Abstract
This thesis addresses the study of social difference (both spatial and temporal) and the debate over theoretical mechanisms that explain the structuring of this difference. The culture concept is identified as the primary means by which anthropologists and archaeologists have modelled change through time and the conceptual foundations that support this approach are investigated. The growth of the culture concept and its application as an archaeological tool is charted in comparison to subsequent developments in anthropological theory and points of divergence are identified. Strengths and constraints of models of culture are evaluated with particular reference to the study of change in New Zealand archaeology. When compared to Europe and the Americas, temporal and geographic differences in scale within New Zealand highlight problems associated with archaeological models of culture. In the past, these differences contributed to early recognition of the distinction between archaeological and anthropological 'cultures' in New Zealand and they provide a valuable focus for a critique of the culture model in studies of change.
The anthropological critique of culture emerging from contemporary studies of society has led to the development of different ways of modelling change that have exciting implications for archaeology in New Zealand. If other models of interaction in anthropology can replace culture, archaeologists in this country may be able to apply these to better reflect the types and processes of change they are studying. The archaeological tradition is presented as a viable alternative to culture, and its origin and subsequent revision and application is examined. Informed by contemporary anthropological and archaeological theory, the tradition can provide an explanatory framework for the study of stability and change. For archaeologists, models of tradition can address many of the problems inherent in the application of archaeological cultures, drawing archaeology and anthropology closer together to provide a more powerful explanatory model of change.