Anthropomorphemics is a neatly designed and very usable dictionary of anthropological and archaeological terms. The dictionary consists of approximately 1667 terms and definitions of 15‐30 words per entry. There are see‐also references and alternate terms noted when applicable.
The authors are both doctoral candidates in archaeology at the University of California, Santa Barbara. They reference four sources for the definitions. These include Fladmark’s A Guide to Basic Archaeological Field Procedures (1978), Haviland’s Anthropology (1991), Renfrew and Bahn’s Archaeology: Theories, Methods, and Practice (1996), and Stein and Rowe’s Physical Anthropology (1995). As you can tell from the source reference, content is strong in the areas of physical anthropology and archaeology but weaker in the areas of cultural anthropology and linguistic anthropology. In addition, there are very few ethnic group names, place names, or religious terms included. Comparatively, the dictionary had entries for about 68% of entries picked from the print resources, Dictionary of Concepts in Cultural Anthropology, Dictionary of Concepts in Physical Anthropology, and Dictionary of Concepts in Archaeology.
When accessing the web site, the middle frame (and frames are required) displays a random definition. Users then have the option of choosing another definition at random or viewing entries from one of the other three levels of organization. Users can choose one of the three fields, either archaeology, cultural anthropology, or physical anthropology, and view entries pertaining to that field. Or they can view the complete list in alphabetical order.
The last option is a search engine for the site. The engine is good; and the help documentation on the search page is clearly written. Users can use the Boolean operators AND, OR, and NOT, as well as truncating and nesting. The engine does search the term field as well as the definition field but has no option to limit to just one field. Another nice feature is the provision of an online form to suggest new terms for the dictionary.
This resource can’t replace the classic print dictionaries in the field, such as the aforementioned Dictionary of Concepts trio, or Pearson’s Anthropological Glossary, or Champion’s Dictionary of Terms & Techniques in Archaeology. But since there are no comparable online anthropology or archaeology dictionaries, this is a valuable and useful reference source for quick and concise definitions. This reviewer was happy with searching results including speed of access and would not hesitate to add it to an anthropology or archaeology resource guide or an electronic/virtual reference shelf.
