ABSTRACT

Evidence in archaeology typically comprises the data and patterns in data derived from the physical remains of the past. The idea of the archaeological record as incomplete or fragmentary runs through archaeological discourse since the inception of the discipline. The idea of practice being guided by an ethic of totality is also evident throughout the history of the discipline through the ideal of the total record. Various words have been used to characterize the nature of the archaeological record: remains, vestiges, ruins, relics, traces and fragments. Classic statements of this conception emerged in the middle of the twentieth century: formation theory, sampling theories and source criticism, all of which stressed the loss of evidence or data in the form of a failure to survive whether in terms of organic materials or ephemeral phenomena like behaviour itself. While the fragment is a powerful metaphor for the archaeological record, it lacks a temporal dimension.