ARCHEOLOGY 415

plicitly directed the book, can find much of interest in this overview.

Historic Site Archaeology in Canada. KENNETH E. KIDD. Anthropology Papers, 22. Ottawa: National Museum of Canada, 1969. 47 pp., bibliography. n.p.

Reviewed b y JOAN B. TOWNSEND University of Manitoba

In summary form, Kenneth Kidd has drawn together data concerning historic archeological work conducted in Canada up to 1963. He concerns himself with both Class I sites, those which are the result of Europeans in Canada, and Class I1 sites, which were occupied by aboriginal peoples after the beginning of European contact. Kidd has been extremely thorough in his presentation, and his work should be con- sulted t o learn of previous survey, exca- vation, and reconstruction which may have been done at a particular site. In addition, he points to areas for further productive re- search.

The major problem with the monograph is the very lengthy delay between submission and publication: six years. Consequently, the extensive and more recent historic re- search has not been included. During that time, the Historic Sites Service, Ottawa, has become active. In 1970 John Rick’s review of all work done by the Historic Sites Ser- vice itself and through contracts is to be published in Historic Sites Occasional Papers in Archaeology and History, Occasional Paper 1, Ottawa. Together, Rick’s and Kidd’s monographs will be essential basic references for those interested in Canadian historic archeology.

Some of the major research carried out since 1963 can be listed briefly: Fort Louisbourg o n Cape Breton Island, Nova Scot ia ; Fort Beausejour, Aulac, New Brunswick; and Lower Fort Garry, Win- nipeg, Manitoba, have been extensively excavated. The Nootkan village of Yuquot, British Columbia, has been examined both for Indian materials and European goods. A fort, the only Spanish site in Canada, was located here. Indian sites under study in- clude those in Waterton Lakes, Alberta and the Rainey River, Ontario, burial mounds. In summer (1970) a survey was made for fur

(paper).

trade sites between the Lakehead, Ontario, and Jasper House, Alberta. Underwater archeology has also been conducted, notably in the reconnaissance at the eastern end of Lake Ontario and the St. Lawrence River as far as Ganonoque, Ontario and a t the site of the battle of Restigouche near Campbellton, New Brunswick, the location of t h e last naval battle between the British and French for possession of colonial Canada.

Pre-Columbian Ar t and Later Indian Tribal A r t s . F E R D I N A N D ANTON and FREDERICK J. DOCKSTADER. Pan- orama of World Art. New York: Harry N. Abrams, 1968. 264 pp., maps, 277 plates (141 in color), chronological tables, bib- liography, index. $7.95 (cloth).

Reuiewed b y MICHAEL D. COE Yale University

Visually, this book is a bargain, with a wealth of fine photographs of some of the most splendid archeological sites and objects from Pre-Columbian Latin America. Many of the pieces shown are from t h e collections of private individuals and dealers, and thus lit- tle known t o the archeological world. For these reasons alone it should be a useful reference work.

Intellectually, however, it is an utter failure. In the first place, it is difficult t o detect any artistic unity or even a single underlying theme in the hodgepodge of cul- tures and styles presented here, spanning twenty-five centuries and thousands of miles. Perhaps some body of anthropological or art historical theory would have made the book hold together, but this is lacking. More seriously, t h e text suggests that Anton, the principal author, has not kept abreast of archeological developments in Latin America since 1959. His chronology is hopelessly out-of-date for 1968 in all three major cul- ture areas covered: Mesoamerica, the Inter- mediate Area, and the Andes. I was as- tonished to find, for instance, that in his bibliography for the Andes not one citation is given t o John H. Rowe or any of his students, while lavish attention is paid t o authors writing in German. This inability t o distinguish what is current and important in the anthropological study of the Pre- Columbian past is unfortunately shared by