The Interpretation of Negative Evidence in Archaeology

Abstract

One of the important changes ¡n the archaeological paradigm that
occurred in the l960s was the expansion of the scope of the problems addressed
by researchers. This expansion was sparked largely by Lewis
Binford (1968:22), who maintained that "data relevant to most, ¡f not all,
the components of past sociocultural systems are preserved ¡n the archaeological
record." Binford argued that we are limited not so much by the
nature of the archaeological record as by our lack of principles for relating
archaeological remains to past human behavior (1968:23). Just as
artifacts tend to reflect more than one component of a cultural system,
each component of a cultural system should be reflected in various material
remains. This meant that gaps in the archaeological record could be
circumvented. Where decay had claimed important information, models
could be devised that turned to other, nonperishable, remains (Binford
1968:19, 1975:256)