Tylor Vs Ucko

Before Binford made his argument that archaeology was holding a backseat in anthropology, and needed to make a necessary transition towards a systematic view of culture, archaeology used a direct historical approach. By studying modern native cultures one could start at the top of each archaeological layer and work down (working the way back in time). Sir Edward B. Tylor represented cultural evolutionism in archaeology. He believed that there was a purpose in the development of society and civilization, and believed this purpose must be universal. Tylor proposed animism and believed that animals, rocks, plants, etc possessed a spiritual essence. The paradigm shift in ways of thinking between Tylor and Binford is considerable, and not the last shift in the way archaeology is conducted. This paper will discuss different paradigms that individuals operate within to access …show more content…
He put emphasis on ethnographic information and said ethnographic parallels should only be used in exceptional cases. He states that ethnographic parallels “widen the horizons of the interpreter.” He asserts that they add variability to interpretation and approach to sites. This is because mortuary practices are a result of social processes, even though the artifacts and structures are static themselves. He uses a more post-processual approach in research and makes a point to stress that no human culture is static. Because no human culture is static, he argues that there is no real need for such severe positions between diffusionists and inventionists and that when evidence supports a theory in a particular area that it should be accepted if the closeness of fit can be seen and manufactured by other sources. In his beliefs towards burial offerings and goods he thought that they were put into a grave/tomb because they were supposed to be beneficial in an afterlife, or believed so by those who put them