1.
Johnson M. Common sense is not enough. Archaeological theory: an introduction [Internet]. 2nd ed. Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell; 2010. p. 1–12. Available from: https://contentstore.cla.co.uk/secure/link?id=017e9e8d-0208-e811-80cd-005056af4099
2.
Morris I. Archaeologies of Greece. Archaeology as cultural history: words and things in Iron Age Greece. Malden, Mass: Blackwell; 2000. p. 37–76.
3.
Whitley J. Introduction: Classical Archaeology and its objects. The archaeology of ancient Greece [Internet]. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2001. p. 3–16. Available from: https://contentstore.cla.co.uk//secure/link?id=1bc8b1eb-5b36-e711-80c9-005056af4099
4.
Snodgrass A. The health of a discipline. An archaeology of Greece: the present state and future scope of a discipline. Berkeley: University of California Press; 1987. p. 1–36.
5.
Biers WR. Art, artefacts, and chronology in classical archaeology. London: Routledge; 1992.
6.
Hodder I. Introduction: Contemporary Theoretical Debate in Archaeology. Archaeological theory today [Internet]. 2nd ed. Cambridge: Polity; 2012. p. 1–14. Available from: 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. Reading the past : current approaches to interpretation in archaeology / Ian Hodder and Scott Hutson [Internet]. p. 1–19. Available from: http://www.vlebooks.com/vleweb/product/openreader?id=UCL&isbn=9780511562136
8.
Hodder I. Crises in Global Archaeology. The archaeological process: an introduction [Internet]. Oxford: Blackwell; 1999. p. 1–19. Available from: https://contentstore.cla.co.uk/secure/link?id=aa824ea4-5e36-e711-80c9-005056af4099
9.
Morris I. Periodization and the heroes: Inventing a dark age. Inventing ancient culture: historicism, periodization and the ancient world [Internet]. London: Routledge; 1997. p. 96–131. Available from: 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(2):155–168.
11.
Osborne R, Alcock S. Introduction. Classical archaeology [Internet]. Malden, MA: Blackwell; 2007. p. 1–8. Available from: 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 [Internet]. 2002;76(294):1104–1111. Available from: https://search.proquest.com/docview/217558742?accountid=14511
13.
Shanks M. Cities and sanctuaries, art and archaeology: roots in the past. Classical archaeology of Greece: experiences of the discipline. London: Routledge; 1995. p. 21–51.
14.
Dyson SL. The role of ideology and institutions in shaping classical archaeology in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries. Tracing archaeology’s past: the historiography of archaeology [Internet]. Carbondale, Ill: Southern Illinois University Press; 1989. p. 127–135. Available from: https://contentstore.cla.co.uk//secure/link?id=bfc0d84c-6e36-e711-80c9-005056af4099
15.
Kurtz DC. Beazley and the connoisseurship of Greek vases. Greek vases in the J Paul Getty Museum: Vol2. Malibu, Calif: J. Paul Getty Museum; 1985. p. 237–250.
16.
Whitley J. Beazley as theorist. Antiquity. 1997 Mar;71(271):40–47.
17.
Ceserani G. Wilamowitz and stratigraphy in 1873. A case study in the history of archaeology’s ‘Great Divide’. Archives, ancestors, practices: archaeology in the light of its history [Internet]. New York: Berghahn Books; 2008. p. 75–87. Available from: 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 Mar;47(185):6–18.
20.
Dyson SL. In pursuit of ancient pasts: a history of classical archaeology in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries [Internet]. New Haven: Yale University Press; 2006. Available from: https://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt1npzcm
21.
Momigliano A. Ancient History and the Antiquarian. Journal of the Warburg and Courtauld Institutes. 1950;13(3/4):285–315.
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 [Internet]. Oxford University Press; (116):98–137. Available from: 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(242):7–13.
26.
Johnson M. The ‘New Archaeology’. Archaeological theory: an introduction [Internet]. 2nd ed. Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell; 2010. p. 12–34. Available from: https://contentstore.cla.co.uk//secure/link?id=c030bb34-7a36-e711-80c9-005056af4099
27.
Clarke D. Archaeology: the loss of innocence. Antiquity. 1973 Mar;47(185):6–18.
28.
Shanks M. Rudiments of a social archaeology (Chapter 5). Classical archaeology of Greece: experiences of the discipline. London: Routledge; 1995. p. 118–153.
29.
Snodgrass AM. The New Archaeology and the Classical Archaeologist. American Journal of Archaeology. 1985;89(1):31–37.
30.
Binford L. Archaeological perspectives. New perspectives in archaeology [Internet]. Chicago: Aldine; 1968. p. 78–104. Available from: https://contentstore.cla.co.uk//secure/link?id=6c608edf-4b36-e711-80c9-005056af4099
31.
Ian Hodder. Theoretical archaeology: a reactionary view. In: Hodder I, editor. Symbolic and Structural Archaeology [Internet]. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 1982. p. 1–16. Available from: http://ebooks.cambridge.org/ref/id/CBO9780511558252
32.
Johnson M. Culture as system. Archaeological theory: an introduction. Oxford: Blackwell; 1999. p. 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(1):79–108.
34.
Morris I. Burial and ancient society: the rise of the Greek city-state [Internet]. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 1987. Available from: http://hdl.handle.net/2027/heb.01457
35.
Renfrew C. The multiplier effect in action. Approaches to social archaeology [Internet]. Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press; 1984. p. 283–308. Available from: 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(2):156–165.
38.
Trigger BG. Current trends in American archaeology. Time and traditions: essays in archaeological interpretation [Internet]. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press; 1978. p. 2–18. Available from: 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 [Internet]. British School at Athens; 1991;86:341–365. Available from: http://www.jstor.org/stable/30102882
41.
Cherry J. Power in space: archaeological and geographical studies of the state. Landscape and culture: geographical and archaeological perspectives [Internet]. Oxford: Basil Blackwell; 1987. p. 146–172. Available from: https://contentstore.cla.co.uk//secure/link?id=90501fdd-5d36-e711-80c9-005056af4099
42.
Thomas J. Archaeologies of place and landscape. Archaeological theory today [Internet]. Cambridge: Polity; 2001. p. 165–186. Available from: 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. Classical Greece: ancient histories and modern archaeologies. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 1994. p. 137–170.
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. Companion encyclopedia of archaeology [Internet]. London: Routledge; 1999. p. 505–545. Available from: https://contentstore.cla.co.uk//secure/link?id=2585e681-5136-e711-80c9-005056af4099
47.
Cunliffe B. Hill-Forts and oppida in Britain. Problems in economic and social archaeology [Internet]. London: Duckworth; 1976. p. 343–358. Available from: https://contentstore.cla.co.uk//secure/link?id=33962b5c-6436-e711-80c9-005056af4099
48.
Fitzjohn M. A cognitive approach to an upland landscape. Uplands of ancient Sicily and Calabria: the archaeology of landscape revisited [Internet]. London: Accordia Research Institute; 2007. p. 143–155. Available from: https://contentstore.cla.co.uk//secure/link?id=572135d9-8e36-e711-80c9-005056af4099
49.
Higgs ES, Vita-Finzi C. Prehistoric Economies: a territorial approach. Papers in economic prehistory: studies by members and associates of the British Academy Major Research Project in the Early History of Agriculture [Internet]. London: Cambridge University Press; 1972. p. 27–36. Available from: https://contentstore.cla.co.uk/secure/link?id=ce479ae8-0608-e811-80cd-005056af4099
50.
Knapp AB, Ashmore W. Archaeological Landscapes: Constructed, Conceptualized, Ideational. Archaeologies of landscape: contemporary perspectives [Internet]. Malden, Mass: Blackwell Publishers; 1999. p. 1–30. Available from: https://contentstore.cla.co.uk//secure/link?id=ad4ce8e9-5e36-e711-80c9-005056af4099
51.
Rackham O. Ancient landscapes. The Greek city: from Homer to Alexander [Internet]. Oxford: Clarendon Press; 1991. p. 85–111. Available from: https://contentstore.cla.co.uk//secure/link?id=ef0e44c9-4c36-e711-80c9-005056af4099
52.
Renfrew AC. Space, time and polity. 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 [Internet]. NW1 [i.e. London]: Duckworth; 1977. p. 89–112. Available from: https://contentstore.cla.co.uk//secure/link?id=ab131751-6436-e711-80c9-005056af4099
53.
Tilley C. Space, place, landscape and perception: phenomenological perspectives. A phenomenology of landscape: places, paths, and monuments [Internet]. Oxford: Berg; 1994. p. 7–34. Available from: 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(2):195–206.
55.
Johnson, Matthew. Archaeological theory: an introduction. 2nd ed. Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell; 2010.
56.
Morris I. Archaeology as cultural history. Archaeology as cultural history: words and things in Iron Age Greece. Malden, Mass: Blackwell; 2000. p. 3–36.
57.
Morris I. The past, the east and the hero of Lefkandi. Archaeology as cultural history: words and things in Iron Age Greece. Malden, Mass: Blackwell; 2000. p. 195–256.
58.
Shanks M, Hodder I. Processual, postprocessual and interpretive archaeologies. Interpreting archaeology: finding meaning in the past [Internet]. London: Routledge; 1994. p. 3–28. Available from: https://www.taylorfrancis.com/books/9781317799467
59.
Hodder I. Contextual archaeology. Reading the past: current approaches to interpretation in archaeology [Internet]. 2003. p. 156–205. Available from: 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. Contemporary archaeology in theory: [a reader] [Internet]. Cambridge, Mass: Blackwell; 1996. p. 364–393. Available from: 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, editor. Symbolic and Structural Archaeology [Internet]. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 1982. p. 129–161. Available from: http://ebooks.cambridge.org/ref/id/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. An archaeology of Greece: the present state and future scope of a discipline. Berkeley: University of California Press; 1987. p. 132–169.
64.
Interpretative Archaeology [Internet]. Bloomsbury Academic; 1993. Available from: http://www.bloomsburycollections.com/book/interpretative-archaeology
65.
Thomas J. Where are we now? Archaeological theory in the 1990s. Theory in archaeology: a world perspective [Internet]. London: Routledge; 1994. p. 343–362. Available from: 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 [Internet]. Wiley; 92(3):613–629. Available from: http://www.jstor.org/stable/680338
67.
d’Agostino B. The Italian perspective on theoretical archaeology. Archaeological theory in Europe: the last three decades. London: Routledge; 1991. p. 52–64.
68.
Kotsakis K. The powerful past: theoretical trends in Greek archaeology. Archaeological theory in Europe: the last three decades [Internet]. London: Routledge; 1991. p. 65–90. Available from: 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. A city of images: iconography and society in ancient Greece [Internet]. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press; 1989. p. 71–87. Available from: https://contentstore.cla.co.uk//secure/link?id=b038aa25-6136-e711-80c9-005056af4099
71.
Bintliff, J. L. The Annales school and archaeology [Internet]. London: Leicester University Press; 1991. Available from: 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 JP, Schnapp A. The use of Theory in French Archaeology. Archaeological theory in Europe: the last three decades. London: Routledge; 1991. p. 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 Sep;2(2):263–298.
75.
Cuozzo MA. Ancient Campania. Cultural interaction, political borders and geographical boundaries. Ancient Italy: regions without boundaries [Internet]. Exeter: University of Exeter Press; 2007. p. 224–267. Available from: 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. The Greek city: from Homer to Alexander. Oxford: Clarendon Press; 1991. p. 59–82.
77.
Izzet V. Etruria and the Etruscans. Recent approaches. Ancient Italy: regions without boundaries. Exeter: University of Exeter Press; 2007. p. 114–130.
78.
Lissarrague F. Epiktetos egraphsen: the Writing on the Cup. Art and text in ancient Greek culture [Internet]. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 1994. p. 12–27. Available from: 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. 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. p. 39–43.
81.
Dobres MA, Robb JE. Agency in archaeology: paradigm or platitude? Agency in archaeology [Internet]. London: Routledge; 2000. p. 3–17. Available from: https://contentstore.cla.co.uk//secure/link?id=37d0cb62-5336-e711-80c9-005056af4099
82.
Gardner A. Agency. Handbook of archaeological theories [Internet]. 2008. p. 95–108. Available from: http://www.vlebooks.com/vleweb/product/openreader?id=UCL&isbn=9780759113602
83.
Morris I. The anthropology of a dead world. Death-ritual and social structure in classical antiquity [Internet]. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 1992. p. 1–30. Available from: https://contentstore.cla.co.uk//secure/link?id=c4ad4e7d-5a36-e711-80c9-005056af4099
84.
Osborne R. W(h)ither Orientalization? Debating orientalization: multidisciplinary approaches to processes of change in the ancient Mediterranean [Internet]. London: Equinox; 2006. p. 153–158. Available from: https://contentstore.cla.co.uk/secure/link?id=ff782124-8636-e711-80c9-005056af4099
85.
Sewell WH. The Concept(s) of Culture. Logics of history: social theory and social transformation. Chicago: University of Chicago Press; 2005. p. 152–174.
86.
Shanks M, Tilley C. The individual and the social. Social theory and archaeology [Internet]. Cambridge: Polity in association with Blackwell; 1987. p. 61–78. Available from: 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. Art and agency: an anthropological theory [Internet]. Oxford: Clarendon Press; 1998. p. 1–11. Available from: 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. The invention of art history in Ancient Greece: religion, society and artistic rationalisation [Internet]. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2006. p. 141–204. Available from: 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. Archaeological theory today [Internet]. Cambridge: Polity; 2001. p. 141–164. Available from: 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. Rules and meanings: the anthropology of everyday knowledge : selected readings [Internet]. Harmondsworth: Penguin Education; 1973. p. 98–110. Available from: 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. The archaeology of social boundaries [Internet]. Washington [D.C.]: Smithsonian Institution Press; 1998. p. 232–263. Available from: 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 [Internet]. Cambridge: Polity Press; 1986. Available from: https://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/ucl/detail.action?docID=1221197
95.
van Dommelen P. Punic persistence: colonialism and cultural identity in Roman Sardinia. Cultural identity in the Roman Empire [Internet]. London: Routledge; 1998. p. 25–48. Available from: https://contentstore.cla.co.uk//secure/link?id=407c43b5-5236-e711-80c9-005056af4099
96.
Meskell L. Archaeologies of identity. Archaeological theory today [Internet]. Cambridge: Polity; 2001. p. 187–213. Available from: 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(02):265–283.
98.
Vives-Ferrándiz Sánchez J. Colonial encounters and the negotiation of identities in south-east Iberia. Mediterranean crossroads. Athens: Pierides Foundation; 2007. p. 537–562.
99.
Peter van Dommelen. Colonial Constructs: Colonialism and Archaeology in the Mediterranean. World Archaeology [Internet]. Taylor & Francis, Ltd.; 28(3):305–323. Available from: http://www.jstor.org/stable/125021
100.
Antonaccio C. Ethnicity and Colonization. Ancient perceptions of Greek ethnicity. Washington, D.C.: Center for Hellenic Studies, Trustees for Harvard University; 2001. p. 113–157.
101.
Diaz-Andreu M, Lucy S. Introduction. The archaeology of identity: approaches to gender, age, status, ethnicity and religion [Internet]. London: Routledge; 2005. p. 1–13. Available from: 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 Jan;37:131–163.
103.
Given M. Inventing the Eteocypriots: Imperialist Archaeology and the Manipulation of Ethnic Identity. Journal of Mediterranean Archaeology. 1998 Aug 1;11(1):3–29.
104.
Fotiadis M. Cultural identity and regional archaeological projects. Archaeological Dialogues. 1997 May;4(01):102–113.
105.
Hingley R. Cultural Diversity and Unity: empire and Rome. Material culture and social identities in the ancient world [Internet]. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2010. p. 54–75. Available from: 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. Cultural identity and archaeology: the construction of European communities [Internet]. London: Routledge; 1996. p. 62–80. Available from: 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 [Internet]. Duke University Press; 2004;65(3):341–364. Available from: 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. Italy and the west: comparative issues in Romanization [Internet]. Oxford: Oxbow; 2001. p. 68–84. Available from: https://contentstore.cla.co.uk//secure/link?id=cdd86dae-8136-e711-80c9-005056af4099
110.
Woolf, Greg, Gosden C. Beyond Romans and natives. World Archaeology [Internet]. 1997;28(3):339–350. Available from: https://www.jstor.org/stable/125023
111.
Woolf G. Becoming Roman: The Origins of Provincial Civilization in Gaul [Internet]. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 1998. Available from: http://ebooks.cambridge.org/ref/id/CBO9780511518614
112.
Yates T. Frameworks for an archaeology of the body. Interpretative archaeology [Internet]. Oxford, UK: Berg; 1992. p. 31–72. Available from: https://www.bloomsburycollections.com/book/interpretative-archaeology/
113.
Izzet V. Holding a mirror to Etruscan gender. Gender and Italian archaeology: challenging the stereotypes [Internet]. London: Accordia Research Institute; 1998. p. 209–227. Available from: https://contentstore.cla.co.uk/secure/link?id=ec69728f-8e36-e711-80c9-005056af4099
114.
Meskell L. Archaeologies of identity. Archaeological theory today [Internet]. Cambridge: Polity; 2001. p. 187–213. Available from: 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(1):411–437.
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(02):183–204.
119.
Meskell L. The somatization of archaeology: Institutions, discourses, corporeality. Norwegian Archaeological Review. 1996;29(1):1–16.
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. Sex and difference in ancient Greece and Rome [Internet]. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press; 2003. p. 264–275. Available from: 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. Classical Greece: ancient histories and modern archaeologies. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 1994. p. 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 [Internet]. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2006. Available from: http://ebooks.cambridge.org/ref/id/CBO9780511816666
126.
Stewart A. Reflections. Sexuality in ancient art: Near East, Egypt, Greece and Italy [Internet]. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 1996. p. 136–154. Available from: 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. A passion for difference: essays in anthropology and gender [Internet]. Cambridge: Polity; 1994. p. 71–85. Available from: https://contentstore.cla.co.uk//secure/link?id=ed370090-6736-e711-80c9-005056af4099
128.
Mauss M. Body Techniques. Sociology and psychology: essays [Internet]. London [etc.]: Routledge and Kegan Paul; 1979. p. 95–123. Available from: 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 [Internet]. Wiley; 94(4):837–859. Available from: http://www.jstor.org/stable/680224
130.
Rowlands M. The politics of identity in archaeology. Social construction of the past: representation as power [Internet]. London: Routledge; 1994. p. 129–143. Available from: 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 Mar;70(267):117–129.
132.
Meskell (ed.) L. Archaeology Under Fire: Nationalism, Politics and Heritage in the Eastern Mediterranean and Middle East [Internet]. Routledge; 2002. Available from: https://www.taylorfrancis.com/books/9780203029817
133.
Díaz-Andreu M. Nationalism and Archaeology in Europe [Internet]. Routledge; 2014. Available from: https://www.taylorfrancis.com/books/9781315748221
134.
Michael Dietler. ‘Our Ancestors the Gauls’: Archaeology, Ethnic Nationalism, and the Manipulation of Celtic Identity in Modern Europe. American Anthropologist [Internet]. Wiley; 96(3):584–605. Available from: 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 [Internet]. Archaeological Institute of America; 99(1):59–78. Available from: http://www.jstor.org/stable/506879
136.
Hamilakis Y. Decolonizing Greek archaeology: indigenous archaeologies, modernist archaeology and the post-colonial critique. A singular antiquity: archaeology and Hellenic identity in twentieth-century Greece [Internet]. Athens: Benaki Museum; 2008. p. 273–284. Available from: 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 Jun;85(328):625–629.
139.
Hamilakis Y. Are We Postcolonial Yet? Tales from the Battlefield. Archaeologies. 2012;8(1):67–76.
140.
Hobsbawm E, Ranger T, editors. The Invention of Tradition [Internet]. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2012. Available from: http://ebooks.cambridge.org/ref/id/CBO9781107295636
141.
Lowenthal D. The Heritage Crusade and the Spoils of History [Internet]. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 1998. Available from: http://ebooks.cambridge.org/ref/id/CBO9780511523809
142.
Lynn Meskell. The Intersections of Identity and Politics in Archaeology. Annual Review of Anthropology [Internet]. Annual Reviews; 2002;31:279–301. Available from: http://www.jstor.org/stable/4132881
143.
Odermatt P. Built heritage and the politics of (re) presentation. Archaeological Dialogues. 1996;3(02):95–119.
144.
Pierre Nora. Between Memory and History: Les Lieux de Mémoire. Representations [Internet]. University of California Press; (26):7–24. Available from: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2928520
145.
Yiannis Papadakis. Greek Cypriot Narratives of History and Collective Identity: Nationalism as a Contested Process. American Ethnologist [Internet]. Wiley; 25(2):149–165. Available from: http://www.jstor.org/stable/646690
146.
Paul Sant Cassia. Tradition, Tourism and Memory in Malta. The Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute [Internet]. Royal Anthropological Institute of Great Britain and Ireland; 5(2):247–263. Available from: 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. The archaeologist’s laboratory: the analysis of archaeological data [Internet]. New York: London; 2000. p. 73–92. Available from: https://contentstore.cla.co.uk/secure/link?id=cfa3440e-4e67-e911-80cd-005056af4099
149.
Binford LR. A Consideration of Archaeological Research Design. American Antiquity [Internet]. Society for American Archaeology; 1964;29(4):425–441. Available from: 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 [Internet]. Sheffield, U.K.: Research School of Archaeology and Archaeological Sciences, University of Sheffield; 4. Available from: 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, Wardle KA. Introduction. Classical archaeology in the field: approaches. London: Bristol Classical Press; 2001. p. 1–10.
152.
Bowkett L, Hill S, Wardle D, Wardle KA. The development of Classical Archaeology. Classical archaeology in the field: approaches [Internet]. London: Bristol Classical Press; 2001. p. 11–25. Available from: https://contentstore.cla.co.uk//secure/link?id=87753895-8936-e711-80c9-005056af4099
153.
Andrews G, English Heritage. Management of archaeological projects [Internet]. London: English Heritage; 1991. Available from: 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 Dec;71(274):1020–1025.
156.
Hodder I. ‘Always momentary, fluid and flexible’: towards a reflexive excavation methodology. Antiquity. 1997 Sep;71(273):691–700.
157.
Hodder I. Whose rationality? A response to Fekri Hassan. Antiquity. 1998 Mar;72(275):213–217.
158.
Milne G. The archaeologist as alchemist. From Roman basilica to medieval market: archaeology in action in the city of London [Internet]. London: HMSO; 1992. p. 51–59. Available from: 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. Papers in economic prehistory: studies by members and associates of the British Academy Major Research Project in the Early History of Agriculture [Internet]. London: Cambridge University Press; 1972. p. 49–64. Available from: https://contentstore.cla.co.uk//secure/link?id=41494f18-5936-e711-80c9-005056af4099
160.
Redman CL. Multistage Fieldwork and Analytical Techniques. American Antiquity [Internet]. Society for American Archaeology; 38(1):61–79. Available from: http://www.jstor.org/stable/279311
161.
Redman CL. Surface Collection, Sampling, and Research Design: A Retrospective. American Antiquity [Internet]. Society for American Archaeology; 52(2):249–265. Available from: 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 [Internet]. Springer; 1978;1:315–381. Available from: http://www.jstor.org/stable/20170136
163.
Lewis R. Binford. Behavioral Archaeology and the ‘Pompeii Premise’. Journal of Anthropological Research [Internet]. University of New Mexico; 1981;37(3):195–208. Available from: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3629723
164.
Bon SE. A city frozen in time or a site in perpetual motion? Formation processes at Pompeii. Sequence and space in Pompeii [Internet]. Oxford: Oxbow Books; 1997. p. 7–12. Available from: 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 [Internet]. London: Institute of Archaeology, University of London; 1980;17:85–94. Available from: 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. Whither environmental archaeology? [Internet]. Oxbow; 1994. p. 91–104. Available from: 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(2):118–131.
168.
Jansen GCM. Systems for the disposal of waste and excreta in Roman cities. The situation in Pompeii, Herculaneum and Ostia. 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. p. 37–50.
169.
Liebschuetz W. Rubbish disposal in Greek and Roman Cities. 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. p. 51–62.
170.
Orton CR. Two useful parameters for pottery research. Computer applications in archaeology 1985: proceedings of the Conference on Quantitative Methods, Institute of Archaeology, London, March 29-30, 1985 [Internet]. London: University of London, Institute of Archaeology; 1986. p. 114–120. Available from: https://contentstore.cla.co.uk/secure/link?id=2f76d612-1c46-e711-80cb-005056af4099
171.
Peña JT. Roman Pottery in the Archaeological Record [Internet]. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2007. Available from: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/9780511499685/type/book
172.
Schiffer MB. Archaeological Context and Systemic Context. American Antiquity [Internet]. Society for American Archaeology; 1972;37(2):156–165. Available from: http://www.jstor.org/stable/278203
173.
Schiffer, Michael B. Formation processes of the archaeological record [Internet]. Albuquerque, N.M.: University of New Mexico Press; 1987. Available from: 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 [Internet]. Taylor & Francis, Ltd.; 1986;18(1):96–115. Available from: http://www.jstor.org/stable/124664
175.
Alan P. Sullivan, III. The Technology of Ceramic Reuse: Formation Processes and Archaeological Evidence. World Archaeology [Internet]. Taylor & Francis, Ltd.; 1989;21(1):101–114. Available from: http://www.jstor.org/stable/124487
176.
Allison PM. Artefact Assemblages: Not the Pompeii Premise. Papers of the fourth Conference of Italian archaeology [Internet]. London: Accordia Research Centre; 1991. p. 49–56. Available from: https://contentstore.cla.co.uk//secure/link?id=0b7c6260-8e36-e711-80c9-005056af4099
177.
Cool HEM. An overview of the small finds from Catterick. Cataractonium: Roman Catterick and its hinterland : excavations and research, 1958-1997 [Internet]. York: Council for British Archaeology; 2002. p. 24–43. Available from: 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(4):365–380.
179.
Crummy N. Six honest serving men: a basic methodology for the study of small finds conference held at the Univeristy of Durham. Roman finds: context and theory : proceedings of a conference held at the Univeristy of Durham [Internet]. Oxford: Oxbow Books; 2007. p. 59–66. Available from: 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(2):117–163.
181.
Lockyear K. Site Finds in Roman Britain: A Comparison of Techniques. Oxford Journal of Archaeology. Oxford: Basil Blackwell; 2000;19(4):397–423.
182.
Lockyear, Kris. Patterns and process in late Roman Republican coin hoards, 157-2 BC. Oxford: Archaeopress; 2007.
183.
Lucas G. Splitting objects. Critical approaches to fieldwork : contemporary and historical archaeological practice / Gavin Lucas [Internet]. p. 64–106. Available from: 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. Roman finds: context and theory : proceedings of a conference held at the Univeristy of Durham [Internet]. Oxford: Oxbow Books; 2007. p. 100–105. Available from: https://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt1kw29ff
185.
Orton C, Hughes M. Pottery in Archaeology [Internet]. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2013. Available from: http://ebooks.cambridge.org/ref/id/CBO9780511920066
186.
Reece R. The interpretation of site finds — a review. Coin finds and coin use in the Roman world: the thirteenth Oxford Symposium on Coinage and Monetary History, 25-2731993 : a NATO advanced research workshop. Berlin: Gebr. Mann Verlag; 1996. p. 341–355.
187.
Tyers P. Sources for the study of Roman pottery. Roman pottery in Britain [Internet]. London: Batsford; 1996. p. 24–35. Available from: https://contentstore.cla.co.uk//secure/link?id=f9cfe4ff-6236-e711-80c9-005056af4099
188.
Allison PM. Artefact distribution and spatial function in Pompeian houses. The Roman family in Italy: status, sentiment, space [Internet]. Canberra: Humanities Research Centre; 1997. p. 321–354. Available from: https://contentstore.cla.co.uk//secure/link?id=79e1dcd6-4c36-e711-80c9-005056af4099
189.
Allison PM. Introduction. The archaeology of household activities / edited by Penelope M Allison [Internet]. p. 1–18. Available from: 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. The archaeology of household activities / edited by Penelope M Allison [Internet]. p. 57–77. Available from: http://www.vlebooks.com/vleweb/product/openreader?id=UCL&isbn=9780203014929
191.
Flannery KV. Analysis on the household level/The Early Mesoamerican House. The early Mesoamerican village. New York: Academic Press; 1976. p. 13–24.
192.
Gardner A. Artefacts, contexts, and the archaeology of social practicess of a conference held at the Univeristy of Durham. Roman finds: context and theory : proceedings of a conference held at the Univeristy of Durham [Internet]. Oxford: Oxbow Books; 2007. p. 128–139. Available from: 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. Roman finds: context and theory : proceedings of a conference held at the Univeristy of Durham [Internet]. Oxford: Oxbow Books; 2007. p. 137–164. Available from: 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. The archaeology of household activities / edited by Penelope M Allison [Internet]. p. 19–29. Available from: 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, Ecole française de Rome, Instituto Español de Historia y Arqueología, Struttura agricola romana: il contributo della ricognizione archeologica: Conference. 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. Geographical information systems and landscape archaeology. Oxford: Oxbow; 1999. p. 95–101.
202.
Flannery, Kent V. The early Mesoamerican village. New York: Academic Press; 1976.
203.
Flannery KV. Sampling on the Regional Level. The early Mesoamerican village [Internet]. New York: Academic Press; 1976. p. 131–160. Available from: 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. Extracting meaning from ploughsoil assemblages. Oxford: Oxbow; 2000. p. 105–109.
205.
Lock G, Bell T, Lloyd J. Towards a methodology for modeling surface survey data: the Sangro Valley Project. Geographical information systems and landscape archaeology [Internet]. Oxford: Oxbow; 1999. p. 55–63. Available from: https://contentstore.cla.co.uk//secure/link?id=59347803-9036-e711-80c9-005056af4099
206.
Mattingly D. Methods of collection, recording and quantification. Extracting meaning from ploughsoil assemblages [Internet]. Oxford: Oxbow; 2000. p. 5–15. Available from: 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. Side-by-side survey: comparative regional studies in the Mediterranean World [Internet]. Oxford: Oxbow; 2004. p. 173–188. Available from: 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. Extracting meaning from ploughsoil assemblages. Oxford: Oxbow; 2000. p. 53–59.
209.
Orton CR. Covering the ground. Sampling in archaeology [Internet]. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2000. p. 67–111. Available from: 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. Extracting meaning from ploughsoil assemblages [Internet]. Oxford: Oxbow; 2000. p. 60–71. Available from: 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. Side-by-side survey: comparative regional studies in the Mediterranean World. Oxford: Oxbow; 2004. p. 36–48.
