Acanmul, Becán, and the Xcocom Phenomenon through a Type-Variety Looking Glass
Acanmul, Becán, and the Xcocom Phenomenon through a Type-Variety Looking Glass
Resolving Historical Enigmas through Hands-On Typological Assessments
In a chapter rich with culture-historical interpretations as well as methodological commentary, Joseph Ball and Jennifer Taschek begin with the useful reminder (via Robert Sonin) that type-variety classification is not analysis but merely a step toward analysis. Too often in Maya archaeology there is a sense that type-variety classification is standard operating procedure for pottery and if one simply “does” type-variety, then any number of interpretations on a variety of topics can then be extracted from the classification. I believe this is a part of a usually unexamined assumption that all type-variety classifications are essentially equivalent and easily comparable. On the contrary, the questions one is posing will shape how the classification proceeds (as Rice notes at the beginning of her chapter, the corollary is that classifications also limit the research questions one can address), so research questions should be defined before the classification begins. Once the questions and methods of classification are defined, classification occurs and the analysis flows from there.
Keywords: type-variety, classification, interpretation, analysis, research questions, questions, methods
Florida Scholarship Online requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books within the service. Public users can however freely search the site and view the abstracts and keywords for each book and chapter.
Please, subscribe or login to access full text content.
If you think you should have access to this title, please contact your librarian.
To troubleshoot, please check our FAQs , and if you can't find the answer there, please contact us .
