Hostname: page-component-7b7567c8c-2n9c9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-15T08:25:05.676Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Description of Archaeological Data in Computer Language

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

R. G. Chenhall
R. G. Chenhall*
Affiliation:
Arizona State University, Tempe, Arizona
Get accessRights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The storage, retrieval, and analysis of archaeological data on electronic computers requires that artifacts be described in the framework of models which are: (a) sufficiently analogous to the “real world” of the data to be meaningful; (b) sufficiently expandable or open-ended to be usable in situations as yet undefined; and (c) sufficiently specific to be convertible into machine language. A model which meets these criteria is described, and samples of an artifact inventory prepared on an IBM 1440 computer are shown to illustrate the use of this descriptive system.

Information

Type
Research Article
Information
American Antiquity , Volume 32 , Issue 2 , April 1967, pp. 161 - 167
Copyright
Copyright © The Society for American Archaeology 1967

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.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Ankel, Cornelius 1966 Methods of Research on Prehistoric Pottery by Means of Computers. In Proceedings of the International Symposium on Mathematical and Computational Methods in the Social Sciences, International Computation Center, Rome, (in press)Google Scholar
Black, Glenn A. and Weer, Paul 1936 A Proposed Terminology for Shape Classifications of Artifacts. American Antiquity, Vol. 1, No. 4, pp. 280–94. Menasha.Google Scholar
Brew, John O. 1946 Archaeology of Alkali Ridge, Southeastern Utah. Papers of the Peabody Museum of American Archaeology and Ethnology, Harvard University, Vol. 21. Cambridge.Google Scholar
Chenhall, Robert G. 1966 The Logic of Models Used for Processing Archaeological Data on Computers. In Proceedings of the International Symposium on Mathematical and Computational Methods in the Social Sciences, International Computation Center, Rome, (in press)Google Scholar
Chenhall, Robert G. (Editor) 1966 Newsletter for Computer Archaeologists, Vol. 1, No. 3. Department of Anthropology, Arizona State University, Tempe.Google Scholar
Cowgill, George L. 1965 Computers and Prehistoric Archaeology. Paper delivered at a conference on The Impact of Computers on the Humanities and the Arts, Boston University, November, 1965.Google Scholar
Ford, James A. 1954 The Type Concept Revisited. American Anthropologist, Vol. 56, No. 1, pp. 43–54. Menasha.Google Scholar
Gifford, James C. 1952 A Guide to Description of Pottery Types in the Southwest. MS prepared by the Archaeological Seminar of the Department of Anthropology, University of Arizona, Spring, 1952.Google Scholar
Gundlack, R. 1966 ARDOC: A System of Information Storage and Retrieval in Archaeology. In Proceedings of the International Symposium on Mathematical and Computational Methods in ihe Social Sciences, International Computation Center, Rome. (in press)Google Scholar
Ives, John C. 1960 The Type Concept: A Methodological Inquiry into Archaeological Classification. MS, doctoral dissertation, Harvard University, Cambridge.Google Scholar
Lederberg, Joshua 1965 Computers and the Life Sciences. Science, Vol. 150, pp. 1576–7. Washington.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Murdock, George P. and Others 1961 Outline of Cultural Materials (4th revised edition). Human Relations Area Files, Inc., New Haven.Google Scholar
Nagel, Ernest 1961 The Structure of Science. Harcourt, Brace and World, Inc., New York.Google Scholar
Rouse, Irving 1960 The Classification of Artifacts in Archaeology. American Antiquity, Vol. 25, No. 3, pp. 313–23. Salt Lake City.Google Scholar
Sebastian, Robert A. 1965 The New Mathematician. Management Controls, Vol. 12, No. 4, pp. 77–9. New York.Google Scholar
Sorensen, John L. 1964 Use of Automated Tools in Archaeology. American Antiquity, Vol. 30, No. 2, pp. 205–06. Salt Lake City.Google Scholar
Spaulding, Albert C. 1953 Statistical Techniques for the Discovery of Artifact Types. American Antiquity, Vol. 18, No. 4, pp. 305–13. Salt Lake City.Google Scholar
Taylor, Walter W. 1948 A Study of Archaeology. Memoirs of the American Anthropological Association, No. 69. Menasha.Google Scholar
Tugby, Donald J. 1965 Archaeological Objectives and Statistical Methods: A Frontier in Archaeology. American Antiquity, Vol. 31, No. 1, pp. 1–16. Salt Lake City.Google Scholar