000 01601nab a2200313 4500
001 MUSEF-HEM-PPE-091264
003 BO-LP-MUSEF
005 20230614163228.0
008 230613b1983 us ||||| |||| 00| 0 eng d
040 _aBO-LpMNE
041 _aeng
092 _sE
_aAMER-ANT/vol.48(1)/ Jan.1983
100 1 _aKnapp, Gregory
245 _aReply to richard T. Smith.
_cGregory Knapp
260 _aEstados Unidos-US :
_bSociety for American Archaeology,
_c1983.
300 _apáginas 150-151:
_bilustraciones en blanco y negro.
310 _aTrimestral
362 _avol.48; n.1 (Jan.1983)
490 _3American Antiquity. Journal of the Society for American Archaeology ;
_ano.1
520 _aThe distinction between embanked and sunken fields is not merely semantic. There is good evidence for frequent flooding at Chilca. Archaeostratigraphy provides neither privileged nor unambiguous evidence for original field function. The full range of environmental, archaeological, ethnohistoric, and ethnographic evidence is more consistent with the embanked field theory than with Smith´s alternative.
653 _aARQUEOLOGIA
653 _aENERGIA HIDRAULICA
773 0 _0302674
_976737
_aSociety for American Archaeology
_dEstados Unidos-US : Society for American Archaeology, 1983.
_oHEMREV012693
_tAmerican Antiquity. Journal of the Society for American Archaeology;
_w(BO-LP-MUSEF)MUSEF-HEM-PPE-091247
810 _aSoociety for American Archaeology.
850 _aBO-LpMNE
866 _a1
942 _2ddc
_cPPE
_dCON
_j011
999 _c302716