The present state of terminology in quantitative faunal analysis is chaotic. New terms are continually being introduced which are redundant, contradictory, and/or inadequately defined. This situation is most clearly brought out in the examples presented and in the table of abbreviations which accompanies the text. Suggestions are put forward for correcting these problems and it is argued that adoption of this or a similar system will greatly facilitate development of faunal studies within archaeology.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Casteel et al. (1977) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: