Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-gb8f7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-30T15:05:56.716Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A UNIVAC Analysis of Sherd Frequencies from the Carter Ranch Pueblo, Eastern Arizona

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

J. A. Brown  and
L. G. Freeman Jr.
J. A. Brown
Affiliation:
University of Chicago, Chicago Natural History Museum, Chicago, Illinois
L. G. Freeman Jr.
Affiliation:
University of Chicago, Chicago Natural History Museum, Chicago, Illinois
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Three factors contribute to differences between archaeological samples: sampling error and functional and temporal differences between the parent populations from which the samples are drawn. Many archaeologists have explained such differences as due only to temporal variations between the parent populations, thereby ignoring sampling error and relegating functional specificity to a minor role.

A statistical analysis of potsherd frequencies in samples made by the Chicago Natural History Museum from an eastern Arizona pueblo, the Carter Ranch site, was undertaken using UNIVAC. By taking into account sampling error, differences between parent populations appeared that could most logically be attributed to functional differences. From the calculations, four possible functional constellations of pottery types were discovered, four types of rooms were isolated, a probable ceremonial complex of five pottery types was established, and differential areal disposal of sherds was found. It was impossible to demonstrate temporal differences between provenience units on the basis of sherd frequencies. Any such differences played a minor part in contributing to sample variation as compared to functional differences between provenience units.

Type
Research Article
Information
American Antiquity , Volume 30 , Issue 2Part1 , October 1964 , pp. 162 - 167
Copyright
Copyright © The Society for American Archaeology 1964

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

Crow, Edwin L., Davis, Frances A., and Maxfield, Margaret W. 1960 Statistics Manual, Dover Publications, New York.Google Scholar
Duncan, Otis D., Cuzzort, Ray P., and Duncan, Beverly 1961 Statistical Geography: Problems in Analyzing Areal Data. Free Press of Glencoe, Illinois.Google Scholar
Freeman, Leslie G. Jr. and Brown, James A. 1964 Statistical Analysis of Carter Ranch Pottery. In “Carter Ranch Site,” by Martin, Paul S. and others. Vieldiana: Anthropology, in press. Chicago Natural History Museum, Chicago.Google Scholar
Ledley, Robert S. 1962 Programming and Utilizing Digital Computers. McGraw-Hill Co., New York.Google Scholar
Spaulding, Albert C. 1960a The Dimensions of Archaeology. In Essays in the Science of Culture in Honor of Leslie A. White, edited by Dole, Gertrude E. and Carneiro, Robert L., pp. 437–56. Thomas Y. Crowell Co., New York.Google Scholar
Spaulding, Albert C. 1960b Statistical Description of Comparison of Artifact Assemblages. In “The Application of Quantitative Methods in Archaeology,” edited by Heizer, Robert F. and Cook, Sherburne F.. Viking Fund Publications in Anthropology, No. 28, pp. 60–83. New York.Google Scholar
Walker, Helen M. and Lev, Joseph 1953 Statistical Inference. Holt, Rinehart & Winston, New York.Google Scholar