Archaeologists have long pondered whether archaeology is a science or not; most (as far as I can tell) truly have their doubts. Here's a list of the top five reasons archaeologists give for why archaeology is not a science.
1. Archaeological Excavation is Not Repeatable
One of the tenets of science is that experiments must be repeatable; that is, if you run your experiment twice (or a thousand times) you'll get the same results. Philip Barker (and others including Colin Renfrew and Graeme Barker) points out that since no two archaeological sites or situations are the same, it's never possible to verify one's conclusions in a repeatable fashion. Even if you're comparing the excavations of one archaeologist, circumstances in the field change so quickly that the strategies are rarely comparable. If you can't test your results, it ain't science, goes the argument.
2. Archaeological Data Are Too Crummy (um, Crumbly)
Archaeologist David Clarke wrote in a number of different venues, and far more succinctly than I can, that we have to recognize that archaeological data is corrupt and patchy. Archaeological evidence taken out of the earth is corrupted by the passage of time, by climate and environmental circumstances; by human behaviors at the time of occupation, after the occupation, at the time of excavation, and in the laboratory.
3. Too Much of Archaeology is Based on Interpretation
Interpretation of results is something all scientists must do--but does archaeology rely too much on one person's opinions? We can measure as many projectile points as we like, we can run statistics on the measurements as much as we like, but in the end, we still have to rely on (past and present) interpretations to decide when a Clovis point is a Clovis point or simply Clovis-like.
- John Younger (the elder)
- Lawrence Guy Strauss
4. Archaeology is Part of Anthropology
In a 2003 article in The Review of Archaeology, R.E. Taylor commented that as long as [American] archaeology is embedded in sociocultural anthropology, archaeologists will not be scientists. Robert Dunnell says as long as we're focused on the anthropological behaviors of the past, and not the processes that create the archaeological record, we're anthropologists and not scientists.
5. Science is Boring, Archaeology is Not
Oscar Wilde says archaeology is only delightful when it's turned into art. How can you argue with Oscar Wilde?
