Anders Högberg is a Swedish archaeologist whose research offers an original perspective on prehistoric flint technology but he has also been directing some innovative projects in archaeological teaching and learning. In this interview I am exploring some of the ideas that have been guiding his work in both realms. Although part of the interview is about work conducted in the past, equal weight is given to new opportunities and developments that affect the future of archaeology. Anders Högberg's ideas cannot be said to be typical or representative for any larger community, but he is operating in very specific historic circumstances that are shared to a greater or lesser extent by many other archaeologists living and working today. This interview documents the particular views on material culture, public archaeology, and the field of archaeology more generally that were held by one European archaeologist in 2008.

This article summarizes and discusses recent research into the Danish Bell Beaker phenomenon c.2350–1950 BC. Its focus is on the meaning of material culture here represented by Bell Beakers and bifacial lanceolate flint daggers, both seen from a social perspective. The Bell Beaker pottery is known to have had a very wide distribution. However, questions remain as to why Bell Beakers were only adopted in some regions and what meaning this special pottery had? Similarly the Danish type I daggers, which were manufactured within the context of the Danish Bell Beaker phenomenon in the northern parts of Jutland, had a wide distribution. Daggers of this type, which in general denote male identity, were exported in vast quantities, especially to Norway and the western parts of Sweden. In both case studies the evidence from a Danish Bell Beaker settlement site excavated in recent years – Bejsebakken – plays a major part.

Middle Bronze Age Hungary provides an opportunity to investigate prehistoric ‘landscapes of the body’, as perceptions and attitudes to the body affect burial practices and other body practices, including the wearing of dress and the use of pottery. This article explores the cultural diversity expressed by the roughly contemporary and neighbouring groups of the Encrusted Ware, Vatya, and Füzesabony Cultures. Amongst others, differences between the three groups are articulated through their burials (scattered cremations, urn burials as well as crouched inhumations) and the diverse use of material culture. At the same time, despite formal differences in the burials, the analysis shows that cremations and inhumations in this area share a number of characteristics, and it is the other practices through which the dead body is manipulated that are the primary means of expressing regional differences. Simultaneously, whilst being a means of formulating understandings of the deceased body, burial practices are also tied into subtle differences in lifestyles, daily routines and regional subsistence strategies, as the landscapes of the living provide metaphors, know-how and practical understanding.

The association of Tomb II at Vergina, Greece, with Philip II initiated a debate concerning the use of barrel-vaults in Macedonian tombs. The accepted theory at the time held that, since no Macedonian tomb was dated prior to the last quarter of the 4th century BC, Macedonians copied the barrel-vault from the Persians after the military campaign of Alexander the Great in Asia, and therefore Tomb II should be dated to a later period. After an intense dispute, fresh archaeological evidence proved that this theory was false. This article examines the ways we structure knowledge in archaeology from hypothesis to theory that can develop to consensus, and how later consensus exercises a conservative influence on the production of new knowledge. New evidence that contradicts consensual theories is approached with stronger hostility and is confronted with higher demands of confirmation. I suggest that the same amount of scrutiny should be applied to the established theories, which are not unchangeable representations of reality, but conventionally shared property of archaeologists.