Hostname: page-component-77c89778f8-n9wrp Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-16T23:22:41.886Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Type-Variety Concept as a Basis for the Analysis of Maya Pottery

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

Robert E. Smith ,
Gordon R. Willey  and
James C. Gifford
Robert E. Smith
Affiliation:
Orchard St., Marblehead, Mass.
Gordon R. Willey
Affiliation:
Harvard University, Cambridge, Mass.
James C. Gifford
Affiliation:
Harvard University, Cambridge, Mass.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The method being used to analyze pottery from Uaxactún and Barton Ramie by the application of the type-variety concept is offered as an analytical approach well suited to the classification of Maya ceramics. Types and varieties are seen as the best archaeological approximation of the ceramic abstractions which existed in the prehistoric cultural configuration. The systematic application of the type-variety concept will make it possible to establish analytical ceramic units which will be comparable throughout the Maya territory, to undertake detailed chronological and areal studies, especially in areas away from the ceremonial centers, and to use ceramics as a step toward cultural interpretation. Considerable attention is given to the procedure of analysis and to the problem of naming the resulting analytical ceramic units. The most desirable nomenclature is illustrated by Aguacate Orange [type]: Holha Variety. Place names have been used for the primary type term and for the variety name, but a descriptive term is used for the second part of the type name. The desirability of keeping the variety flexible and free of bias or prejudice stemming from the nomenclature is stressed. The variety is the smallest meaningful unit of classification in the type-variety method. Sorting, naming, and tabulating begin with varieties which, in turn, lead to the recognition, naming and description of types.

Type
Research Article
Information
American Antiquity , Volume 25 , Issue 3 , January 1960 , pp. 330 - 340
Copyright
Copyright © The Society for American Archaeology 1960

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

Brainerd, G. W. 1958 The Archaeological Ceramics of Yucatan. University of California, Anthropological Records, Vol. 19. Berkeley and Los Angeles.Google Scholar
Colton, H. S. 1953 Potsherds. Museum of Northern Arizona, Bulletin 25. Flagstaff.Google Scholar
Ekholm, G. F. 1942 Excavations at Guasave, Sinaloa, Mexico. Anthropological Papers of The American Museum of Natural History, Vol. 38, No. 2. New York.Google Scholar
Longyear, J .M. III 1952 Copan Ceramics: A Study of Southeastern Maya Pottery. Carnegie Institution of Washington, Publication 597. Washington.Google Scholar
Macneish, R. S. 1958 Preliminary Archaeological Investigations in the Sierra de Tamaulipas, Mexico. Transactions of the American Philosophical Society. Vol. 48, Part 6. Philadelphia.Google Scholar
Phillips, Philip 1958 Application of the Wheat-Gifford-Wasley Taxonomy to Eastern Ceramics. American Antiquity, Vol. 24, No. 2, pp. 117–25. Salt Lake City.Google Scholar
Rlcketson, E. B. 1937 The Artifacts. In “Uaxactun, Guatemala: Group E—1926-1931,” by O. G. and E. B. Ricketson, pp. 181–284. Carnegie Institution of Washington, Publication 477. Washington.Google Scholar
Rowe, J. H. 1959 Archaeological Dating and Cultural Process. MS, Department of Anthropology, University of California, Berkeley.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shepard, A. O. 1948 Plumbate — A Mesoamerican Trade Ware. Carnegie Institution of Washington, Publication 573. Washington.Google Scholar
Shepard, A. O. 1956 Ceramics for the Archaeologist. Carnegie Institution of Washington, Publication 609. Washington.Google Scholar
Smith, R. E. 1955 Ceramic Sequence at Uaxactun, Guatemala, 2 vols. Middle American Research Institute, Publication 20. Tulane University, New Orleans.Google Scholar
Smith, R. E. 1958 The Place of Fine Orange Pottery in Mesoamerican Archaeology. American Antiquity, Vol. 24, No. 2, pp. 151–60. Salt Lake City. 340 Google Scholar
Thompson, J. E. S. 1939 Excavations at San Jose, British Honduras. Carnegie Institution of Washington, Publication 506. Washington.Google Scholar
Tolstoy, Paul 1958 Surface Survey of the Northern Valley of Mexico: the Classic and Post-Classic Periods. Transactions of the American Philosophical Society, Vol. 48, Part 5. Philadelphia.Google Scholar
Vaillant, G. C. 1927 The Chronological Significance of Maya Ceramics. MS, doctoral dissertation, Harvard University, Cambridge.Google Scholar
Wauchope, Robert 1948 Excavations at Zacualpa, Guatemala. Middle American Research Institute, Publication 14. Tulane University, New Orleans.Google Scholar
Wheat, J. B., Gifford, J. C., and Wasley, W. W. 1958 Ceramic Variety, Type Cluster, and Ceramic System in Southwestern Pottery Analysis. American Antiquity, Vol. 24, No. 1, pp. 34–47. Salt Lake City.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Willey, G. R. 1958 Review of “Ceramic Sequence at Uaxactun, Guatemala.” American Journal of Archaeology, Vol. 62, No. 2, pp. 256–7. Princeton.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Willey, G. R. and Phillips, Philip 1958 Method and Theory in American Archaeology. University of Chicago Press, Chicago.Google Scholar