It is delightful to read an archaeological work that is so fluent with the history and uses of philosophical traditions and their effects on archaeological debates. Equally refreshing is Olsen’s decision to abstain from creating a cavalcade of case studies, although the number of examples andtheir analyses increase towards the end of the book. The conventional way of writing archaeological theory as a series of case studies is often tedious for readers as well as restrictive for theoretical discussion. In fact, the absence of case studies could be seen as an implication of Olsen’s position:at its best, writing about things makes the neat distinction between an ‘abstract’, theoretical introduction and the subsequent, ‘concrete’ case study questionable. Olsen’s book is an imperative call for new ways of making archaeological theory relevant for other disciplines and is a reminder of the importance of ontological difference in thinking about things.