Objectivity

Back to top: Objectivity

The concept

For the purposes of our grammar, I define objectivity in terms of the role that referentiality plays in a definition of any given element. There will be greater objectivity in the measure of control we can claim on the referential link.

We may accordingly distinguish two levels of “objectivity,” subsuming the four referential levels, and matching the two perceptual levels, as follows:

		recovery	reference	perception	objectivity
1		stratigraphy	fixed place	ancient	high
typology	2	morphology	extra-cultural standards
	3	semiotics	function and use	ancient and modern	low
4		hermeneutics	meaning

Back to top: Objectivity

Current trends

In recent archaeological discourse, the question of objectivity has been at the center of post-processualism and beyond, especially in relation to the central position of the concept of “laws” in processual archaeology. The discussion focuses exclusively on what I consider the fourth level of referentiality, a level which is the domain of other, non-archaeological, types of analysis.

Other disciplines do precisely this. History and art history are in the first place: they deal precisely with the inferences that can be drawn from the data to arrive at an understanding of social, intellectual and other aspects of ancient culture. Linguistics can also be called into question: we claim that we would be able to understand ancient Babylonians speaking to us and that we would in turn be understood by them if they could hear us speak, no small claim for objectivity indeed.

The emphasis must be on what is exclusive to archaeology, what no other discipline does, i. e., the excavation process seen as an epistemic endeavor. Which is precisely the task of our grammar.

Back to top: Objectivity

References

Horácek, Stanislav, Filip Timingeriu, Hryhorii Maliukov, and Johana Stejskalová. 2025. “Archaeology’s Turn to Ontology: A Philosophical Perspective.” Journal for General Philosophy of Science 56: 551–575.

Murray, Tim. 2025. “Archaeological Epistemology, Middle Range Theory, and the Prospect of Intractable Problems?” In Archaeology: Historiography and Theory, pp. 291–319.

VanPool, Christine S., and Todd L. VanPool. 2017. “The Scientific Nature of Postprocessualism.” American Antiquity.