Histories of archaeology are now a well-established sub-discipline of archaeology; yet too often we see these histories reflect our current understanding(s) of the subject: past scholarship is evaluated for the ways in which it contributed to the development of contemporary paradigms. In this talk I will show how such progressive accounts on the development of the discipling of castle studies have sidelined past Antiquarian research. Such narrative histories do a disservice to our understanding of past; ideas do not arrive fully-formed, but are the product of complex and often acrimonious debate. Unfortunately, archaeologist have rarely detailed the development of their ideas, so recreation of past thought patterns has to be “excavated” from published research. It is only by showing how ideas have developed that we can be in a position to truly understand the discipline and re-evaluate the ideas we hold as truisms.