Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-rcrh6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-27T22:30:52.818Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Considerations in Estimating Prehistoric California Coastal Populations

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

Michael A. Glassow
Michael A. Glassow*
Affiliation:
University of California, Los Angeles, California
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Archaeologists are constantly faced with the problem of estimating population numbers of the social units they study. After a brief survey of some of the methods used in population estimations, particularly in California, attention is focused, in this paper, on a population model proposed by Robert Ascher. Nine variables which comprise the basis of his model are considered individually, and as a result of this analysis the precision with which these variables can be controlled is seen as insufficient for purposes of population estimation. Alternatively, broader, more comprehensive, ecological studies are suggested for acquiring the necessary data for population estimation.

Type
Research Article
Information
American Antiquity , Volume 32 , Issue 3 , July 1967 , pp. 354 - 359
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.)

References

References Cited

Allison, J. B. And others 1959 Evaluation of Protein Nutrition, A Report of the Food and Nutrition Board, Division of Biology and Agriculture, Publication 711. National Research Council, Committee on Amino Acids, Washington.Google Scholar
Ascher, Robert 1959 A Prehistoric Population Estimate Using Midden Analysis and Two Population Models. Southwestern Journal of Anthropology, Vol. 15, pp. 168–78. Albuquerque.Google Scholar
Aykroyd, W. R. and Others 1957 Protein Requirements, Report of the FAO Committee, Rome, Italy, October 24–31, 1955. Nutritional Studies No. 16. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Rome.Google Scholar
Baumhoff, Martin A. 1963 Ecological Determinants of Aboriginal California Populations. University of California Publications in American Archaeology and Ethnology, Vol. 49, No. 2, pp. 155–236. Berkeley and Los Angeles.Google Scholar
Berger, Rainer and Libby, W. F. 1965 UCLA Radiocarbon Dates V, Publication No. 480. Institute of Geophysics and Planetary Physics, University of California, Los Angeles.Google Scholar
Binford, Lewis R. 1964 A Consideration of Archaeological Research Design. American Antiquity, Vol. 29, No. 4, pp. 425–41. Salt Lake City.Google Scholar
Cook, S. F. 1943 The Conflict between the California Indian and White Civilization. Ibero-Americana, Vols. 21, 22, 23. Berkeley and Los Angeles.Google Scholar
Cook, S. F. 1946 A Reconsideration of Shellmounds with Respect to Population and Nutrition. American Antiquity, Vol. 12, pp. 50–3. Menasha.Google Scholar
Cook, S. F. and Heizer, Robert F. 1965 The Quantitative Approach to Relation between Population and Settlement Size. Reports of the University of California Archaeological Survey, No. 64. Berkeley.Google Scholar
Cook, S. F. and Treganza, A. E. 1947 The Quantitative Investigation of Aboriginal Sites: Comparative Analysis of Two California Indian Mounds. American Antiquity, Vol. 13, No. 2, pp. 135–41. Menasha.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cook, S. F. and Treganza, A. E. 1950 The Quantitative Investigation of Indian Mounds, with Special Reference to the Relation of the Physical Components to the Probable Material Culture. University of California Publications in American Archaeology and Ethnology, Vol. 40, No. 5. Berkeley and Los Angeles.Google Scholar
Curtis, Freddie 1965 The Glen Annie Canyon Site (SBa-142): A Case for Sedentary Village Life. Archaeological Survey Annual Report, 1965. University of California, Los Angeles.Google Scholar
Gifford, E. W. 1916 Composition of California Shellmounds. University of California Publications in American Archaeology and Ethnology, Vol. 12, pp. 1–29. Berkeley.Google Scholar
Heizer, R. F. 1960 Physical Analysis of Habitation Residues. In “The Application of Quantitative Methods in Archaeology,” edited by R. F. Heizer and S. F. Cook. Viking Fund Publications in Anthropology, No. 28, pp. 93–157. Chicago.Google Scholar
Hill, James N. 1966 A Prehistoric Community in Eastern Arizona. Southwestern Journal of Anthropology, Vol. 22, No. 1, pp. 9–30. Albuquerque.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Howells, W. W. 1960 Estimating Population Numbers through Archaeological and Skeletal Remains. In “The Application of Quantitative Methods in Archaeology,” edited by R. F. Heizer and S. F. Cook. Viking Fund Publications in Anthropology, No. 28, pp. 158–85. Chicago.Google Scholar
Landberg, Leif C. W. 1965 The Chumash Indians of Southern California. Southwest Museum Papers No. 19. Los Angeles.Google Scholar
Nelson, N. C. 1909 Shellmounds of the San Francisco Bay Region. UmVersity of California Publications in American Archaeology and Ethnology, Vol. 7, pp. 309–56. Berkeley.Google Scholar
Owen, Roger C. 1964 Early Milling Stone Horizon (Oak Grove), Santa Barbara County, California: Radiocarbon Dates. American Antiquity, Vol. 30, No. 2. Salt Lake City.Google Scholar
Peck, S. L. 1955 An Archaeological Report on the Excavations of a Prehistoric Site at Zuma Creek, Los Angeles County, California. Archaeological Survey Association of Southern California, Paper No. 2. Southwest Museum, Los Angeles.Google Scholar
Treqanza, A. E. and Cook, S. F. 1948 The Quantitative Investigation of Aboriginal Sites: Complete Excavation with Physical and Archaeological Analysis of a Single Mound. American Antiquity, Vol. 13, No. 4, pp. 207–97. Menasha.Google Scholar
Weiner, J. M. 1964 Nutritional Ecology. In Human Biology, an Introduction to Human Evolution, Variation and Growth, by G. A. Harrison and others. Oxford University Press, New York and Oxford.Google Scholar