient Greece. Princeton, N.J.: : Princeton University Press 1989.

70

Schnapp A. Eros the Hunter. In: A city of images: iconography and society in ancient Greece. Princeton, N.J.: : Princeton University Press 1989. 71–87.https://contentstore.cla.co.uk//secure/link?id=b038aa25-6136-e711-80c9-005056af4099

71

Bintliff, J. L. The Annales school and archaeology. London: : Leicester University Press 1991. https://openaccess.leidenuniv.nl/handle/1887/7980

72

Bietti Sestieri, Anna Maria. The iron age community of Osteria dell’Osa: a study of socio-political development in central Tyrrhenian Italy. Cambridge: : Cambridge University Press 1992.

73

Cleuziou S, Coudart A, Demoule J-P, et al. The use of Theory in French Archaeology. In: Archaeological theory in Europe: the last three decades. London: : Routledge 1991. 91–128.

74

Cuozzo M. Patterns of Organisation and Funerary Customs in the Cemetery of Pontecagnano (Salerno) During the Orientalising Period. Journal of European Archaeology 1994;2:263–98. doi:10.1179/096576694800719157

75

Cuozzo MA. Ancient Campania. Cultural interaction, political borders and geographical boundaries. In: Ancient Italy: regions without boundaries. Exeter: : University of Exeter Press 2007. 224–67.https://contentstore.cla.co.uk/secure/link?id=575d8078-0b08-e811-80cd-005056af4099

76

d’Agostino B. Military Organisation and social structure in Archaic Etruria. In: The Greek city: from Homer to Alexander. Oxford: : Clarendon Press 1991. 59–82.

77

Izzet V. Etruria and the Etruscans. Recent approaches. In: Ancient Italy: regions without boundaries. Exeter: : University of Exeter Press 2007. 114–30.

78

Lissarrague F. Epiktetos egraphsen: the Writing on the Cup. In: Art and text in ancient Greek culture. Cambridge: : Cambridge University Press 1994. 12–27.https://contentstore.cla.co.uk//secure/link?id=01b654c8-5a36-e711-80c9-005056af4099

79

Marchand, Suzanne L. Down from Olympus: archaeology and philhellenism in Germany, 1750-1970. Princeton, N.J: : Princeton University Press 1996.

80

Terrenato N. ‘Start the revolution without me’: recent debates in Italian Classical Archaeology. In: Papers in Italian archaeology VI: communities and settlements from the Neolithic to the early Medieval period : proceedings of the 6th Conference of Italian Archaeology held at the Univrsity of Groningen, Groningen Institute of Archaeology, the Netherlands, April 15-17, 2003. Oxford: : Archaeopress 2005. 39–43.

81

Dobres M-A, Robb JE. Agency in archaeology: paradigm or platitude? In: Agency in archaeology. London: : Routledge 2000. 3–17.https://contentstore.cla.co.uk//secure/link?id=37d0cb62-5336-e711-80c9-005056af4099

82

Gardner A. Agency. In: Handbook of archaeological theories. 2008. 95–108.http://www.vlebooks.com/vleweb/product/openreader?id=UCL&isbn=9780759113602

83

Morris I. The anthropology of a dead world. In: Death-ritual and social structure in classical antiquity. Cambridge: : Cambridge University Press 1992. 1–30.https://contentstore.cla.co.uk//secure/link?id=c4ad4e7d-5a36-e711-80c9-005056af4099

84

Osborne R. W(h)ither Orientalization? In: Debating orientalization: multidisciplinary approaches to processes of change in the ancient Mediterranean. London: : Equinox 2006. 153–8.https://contentstore.cla.co.uk/secure/link?id=ff782124-8636-e711-80c9-005056af4099

85

Sewell WH. The Concept(s) of Culture. In: Logics of history: social theory and social transformation. Chicago: : University of Chicago Press 2005. 152–74.

86

Shanks M, Tilley C. The individual and the social. In: Social theory and archaeology. Cambridge: : Polity in association with Blackwell 1987. 61–78.https://contentstore.cla.co.uk/secure/link?id=07ba3ee9-6636-e711-80c9-005056af4099

87

Gardner, Andrew. An archaeology of identity: soldiers and society in late Roman Britain. Walnut Creek, Calif: : Left Coast Press 2007.

88

Gell A. The problem defined. In: Art and agency: an anthropological theory. Oxford: : Clarendon Press 1998. 1–11.https://contentstore.cla.co.uk/secure/link?id=f6621786-4e67-e911-80cd-005056af4099

89

Tanner J. Culture, social structure and artistic agency in Classical Greece. In: The invention of art history in Ancient Greece: religion, society and artistic rationalisation. Cambridge: : Cambridge University Press 2006. 141–204.https://contentstore.cla.co.uk//secure/link?id=f7d2a9ba-5c36-e711-80c9-005056af4099

90

Barrett J. Agency, the duality of structure and the problem of the archaeological record. In: Archaeological theory today. Cambridge: : Polity 2001. 141–64.http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&AuthType=ip,shib&db=nlebk&AN=1101335&site=ehost-live&scope=site&ebv=EK&ppid=Page-__-76

91

Bourdieu P. The Berber house or the world reversed. In: Rules and meanings: the anthropology of everyday knowledge : selected readings. Harmondsworth: : Penguin Education 1973. 98–110.https://contentstore.cla.co.uk/secure/link?id=f96314a8-155a-e911-80cd-005056af4099

92

Bourdieu, Pierre, Nice, Richard. Outline of a theory of practice. Cambridge: : Cambridge University Press 1977.

93

Dietler M, Herbich I. Habitus, techniques, style: an integrated approach to the social understanding of material culture and boundaries. In: The archaeology of social boundaries. Washington [D.C.]: : Smithsonian Institution Press 1998. 232–63.https://contentstore.cla.co.uk//secure/link?id=01d474eb-7d36-e711-80c9-005056af4099

94

Giddens, Anthony. The constitution of society: outline of the theory of structuration. Cambridge: : Polity Press 1986. https://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/ucl/detail.action?docID=1221197

95

van Dommelen P. Punic persistence: colonialism and cultural identity in Roman Sardinia. In: Cultural identity in the Roman Empire. London: : Routledge 1998. 25–48.https://contentstore.cla.co.uk//secure/link?id=407c43b5-5236-e711-80c9-005056af4099

96

Meskell L. Archaeologies of identity. In: Archaeological theory today. Cambridge: : Polity 2001. 187–213.https://contentstore.cla.co.uk//secure/link?id=a382cfcd-6736-e711-80c9-005056af4099

97

Hall JM. Ethnic Identity in Greek Antiquity. Cambridge Archaeological Journal 1998;8:265–83. doi:10.1017/S0959774300001864

98

Vives-Ferrándiz Sánchez J. Colonial encounters and the negotiation of identities in south-east Iberia. In: Mediterranean crossroads. Athens: : Pierides Foundation 2007. 537–62.

99

Peter van Dommelen. Colonial Constructs: Colonialism and Archaeology in the Mediterranean. World Archaeology;28:305–23.http://www.jstor.org/stable/125021

100

Antonaccio C. Ethnicity and Colonization. In: Ancient perceptions of Greek ethnicity. Washington, D.C.: : Center for Hellenic Studies, Trustees for Harvard University 2001. 113–57.

101

Diaz-Andreu M, Lucy S. Introduction. In: The archaeology of identity: approaches to gender, age, status, ethnicity and religion. London: : Routledge 2005. 1–13.https://contentstore.cla.co.uk//secure/link?id=b25f4f45-5336-e711-80c9-005056af4099

102

Morgan C. Ethnicity and early Greek states: historical and material perspectives. Proceedings of the Cambridge Philological Society 1992;37:131–63. doi:10.1017/S0068673500001565

103

Given M. Inventing the Eteocypriots: Imperialist Archaeology and the Manipulation of Ethnic Identity. Journal of Mediterranean Archaeology 1998;11:3–29. doi:10.1558/jmea.v11i1.3

104

Fotiadis M. Cultural identity and regional archaeological projects. Archaeological Dialogues 1997;4:102–13. doi:10.1017/S1380203800000933

105

Hingley R. Cultural Diversity and Unity: empire and Rome. In: Material culture and social identities in the ancient world. Cambridge: : Cambridge University Press 2010. 54–75.https://contentstore.cla.co.uk//secure/link?id=4073012d-5c36-e711-80c9-005056af4099

106

Jones S. Discourses of identity in the interpretation of the past. In: Cultural identity and archaeology: the construction of European communities. London: : Routledge 1996. 62–80.https://contentstore.cla.co.uk//secure/link?id=8c7bba35-5236-e711-80c9-005056af4099

107

Malkin I. Postcolonial Concepts and Ancient Greek Colonization. MLQ: Modern Language Quarterly 2004;65:341–64.http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/modern_language_quarterly/v065/65.3malkin.html

108

Hall, Jonathan M. Hellenicity: between ethnicity and culture. Chicago: : University of Chicago Press 2002.

109

van Dommelen P. Cultural imaginings. Punic tradition and local identity in Roman Republican Sardinia. In: Italy and the west: comparative issues in Romanization. Oxford: : Oxbow 2001. 68–84.https://contentstore.cla.co.uk//secure/link?id=cdd86dae-8136-e711-80c9-005056af4099

110

Woolf, Greg, Gosden C. Beyond Romans and natives. World Archaeology 1997;28:339–50.https://www.jstor.org/stable/125023

111

Woolf G. Becoming Roman: The Origins of Provincial Civilization in Gaul. Cambridge: : Cambridge University Press 1998. doi:10.1017/CBO9780511518614

112

Yates T. Frameworks for an archaeology of the body. In: Interpretative archaeology. Oxford, UK: : Berg 1992. 31–72.https://www.bloomsburycollections.com/book/interpretative-archaeology/

113

Izzet V. Holding a mirror to Etruscan gender. In: Gender and Italian archaeology: challenging the stereotypes. London: : Accordia Research Institute 1998. 209–27.https://contentstore.cla.co.uk/secure/link?id=ec69728f-8e36-e711-80c9-005056af4099

114

Meskell L. Archaeologies of identity. In: Archaeological theory today. Cambridge: : Polity 2001. 187–213.https://contentstore.cla.co.uk/secure/link?id=e0a1019e-0a08-e811-80cd-005056af4099

115

Johnson, Matthew. Archaeological theory: an introduction. Oxford: : Blackwell 1999.

116

Conkey MW, Gero JM. Programme to practice: Gender and Feminism in Archaeology. Annual Review of Anthropology 1997;26:411–37. doi:10.1146/annurev.anthro.26.1.411

117

Tarlow, Sarah, Hamilakis, Yannis, Pluciennik, Mark. Thinking through the body: archaeologies of corporeality. New York: : Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers 2002.

118

Knapp AB, Meskell L. Bodies of Evidence on Prehistoric Cyprus. Cambridge Archaeological Journal 1997;7:183–204. doi:10.1017/S0959774300001931

119

Meskell L. The somatization of archaeology: Institutions, discourses, corporeality. Norwegian Archaeological Review 1996;29:1–16. doi:10.1080/00293652.1996.9965595

120

Meskell, Lynn. Archaeologies of social life: age, sex, class et cetera in ancient Egypt. Oxford: : Blackwell 1999.

121

Morris I. Archaeology and gender ideologies in early Archaic Greece. In: Sex and difference in ancient Greece and Rome. Edinburgh: : Edinburgh University Press 2003. 264–75.https://contentstore.cla.co.uk//secure/link?id=67759abe-6836-e711-80c9-005056af4099

122

Nevett, Lisa C. House and society in the ancient Greek world. Cambridge: : Cambridge University Press 1999.

123

Osborne R. Looking on Greek style: does the sculpted girl speak to women too. In: Classical Greece: ancient histories and modern archaeologies. Cambridge: : Cambridge University Press 1994. 81–96.

124

Rautman, Alison E., Gender and Archaeology Conference. Reading the body: representations and remains in the archaeological record. Philadelphia: : University of Pennsylvania Press 2000.

125

Sofaer JR. The Body as Material Culture: a Theoretical Osteoarchaeology. Cambridge: : Cambridge University Press 2006. doi:10.1017/CBO9780511816666

126

Stewart A. Reflections. In: Sexuality in ancient art: Near East, Egypt, Greece and Italy. Cambridge: : Cambridge University Press 1996. 136–54.https://contentstore.cla.co.uk//secure/link?id=d0bd0a7c-5b36-e711-80c9-005056af4099

127

Moore H. Bodies on the move: gender, power and material culture. In: A passion for difference: essays in anthropology and gender. Cambridge: : Polity 1994. 71–85.https://contentstore.cla.co.uk//secure/link?id=ed370090-6736-e711-80c9-005056af4099

128

Mauss M. Body Techniques. In: Sociology and psychology: essays. London [etc.]: : Routledge and Kegan Paul 1979. 95–123.https://contentstore.cla.co.uk//secure/link?id=7d8e026e-6236-e711-80c9-005056af4099

129

Jonathan Friedman. The Past in the Future: History and the Politics of Identity. American Anthropologist;94:837–59.http://www.jstor.org/stable/680224

130

Rowlands M. The politics of identity in archaeology. In: Social construction of the past: representation as power. London: : Routledge 1994. 129–43.https://contentstore.cla.co.uk//secure/link?id=5aacb0fb-5136-e711-80c9-005056af4099

131

Hamilakis Y, Yalouri E. Antiquities as symbolic capital in modern Greek society. Antiquity 1996;70:117–29. doi:10.1017/S0003598X00082934

132

Meskell (ed.) L. Archaeology Under Fire: Nationalism, Politics and Heritage in the Eastern Mediterranean and Middle East. Routledge 2002. doi:10.4324/9780203029817

133

Díaz-Andreu M. Nationalism and Archaeology in Europe. Routledge 2014. doi:10.4324/9781315748221

134

Michael Dietler. ‘Our Ancestors the Gauls’: Archaeology, Ethnic Nationalism, and the Manipulation of Celtic Identity in Modern Europe. American Anthropologist;96:584–605.http://www.jstor.org/stable/682302

135

Michael Fotiadis. Modernity and the Past-Still-Present: Politics of Time in the Birth of Regional Archaeological Projects in Greece. American Journal of Archaeology;99:59–78.http://www.jstor.org/stable/506879

136

Hamilakis Y. Decolonizing Greek archaeology: indigenous archaeologies, modernist archaeology and the post-colonial critique. In: A singular antiquity: archaeology and Hellenic identity in twentieth-century Greece. Athens: : Benaki Museum 2008. 273–84.https://contentstore.cla.co.uk/secure/link?id=e15c9e59-4d67-e911-80cd-005056af4099

137

Hamilakis, Yannis. The nation and its ruins: antiquity, archaeology, and national imagination in Greece. Oxford: : Oxford University Press 2007.

138

Hamilakis Y. Museums of oblivion. Antiquity 2011;85:625–9. doi:10.1017/S0003598X00068010

139

Hamilakis Y. Are We Postcolonial Yet? Tales from the Battlefield. Archaeologies 2012;8:67–76. doi:10.1007/s11759-012-9200-5

140

Hobsbawm E, Ranger T, editors. The Invention of Tradition. Cambridge: : Cambridge University Press 2012. doi:10.1017/CBO9781107295636

141

Lowenthal D. The Heritage Crusade and the Spoils of History. Cambridge: : Cambridge University Press 1998. doi:10.1017/CBO9780511523809

142

Lynn Meskell. The Intersections of Identity and Politics in Archaeology. Annual Review of Anthropology 2002;31:279–301.http://www.jstor.org/stable/4132881

143

Odermatt P. Built heritage and the politics of (re) presentation. Archaeological Dialogues 1996;3:95–119. doi:10.1017/S1380203800000660

144

Pierre Nora. Between Memory and History: Les Lieux de Mémoire. Representations;:7–24.http://www.jstor.org/stable/2928520

145

Yiannis Papadakis. Greek Cypriot Narratives of History and Collective Identity: Nationalism as a Contested Process. American Ethnologist;25:149–65.http://www.jstor.org/stable/646690

146

Paul Sant Cassia. Tradition, Tourism and Memory in Malta. The Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute;5:247–63.http://www.jstor.org/stable/2660696

147

Yalouri, Eleana. The Acropolis: global fame, local claim. Oxford: : Berg 2001.

148

Banning E. Research design and sampling. In: The archaeologist’s laboratory: the analysis of archaeological data. New York: : London 2000. 73–92.https://contentstore.cla.co.uk/secure/link?id=cfa3440e-4e67-e911-80cd-005056af4099

149

Binford LR. A Consideration of Archaeological Research Design. American Antiquity 1964;29:425–41.http://www.jstor.org/stable/277978

150

Blinkhorn PW, Cumberpatch CG. The Interpretation of Artefacts and the Tyranny of the Field Archaeologist. Assemblage: the Sheffield graduate journal of archaeology;4.https://assemblagejournal.files.wordpress.com/2017/05/blinkhorn-and-cumberpatch-1998-the-interpretation-of-artefacts-and-the-tyranny-of-the-field-archaeologist.pdf

151

Bowkett L, Hill S, Wardle D, et al. Introduction. In: Classical archaeology in the field: approaches. London: : Bristol Classical Press 2001. 1–10.

152

Bowkett L, Hill S, Wardle D, et al. The development of Classical Archaeology. In: Classical archaeology in the field: approaches. London: : Bristol Classical Press 2001. 11–25.https://contentstore.cla.co.uk//secure/link?id=87753895-8936-e711-80c9-005056af4099

153

Andrews G, English Heritage. Management of archaeological projects. London: : English Heritage 1991. http://intarch.ac.uk/journal/issue5/westhes/map2index.htm

154

Flannery, Kent V. The early Mesoamerican village. New York: : Academic Press 1976.

155

Hassan FA. Beyond the surface: comments on Hodder’s ‘reflexive excavation methodology’. Antiquity 1997;71:1020–5. doi:10.1017/S0003598X00085938

156

Hodder I. ‘Always momentary, fluid and flexible’: towards a reflexive excavation methodology. Antiquity 1997;71:691–700. doi:10.1017/S0003598X00085410

157

Hodder I. Whose rationality? A response to Fekri Hassan. Antiquity 1998;72:213–7. doi:10.1017/S0003598X00086439

158

Milne G. The archaeologist as alchemist. In: From Roman basilica to medieval market: archaeology in action in the city of London. London: : HMSO 1992. 51–9.https://contentstore.cla.co.uk//secure/link?id=c3113bbe-4b36-e711-80c9-005056af4099

159

Payne S. Partial recovery and sample bias: The results of some sieving experiments. In: Papers in economic prehistory: studies by members and associates of the British Academy Major Research Project in the Early History of Agriculture. London: : Cambridge University Press 1972. 49–64.https://contentstore.cla.co.uk//secure/link?id=41494f18-5936-e711-80c9-005056af4099

160

Redman CL. Multistage Fieldwork and Analytical Techniques. American Antiquity;38:61–79.http://www.jstor.org/stable/279311

161

Redman CL. Surface Collection, Sampling, and Research Design: A Retrospective. American Antiquity;52:249–65.http://www.jstor.org/stable/281779

162

W. Raymond Wood and Donald Lee Johnson. A Survey of Disturbance Processes in Archaeological Site Formation. Advances in Archaeological Method and Theory 1978;1:315–81.http://www.jstor.org/stable/20170136

163

Lewis R. Binford. Behavioral Archaeology and the ‘Pompeii Premise’. Journal of Anthropological Research 1981;37:195–208.http://www.jstor.org/stable/3629723

164

Bon SE. A city frozen in time or a site in perpetual motion? Formation processes at Pompeii. In: Sequence and space in Pompeii. Oxford: : Oxbow Books 1997. 7–12.https://contentstore.cla.co.uk//secure/link?id=123f78cd-8f36-e711-80c9-005056af4099

165

Bradley R, Fulford M. Sherd size in the analysis of occupation debris. Bulletin of the Institute of Archaeology 1980;17:85–94.https://contentstore.cla.co.uk//secure/link?id=de9090bc-4a36-e711-80c9-005056af4099

166

Green FJ, Lockyear K. Seeds, sherds and samples: site formation processes at the Waitrose site, Romsey. In: Whither environmental archaeology? Oxbow 1994. 91–104.https://contentstore.cla.co.uk//secure/link?id=1f953589-7736-e711-80c9-005056af4099

167

Halstead P, Hodder I, Jones G. Behavioural archaeology and refuse patterns: A case study. Norwegian Archaeological Review 1978;11:118–31. doi:10.1080/00293652.1978.9965308

168

Jansen GCM. Systems for the disposal of waste and excreta in Roman cities. The situation in Pompeii, Herculaneum and Ostia. In: Sordes urbis: la eliminación de residuos en la ciudad romana : actas de la Reunión de Roma (15-16 de noviembre de 1996). Roma: : L’Erma di Bretschneider 2000. 37–50.

169

Liebschuetz W. Rubbish disposal in Greek and Roman Cities. In: Sordes urbis: la eliminación de residuos en la ciudad romana : actas de la Reunión de Roma (15-16 de noviembre de 1996). Roma: : L’Erma di Bretschneider 2000. 51–62.

170

Orton CR. Two useful parameters for pottery research. In: Computer applications in archaeology 1985: proceedings of the Conference on Quantitative Methods, Institute of Archaeology, London, March 29-30, 1985. London: : University of London, Institute of Archaeology 1986. 114–20.https://contentstore.cla.co.uk/secure/link?id=2f76d612-1c46-e711-80cb-005056af4099

171

Peña JT. Roman Pottery in the Archaeological Record. Cambridge: : Cambridge University Press 2007. doi:10.1017/CBO9780511499685

172

Schiffer MB. Archaeological Context and Systemic Context. American Antiquity 1972;37:156–65.http://www.jstor.org/stable/278203

173

Schiffer, Michael B. Formation processes of the archaeological record. Albuquerque, N.M.: : University of New Mexico Press 1987. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&AuthType=ip,shib&db=nlebk&AN=10467&site=ehost-live&scope=site&ebv=EB&ppid=pp_COVER

174

Peter E. Siegel and Peter G. Roe. Shipibo Archaeo-Ethnography: Site Formation Processes and Archaeological Interpretation. World Archaeology 1986;18:96–115.http://www.jstor.org/stable/124664

175

Alan P. Sullivan, III. The Technology of Ceramic Reuse: Formation Processes and Archaeological Evidence. World Archaeology 1989;21:101–14.http://www.jstor.org/stable/124487

176

Allison PM. Artefact Assemblages: Not the Pompeii Premise. In: Papers of the fourth Conference of Italian archaeology. London: : Accordia Research Centre 1991. 49–56.https://contentstore.cla.co.uk//secure/link?id=0b7c6260-8e36-e711-80c9-005056af4099

177

Cool HEM. An overview of the small finds from Catterick. In: Cataractonium: Roman Catterick and its hinterland : excavations and research, 1958-1997. York: : Council for British Archaeology 2002. 24–43.https://contentstore.cla.co.uk//secure/link?id=a3e10cef-9036-e711-80c9-005056af4099

178

Cool HEM, Baxter MJ. Exploring Romano-British finds assemblages. Oxford Journal of Archaeology 2002;21:365–80. doi:10.1111/1468-0092.00168

179

Crummy N. Six honest serving men: a basic methodology for the study of small finds conference held at the Univeristy of Durham. In: Roman finds: context and theory : proceedings of a conference held at the Univeristy of Durham. Oxford: : Oxbow Books 2007. 59–66.https://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt1kw29ff

180

Hayden B, Cannon A. Where the garbage goes: Refuse disposal in the Maya Highlands. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 1983;2:117–63. doi:10.1016/0278-4165(83)90010-7

181

Lockyear K. Site Finds in Roman Britain: A Comparison of Techniques. Oxford Journal of Archaeology 2000;19:397–423. doi:10.1111/1468-0092.00118

182

Lockyear, Kris. Patterns and process in late Roman Republican coin hoards, 157-2 BC. Oxford: : Archaeopress 2007.

183

Lucas G. Splitting objects. In: Critical approaches to fieldwork : contemporary and historical archaeological practice / Gavin Lucas.64–106.http://www.vlebooks.com/vleweb/product/openreader?id=UCL&isbn=9780203132258

184

Millett M. Experiments in the analysis of finds deposition at Shiptonthorpe: a retrospect. In: Roman finds: context and theory : proceedings of a conference held at the Univeristy of Durham. Oxford: : Oxbow Books 2007. 100–5.https://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt1kw29ff

185

Orton C, Hughes M. Pottery in Archaeology. Cambridge: : Cambridge University Press 2013. doi:10.1017/CBO9780511920066

186

Reece R. The interpretation of site finds — a review. In: Coin finds and coin use in the Roman world: the thirteenth Oxford Symposium on Coinage and Monetary History, 25.-27.3.1993 : a NATO advanced research workshop. Berlin: : Gebr. Mann Verlag 1996. 341–55.

187

Tyers P. Sources for the study of Roman pottery. In: Roman pottery in Britain. London: : Batsford 1996. 24–35.https://contentstore.cla.co.uk//secure/link?id=f9cfe4ff-6236-e711-80c9-005056af4099

188

Allison PM. Artefact distribution and spatial function in Pompeian houses. In: The Roman family in Italy: status, sentiment, space. Canberra: : Humanities Research Centre 1997. 321–54.https://contentstore.cla.co.uk//secure/link?id=79e1dcd6-4c36-e711-80c9-005056af4099

189

Allison PM. Introduction. In: The archaeology of household activities / edited by Penelope M. Allison.1–18.http://www.vlebooks.com/vleweb/product/openreader?id=UCL&isbn=9780203014929

190

Allison PM. Labels for Ladles: Interpreting the material culture of Roman Householdsby Penelope M. Allison. In: The archaeology of household activities / edited by Penelope M. Allison.57–77.http://www.vlebooks.com/vleweb/product/openreader?id=UCL&isbn=9780203014929

191

Flannery KV. Analysis on the household level/The Early Mesoamerican House. In: The early Mesoamerican village. New York: : Academic Press 1976. 13–24.

192

Gardner A. Artefacts, contexts, and the archaeology of social practicess of a conference held at the Univeristy of Durham. In: Roman finds: context and theory : proceedings of a conference held at the Univeristy of Durham. Oxford: : Oxbow Books 2007. 128–39.https://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt1kw29ff

193

Grahame M. Public and private in the Roman house: the spatial order of the Casa del Fauno. In: Roman finds: context and theory : proceedings of a conference held at the Univeristy of Durham. Oxford: : Oxbow Books 2007. 137–64.https://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt1kw29ff

194

Grahame, Mark. Reading space: social interaction and identity in the houses of Roman Pompeii : a syntactical approach to the analysis and interpretation of built space. Oxford: : Archaeopress 2000.

195

LaMotta VM, Schiffer MB. The formation processes of house floor assemblages. In: The archaeology of household activities / edited by Penelope M. Allison.19–29.https://www.dawsonera.com/readonline/9780203014929/startPage/16/1

196

Laurence, Ray. Roman Pompeii: space and society. London: : Routledge 1994.

197

Wallace-Hadrill, Andrew. Houses and society in Pompeii and Herculaneum. Princeton: : Princeton University Press 1994.

198

Barker, Graeme, Hodges, Richard, Clark, Gillian. A Mediterranean valley: landscape archaeology and Annales History in the Biferno Valley. London: : Leicester University Press 1995.

199

Barker, Graeme, Mattingly, D. J., Unesco Libyan Valleys Archaeological Survey. Farming the desert: the UNESCO Libyan Valleys Archaeological Survey. Paris: : UNESCO 1996.

200

Barker, Graeme, Lloyd, John, British School at Rome, et al. Roman landscapes: archaeological survey in the Mediterranean region. London: : British School at Rome 1991.

201

Belcher M, Harrison A, Stoddart S. Analyzing Rome’s hinterland. In: Geographical information systems and landscape archaeology. Oxford: : Oxbow 1999. 95–101.

202

Flannery, Kent V. The early Mesoamerican village. New York: : Academic Press 1976.

203

Flannery KV. Sampling on the Regional Level. In: The early Mesoamerican village. New York: : Academic Press 1976. 131–60.https://contentstore.cla.co.uk//secure/link?id=76158fd1-4b36-e711-80c9-005056af4099

204

Hayes JW. The current state of Roman ceramic studies in Mediterranean survey, or handling pottery from surveys. In: Extracting meaning from ploughsoil assemblages. Oxford: : Oxbow 2000. 105–9.

205

Lock G, Bell T, Lloyd J. Towards a methodology for modeling surface survey data: the Sangro Valley Project. In: Geographical information systems and landscape archaeology. Oxford: : Oxbow 1999. 55–63.https://contentstore.cla.co.uk//secure/link?id=59347803-9036-e711-80c9-005056af4099

206

Mattingly D. Methods of collection, recording and quantification. In: Extracting meaning from ploughsoil assemblages. Oxford: : Oxbow 2000. 5–15.https://contentstore.cla.co.uk/secure/link?id=d1f3d1f6-075a-e911-80cd-005056af4099

207

Mattingly D, Witcher R. Mapping the Roman world: the contribution of field survey data. In: Side-by-side survey: comparative regional studies in the Mediterranean World. Oxford: : Oxbow 2004. 173–88.https://contentstore.cla.co.uk//secure/link?id=f3d0a902-8236-e711-80c9-005056af4099

208

Millett M. Dating, quantifying and utilizing pottery assemblages from surface survey. In: Extracting meaning from ploughsoil assemblages. Oxford: : Oxbow 2000. 53–9.

209

Orton CR. Covering the ground. In: Sampling in archaeology. Cambridge: : Cambridge University Press 2000. 67–111.https://contentstore.cla.co.uk//secure/link?id=455f02ab-5b36-e711-80c9-005056af4099

210

Terrenato N. The visibility of sites and the interpretation of field survey results: towards an analysis of incomplete distributions. In: Extracting meaning from ploughsoil assemblages. Oxford: : Oxbow 2000. 60–71.https://contentstore.cla.co.uk//secure/link?id=cb022a17-9036-e711-80c9-005056af4099

211

Terrenato N. "Sample size matters! The paradox of global trends and local surveys. In: Side-by-side survey: comparative regional studies in the Mediterranean World. Oxford: : Oxbow 2004. 36–48.