Multivocality and Social Archaeology

  • Ian Hodder

Multivocality remains for me a key component of archaeological practice, and it remains a core aspect of the methods we are using at Çatalhöyük. But I also recognize the dangers in the term and the idea, and I wish to respond here to those dangers.


Cultural Heritage Archaeological Practice Multiple Voice Wide Consideration Local Voice 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Appiah, K. A. (2006). Cosmopolitanism: Ethics in a World of Strangers. New York: W.W. Norton & Company.Google Scholar
  2. Habermas, J. (2000). The Inclusion of the Other. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
  3. Hodder, I. (2004). Archaeology beyond Dialogue. Salt Lake City: University of Utah Press.Google Scholar
  4. Hodder, I. (2005). Reflexive methods. In H. D. G. Maschner & C. Chippindale (Eds.), Handbook of Archaeological Methods (pp. 643–669). New York: AltaMira Press.Google Scholar
  5. Kojan, D., & Angelo, D. (2005). Dominant narratives, social violence and the practice of Bolivian archaeology. Journal of Social Archaeology, 5(3), 383–408.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Meskell, L. (2002). Negative heritage and past mastering in archaeology. Anthropological Quarterly, 75(3), 557–574.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Spivak, G. C. (1995). Can the subaltern speak? In B. Ashcroft, G. Griffiths, & H. Tiffin (Eds.), The Post-Colonial Studies Reader (pp. 24–28). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  8. Trigger, B. G. (1984). Alternative archaeologies: Nationalist, colonialist, imperialist. Man, 19, 355–370.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ian Hodder
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Cultural and Social AnthropologyStanford UniversityStanfordUSA

Personalised recommendations