Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-mkpzs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T08:23:58.891Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Jamaican Site Designation—A Critique

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  25 January 2017

R. V. Emmons
R. V. Emmons*
Affiliation:
Department of Anthropology, University of Oregon
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

In designating archaeological sites it has become customary to use one or the other of two general methods. The first, such as the system used by the River Basin Surveys, makes use of numbers and letter abbreviations which together give ready reference to state, county, and site number. A second method has been to name a site after some cultural or geological manifestation associated with the site. Discussions regarding the relative merits of the two methods have for the most part focused upon the degree to which either system lends itself to the efficient manipulation of areal data.

Type
Facts and Comments
Information
American Antiquity , Volume 18 , Issue 4 , April 1953 , pp. 396
Copyright
Copyright © The Society for American Archaeology 1953

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

De Booy, Theodoor 1913. Certain Kitchen Middens in Jamaica. American Anthropologist, Vol. 15, No. 3, pp. 425–434. Menasha.Google Scholar
De Wolf, Marian 1953. Excavations in Jamaica. American Antiquity, Vol. 18, pp. 230–238. Salt Lake City.Google Scholar
Duerden, J. F. 1897. Aboriginal Indian Remains in Jamaica. Journal of the Institute of Jamaica, Vol. 2, No. 4. Kingston.Google Scholar