The Limits of the Scientific Method in Archaeology: Toward a Claim-Level Falsifiability Layer for Auditable Interpretation

Archaeology and ancient-script research do not always fit the simple classroom model of the scientific method because the past cannot be rerun and surviving evidence is often fragmentary, damaged, displaced, or incomplete. This working paper argues that archaeology is not unscientific, but that it benefits from a clearer bridge between hypothesis formation and evidential testing. Drawing on work by Carol Cleland, Adrian Currie, Alison Wylie, Robert Chapman, Stephen Shennan, Ian Hacking, Bruno Latour, and the tradition of multiple working hypotheses, the paper proposes a claim-level falsifiability layer. This layer turns broad interpretations into narrow, evidence-bound, peer-checkable claim objects. Its working instrument, the Falsifiability Sheet, records the claim, evidence trail, structural decisions, component-level confidence, reviewer outcomes, and revision status. The goal is not to replace experts or peer review, but to make archaeological reasoning more visible, auditable, and responsible.