Meaning of the term ‘model’: Types of Paradigms

1. Models and Paradigms
Dr. Ashwani Asthana

2. Models and Paradigms
Model :
• Orientation in an investigation
• Archaeologist’s explanation may be ecology-
oriented or diffusion-oriented, something else
oriented, etc, according to his perspective
• Taxonomical
• Some designate, these different orientation as
models eg. Colin Renfrew’s framework model.
Bruce Trigger’s Processual model

3. Actual meaning of the term ‘model’:
1. Two fundamental notions embedded
(i) Isomorphism
(ii) Idealization
2. Models are conceptual structures that (a)
organise and guide our thinking (heuristic-
serving or leading to find out; encouraging
the desire to find out depending upon
assumption based on past experience), (b)
describe the relationship between
variables (explanatory or legal), or (c)
describe a situation in graphic form
(illustrative)

4. 3. Models are not mysterious. We all use
them in every day life
Paradigm (Greek): literally meaning
example showing certain pattern
1. Robert Metron in 1949 was the first to
introduce the word to the scientific area
by using it
2. Thomas S.Kuhn (1962) popularised the
word and discussed in detail the nature
and role of paradigm with the context and
its effect with the change in nature and
context

5. 3. David Clarke further utilised the role of
paradigm in archaeology by the way of
his field investigations and publishing
works like Archaeology as Anthropology
(1962) and Analytical
Archaeology(1968)
4. It is very unfortunate that he died at the
age of 36 but his various papers are
remarkable for illustrating the
application of new methodology in
archaeology which are shining models of
British scholarship

6. 5. Like Binford his work is also written in
jargon which according to him is
inevitable when scientific mythology is
employed in any discipline (1979)
• He commented that ‘yesterdays jargon
is tomorrow's prose’.
• Through his experience and field
research he gives the clearest possible
exposition of new archaeology, which
according to him consists of:

7. 1. Morphological paradigm
2. Ecological paradigm
3. Anthropological paradigm
4. Geographical paradigm

8. 1. Morphological Paradigm
1. It consists of detailed study of artefacts
assemblages using computer techniques
2. David Clarke successfully applied this
approach is archaeological situation.
• The technique involved with numeral,
statistical and taxonomical data identifies
fundamental archaeological entities
(attributes or traits)

9. • These entities are linked together on the
basis of hierarchy of various taxonomical
ranks, eg., artefacts, types, industry,
assemblages, cultures, and group of cultures
• These entities are conceived as system in
which the lowest place is assigned to the
attributes of artefacts
• Starting from the most basic unit, i.e.,
attributes, artefacts are defined as clusters of
attributes; assemblages as clusters of
industries; cultures as clusters of
assembleges and culture groups as clusters of
cultures

10. 3. Using computer techniques and
employing the methods of numerical and
statistical taxonomy, phase pattern
regularities, time pattern regularities and
system pattern regularities of
archaeological entities are identified and
analysed.
4. David Clarke used this approach for his
dissertation on the Origin and
Development of British Beaker Pottery

11. 2. Ecological Paradigm
1. Aims at reconstructing the dynamics of
ecological equilibrium which existed
between the prehistorical people and their
changing environmental contexts
• This approach has most remarkably been
followed by David Clarke in his work
Mesolithic Europe – The Economic Basis
1979
2. Earlier Senior Clarke (Graham) had
postulated that the Mesolithic economy
was based mainly on hunting fishing

12. 3. But it was refuted by David Clarke who
on the basis of a variety of evidences,
convincingly established that 80% of the
subsistence of Mesolithic Europe was
based on vegetal food.
• This was supplemented by hunting and
fishing
• His observation was based upon the
functional analysis of microlithic blade
tools
• Similar experimentations were carried out
at Baghor in M.P.

13. 3. Anthropological Paradigm
1. It derives it models mainly from ethnology
2. It is not a new paradigm at all and is being
utilized by prehistorians since the
beginning of the discipline itself
3. The hypothetico – deductive procedure,
characterises the new anthropological
paradigm of archaeology
4. David clarke reexamined the evidence
from Glastonbury excavation of early 20th
century

14. • He identified various structures and
located different activity areas
• He reinterpreted the data on the basis of
spatial, structural and artefact relationship
and successfully traced the development
of the site
• He could identify in each complex the
major house, minor house, temporary
shelter or hut, granaries, stable, etc.
5. The study began with a typological
analysis of buildings on the sites and a
structural analysis of their relationship

15. 5. This procedure resulted in the
identification of male and female
activity areas, the socio-economic
position of the occupants, etc.
• From this, study expanded to consider
the site in regional context
6. The work is remarkable for showing
that how far-reaching conclusion can
be drawn

16. Geographical Paradigm
1. Borrows its models mainly from modern
geography or new geography
• It emphasises the study of within site and
between sites phase pattern regularities
2. The concept of site exploitation territory
is one of the basic concepts in this
paradigm

17. 3. David Clarke’s work on ‘spatial
information in Archaeology is a superb
example of geographical paradigm
showing how far data can be interpreted
by the way of obtaining information
from spatial relationship
• This approach has also been applied on
various archaeological sites, eg., Jorwe
early-late phase