Pages: 379-387

Debates generated by archaeological practice (particularly, around the Yamnaya westward migrations) led to attempts to find theoretical proves for various arguments advanced during the debates. Developing Ch. P. Snow’s idea on a divide of the modern educated society into two cultures (scientific and humanistic), C. Christiansen proclaimed the Third Scientific Revolution in archaeology, i. e. a new attempt to implement scientific methods in this field of knowledge. In his opinion, they were able to bring a radical change to archaeology and its humanistic foundations. His position was debated by T. F. Sörensen, who believes that archaeology can lose its inherent essence without this humanistic foundation. Both views are groundless, as the author of this article maintains. He sceptically questions the dichotomy itself in the classification of sciences, he denies the humanistic essence of archaeology and rejects supremacy of either humanistic or scientific methods in it. For it is all situation-based.

Keywords: archaeological theory, science methods, humanity, scientific revolution, historical record

Information about author:

Leo Klejn (Saint Petersburg, Russian Federation). Doctor of Historical Sciences, Professor
E-mail: [email protected]