On the Concept of Types

Transitions Before the Transition

“…In other words, does it make sense for us to study the patterning of standardization attributes through time within a given tool type, if that tool type does not correspond to a type that the original toolmakers would have recognized? The question of the "reality" of types and whether or not we can identify emic types is the subject of an age-old debate (Spaulding 1953;Ford 1954). Clearly we will never know whether we can identify emic types or not.…”

Style, Society, and Person

“…Although dissenting points of view have been expressed (e.g., Ford 1954), and the polythetic nature of types has been discussed (e.g., Clarke 1968), most research either attempts to define types or assumes that types defined by consistent associations are present.…”

Mobilization as Mediation

“…The macroscopic classification of ceramics is among the most long-standing elements of archaeological laboratory research, and it continues to be a vital component of many research programs even amidst the proliferation of archaeometric methods of characterization. Debates over its aims have figured prominently in the development of archaeological epistemologies (e.g., Ford 1954; Ford and Steward 1954; Gifford 1960; Hegmon 1992; Hodder 1982; Lyman et al 1997; Spaulding 1953, 1954). But the practical work of classification—the way in which archaeologists observe, measure, and label ceramics based on regularities of form, decoration, and other indices of production and consumption—has received little critical attention.…”