To understand archaeology, one needs to understand its history. Only by tracing the origins and development of the subject can one really appreciate how it has arrived at its present condition. This applies to archaeological writing just as it does to other aspects of the discipline. Braidwood (1981: 25) recalled with dismay how during the ‘New Archaeology’ of the 1960s and 1970s it was ‘declared publicly’ that ‘nothing written before 1960 is worth reading’. Such an attitude is hardly helpful to the aspiring archaeological author. As already suggested in Chapter 1, one way to learn how to write, or to write more effectively, is to read widely and critically amongst the published literature of the relevant field. Older publications that handle data and theory in a manner now thought outdated can still be informative about the mechanics of writing and about stylistic treatment. More importantly, with the benefit of hindsight one can begin to understand how underpinning theories, the availability of data, the author's cultural background and the purpose of the publication have shaped the genre of writing that resulted. Furthermore, a wide knowledge of archaeological literature can reduce the risk of ‘reinventing the wheel’, a trap into which the writers of postgraduate theses occasionally fall but that must be avoided in publications. Indeed, it is also the case that ‘connections and insights often result from reading about research in another field than one's own’ (Antiquaries Journal 2008).