DOCSLIB.ORG

Documenting Rock Art in Dinosaur National Monument

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Documenting Rock Art in Dinosaur National Monument DOCUMENTING ROCK ART IN DINOSAUR NATIONAL MONUMENT By Ralph J. Hartley Anne Wolley Vawser Alan R. Smith Mary A. Johnson Midwest Archeological Center Occasional Studies in Anthropology No. 29 Series Editor F.A. Calabrese Produced for the Rocky Mountain Region, National Park Service United States Department of the Interior National Park Service Midwest Archeological Center Lincoln, Nebraska 1993 ABSTRACT In 1988 and 1989 comprehensive docu· Documentation for each site was compiled in mentation of twenty·two rock art sites in a notebook format for use by park personnel Dinosaur National Monument was under­ during monitoring phases. Analyses of the taken to establish baseline information for rock art and the kinds of situations in which the long·term monitoring of these sites. Pro­ they are placed suggest that the images were cedures used included still photography, scale used to influence the behavior of aboriginal drawings, video photography, photogramme­ visitors to the site. try, and standardized written descriptions. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The successful completion of this documentation was conducted by Dave project relied upon the skills of many people. DeVries of Hammon, Jensen, Wallen and Alan Smith took all of the hundreds of photo­ Associates, Inc. From Dave we learned a graphs needed for this project, used some of great deal about the potential use of this his own equipment not affordable with the process for documenting rock art. National Park Service funding available, hand processed the film, and drafted the photo­ Dave Whitman (Chief of Interpreta­ graphic methods section in this report. The tion) andJim Truesdale (Archeologist) of the artistictalentofMaryJohnsonwasinvaluable park staff were instrumental in organizing the in the construction of drawings used in this site priorities and logistics. Their knowledge report as well as those used by the park staff of the park's archeological resources and the for their long-term monitoring of these sites. management responsibilities relative to these We found it necessary that both scale drawing sites helped us immensely in putting this and photography be used in the documenta­ project into perspective. The voluntary assis­ tion of the rock art sites. Anne WolleyVawser tance of Katie Askeris during our field work compiled data for the site forms, conducted in 1989 is greatly appreciated. We also want the mapping of all sites, organized the format to thank Don Toney of the U.S. Fish and of documentation for the park's monitoring Wildlife Service and staff of the Jones Hole program, and drafted and edited numerous Fish Hatchery for their assistance and accom­ portions of this report. Without her involve­ modations while working in the Jones Hole ment this project would not have been com­ area of the park. pleted in a timely manner. Photogrammetric 11 TABLE OF CONTENTS Abstract ..................................................................................................................................... i Acknowledgements .................................................................................................................. ii Table of Contents ................................................................................................................... iii List of Tables ........................................................................................................................... iv List of Figures ........................................................................................................................... v Introduction .............................................................................................................................. 1 Environmental Background ..................................................................................................... 3 Archeological Overview and Cultural History ........................................................................ 5 History of Archeological Investigations in the Monument ................................................... 11 Methodology ........................................................................................................................... 15 Still Photography ........................................................................................................... 15 1988 Equipment and Materials ......................................................................... 15 Film .................................................................................................................... 16 Filters ................................................................................................................. 18 1988 Field Procedures ....................................................................................... 20 Lighting .............................................................................................................. 23 1988 Lab Procedures ......................................................................................... 25 1988 Results ....................................................................................................... 28 1989 Equipment and Materials ......................................................................... 31 1989 Field Procedures ....................................................................................... 31 1989 Lab Procedures ......................................................................................... 33 Photographic Documentation for Future Projects ........................................... 34 Field Sketches and Scale Drawings .............................................................................. 40 Terrestrial Photogrammetry ......................................................................................... 46 Video Photography ........................................................................................................ 48 Site Descriptions ..................................................................................................................... 49 111 ROCK ART A Perspective on the Rock Art in Dinosaur National Monument ....................................... 79 Introduction ................................................................................................................... 79 Chronological and Cultural Placement ........................................................................ 79 The Interpretation of Rock Art .................................................................................... 81 Dinosaur Rock Art: An Assessment ............................................................................. 89 Conclusions .................................................................................................................... 95 Recommendations .................................................................................................................. 97 Notes ....................................................................................................................................... 99 References Cited .................................................................................................................. 101 Appendix A. Dinosaur National Monument Rock Art Documentation and Monitoring Program Field Monitoring Packet and Forms ..................................................................... 119 LIST OF TABLES Table 1. Chronological listing of compliance-related archeological projects completed between 1970 and the present in Dinosaur National Monument ......................................... 13 Table 2. Equipment used for photographic documentation during the 1988 field season ...................................................................................................................................... 16 Table 3. Equipment used for photographic documentation during the 1989 field season ...................................................................................................................................... 32 Table 4. Rock art sites recorded in Dinosaur National Monument during 1988 and 1989 ......................................................................................................................................... 50 Table 5. Rock art styles present at sites recorded during 1988 and 1989 in Dinosaur National Monument ............................................................................................................... 82 Table 6. Rock art element classifications ............................................................................. 91 lV TABLE OF CONTENTS Table 7. Information measures for rock art at rockshelter sites .......................................... 93 Table 8. Information measures for rock art on cliff faces .................................................... 94 LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1. Dinosaur National Monument. Circled locations show general areas of site documentation ................................................................................................................... 2 Figure 2. Panel 3 at site 42UN178 shot under flat lighting conditions to eliminate surface texture and enhance the pictographs ......................................................................... 24 Figure 3. Panel 3 at site 42UN178 shot under acute-angled lighting conditions to enhance the petroglyphs ......................................................................................................... 24 Figure 4. Panel 2 at site 42UN192 shot without a polarizing filter .....................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Cultural Resource Assessment Survey of the Peck Sink Storm Water Park Design Project Area in Hernando County, Florida
    CULTURAL RESOURCE ASSESSMENT SURVEY OF THE PECK SINK STORM WATER PARK DESIGN PROJECT AREA IN HERNANDO COUNTY, FLORIDA Prepared for: Hernando County Board of County Commissioners 20 North Main Street Brooksville, Florida 34601 By: Archaeological Consultants, Inc. 8110 Blaikie Court, Suite A Sarasota, Florida 34240 Joan Deming - Project Manager Elizabeth A. Horvath and Lee Hutchinson - Project Archaeologists Justin Winkler and Nelson Rodriguez - Archaeologists In Association with: King Engineering Associates, Inc. 4921 Memorial Highway, Suite 300 Tampa, Florida 33634 September 2009 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Archaeological Consultants, Inc. (ACI) conducted a cultural resource assessment survey (CRAS) of the approximately 111-acre Peck Sink Storm Water Park Design project area (hereinafter referred to as Peck Sink) in Hernando County, Florida in June and July 2009. The purpose of this survey was to locate and identify any cultural resources within the project area, and to assess their significance in terms of eligibility for listing in the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP). This survey was conducted for the Hernando County Board of County Commissioners (BOCC), and complies with Hernando County’s Comprehensive Plan (effective February 2006). This report also complies with Chapters 267 and 373, Florida Statutes (FS), Florida’s Coastal Management Program, and implementing state regulations regarding possible impact to significant historical properties. This report conforms to the specifications set forth in Chapter 1A-46, Florida Administrative Code (FAC) (revised August 21, 2002) and the Cultural Resource Management Standards and Operational Manual (Florida Division of Historical Resources [FDHR] 2003). Background research and a review of the Florida Master Site File (FMSF) and NRHP indicated that no archaeological sites have been recorded previously within the Peck Sink property.
    [Show full text]
  • Steinaker Dam Right Abutment Slide Repair Final Environmental Assessment
    Steinaker Dam Right Abutment Slide Repair Final Environmental Assessment PRO-EA-16-010 Upper Colorado Region Provo Area Office Provo, Utah U.S. Department of the Interior Bureau of Reclamation Provo Area Office Provo, Utah January 2017 Mission Statements The mission of the Department of the Interior protects and manages the Nation’s natural resources and cultural heritage; provides scientific and other information about those resources; and honors its trust responsibilities or special commitments to American Indians, Alaska Natives, and affiliated island communities. The mission of the Bureau of Reclamation is to manage, develop, and protect water and related resources in an environmentally and economically sound manner in the interest of the American public. Steinaker Dam Right Abutment Slide Repair Final Environmental Assessment Upper Colorado Region Provo Area Office Provo, Utah Interdisciplinary Team Leader: Peter L. Crookston 302 East 1860 South Provo, Utah 84606 801-379-1152 [email protected] U.S. Department of the Interior Bureau of Reclamation Provo Area Office Provo, Utah January 2017 Contents Page Chapter 1 Purpose of and Need for Proposed Action ...................................... 1 1.1 Introduction ........................................................................................... 1 1.2 Background ........................................................................................... 1 1.3 Purpose of and Need for Proposed Action ............................................ 2 1.4 Public Scoping and Involvement
    [Show full text]
  • Idealized Lithic Trajectory 221T563 Trajectory Spatial Interpretation Representation
    Archaeological Report No. 17 THE TCHULA PERIOD IN THE MID-SOUTH AND LOWER MISSISSIPPI VALLEY Proceedings of the 1982 Mid-South Archaeological Conference Edited by David H. Dye Department of Anthropology Memphis State University and Ronald C. Brister Chief, Curator of Collections Memphis Museums Mississippi Department of Archives and History Jackson, Mississippi 1986 MISSISSIPPI DEPARTMENT OF ARCHIVES AND HISTORY Archaeological Report No. 17 Patricia Kay Galloway Series Editor Elbert R. Hilliard Director Library of Congress Catalog Card Number 86-620005 ISBN: 0-938896-48-2 © Copyright 1986 Mississippi Department of Archives and History This volume is dedicated to Philip Phillips, James A. Ford, and James B. Griffin TABLE OF CONTENTS Page Acknowledgments • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •• x Introduction David H. Dye ••••••• 1 The Second Mid-South Archaeological Conference Dan F. Morse 9 Chapter 1 Tchula Period Ceramics in the Upper Sunflower Region Samuel O. Brookes and Cheryl Taylor ••••••• 23 2 Alexander, Tchefuncte, and Black Sand: An Early Gulf Tradition in the Mississippi Valley David H. Dye and Jerry R. Galm •• 28 3 The Tchula Period in the Mississippi Valley James B. Griffin 40 4 The Wheeler Series: Space, Time, and External Relationships Ned J. Jenkins 43 5 Tchula/Miller I: A Perspective from Pinson Mounds Robert C. Mainfort, Jr. 52 6 Comment on Geomorphological Implications on the Development of the Late Tchula/Early Marksville Settlement Pattern in the Upper Yazoo Basin, Mississippi Richard A. Marshall ••• 63 7 McCarty (3-Po-467): A Tchula period site near Marked Tree, Arkansas Dan F. Morse . 70 v Chapter Page 8 An Assessment of Archaeological Data for the Tchula Period in Southeastern Arkansas Martha Ann Rolingson and Marvin D.
    [Show full text]
  • 00-ARQUEOLOGIA 43-INDICE.Pmd
    28 ARQUEOLOGÍA 43 enero-abril 2010 Leticia González Arratia* La etapa lítica y las categorías utilizadas en México y Estados Unidos para designar las etapas arqueológicas más antiguas El presente artículo analiza el concepto de etapa lítica y sus subdivisiones (arqueolítico, cenolítico, protoneolítico), que el prehistoriador José Luis Lorenzo introdujo en 1969 como una forma de organizar de manera sistemática los más antiguos materiales arqueológicos de la lítica tallada y pulida, conocidos hasta esa época en México. Dichos materiales abarcan la eta- pa que se inicia con la llegada del hombre antiguo a este territorio (como cazador-recolector), hasta el momento en que las sociedades prehispánicas —con el paso de los milenios y con su conocimiento del territorio— inician el cultivo de sus alimentos. También se incluye el tema de la clasificación y periodización de los materiales líticos de dicha época, según lo exponen los arqueólogos estadounidenses Gordon Willey y Alex Krieger. Finalmente, se lleva a cabo una primera reflexión sobre el uso de la nomenclatura empleada por la arqueología mexicana en el norte de México, misma que se basa en los planteamientos, cronología y nomenclatura aplicada en Texas. Lo anterior constituye un problema, pues al retomar conceptos y cate- gorías de la arqueología estadounidense, se ignora la historia misma del desarrollo de la ar- queología mexicana. Esto se plantea como hipótesis de que dicha situación limita y afecta el desarrollo y originalidad de lo que la arqueología del norte de México pueda estudiar. The article discusses the notion of the Lithic Stage and its subdivisions (Archaeolithic, Ceno- lithic, Protoneolithic) proposed in 1969 by pre-historian José Luis Lorenzo, who introduced it as a means of systematically organizing the most ancient archaeological carved and polished lithic material known up to that time in Mexico.
    [Show full text]
  • Geographical Data
    NPS Form 10-900b 0MB No. 1024-0018 (Rev. 8/86) NPS/CHS Word Processor Format P""" (Approved 03/88) United States Department of the Interior National Park Service NATIOHAL REGISTER OF HISTORIC PLACES MULTIPLE PROPERTY DOCUMENTATION FORM This form is for use in documenting multiple property groups relating to one or several historic contexts. See instructions in Guidelines for Completing National Register Forms (National Register Bulletin 16). Complete each item by marking "x" in the appropriate box or by entering the requested information. For additional space use continuation sheets (Form 10-900a). Type all entries. Use letter quality printers in 12 pitch. Use only 25% or greater cotton content bond paper. Archaic Period Architectural Sites in Colorado B. Associated Historic Contexts Archaic Period Architecture in Colorado Geographical Data State of Colorado ( ) See continuation sheet D. Certification As the designated authority under the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended, I hereby certify that this documentation form meets the National Register criteria. This submission meets the procedural and professional requirements set forth in 36 CFR Part 60 and the Secretary of s Standards for Planning and Evaluation. 'ate State or Federal agency and bureau I, hereby, certify that this multiple property form has been approved by the National Register as a basis for evaluating related properties for listing in the National Register. Signatur/ of the Keeper of the National Register Date E. Statement of Historic Contexts Discuss each historic context listed in Section B. In recent years Colorado archaeologists have become increasingly vigilant in searching for architectural ruins within sites of the Archaic period (ca.
    [Show full text]
  • KIVA INDEX: Volumes 1 Through 83
    1 KIVA INDEX: Volumes 1 through 83 This index combines five previously published Kiva indexes and adds index entries for the most recent completed volumes of Kiva. Nancy Bannister scanned the indexes for volumes 1 through 60 into computer files that were manipulated for this combined index. The first published Kiva index was prepared in 1966 by Elizabeth A.M. Gell and William J. Robinson. It included volumes 1 through 30. The second index includes volumes 31 through 40; it was prepared in 1975 by Wilma Kaemlein and Joyce Reinhart. The third, which covers volumes 41 through 50, was prepared in 1988 by Mike Jacobs and Rosemary Maddock. The fourth index, compiled by Patrick D. Lyons, Linda M. Gregonis, and Helen C. Hayes, was prepared in 1998 and covers volumes 51 through 60. I prepared the index that covers volumes 61 through 70. It was published in 2006 as part of Kiva volume 71, number 4. Brid Williams helped proofread the index for volumes 61 through 70. To keep current with our volume publication and the needs of researchers for on-line information, the Arizona Archaeological and Historical Society board decided that it would be desirable to add entries for each new volume as they were finished. I have added entries for volumes 71 through 83 to the combined index. It is the Society's goal to continue to revise this index on a yearly basis. As might be expected, the styles of the previously published indexes varied, as did the types of entries found. I changed some entries to reflect current terminology.
    [Show full text]
  • Native American Archaeological Sites: an Annotated Bibliography Relating to Indian Archaeological Sites in the Sontheastern United States
    DOCUMENT RESUME ' ED 111 592 RC 008 811 Author Wheelbarger, Johnny J. TITLE Native American Archaeological Sites: An Annotated Bibliography Relating to Indian Archaeological Sites in the Sontheastern United States. PUB DATE 74 NOTE 41p. EDRS PRICE MF-$0.76 HC-$1:95 Plus Postage DESCRIPTORS *American Indian Culture; American Indians; *Annotated Bibliographies; Anthropology; *Archaeology; *Culture Background; Parks; *Reference Materials IDENTIFIERS *Southeastern States ABSTRACT Thirty-sia AmeriCan Indiae archaeological sites located in the southeastern states of Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, North Carolina, and Tennessee are cited. Included are some of the very early sites, some of the larger and better known site's, and some that are being developed as state-owned archaeological parks in Tennessee. Information sources, briefly annotated, are cited for each site. A glossary of terms used and a listing of the sites by respectivs states are also included. Among'the sites listed are: Mouadville Site, Crystal River Site, Fort Walton Site, Weeden Island Site, Swift Creek Site, Parish and Ward Sites, Doerschuk Site, Brick Church Mound, Red Clay, Sellers Farm,-and Stone Fort. (NQ) NATIVE American ARCHAEOLOGICAL Sites An Annotated Bibliography Relating to Indian Archeological Sites in the Southeastern United States Johnny J. Wheelbarger Learning Resources Center Trevecca Nazarene College Nashville, Tennessee Fall 1974 TAB LE OF CONTENTS BRICK CHURCH MOUND 1 CH UCA LISSA CRYSTAL RIVER SITE .2 Doerschuk Site DOVER FLINT QUARRY 3 ECHITA —TENA SE ETOWAH SITE lk EVA SITE 5 FORT WA LTON SITE 6 GASTON SITE 7 HARDAWAY SITE 8 HIWASSEE ISLAND SITE 8 HOLLYWOOD SITE 11 HUGH LINK FARM 11 IRENE SITE, 11 KOLOMOKI SITE 13.
    [Show full text]
  • Human Adaptations and Cultural Change in the Greater Southwest
    Human Adaptations and Cultural Change in the Greater Southwest: An Overview of Archeological Resources in the Basin and Range Province by Alan H. Simmons, Ann Lucy Wiener Stodder, Douglas D. Dykeman, and Patricia A. Hicks Prepared by the Desert Research Institute, Quaternary Sciences Center, University of Nevada, Reno, and the Bureau of Anthropological Research, University of Colorado, Boulder, with the Arkansas Archeological Survey, Fayetteville. Final Report Submitted to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Southwestern Division. Study Unit 4 of the Southwestern Division Archeological Overview. Contract DACW63-84-C-0149 1989 Academic Press of Orlando, Florida, kindly granted permission for use of a number of figures from Prehistory of the Southwest (Cordell 1984) The Historic Preservation Division, Office of Cultural Affairs, State of New Mexico, kindly granted permission for use of figures from Prehistoric New Mexico (Stuart and Gauthier 1980) Library of Congress Catalog Card Number 1-56349-060-9 Arkansas Archeological Survey Fayetteville, Arkansas 72702 Printed in the United States of America, 1989 Second Printing, 1996 New Printing, 2004 Offset Printing by Arkansas Department of Corrections, Wrightsville. Second Printing by University of Arkansas Quick Copy and Printing Services, Fayetteville. New Printing by University of Arkansas Copy Center ii ABSTRACT The archeology of the Region 4, Basin and Range, of the Southwestern Divisions of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers is examined in detail. The area included in this study is most of New Mexico and parts of south-central Colorado and the Trans-Pecos region of Texas. This area represents one of the richest archeological regions in the United States.
    [Show full text]
  • Basketmaker II
    Wetherills • Discovery of Cliff Palace in Mesa Verde - 1888 • Richard Wetherill, Charlie Mason, and Akowitz (Ute) • Richard, John and Al Wetherill – 1893 • Use of Stratigraphy led to discovery of Basketmakers • Richard explored Mesa Verde, Grand Gulch, Kiet Seel, and Chaco • Homesteaded and set up trading posts in Southwest – the first at Chaco Canyon near Pueblo Bonito Nordenskiold • Gustav Nordenskiold of Norway, • continued excavating Cliff Palace in 1891 and sent artifacts and burials back home to Norway • 1893 – Cliff Dwellers of the Mesa Verde, Southwestern CO • Initiated a lawsuit that led to the Antiquities Act of 1906 that; • Made it illegal to destroy archaeological resources • Established a permitting process to excavate legally • Gave President the authority to designate national monuments to protect scientific objects Cliff Palace Cliff Palace Today NAGPRA of 1990 Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act requires; • Museums and agencies to return human burials, grave goods and patrimonial objects to tribes • Tribal affiliation determined by • Direct living descendants • Tribes living in the geographic area Alfred V. Kidder • Alfred V. Kidder – 1915 to 1929 Pecos Excavations • Systematic examination of stratigraphy and chronology • 1924 – Introduction to the Study of Southwestern Archaeology • 1st synthesis of North American prehistory based on professionally excavated data • Initiated Pecos Classification System – 1927 • Pecos Conferences – 2nd weekend of August each year Stratigraphy and Chronology Pecos
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 7 the FORMATIVE ERA
    Chapter 7 THE FORMATIVE ERA INTRODUCTION The Formative era refers to the extended period when com was a major subsistence focus in some portions of western Colorado, roughly between 400 B.C. and A.D. 1300 (Jett 1991; Stiger and Larson 1992). Certainly, not all inhabitants of western Colorado were engaged in horticultural practices during this era; the mountains comprising the eastern portion of the Northern Colorado Basin were unsuited for horticulture, as growing seasons were too short for com, beans, and squash. Because the unit of discussion is an era, however, both horticultural and nonhorticultural groups that occupied the study area between 400 B.C. and A.D. 1300 will be examined herein. Horticultural groups occupied the Colorado Plateau. These groups often constructed substantial habitation structures and made, or obtained in trade, high-quality pottery. Groups most reliant upon cultigens used two-hand manos to increase grinding efficiency. The remains of horticultural groups are not evenly distributed across the Colorado Plateau. Site file data from OAHP show two major clusters of Formative-era structures, cultigens, ceramics, two-hand manos, and rock art: one in western Rio Blanco and Moffat counties, and one in the lower San Miguel and Dolores river drainages in western Montrose County (Figures 7-1 - 7-6) . A third, less distinct cluster occurs south of Grand Junction in the vicinity of Glade Park. The Formative sites in Glade Park and in northwestern Colorado are attributed to the Fremont tradition. The cultural affiliation of the southern Formative-era sites is less clear; some may be Fremont, but most are attributed to the Gateway tradition, thought to be an indigenous horticultural unit.
    [Show full text]
  • Look to the Earth: the Search for Ritual in the Context of Mound Construction
    Archaeol Anthropol Sci DOI 10.1007/s12520-016-0369-1 ORIGINAL PAPER Look to the earth: the search for ritual in the context of mound construction Tristram R. Kidder 1 & Sarah C. Sherwood2 Received: 31 May 2015 /Accepted: 25 July 2016 # Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2016 Abstract In North America mound research traditionally fo- Introduction cuses on how these earthen structures functioned – as mortu- ary facilities, ceremonial platforms, observatories, and the res- Mound building and the resulting monumental architecture idences of political elites and/or ritual practitioners. This paper documented throughout the Eastern Woodlands of North acknowledges mound building as the purposeful selection of America are broadly considered part of actively constructed soils and sediments for specific color, texture, or engineering ritual landscapes (Knight 2001, 2010; Sherwood and Kidder properties and the organization of deposits suggesting that the 2011;Howey2012; Thompson and Pluckhahn 2012; Wright building process reflects both shared knowledge and commu- and Henry 2013). The construction of these cultural land- nicates specific information. We present two examples: Late scapes varies through time and across space taking on various Archaic period Poverty Point site Mound A, and forms and functions (Milner 2004). How we study these earth- Mississippian period Shiloh site Mound A, in the exploration en monuments has evolved significantly from their eighteenth of structured deposits to identify ritual in contrast to a more and nineteenth century treatments as abiding mysteries, con- mundane or purely practical origin. We argue the building of sidered by most Euroamericans of the time to be beyond the these earthen monuments was not only architecturally impor- technological and organizational skills of indigenous popula- tant as a means to serve a subsequent purpose but that the act tions.
    [Show full text]
  • Method and Theory in American Archaeology
    Method and Theory in American Archaeology GORDON R. WILLEY and PHILIP PHILLIPS A rchaeology and Anthropology meet in thi&stud^ of the prehi$iQTy\ of the Americas^ P88 $1.50 (U.K. 10/6 n.et» PLEASE HANDLE WITH CARE University of Connecticut Libraries •Q* «^0 f^» «^9 <^» 3 =1153 013523bl D GAYLORD RG Digitized by the Internet Archive in 2011 with funding from LYRASIS members and Sloan Foundation http://www.archive.org/details/methodtheoryinam1958will S < C oO Method and Theory in American A rchaeology Method and Theory BY GORDON R. WILLEY AND PHILIP PHILLIPS in American Archaeology PHOENIX BOOKS 4£fc THE UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO PRESS CHICAGO & LONDON Library of Congress Catalog Card Number: 57-11215 The University of Chicago Press, Chicago & London The University of Toronto Press, Toronto 5, Canada © 1958 by The University of Chicago. Published 1958 First Phoenix Edition 1962 Third Impression 1963 Composed and printed by The University of Chicago Press, Chicago, Illinois, U.S.A. To JAMES ALFRED FORD Preface In the summer of 1952, as a result of numerous discussions, we de- cided to set down our thoughts on certain methodological and the- oretical questions in American archaeology. The original plan was an article in two parts : the first, a statement of what we believed to be the minimal aims of archaeology and the basic operations di- rected toward the achievement of these aims, and the second, some theoretical formulations about New World prehistory. The first part was subsequently published under the title "Method and Theory in American Archaeology: An Operational Basis for Cul- ture-Historical Integration." 1 The second part followed a year and a half later as "Method and Theory in American Archaeology II: Historical-Developmental Interpretation." 2 The comments and criticism which these papers drew from colleagues and students have kept us interested in the subject, and, as a result, we have re- written both original papers and combined them, along with an introduction, originally published as a brief journal article, 3 in the present volume.
    [Show full text]