Inference from absence: the case of archaeology

Abstract

Inferences from the absence of evidence to something are common in ordinary speech, but when used in scientific argumentations are usually considered deficient or outright false. Yet, as demonstrated here with the help of various examples, archaeologists frequently use inferences and reasoning from absence, often allowing it a status on par with inferences from tangible evidence. This discrepancy has not been examined so far. The article analyses it drawing on philosophical discussions concerning the validity of inference from absence, using probabilistic models that were originally developed to show that such inferences are weak and inconclusive. The analysis reveals that inference from absence can indeed be justified in many important situations of archaeological research, such as excavations carried out to explore the past existence and time-span of sedentary human habitation. The justification is closely related to the fact that archaeology explores the human past via its material remains. The same analysis points to instances where inference from absence can have comparable validity in other historical sciences, and to research questions in which archaeological inference from absence will be problematic or totally unwarranted.

The missing Macassans: Indigenous sovereignty, rock art and the archaeology of absence

“…The latter is unerringly a major point we wish to make in the present study. Following Amaral (2017), Meskell (2010), Wallach (2019), and others (e.g. Bille 2010), we argue that the 'absence' of a particular phenomenon is as vital for our quest to understand specific social and historical trajectories as is the 'presence' of any object or depicted subject matter.…”

Garden Offerings in the Kona Field System, Hawai'i Island: A Fine-Grained Chronology and Its Implications

“…We recognize the weakness of negative evidence. It is nonetheless a commonplace and, to some degree, a necessary part of interpreting the archaeological record (Wallach 2019). Further, if we accept that the lack of samples dated to the nineteenth century is associated with state prohibitions on religious practices, then we must at least entertain the possibility that the absence of coral offerings in upland fields after AD 1600–1700 is not just a byproduct of sampling and uneven preservation but may also be an expression of religious authority.…”

“…It is inherently easier for archaeologists to identify materializations of generative acts, such as building a temple or leaving an offering. It is harder to recognize the end of traditions, because doing so requires the judicious use of negative evidence (Wallach 2019). We hope in the future that this discussion expands to also include the destruction of religious sites and iconography.…”

Sedimentary unknowns constrain the current use of frequency analysis of radiocarbon data sets in forming regional models of demographic change

“…Such depth–age models are themselves problematic because they assume, amongst other things, that the overall sediment accumulation and erosion patterns are well approximated by the net rate (Trachsel & Telford, 2017). Further, and critically, SPD analyses rarely account for diastems, yet the significance of gaps in the records and of changes in accumulation rates remain fundamental to almost all branches of archaeology (see also Wallach, 2019; Ward & Larcombe, 2003). Thus, a variety of interpretative issues can be an inevitable result of not considering context, logical tests and forming a clear approach.…”

“…We therefore promote the careful assessment of the temporal characteristics of diastems (Kowalewski & Bambach, 2003) and studies to understand chronological gaps in the archaeological record, particularly because such gaps can be used, erroneously, as negative evidence regarding past human behaviour (Ward & Larcombe, 2003). Even when archaeological inferences from local absence are reasonably secure, generalisations to the broader region required separate justification (Wallach, 2019, p. 9). The above aspects can be aided by combining results from radiocarbon and OSL dating, plus other applicable dating techniques, to help distinguish cultural events from depositional events and to test apparent chronological gaps (e.g., Bubenzer et al, 2007; Hughes et al, 2017).…”