ABSTRACT
Different theoretical perspectives on material culture can lead to radically different interpretations of archaeological evidence. The competition of multiple interpretations can cause considerable controversy if one interpretation of the evidence has previously been accepted as 'fact' rather than hypothesis. This raises questions about the extent td which belief in the conventional wisdom may constrain the search for new interpretations. The overdetermination of facts by interpretive frameworks has been recognised for some time in archaeology, but few empirical examples have been produced to illustrate the issue.
