What do you think?


Archaeological Semiotics
This book explores the multiple ways in which archaeologists give meaning to the past, highlighting debates over the ontological and epistemological status of the discipline and evaluating current responses to these issues.
- GenresSemiotics
352 pages, Hardcover
First published January 16, 2006
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 3 of 3 reviews
January 7, 2008
In all, a very useful volume about the application of Peirce's semiotics to archaeology. The discussion of the nature of the sign and the grounds that connect it to objects and interpretants is straightforward without being as elaborate and jargon-laden as some. I was a little disappointed at the case studies, however, as they did not carry the punch I was hoping for. After laying out an interesting way of understanding the logic undergirding archaeological interpretation, Pruecel could have applied his argument much more forcefully in his discussions of the Brook Farm and post-Revolt pueblos.
April 14, 2019
Preucel's study is broadly structured as a historical survey of archaeology's engagement with the interpretive principles of semiotics by way of the latter's formative influence on structuralism and its subsequent critiques, with particular attention devoted to the semiotic theory formulated by Charles Sanders Pierce. While the author offers several case studies which do illustrate the inherent potential of archaeological data as abstract as settlement organization and architectural style to communicate defined ideological values, the methodological utility he seeks to demonstrate in framing these data within Pierce's modular typology of signs is not entirely convincing, though it may aid in rendering explicit certain analytical perspectives and casting into sharper relief emic/etic distinctions.
April 20, 2023
Focuses on discussing and introducing the semiotic trends in archaeology, specifically in Psycho-archaeology and structuralism and post-structuralism archaeology.
Displaying 1 - 3 of 3 reviews




