A Survival Guide for Written Assignments in Anthropology - or -
Why Are My Profs. So Anal About My Writing ?

John P. Staeck
College of DuPage
(c) 1997, 1998, 1999 John Staeck
Feel free to use this page, but please do not cite in publications without permission of the author

  
    One of my goals as an educator is to begin to teach you how to write in an anthropological style.  Therefore, you will be expected to follow the guidelines established in the profession in all of your written submissions.  The following discussion provides you with the basic rules and formats that you will be expected to follow in all writings related to my courses.

Hyperlinks to Contents
Citations (when to cite) e.g., i.e., cf., etc. Titles and Title Pages
Why Cite (Plagiarism) Bibliographies Miscellany
Citation Formats Formatting Documents



  
To Cite or Not to Cite
    One of the problems most frequently encountered by students at all levels centers on when it is appropriate to cite any given source.  Related topics center around whether or not it is appropriate to cite more than one source, where to place citations, and what citation forms are appropriate given the context of the entry.  As we shall see, there are solutions to these problems.
    To begin with, you must cite the source of any information that you incorporate into your work.  If you conducted the research under discussion, you may simply proceed to narrate how you went about this work.  You could include such a discussion in a section of your paper entitled Methodology or something similar.  At the very least, you should make a point of discussing how you came about the data and interpretations that you are presenting so that your readers can evaluate the merits of your arguments.
    Let us assume, however, that you are using work someone else produced in order to make a point of your own (since this is the base for most undergraduate research papers).  In this case, you must give credit to the authors whose works you are using.  Failure to do so is plagiarism (see below) and is simply intolerable.  The question, then, is when and what to cite. Here are some basic rules.

1.  If you quote someone you must provide a citation.  This citation should include the author's last name, the date of publication for the work from which you are quoting, and the page numbers on which the quote appears.  All of this should be enclosed within parentheses; separate the date of publication from the page numbers by a colon.  For instance (Binford 1962:12_15) or (Hodder 1989:272_73) or (Watson 1991:451).
2.  If you closely paraphrase someone, you should provide a citation just as though you were quoting that person.
3.  If you use data from a given source, such as the number of projectile points found on an archaeological site or dates for linguistic fissioning from glottochronological research, then you should provide the name of the author(s) and the date in which the information was published.  For example, (Shanks 1992) or (Miller 1991) (see below for more on citation formats).
4.  If you use someone else's interpretations, then you must give them credit in a citation.
5.  If you refer to someone's research (and you will undoubtedly be doing such things when writing a term paper), then you should cite the articles/books/lectures you are relying on.  For instance, if you are discussing style in the archaeological record you may have cause to use the works of Sackett and Wiessner.  When discussing their specific arguments for the use of style by past peoples, you should refer to their specific arguments with in-text citations.  Such citations are identical in form to the ones discussed above.  Thus, were I to write about Sackett's idea of Isochrestic variation, I should include a reference to the articles in which he discusses this issue (Sackett 1982, 1990).
6.  If you redraw or reproduce a chart or drawing, then you must give credit to the source.  Such a citation is usually included in the caption for the illustration and includes the same information as in_text citations as well as the figure number of the original piece.  For example, were I using a chart based on one provided by Price 1981, I would cite it as (after Price 1981, figure n).  Note, unless it is unavoidable or necessary (e.g., you're critiquing the information and presentation of the chart itself), you should avoid reproducing figures directly from published sources. This is because the copyrights, especially for drawings, may reside with someone other than the author of the article.

  
Why This Is
Of utmost importance to all scholars are the issues of academic integrity and scholarly reputation.  The first of these issues, academic integrity, has to do with the ethical aspects of research and publication as well as with the ways a scholar's work is perceived by her/his peers.  The second issue, scholarly reputation, derives from the academic integrity of a scholars works. Over time, all scholars develop a reputation, usually based on the quality and presentation of the work that they have done. Other factors, such as speaking skills, contributions to professional organizations, and teaching abilities, can also be important, depending on the career path a particular scholar follows. Significantly, a scholars employment and professional future is usually closely tied to academic integrity and professional reputation.
Academic integrity begins with a basic set of codes.  These are not written in stone, cast in bronze, or otherwise manifest in the physical word. They are more appropriately described as a common set of values common to students of all disciplines, although some values may weigh more or less heavily across the spectrum of disciplines depending on the particular nature of the material under consideration. For practical purposes, however, there tend to be a fairly homogenous set of values that need to be addressed.
    As you might expect, the first of these deals with honesty and giving credit where credit is due.  In order to have academic integrity, it essential that a scholar take credit for only the work that s/he has carried out.  Any material taken from another scholar may be used only if the source of that material is given immediate and appropriate credit, usually in the form of an in-text citation.  Failing to do this isplagiarism, which is one of the most heinous sins any academician can commit. Although mild forms of plagiarism may be attributable to poor research, writing, or editing, deliberate use of another person's work without credit is a form of intellectual theft and is intolerable.  The only exception to this rule is the case of common knowledge.
    As you are probably aware, as a student and scholar you function under an honor code.  This code is more than a set of rules to help faculty evaluate your individual abilities or a method of crowd control (as it is in some high schools).  One of the primary functions of this honor code is to teach you the rules of academic and professional life.  As with all codes, though, your's probably bears some rather nasty teeth. Depending on the seriousness of the issue, a person found guilty of plagiarism may be warned, failed, suspended, or expelled.  Yet, these penalties are mere pittances compared to the informal academic censures a plagiarist may be subjected to.  Guilty individuals may be ostracized from peer groups, which usually has the effect of removing the individual from academic information loops.  In turn, the ostracized person is less able to compete for jobs, grants, and even friends.  At more formal levels, plagiarism has resulted in prominent scholars being fired from tenured positions.  Once such action is taken, it becomes extremely difficult to find another post.  Four years of undergraduate education, perhaps ten years of graduate research, and probably the tens of thousands of dollars that went into making a career could all be lost through sloppy writing and/or unethical behavior.
    A second element in academic integrity is to present the results of your research fairly and honestly. That is, you should not seek to conceal data that is contrary to your personal positions if that data alters the results of your research.  Likewise, you should not alter existing data (sometimes called fudging) or invent new data in order to support your arguments.  Rather, you must do the research and use whatever data you have generated to fairly evaluate the topic(s) you are considering.
    It is here that we need to say a word about ego.  All academics have some measure of ego, we would not be human if we did not.  Indeed, pride in your abilities as a researcher, writer, teacher, and colleague are all valuable and desirable.  If this pride begins to blind you to your real obligations as a scholar, however, then it is time to reconsider exactly what it is that you are doing.  Learning, knowledge, and scholarship are all part of a debate and discussion, processes that require that all parties have open minds about the issues at hand.  Certainly, all people are free to disagree with any interpretation, but they are also obliged to consider the evidence supporting that interpretation.  Scholars cannot dismiss out-of-hand any argument, nor may they claim intuitive knowledge of "truth," especially if such is done only to bolster one's ego. Hence, to be a scholar, and to undertake productive and valuable research, it is essential that each of us keep an open mind and be willing to look for better ways to understand the issues that we study.

  
Citation Formats
    As you may have gathered from the preceding discussion, writing in an anthropological format requires that you master a specific set of conventions.  Most notably, anthropological publications tend to use in-text citations rather than footnotes or endnotes.  There are, of course, exceptions to this trend but, as a quick perusal of the major journals will demonstrate, in-text citations are the anthropological standard. Briefly, let's take a look at how this format works.
The standard in-text citation consists of the last name of the author and the date the article or book you are citing was published.  This information is placed within parentheses and the entire unit is located in the sentence in which the cited material is used.  Be sure to place the citation before the punctuation mark that closes the sentence.  The format looks like:

    Sentence text (Name Date).
    example   Blah, blah, blah, (Staeck 1993).

In particularly long sentences, especially those with dependent clauses, citations may be placed in more than one place.  This is useful for expressing complex ideas, especially during comparisons of competing or related concepts.  For example:
 
It has been suggested that Lake Winnebago Phase Oneota remains represent Winnebago settlements (McKern 1945), although some scholars question whether such an association may be premature (Mason 1976).

On occasion, you will encounter a book or article which has more than one author.  For instance, Phillip Philips and James Brown prepared a two volume tome on the shell engravings from the site of Spiro, Oklahoma.  When citing a work with two authors, you should include the last names of both authors and then the date the piece was published.  For example, we could cite one of the aforementioned volumes as (Philips and Brown 1982).
    If the published work you are citing has more than two authors (and some academicians are known for collaborations with everyone and their significant others), use the Latin et al. along with the last name of the senior author (whose name appears first in the list of authors).  For example, were Baerreis, Freeman, and Parmalee to publish a work together, let's say in 1994, the citation would be (Baerreis et al. 1994).  In the bibliography, however, you should include the names of all authors involved in the publication.  We shall discuss this topic later.
    Another problem arises when you happen to be using works by the same author(s) published in the same year.  For example, authors like Lewis Binford and Ian Hodder are very prolific.  You may find yourself faced with using two or more articles (by either one of them) which were published in the same year. This problem is easily solved, however, by adding a small letter, beginning with a, to each citation for the same year.  Hence, you could refer to works by Hodder as follows: (Hodder 1982a, 1982b, 1982c). Remember to add similar notations to the corresponding entries in the bibliography, though, otherwise the system will not work.  Also take care not to confuse the entries between your uses in the text of your paper and in the bibliography.  Always use reference cards or a comparable system in order to keep the references properly ordered.
    Finally, as your research progresses, you will find that more than one person has written on the subject at hand.  If you are referring to a series of comments made by more than one author, you may be puzzled about who to give the credit to.  The answer is simple and very direct -all of them!  Thus, if you were writing about interpretations of Winnebago oral traditions, you might have cause to use a citation much like this, (Radin 1915, 1923; Lurie 1972, 1978; Staeck 1991, 1992, 1993).  In effect, you are saying that each of these articles discuss the topic at hand in similar ways.  Therefore, you are giving credit to those who have come before you, in a theoretical sense, in considering the issues which now face you. Remember, one of the hallmarks of good research is to demonstrate that you have done a thorough literature search.  Citations such as this are one way to demonstrate that you have done precisely this.
Be warned, however, against just throwing a bunch of citations together in order to appear more erudite and thorough.  You may succeed in getting it past one or two readers, but, presumably, your works will come into the hands of someone who knows these sources well.  If you're citations are inappropriate, you will be perceived as unprofessional (see discussion above).  This may make a great deal of difference in admissions to graduate schools, professional firms, and in your grades.  

  
e.g., i.e., cf., etc.
    If you have been looking through the anthropological literature, you may have come across citations using references such as e.g., i.e., and cf. These are grammatical conventions that have very specific meanings.  You could, and should, look them up in any standard collegiate dictionary in order to understand what they mean and how they are used.  Briefly, however, we can cover these conventions as follows:  

e.g., translates, roughly, to "for example."  Were I discussing the use of typologies in constructing archaeological phases, I might (and should) wish to provide a reference for readers who want to know about the specifics of such arguments.  By providing this reference I am, (1) providing my readers a basic courtesy and service, (2) letting them know upon which theoretical arguments my statements are based, and (3) making a statement about the thoroughness and professionalness of my work.  My citation might look something like (e.g., Adams and Adams 1991; Binford 1962; Willey and Philips 1958).  

i.e., translates to "that is" or "that is to say."  It is often used in conjunction with a parenthetical explanation of a potentially vague or easily misinterpreted statement.  It is also sometimes used when referring to a specific work that specifically demonstrates or explores comments you are currently discussing (i.e., a specific and usually important reference that pertains to exactly what you are writing about).  In this case, the convention is most useful in wide-ranging discussions in which you have need to make very specific references.  In my dissertation, for example, I discuss at (too) great length typologies and how they have been equated with cultures and ethnic identities.  During the course of this discussion, I specifically needed to point out that McKern (1945) did precisely this sort of thing by equating Lake Winnebago phase artifacts with the ethnographically-known Winnebago people (wrongly, or at least prematurely, I might add).  In the course of the discussion I wrote something like...

The same procedure has been applied to the archaeology of eastern Wisconsin in the search for remains of a prehistoric Winnebago ethnic identity (i.e., McKern 1945).

My purpose in using this convention was to point out a very important use of the ideas I was discussing while avoiding launching into a lengthy exploration of McKern's specific arguments.  It was sufficient for me to let the readers know that I was aware of how McKern applied these concepts to a topic key to my own work.  By using the convention, however, I also implied that I would return to this topic or had already discussed it in detail.  In the former instance the convention could have served to foreshadow later arguments while in the latter case it could have served as a reminder of an important discussion that had already been presented in the dissertation.  (I actually did both, foreshadowing in the overview of three section (chapter 2) and reminding the reader in the conclusion of the chapter on archaeological background (chapter 5).

cf., is best translated as "compare to" or "compare with."  It is most often used to either, (1) cite an article that contradicts what other authors or you have argued, or (2) to cite an article that presents parallel arguments to those you (or those you are citing) have made.  For instance, Fox (1967), and many have others, have argued that one of the basic rules of kinship is that men become leaders, even in matrilineal societies. There are various reasons for this, we need go into them here. Eleanor Burke Leacock (1982), however, has argued that this really is not so and has proposed a competing model based on what she perceives to be laws of complementariness between genders.  In discussing the more widely accepted view (e.g., Fox 1967), I also felt obliged to refer to Leacock's strong challenge to this conventional orthodoxy.  Hence, my reference in one paragraph reads something like (e.g., Fox 1967; Ember and Ember 1983; Keegan 1991; cf., Leacock 1982).  

  
Bibliographies
    Preparing a bibliography is often the most neglected aspect of paper preparation.  This is unfortunate since a bibliography is of great importance to readers.  It provides a systematic series of entries that can be used to expand upon current research interests.  Similarly, the bibliography provides readers with a chance to, at a glance, assess the detail with which a writer has gone about her/his research.  In effect, the bibliography becomes an encapsulated presentation of what the author has read and where s/he is coming from for purposes of the paper. Presenting a poor bibliography is a sure way for an author to meet with the sharp criticism of a reader.  Likewise, it is almost a sure way to have a paper rejected (or graded harshly) since the bibliography, whether intentionally or not, is a reflection of the research that went into a paper.  Hence, we should take a few moments to review what a bibliography is and how to go about preparing one.
    First and foremost, a bibliography is the second portion of all in_text citations.  Citations are meaningless unless readers can refer to their counterparts in the bibliography in order to discover from whence the cited material derives.  Consequently, every citation should have a corresponding entry in the bibliography.  Concomitantly, bibliographies should also be organized in an efficient and consistent manner so that readers can find and extract information from the entries.  To this end, every publisher has a standard bibliographic form that must be used when submitting articles.  The two most popular of these, for anthropologists at least, are those adopted by the journals American Anthropologist andAmerican Antiquity. Significantly, each of these journals periodically updates its style guide (requirements and formats for citations and paper formats) and publishes them.  You can find the most recent style guide for American Antiquity in volume 57, number 4 (October 1992).  For the purposes of this course, you will adhere to one of these formats for all written assignments.

Some general rules for the preparation of bibliographies are as follows:
   Every in_text citation should have a corresponding entry in the bibliography.
   A bibliography should be organized alphabetically.
   A bibliography should be single_spaced, with a double_space between entries.
   A bibliography should not be numbered, unless there is some compelling reason to do so.
   Only those materials actually referenced in_text should appear in the bibliography.
   A bibliography should follow a consistent format.
   With these in mind, it is useful to examine some sample entries.  A basic entry using the American Antiquity format would look something like:

Tite, M.S.
1972  Methods of Physical Examination in Archaeology.  Seminar Press, New York

    You should notice several important characteristics of this entry.  First, the author's name is placed on a separate line from the cited book. Subsequent books would simply be listed on subsequent line following the model provided in the 1972 example (e.g., a 1975 citation would appear immediately below the 1972 entry).  Second, since a book is being referenced, its title is in italics.  If you are writing on a word processor this should be easily enough done and you are expected to use this format.  If you are using a typewriter, simple underlining will do. Third, there is a period at the end of the title.  Fourth, the publisher is placed before the city in which the publisher is based and the two elements are separated by a comma. Fifth, significant words in the title of the work cited are capitalized.  Sixth, the entire entry is closed with a period.
    During the course of your research, you will have recourse to use journal articles in addition to books. There are several reasons for this, the two most significant being: (1), articles are topic specific and therefore get directly to the point and, (2) articles are shorter than books so that you can read more of them.  In effect, carefully selected articles tend to provide more academic bang for the invested energy buck.  As you might expect, there is a specific format for entering a journal article into your bibliography. A typical entry might look something like:

Kelly, R. and L. Todd
1988  Coming Into the Country Early Paleoindian Hunting Mobility.  American Antiquity 53:231-244.

    There are several important elements of note here.  First, since this is the title of a journal article, it is not italicized, although its significant words (all but words such as "the") are still capitalized.  Second, the title of the journal in which the article appeared is italicized.  Third, the volume of the journal is cited (i.e., 53), followed by a colon, and then the page numbers in which the article appeared.  Since most journals now publish their volumes with sequential page numbering that begins in the first issue of the volume and continues to rise (as would a book's) through the remainder of the issues for that volume, there is no need to cite issue numbers (e.g., Vol 53, number 3 [number 3 being the issue]).
    As a separate point, this particular article has two authors.  Note that the senior author (first name published) is used to place the citation in its alphabetic position within the bibliography.  Second, subsequent authors are listed with their initial(s) first and then their last name(s).  Each author's name is separated from others by a comma.  
    As a counterpoint to these entries, let us briefly examine them in the format of American Anthropologist.

Tite, M.S.
1972  Methods of Physical Examination in Archaeology.  New York: Seminar Press.  

Kelly, R. and L. Todd
1988  Coming Into the Country Early Paleoindian Hunting Mobility.  American Antiquity 53:231-44.  

    Note that this format does not make use of italicized lettering in these instances (although it does in others, see below). Also note that the city in which the book was published is listed before the name of the publisher and that the two elements are separated by a colon.  Lastly, notice that the page numbers for the journal article eliminates the 2 in 244.  This is because it is assumed that the page numbers do, in fact, run continuously and that there is no need to repeat the hundreds' marking. If, however, the page numbers had straddled a hundreds' mark, perhaps ranging from 197-204, then the mark is used.
    There is one other type of citation that will have (good) cause to use.  In anthropology, there is a tendency to produce edited volumes.  These are books in which each chapter is a distinct article, usually written by different authors.  You might think of these books as topic-specific journals.  Indeed, the common thread that binds edited volumes together usually is some sort of topical issue, such as the archaeology of the Upper Midwest, or, on a more abstract level, issues related to the philosophy of science or specialized techniques (e.g., radiocarbon dating). These books are valuable because they often contain a number of articles bound together that address topics of interest to the reader.  Such volumes, however, present sets of citation and bibliography rules that you need to be aware of.
    First, in your in-text citations, you present each chapter in such a book as if it were an article in a journal. You do not cite the editor of the book in-text, rather, you cite the author's of the chapters you are referring to.  You continue to do this in the bibliography, although you have to also enter relevant information for the book itself.  An example will help to clarify what I'm getting at here.  

Hall, R.L.
1989  The Cultural Background of Mississippian Symbolism.  In The Southeastern Ceremonial Complex: Artifacts and Analysis. P. Galloway ed., pp. 239-78.  Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press.

I have used the American Anthropologist format here.  We can first, however, make some general comments about the nature of this type of citation.  First, the title of the chapter is treated as though it were the title of a journal article.  The book, then, replaces the journal as the place where a reader would turn if s/he wanted to read the article.  The title of the book is treated like any other title, but is followed by information about the editor (P. Galloway) and the pages in which the article appears (pp. 239-78). Finally, the standard information about the publisher is presented.  You should also note that "In" is italicized in this form as a sort of deferential representation that the article appears in a formal book.  (I suspect an entire anthropological study might be undertaken on this symbolism, but it is, nonetheless, what we are left to deal with.)  

  
Formatting Documents
"Image is everything," or so the modern advertisers would have us believe.  Yet, in academics, particularly in American colleges and universities, this idea, so paramount to ideas of fashion and personal identity, has been cast aside.  Most students would argue that the content of a paper is clearly more important than the image its presents.  Few professors would argue with this notion in its basic tenet, that content is the most important element in a paper.  These same professors, however, would not cast away image altogether.  Let's look at why.
    First, by image we mean the overall impact a paper makes upon its readers.  This impact is conditioned by many things, but three items stand out. These are:
The content of the paper, including its ideas and data base.
The readability of the paper, including its organization, flow, and expository quality.
The overall presentation of the work, including print quality, margins, and attention to typographic detail.
    It is the latter two items that we are addressing under the heading of "image."  Although Americans tend, ideally, to emphasize content over form (cf., ideas of absent_minded professors, Einstein-like figures, and the socially dysfunctional researchers characterized by the entertainment industry), there tends to be a strong positive correlation between how well ideas are presented and how well they are received. Hence, it is imperative that your ideas be clearly and accurately presented.  This presentation, then, is image.
    Adhering to some basic guidelines for paper presentation can improve the image of your work.  Although such guidelines cannot change the content of your work, they can help you conduct readers through the presentation of your ideas. Remember, no reader can know, a priori, what you are trying to present in your work, s/he can only form opinions based on what you present.  Even though your ideas may be clear to you, they may become lost to the reader in a dizzying array of typos, format problems, and a lack of organization.  The following suggestions and questions may help you image your papers more efficiently.

On Organizing Ideas:
   Prepare either an outline or list of the major points you wish to discuss in your paper.
   Rate these points from most important to least important.
   If several of your points can be connected within an umbrella category (i.e., can be grouped together), nest these items together and then rate each point's importance in relation to the others.
   Arrange your entire list in an order for presentation in your paper.
   Systematically address each issue on the list/outline you prepared.  

On Organizing Your Ideas Into a Presentation
   Utilize the 3 basic elements of presentations to help guide your readers through your paper.  The 3 elements are (1) Introduction, (2) Body of text, and (3) Summary/conclusion.
   Use the introduction to describe the topic you are writing on and how you will proceed to present your discussion.  The introduction should introduce the main themes that you will discuss in detail. Remember, you are writing an academic paper, not a mystery novel.  Whodunit and what they done, so to speak, should be summarized in your introduction.
   Use the main body of text to explain to your readers why you say what you do.  Explain each point and clearly state how this point supports your main themes.
   BE PATIENT!!  Take the time to explore and explain your ideas.  Make your points explicit.  Never assume the reader will think precisely as you do; provide her/him with the information to assess your ideas fairly.
   Use in-text headings to separate the main themes you are discussing.  If you have nested sets of ideas (as described above), use intext headings to delineate these groups.  You might think of such groups as mini-chapters of a longer work.
   In your conclusion, summarize what you have discussed and then explain how it supports your opening statements. Although this seems redundant, it really is not.  Use your conclusion to point pull all of your arguments together, reminding the reader of how they support your opening statements.
   Check your in-text headings against the points you listed or outlined.  Check to see if anything has been omitted or has been discussed in an inappropriate place.  Look for internal consistency to what you are saying.
   Ask yourself (and be honest with the answer) if a stranger could make sense out of what you have written.
   Ask yourself (and be honest with the answer) if what you have written really represents what you intended to and wanted to write.  If the answer is no, ask yourself if this is better than what you intended to write.  If the answer is no, try reorganizing and rewriting the areas that you think are problematic.

On Sweating the Details
   Use multiple drafts.
   Spell check your document for typos and other errors.
   Be a critical proof_reader, if something is not correct, fix it.
   Do not rush your proof reading.  Read and critique your paper at least twice, if not three times.
   Make sure your margins are correct.  You should leave at least 1" on all edges.  If you have not done this, reformat the paper and reprint it.  If you are using a typewriter, use a plastic template or mark in pencil the 1" marks.  Erase these marks before submitting your paper.
   Use page numbers (Arabic, not Roman).  Place these page numbers in the bottom center, bottom right, or top right of the paper.  Page numbers should be about 1/2" to 1" from the edges of the paper, depending upon preferences.
   Use a dark ribbon/ink to print your final draft.  If the computer center has light ribbons, ask them to replace them.  If they complain, tell them your professor is a real SOB, give them my name, and point out it is your grade on the line.  If they still don't help, try finding another place to print out.  If there is no other place to print, try to come back at a later date.  If you've waited to the last minute and cannot come back (because the paper is due), print out the light copy, turn in the paper, and bring the circumstances of the problem to my attention.
   Fasten the pages of your paper together with a paper clip or staple.  Never submit an unbound paper or a dog-eared paper. Let's face it, paper clips and staples are cheap, you should have ample access to such items.
  
Titles and Title Pages
    Most papers should be titled.  While this may seem obvious, there is an art to producing titles.  You need to balance your creative urges with the need to convey meaningful information about your choice of topic.  Uninformative titles can have the effect of hiding your work from would-be readers or simply prove misleading.  Overly detailed titles may prove too long to be useful or make your work appear so dry that many would-be readers will simply shuffle your work to the bottom of their pile of anticipated readings. Among professionals, such piles are often so large that there is little chance that your work will ever resurface, and, if you should be fortunate enough to have your work re-emerge, there is always a danger that the title will be so painful that the reader once again shuffles your work to the bottom of the stack. Fortunately, there is a happy median.
    I like to combine creative titles with brief, informative statements.  For example, the draft of one paper (currently in press) is entitled "Chiefs' Daughter, Mothers' Brothers, and Monkeys' Uncles: Some Suggestions for Reinterpreting Winnebago Prehistory."  The title is divided into two elements separated by a colon.  The first element is designed to be eye-catching, somewhat humorous, but still informative; the paper discusses the structure of Winnebago oral traditions in relation to modeling past forms of social structure.  The second element is designed to provide specific information about the paper's 2 topical issues, Winnebago prehistory and how it might be reinterpreted.
    Less humorous titles may also be divided into elements.  My first published article was entitled something like "Goose Island and Salisbury Revisited: Woodland Exploitation of the Inner Coastal Plain."  As in the previous example, the title is divided into 2 elements separated by a colon.  The first element provides specific references to the sites discussed (Goose Island and Salisbury), while the second element identifies the broader topical and theoretical implications discussed (Woodland exploitation of the Inner Coastal Plain).
    You need not divide your titles as discussed here.  Elegant, brief titles are also very useful. Unfortunately, I can seldom develop these.  Indeed, most brief titles tend to be broad titles and are better suited for books or lengthy monographs rather than research papers.  Still, the selection of a title is an author's prerogative.  Rejection of manuscripts, however, is an editor's prerogative, and it would be a shame to develop a habitual form of entitling articles that proved maladaptive.
    Titles should appear twice in your papers.  The title should first appear on the title page.  This page serves as a cover for your paper and clearly identifies the title, author, and any related information.  The title should be centered, beginning about 1/3 of the way down the page, and be produced completely in capital letters.  You should double_space the title if possible. You should then use one of two forms to place your name on the page.  You then place your name, date of paper submission, and course data (not all in capitals) in the lower right hand corner, or center this information near the bottom of the page. In either event, this information should be single_spaced.  Were you to submit this paper for publication, you would substitute your professional affiliation and address for the course data.  You would also include a statement prohibiting anyone from citing your paper without your direct permission.  This statement will not be included in the published version.  It is designed to protect your rights as an author and to prevent people from citing an unreviewed (and hence potentially raw) manuscript.  A typical disclaimer might read "Do not cite for any reason without permission of author."
    The second place your title should appear is atop the first page of your paper.  Here, the title should be printed with only the initial letter of significant words capitalized.  For example, a title might read "Salient Identities Among the Ancient Maya." The presence of this title serves as a safeguard in the event your title page is separated from the main body of your text.  
  
Miscellany
Now that we've covered some of the central themes in writing anthropologically, it may prove beneficial to examine some miscellaneous suggestions and ideas that you may wish to utilize.
      When discussing issues of spatial or geographic detail, consider inserting maps or figures where appropriate.  Inclusion of such figures provides the reader with a better idea of what, specifically, you are talking about and gives you practice in developing illustration skills.  If you find yourself interested in, or needing to use, maps and images, we have a scanner and drawing package in the anthropology laboratory.  It will take time for you to become familiar with how these systems work, but the skills may prove valuable in the job market or in more advanced course work.
 CAVEAT:  Remember, a digitized (i.e., scanned) image is still protected under copyright law.  You must still cite the source of the figure in appropriate form.  If you intend to publish your paper, you might consider writing to the publishers of the image you desire to use for permission to reproduce it.
 CAVEAT:  If you reproduce an image in modified form (perhaps by using a particular illustration as a model or by digitizing an image and then electronically manipulating its elements), you still must cite the original source.  This is usually done in a slightly different manner than conventional citations, though. The most frequently used citation format for modified images is (after NAME DATE, FIGURE #).  An example could be (after Hall 1962, plate 65).  This citation should appear at the end of the caption, with the period placed outside of the parentheses.
      If your discussion centers around numbers or hierarchical classifications (e.g., nested lists similar to outlines), consider presenting this material in tabular form.  You can create a table without much difficulty on a typewriter, word processor, spreadsheet, or more specialized system.  By organizing your material in a logical and condensed fashion, your reader is able to visualize more clearly what you are discussing and how you have arranged your data.  Significantly, you may wish to prepare tables for your own organizational purposes, even if these do not eventually find their way into the final draft of the paper.
      If you find yourself discussing numerical distributions, statistics, or other numerical themes, consider preparing charts or graphs that summarize your organization visually.  Most common spreadsheets have graphing capabilities.  Lotus 1-2-3 is very easy to use and both graphs and charts are easily edited. Microsoft Excel has more sophisticated graphing options and also easy to use (although editing the actual graphs and tables is somewhat more complicated than in Lotus 1-2-3).  If you have very sophisticated data, we also have a copy of Stanford Chart, which features over 100 graphing and charting options. You can even produce 3-dimensional contour maps based on couplets or triplets. Believe it or not, this program is also easy to use, although you must have a firm grasp of the mathematical relationships among your data to get the most out of this program.  Finally, we even have a charting option (CorelChart) as a portion of our drawing package (CorelDraw).  The bottom line is simple, if you need to do, we can probably get it done.
      If you find yourself using illustrations and/or tables, consider using one of the simple organizational formats outlined below.  If you are comfortable with Windows computing, you can include drawings and charts within the body of your text. This is visually and organizationally appealing but, from my perspective, is little more than a nicety.  Most academic papers place all figures and tables at the end of the text, but before the bibliography.  Anthropologists tend to use one of two systems in arranging these visual aids.  Either tables and illustrations are numbered and listed separately (e.g., table 1, table 2, illustration 1), or they lump them all together as figures.  In the former instance, tables are presented before illustrations and include only table, not charts, drawings or maps.  Non-tabular presentations are considered illustrations and are placed after all tables in the rear of the document (but still before the bibliography).  In the event you opt to use the "figures" system, all visual presentations are numbered sequentially and included at the end of the text.
 CAVEAT:  If you use any form of figure, it should be cross referenced in the text itself.  For instance, you might write "As illustrated in figure 7," or "Table 3 shows..."  Alternatively, you might include a reference to a figure in parentheses at the end of a sentence or description, (see figure 9) or (figure 9). In no instance should a figure that has not been cross referenced appear in your document.
      If you use illustrations and/or tables, you should title each one in a caption.  You might also wish to include a brief explanatory note along with the title.  For example, a figure caption might read "Figure 6. Winnebago Trailed Ceramics from Point Sauble."  You might append to this a brief note that helps to reinforce the point you make about the illustrated material in-text.  For example, the preceding title might be followed by "Note that elaborate geometric patterning on the necks and shoulders is similar in form to that found on Orr Phase vessels."
      For a lighter touch, or to set the mood for your paper, you might consider opening your paper with a particularly appropriate quote.  Usually, such a quote would be produced on a page between the cover page and the first page of your paper.  If the paper is relatively short and you deem a cover page inappropriate, you might place the quote beneath the title of the page as the first paragraph of your presentation.  If you elect to use an opening quote, however, be sure to explain its relevance to your topic.  You might use the quote as a segue into your introduction, or you might elect to discuss it in more detail.  In any event, there is an art to selecting a good opening quote; poor selections may prove deleterious to the success of your presentation.
      Do not use elaborate headers or footers in the text of your papers.  If you are concerned that the pages of your paper may become separated, then you may elect to put your last name in either a header or footer that is reproduced on every page of your document.  I discourage you from doing this because I like to use the space where such text would appear for comments.  A good staple or paper clip is usually sufficient to ensure your pages stay attached to one another.
 CAVEAT:  Most journals will prohibit you from using such headers and footers since they send submissions out for blind review.  Book publishers, on the other hand, like to have such headers and footers in place.  This is because the pages of a manuscript are often separated between several people for editorial review and corrections.  Most book publishers like to use headers which display the author's last name, the title of the particular chapter, and the draft number on each page. Some also like to number the lines of each page for ease of reference during editorial work.  You might consider trying such a system to help you and your proof-reader comment on your drafts.  Most word processors provide a feature which can be enabled to number each line in the unprinted margins of your drafts.  

Good luck, and happy expository experiences!