Asian Perspectives is the leading peer-reviewed archaeological journal devoted to the prehistory of Asia and the Pacific region. In addition to archaeology, it features articles and book reviews on ethnoarchaeology, palaeoanthropology, physical anthropology, and ethnography of interest and use to the prehistorian. International specialists contribute regional reports summarizing current research and fieldwork, and present topical reports of significant sites. Occasional special issues focus on single topics.
Since its establishment in 1947, University of Hawai'i Press has published over 2,000 books and over 900 journal issues. Within the worldwide scholarly community, University of Hawai'i Press is recognized as a leading publisher of books and journals in Asian, Asian American, and Pacific studies. Disciplines covered include the arts, history, language, literature, natural science, philosophy, religion, and the social sciences. The University of Hawai'i Press also serves as a distributor for more than 140 scholarly publishers in North America, Asia, the Pacific, and elsewhere.
This item is part of a JSTOR Collection.
For terms and use, please refer to our
Asian Perspectives
© 1984 University of Hawai'i Press