Abstract
One of the central goals of archaeology is the definition of regional cultural succession. Since at least the 1960s, archaeology has purported to have moved beyond the strictures of Culture History, and yet the constructs of that paradigm (styles, periods, cultures) continue to be used routinely. This work aims to show that by doing so, one is still implicitly subscribing to that theoretical perspective"s assumptions and biases. In the end, this article is intended to be a self-critical assessment of the shortcomings of Caribbean archaeology vis-à-vis issues inherent in that region"s dominant culture-history framework. Moreover, it aims to provide an example for Caribbeanists, and archaeologists working in other regions, of the value of moving beyond the products of, and not just beyond the term, Culture History.
