Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
Book cover

Encyclopedia of Global Archaeology pp 1–5Cite as

Actor Network Theory (ANT)

  • Living reference work entry
  • First Online:

  • 282 Accesses

Introduction

Actor-Network Theory (ANT) is a framework for the study of sociology that emerged in the early 1980s with the work of Bruno Latour, Michel Callon, and John Law in the field of Science and Technology Studies (STS). Bruno Latour continued to develop ANT throughout the 1990s, where its application moved beyond the boundaries of STS and made its way into other disciplines outside sociology. The application of ANT within the archaeological discipline has predominantly occurred through the development of symmetrical archaeology, which seeks to apply the ANT concept of symmetry in order to develop more complex interpretations within the archaeological discipline. Beyond this, the application of ANT by archaeologists exists within a number of isolated case studies in the subfields of maritime archaeology aviation archaeology, and ethnographies of archaeological practice.

Definition

ANT primarily emerged as a result of sociologies of scientific practice that developed in the early...

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

References

  • Amsterdamska, O. 1990. Surely, you must be joking, monsieur Latour! Science, Technology and Human Values 15: 495–504.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Braidwood, R.J. 1958. Vere Gordon Childe 1892–1957. American Anthropologist 60: 733–736.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Deal, M., L.M. Daly, and C. Mathias. 2015. Actor-network theory and the practice of aviation archaeology. Journal of Conflict Archaeology 10 (1): 3–28.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Deleuze, G., and F. Guattari. 1980. A thousand plateaus: Capitalism and schizophrenia. Mineapolis: University of Minnesota Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harman, G. 2007. The importance of Bruno Latour for philosophy. Cultural Studies Review 13 (1): 31–49.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hodder, I. 2012. Entangled: An archaeology of the relationships between humans and things. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Jones, A. 2002. Archaeological theory and scientific practice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Latour, B. 1999. On recalling ANT. In ANT theory and after, ed. J. Law and J. Hassard, 15–25. Oxford: Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Latour, B. 2005. Reassembling the social: An introduction to actor-network-theory. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Law, J. 2009. Actor-network theory and material semiotics. In The new Blackwell companion to social theory, ed. B. Turner, 141–158. Oxford: Blackwell.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Leighton, M. 2015. Excavation methodologies and labour as epistemic concerns in the practice of archaeology: Comparing examples from British and Andean archaeology. Archaeological Dialogues 22 (1): 65–88.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lucas, G. 2012. Understanding the archaeological record. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Olsen, B. 2007. Keeping things at arm’s length: A genealogy of asymmetry. World Archaeology 39 (4): 579–588.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Olsen, B., M. Shanks, T. Webmoor, and C. Witmore. 2012. Archaeology: The discipline of things. Berkeley: University of California Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Restivo, S. 2005. Politics of Latour. Organization and Environment 8 (1): 111–115.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Oyen, A. 2015. Actor-network theory’s take on archaeological types: Becoming material agency and historical explanation. Cambridge Archaeological Journal 25 (1): 63–78.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Rebrouck, D., and D. Jacobs. 2006. The mutual constitution of natural and social identities during archaeological fieldwork. In Ethnographies of archaeological practice: Cultural encounters, material transformations, ed. M. Edgeworth, 33–44. Lanham: Altamira Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Whitridge, P. 2004. Whales, harpoons and other actors: Actor-network theory and hunter-gatherer archaeology. In Hunters and gatherers in theory and archaeology, ed. G.M. Crothers, 445–474. Carbondale: Southern Illinois University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Whittle, A., and A. Spicer. 2008. Is actor network theory critique? Organization Studies 29 (4): 611–629.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wiltshire, K.D. 2017. All things are connected: An auto-ethnography of archaeological practice with and for the Ngarrindjeri nation. Unpublished PhD dissertation, Flinders University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yarrow, T. 2003. Artefactual persons: The relational capacities of persons and things in the practice of excavation. Norwegian Archaeological Review 36 (1): 65–73.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Archaeology, Flinders University, Adelaide, SA, Australia

    Kelly D. Wiltshire

Authors
  1. Kelly D. Wiltshire
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Kelly D. Wiltshire .

Section Editor information

  1. Department of Archaeology, Flinders University, Adelaide, SA, Australia

    Jordan Ralph

  2. Honors College, The University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, New Mexico, USA

    Troy Lovata

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2018 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this entry

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this entry

Wiltshire, K.D. (2018). Actor Network Theory (ANT). In: Encyclopedia of Global Archaeology. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-51726-1_3401-1

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-51726-1_3401-1

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-51726-1

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-51726-1

  • eBook Packages: Springer Reference HistoryReference Module Humanities and Social SciencesReference Module Humanities

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation