Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t7czq Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-25T04:06:59.215Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A Reply to Sharrock and Grayson on Archaeological Significance

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

L. Mark Raab  and
Timothy C. Klinger
L. Mark Raab
Affiliation:
Arkansas Archeological Survey, University of Arkansas Museum, Fayetteviile, AR 72701
Timothy C. Klinger
Affiliation:
Arkansas Archeological Survey, University of Arkansas Museum, Fayetteviile, AR 72701
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Cultural Resource Management
Information
American Antiquity , Volume 44 , Issue 2 , April 1979 , pp. 328 - 329
Copyright
Copyright © The Society for American Archaeology 1979

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

Glassow, Michael 1977 Issues in evaluating the significance of archaeological resources. American Antiquity 42:413–420.Google Scholar
Goodyear, Albert C., Mark Raab, L.. and Klinger, Timothy C. 1978 The status of archaeological research design in cultural resource management. American Antiquity 43:159–173.Google Scholar
House, John H., and Schiffer, Michael B. 1975 Significance of the archeological resources of the Cache River Basin. In The Cache River Archeological Project, assembled by Schiffer, Michael B. and House, John H.. Arkansas Archeological Survey Research Series 8:163–186.Google Scholar
Raab, L. Mark, and C. Klinger, Timothy 1977 A critical appraisal of “significance” in contract archaeology. American Antiquity 42:629–634.CrossRefGoogle Scholar