University :of Florida
Laboratory Notes: 1 Gainesville, Florida December, 1950
THE STATE-VIDE ARCHEOLOGICAL SITE RECORDING SYSTEM
In order to systematically place on record all archeological sites in
a state it is necessary to number them according to some system. Further-
more, it is desirable that this numbering be of such a nature that sites in
nearby areas are grouped together. Two methods designed to accomplish this
purpose are now in general use.
In the first method the area under study, a state or other unit is
laid out in a grid pattern by the establishment of coordinate lines. The
areas defined by the grids and parts thereof are designated by names or
letters and the sites are numbered within each grid section or subsection.
This system is used in the Southwest, being most widely applied by the Gila
Pueblo in Arizona, New Mexico, Texas, and Chihuahua (Gladwin, 1928; Fisher,
A second method, even more widely used, is based on county units.1 In
each state counties are given numbers 'or abbreviations, within each county
sites are given numbers. Thus a site is designated, as the-case may be, by
an initial county number followed by a site number or an initial county
abbreviation followed by a site number.
In the case of Florida this second form is used-that is each county
is given an abbreviation and each site within a number. In doing this it
is most practical to use two letters for a county abbreviation rather than
F of 1For example see Heizer (1950) and Fenenga (1949) for the use of this
0. I bysstem in California. The latter reference has an extensive bibliography.
9/3.j/7^ ...... .,.o
one. Possible confusion rith grid coordinate numbering systems in excavated
sites is thus avoided. In two Florida counties, Alachua and Lee, this-
could not be avoided; a simple one letter designation for the former was
already in use and the latter is too short to abbreviate.
Unfortunately two distinct systems of county abbreviations and number-
ing are now in use by institutions interested in Florida archeology. The
present system, however, is the one in use by the two state universities,
University of Florida and Florida State University, as well as the Smith-
sonian Institution and Yale University. State coverage with-this system
is wide, sites in the Northwyst Gulf Coast, Central Gulf Coast, and
Manatee areas.being included in Gordon Willey's recent book (Willey, 1949);
those of the Indian River in Irving Rouse's (1951) monograph on that area:
and those of the Northern St. Johns and Glades areas in studies of John M.
Goggin to be published in the near future.
In ordet to convert these site numbers to the national system in use
by the Smithsonian Institution River Basin surveys the state number (derived
frao its alphabetical order), .8, can be added in front of the county abbrev-
iation. However, within the state this is not commonly used. For example,
the famous Mt. Royal mound on the St. Johns River is site 35 in Putnam
County, thus, 8Fu 35 or simple Pu 35. ...In numbering new sites the master
files at the University of Florida or Florida State University should.. first
be consulted in order to determine the latest number for any given county.
For convenience in allocation of numbers, the University of Florida is
assuming primary responsibility for numbering sites east of the Aucilla
River while- Florida State University is numbering those west of that
stream. Thus duplication is prevented.
-( 3 7 ,'
-2- [r? 0 /
CITRUS '.. -.
County Abbreviations in Florida
".:"' "' IC .D ..: .. ... .. .. ... .
IR INDIAN RIVER
UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA
3 1262 07084 6679
19491 ..M'ethods for Archeoloical. Site %Arvey in California
(California Archeological urvey, reports, Berkeley). ."
Fisher, Reginald G.
1930. The Archeological Survi of'the Pueblo Plateau
: University of New Iiexico, bulletin, Archeology series,
vol. 1, Albuquerque) .
Gladvin, ...inifred and Harold S.
1928. A Method for the Designtion of Ruins in the Southwest
". c.. 'T aPuebloTe'dallion aperq, !7o. 1, Globe, Arizona).
Heizer; Robert. F. (editor)
S1950.' A Manual of Archaeological Field Methods (revised edition,
Millbrae alifor nia ).
1951 A Survey of Indian River Archeoloy, Florida (Yale University,
Pubications in Anthropology, in press. New Haven).
,illey, Gordon R,
*1949. Archeology of the Florida Gulf. Coast (Smi. hsonian i.iscellaneous
Collection, voT.-'T13. ashi-nton. .;:
John M, Goggin