Writing Grant Proposals for Anthropological Research

Author(s): Sydel Silverman

Source: Current Anthropology, Vol. 32, No. 4 (Aug. - Oct., 1991), pp. 485-489
Published by: The University of Chicago Press on behalf of Wenner-Gren Foundation for
Anthropological Research

Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2743827 .

Accessed: 11/01/2015 11:51
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

The University of Chicago Press and Wenner-Gren Foundation for Anthropological Research are collaborating
with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Current Anthropology.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 148.223.96.146 on Sun, 11 Jan 2015 11:51:28 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Volume 32, Number 4, August-October I991I 1485

WritingGrantProposalsfor
AnthropologicalResearch'
SYDEL

SILVERMAN

thatneedto be adaptedto thespecificrequirements

of
particular
funders
and programs.
HOW

THE

FUNDING

PROCESS

WORKS

Everyfunderoperateswithina set ofgoals,guidelines,

and procedures
establishedbyits governing
body.Each
one
can
offer
its
grants
only
to
applicants
whose reU.S.A.
II
9I
10001-7708,
i9
questsfallwithinits scopeofactivitiesandonlyon the
in supportofthosereAnthropologists
seekingfundingforresearchcan do basisof thematerialsubmitted
quests.
Systematic
review
procedures
are followedin
muchto improvetheirchancesofsuccessiftheyundermaking
choices
among
competing
requests.
standthe grant-making
and
process
the skillsneeded
to negotiateit. Fundingagenciesthatallocateresearch Everyfunderhas a mission,an overallpurposefor
supporton thebasisofpeerreviewandprofessional
cri- whichits fundsare intended.Sincethemissionis usumayat anygiven
teriaare to some extentan artifact
ofNorthAmerican allystatedin generalterms,thefunder
time
have
more
directions
or
specific
within
priorities
academicculture,but theirscopeis increasingly
international,as are the normstheyapply.The purposeof its scope. Programsare the mechanismsforachieving
current
objectives;thesedefinethespecific
thesecommentsis to encouragethisinternationaliza-thefunder's
for
which
funds
will be awarded,whois eligipurposes
tionandto assistall potentialapplicantsbymakingthe
ble to apply,and whatprocedures
are to be followed.
normsexplicit.
andprogram
directions,
are
guidelines
Grantsare not awardedsimplybecausean applicant Missions,current
material.Beneedsfunds,has a worthwhile
purpose,
and/or
is recom- spelledout in the funder'sinformational
and even missionschange,
priorities,
mendedby an advocate.There is a processthrough cause programs,
consultedshouldbe the most recent
whichthegoalsofa researcher
andthegoalsofa funder the information
whosemissionit is to supportresearchare brought
to- available.
The keyelementin thisprocessis thegrantpro- The funder'smissionand modeof operationdepend
gether.
posal,whichis a particular
kindofdocumentdifferentultimatelyupon its sourceof fundingand its policyThereare basic differences
between
froma researchreportor otherprofessional
writing. makingstructure.
Agenciesestablished
bygovTherearethusparticular
skillsinvolvedin constructingpublicandprivatefunders.
bodiesareintendedto meetnationalorother
"fundable"proposalsthat,like otherculturalpractices, ernmental
publicneeds,whetherthesearedefinedas thesolution
can be learned.
Fortheanthropologist
in searchofresearch
funds,
the of specificsocietalproblemsor as moregeneralgoals
firststepis to locatefunders
to theneed.It such as the buildingof nationalresearchcapabilities.
appropriate
criteriafor
is unfortunately
notthecase thattherearefundsavail- Suchpublicagenciesoftenhave citizenship
andotherrequirements
imposedbythepolitiableforanyneedifone knowswhereto findthem,and eligibility
everyfundersets limitson theeligibility
ofapplicants cal bodies that financethem. Privatefundersvary
andprojects.
it is worthtakingthetrouble widelyin (amongotherthings)the sourcesof their
Nevertheless,
established
bydonors,andthenato investigateall possibilities.Because the circum- funds,theconditions
of
their
ture
Those
that
governance.
dependuponconstancesofdifferent
researchfields,andfundcountries,
constraints
ing needs are so variable,the processof identifyingtinualfundraisingmayworkunderdifferent
by an endowment
(a reservethat
funders
potential
cannotbe generalized.
Whatever
infor- thanthosesupported
While private
mationsourcesareavailable(professors
and colleagues, generatesfundsthroughinvestment).
funders
function
more
may
ofthepolitiindependently
professional
associationsand newsletters,
institutional
grantsoffices,
etc.)shouldbe usedinitially.
Oncea pos- cal arenathanpublicagencies,theyareusuallygoverned
siblefunder
is identified,
it shouldbe contacted
directly notonlybytheirownbylawsbutalso bythelaws covin thecountries
eringnonprofit
in which
organizations
forinformation
on its current
and policies.
programs
in the
offunders,
Despitethediversity
certaincommonprin- theyarebased.(Forexample,privatefoundations
to spendingand accountciplesunderliegrantproposalsofall kinds.The observa- UnitedStatesmustconform
oftheU.S. Internal
RevenueService.)
tionsfollowing
areintendedto apply,in a generalsense, abilityregulations
The
mission
of
a
funder
basic or apmay
emphasize
to proposalswrittenforfundersof anthropological
research.Withmodification,
to pro- plied research.The distinctionis not absolute,as
theycan be extended
missionsmayincludean interestin
posals for funderswith other mandates-including research-oriented
thosesupporting
researchnotspecifically
defined
as an- the potentialapplicationof the results,whilefunders
missionswill use manyof the
or activitiesotherthanresearch.However, withproblem-oriented
thropology
theseremarksshouldbe takenonlyas generalguides same criteriaforevaluatinggoodresearchas thebasicresearchfunders.However,the fundamental
goal in
makingawardsin thefirstinstanceis thecontribution
willmaketobuilding
in thedisciknowledge
i. ? I99I
by The Wenner-Gren
FoundationforAnthropological theproject
Research.All rightsreservedooiI -3204/91/3204-0003$1
.00.
whilein thesecondit is
plineor area of the research,
Wenner-GrenFoundation forAnthropological
Research,Inc., 220 FifthAve., New York,N.Y.

This content downloaded from 148.223.96.146 on Sun, 11 Jan 2015 11:51:28 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

486 1 CURRENT

ANTHROPOLOGY

to solvingtheproblemsiden- be evaluatingtheproposal.Althoughspecialistsin the

theproject'scontribution
tifiedbythemission.
particulartopicof the projectare likelyto be among
Therealso aredistinctions
amongthekindsoffunding the reviewers,
it is almostcertainthatsome of those
Al- involvedin the evaluationwill not be specialists(and
provided,
suchas grants,
fellowships,
andcontracts.
thoughthesetermsare not alwaysused consistently,some maynot be anthropologists).
The proposalmust
awardsto support
a research
project therefore
grantsaregenerally
makea case thatis persuasive
tothosereaders:
or to further
specificresearchgoals.The qualificationsthe languagemust be understandable,
the rationale
will obviouslybe relevant,but the clear,and the significance
of the researcher
of the researchspelledout.
in evaluationis themeritoftheproject. The applicationshouldneither"talkdown"to thenonmaincriterion
in individuals,
providing specialistnor compromisethe intentionsof the reFellowshipsare investments
and/or
time.The search,but an effort
fortraining,
professional
development,
shouldbe madeto anticipatethe
butthis questionsand concernsthatsuchreadersmightreasonapplication
usuallyrequiresa projectstatement,
themeritoftheindivid- ablyhave.
servesmainlyto demonstrate
criterion.
Bothgrantsandfelual, whichis theprimary
lowshipsare awardedon the basis ofproposalswhose GENERAL POINTS
objectivesare definedby the applicant.Contractsare
awardsforprojectsthatimplement
specificpurposesset A numberofprinciplesshouldbe keptin mindin cona "requestfor structing
outbythefunder(oftensolicitedthrough
a proposal:
I. The proposalis theonlythingthatstandsbetween
proposals").
and contractscover theapplicant("you")and thedecisionmakers("they").
Generally,grants,fellowships,
onlytheexpensesoftheparticular
projectand/orindi- It musttherefore
make cleareverything
theyneed to
thismightincludeadminis- knowto make the decisionyou wantand everything
vidualsinvolved.Although
to the youwouldlikethemto takeintoaccount.The proposal
trativefees("overhead")or othercompensation
wheretheresearchis done,suchawardsare consistsnot onlyof the explicitinformation
institution
included;
notusuallydesignedto meetinstitutional
needs.Insti- it also represents
theway theapplicantworksand the
orsupport qualityof researchthatcan be expectedif a grantis
tutionalawards,madetoaidthedevelopment
aregenerally
ofinstitutions,
a separatecat- made.A proposalthatis carelessin presentation,
theprograms
that
egoryofsupport.
to guidelines,
doesnotconform
or thatis overlycasual
andprograms tellsthereaderthatthisis howtheworkwillbe carried
Theremaywell be a numberoffunders
underwhose rubricsa givenprojectmightfitor that out. Similarly,a stingyresponseto the application's
fordifferent
mightbe appropriate
aspectsoftheproject questions(one thatgrudgingly
providestheminimum
needs.The researcher
or different
to make
mightthere- information
funding
required)is a missedopportunity
foresubmitmultipleapplicationsto different
funders, themostpersuasivecase possible.The waytomakethe
beginningwith a masterproposalthat lays out the case is not by exceedingthe lengthlimits,furnishing
of extraneousmaterial,or offering
whole projectand adaptingit to the requirements
personaltestimonials
Ifmultipleapplications
eachapplication.
aresubmitted, butbytakingthetroubleto preparea high-quality
docthateach one be internally
it is important
coherent
and ument.
and thatit followthe guidelinesof the
self-contained
2. The proposalwill be readby informed
reviewers,
and be phrasedso as to responddi- whowill evaluateit on thebasisofitsownmerits.The
particular
program
mission.
rectlyto thefunder's
applicantdoes notneedto be knownto thereader,and
How can applicantsget relevantinformation
about thestatusor personalconnections
oftheapplicantare
to theoutcome.(Infact,personalrecthe specificfunderstheyplan to approach?The best usuallyirrelevant
fullofpraisemaybe counterproductive
sourceis the funder'sown publishedmaterial,which ommendations
will be provideduponrequest.Usuallytheapplication ifbeliedbytheevidenceoftheproposalitself.)
formor accompanying
instructions
willgiveclearindi3. The proposalwill always be evaluatedcompeticationsofwhatis expectedin an application
and clues tivelywithothers.To be adequateor even "good" is
ornotthespecific insufficient;
to howit will be evaluated.Whether
foran applicationto be successfulit must
usedin evaluationarestatedexplicitly,
criteria
theycan be betterthanotherswithwhichit will be compared.
to a largeextentbe gleanedfromthekindsofinforma- The applicantwho asks, "Whywas I turneddown?",
tionrequested.
misses the point.There may be nothingspecifically
Whileapplicantstendto focusupontheirownneeds, "wrong,"buttheproposalhas notpersuaded
thereaders
it is vitalin preparing
an application
to bearin mindthe thatthisprojectshouldbe fundedratherthanothers.
Fora requestto be successful,
it
purposesofthefunder.
4. The proposalwill be evaluatedaccordingto the
is not enoughthatit falltechnically
withinthelimits samebasiccriteria,
ofthefunder:
regardless
Is theprojofthefunder's
thattheap- ectwithinthescopeofthefunder's
mission,and it is irrelevant
mission?Is itpotenor tiallyofvalue in thatit will accomplishsomething
plicantmaythinkthemissionoughtto be redefined
of
so as to includehis/herneeds.The applica- interestto others?Is therea realisticprospectthatit
stretched
thefunder's
tionsthatseemmostlikelyto further
goals will be carriedout successfully?
Does the applicant
willbe theones funded.
showhimself/herself
to be qualified-knowledgeable
in
too is understanding
Of basic importance
who will thetopicoftheproject,
familiar
withtherelevant
work

This content downloaded from 148.223.96.146 on Sun, 11 Jan 2015 11:51:28 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Volume 32, Number 4, August-October I991I 1487

done by others,and capable of seeing the project

In general,
doestheproposalbuildfroma good
through?
theidea,and
idea,doesit havea planforimplementing
does it communicate
bothidea and plan effectively
to
thereader?

oftheapplicaTakingintoaccountthespecificformat
theinformation
tobe presented.
tion,beginbyoutlining
Outlinethewholeproposal,thenreviewto see thateverything
requiredis there,thatthereis minimalredunis as effective
as possidancy,and thattheorganization
ble.Next,writethefullfirstdraft.
The languageshould
be clearanddirect,avoidingunnecessary
jargonormetaTHE PROPOSAL
PREPARING
phor.The overallstyleshouldcommunicate
confidence
Three questions are basic to most researchproposals: and enthusiasmabout the projectbut not overblown
Whatis it youwantto do?How areyougoingto do it? claims forit.
thedraft,
and Whyis it worthdoing?You need to have the anAfter
checkitagainstthelengthlimwriting
swersto thesequestionsclearin yourmindbeforeyou itsand,ifnecessary,
cutjudiciously.
Spacelimitsshould
can articulatethemin a grantproposal.Indeed,ifyou alwaysbe observed,but the allottedspace shouldbe
are not surewhatyou wantto do or whyyou thinkit used constructively.
Finally,editforclarity,
precision,
important,
you shouldnot be lookingforfundsat all; and grammar.(Applicantswritingin a languagethat
and ifyou do nothave a clearidea ofhow to go about theydo notfullycontrolshouldseekhelpwhenediting
about if possible.)When the firstdraftis completed,set it
doingit,nothingthatyouwriteon an application
"methods"will makesense.
aside,returnto it witha fresheye,andrevisefora secA fundablegrantproposal,in otherwords,is based onddraft.
Continueuntilyouaresatisfied
withthedocresearchplan.As notedabove,it is ument.(Ifyou'renotsurewhether
on a well-conceived
youaresatisfied,
try
helpfulto havea masterproposalforyourownuse be- reading
itas ifyouwerea skepticalreviewer
considering
forestarting
to writea proposalforanyspecificfunder. someoneelse's requestforfunding.
Wouldyou giveit
This documentshouldmake explicityouranswersto highpriority
in a competition
forscarcefunds?)
thethreebasic questions,as well as an ideal timetable Oncethedocumentis complete,
typeormechanically
and thefinancialrequirements
and ideal)of printit, if possible,usinga darkribbon.If you must
(minimum
eachphase.The masterproposalwillguideyouin iden- writeit out byhand,printlegibly.Copiesshouldbe as
as theymayrelateto differentlegible as the original;watch for faint,messy,or
tifying
potentialfunders
aboutmaterialsto
phasesor financialneedsoftheprojectandhelpyouto smudgedprint.Followinstructions
Its main be includedand excluded,collation,and otherdetails.
preparespecificproposalsforspecificfunders.
in yourownmindwhat Finally,proofread
purpose,however,is to clarify
everything
thoroughly;
nothingreworthyourtimeandenergy? flectsmore directlyon the applicant'sstandardsand
youwanttodo.Is theeffort
Whydo you thinkit is worthdoing,and whymight habitsofworkthana spateofeditorialortypographical
othersfindit so? Is it realistically
possibleto do evenif errors.
forit?Beingclearon thesebasicissues
yougetfunding
is thenecessary
a proposalthat
starting
pointforwriting
willpersuadeothers.
ADDRESSING
THE MAIN QUESTIONS
As youmovefromthemasterproposalto specificapall Whatyouwantto do. A goodproposalhas as its objecplications,the firstthingto do is to readcarefully
thematerialsprovided
Reviewthewhole tivesomething
bythefunder.
thatis worthdoing:something
thatadandplanhowyoucan makeyourcase most dressesan important
application
questionorissueand thathas not
withinits particular
effectively
guidelinesand format. alreadybeendonebysomeoneelse. Ifit has beendone
thatwhatis pub- but not quite in this way or in thisplace,thenit is
Assume(unlessyouknowotherwise)
lishedin thesematerialsis whatis meant-thatthere necessaryto show whydoingit in thisway or in this
is no secretagenda.Followtheinstructions
as precisely placewill add significantly
to whatwe alreadyknow.
as possible.Ifyou have specialquestionsor problems, The "important
question"is crucial.The factthat
in writing
contactthefunder
risk something
has notbeendonebeforeis insufficient
(oralcommunications
reaon bothsides).However,ifyou find sonfordoingit; whyshouldit be done?The factthatit
misunderstanding
thatyourprojectis noteligiblefortheprogram,
applying fillsa "gap in the literature"is not persuasive;why
is a wasteoftime.
shouldthegapbe filled,andwhyfillthisparticular
gap
It is essentialto allow sufficient
timeto prepareany ratherthanothers?Once it is clearthatthequestionis
allow timeto re- indeedimportant,
proposal.Plan to writeseveraldrafts;
youneedto showthatwhatyouwant
think,revise,and edit.Rememberthatthemechanics to do is themoststrategic
nextstepto takein addressofthefinalversionwillbe timeconsuming.
Hastyprep- ing it.
arationgenerally
revealsitself.
If the projectis descriptiveratherthan problemThe bodyoftheproposalmaytaketheformofa narra- oriented,
it stillneedsto be madeclearhowthedescriptiveor ofanswersto specificquestions.In eithercase, tionwill bear,immediately
or ultimately,
upon some
andformat
instructions
theapplication
shouldguidethe questionorissue.The collectionofdescriptive
datamay
of material.Writing
organization
techniqueis an indi- be valuablein its own right,but a case mustbe made
vidualmatter,butthefollowing
approachmaybe sug- fortheselectionofthisparticular
people,place,site,or
gested:
species.

This content downloaded from 148.223.96.146 on Sun, 11 Jan 2015 11:51:28 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

488 1 CURRENT

ANTHROPOLOGY

projectis likelyto be onlya smallcontri- or addressing

issuesofsignificance
A particular
to a scholarly
discibutionto some largeresearchgoal,butit shouldmake pline.
clearwhatthatgoalis andhowtheprojectwillcontrib- In relatingtheprojectto otherwork,it is notenough
owngoalshould to say thatit "bearsupon" or "contributes
utetoit.Atthesametime,theproject's
to" certain
in termsofone interests,
be achievable.Thus,it shouldbe framed
bodiesofliterature,
or currentdevelopments
or moreresearchquestions,thatis, specificquestions in a discipline.How doesit bearuponandin whatway
thatcan be answeredby the researchproposed.A re- will it advancetheseinterests?
Whyis thisparticular
searchquestionmustbe possibleto answer,butthean- study,ratherthansome other,the best nextstep toswershouldnot be obvious;if it is, whybotherto do wardsmakingsuchadvance?The objectis to leavethe
thework?
readerwitha sensethattheprojectis notonlyinterestWhatyouwantto do needsto be relatedto whathas ingbutofcompelling
valueandthusmeritshighpriority
alreadybeen done: the statusof thequestionor issue, forfunding.
to addressit, and what is inadequateor
otherefforts
incompleteaboutpriorworkthatwill be remediedor ADDITIONAL
ITEMS
advancedby yourproject.Whetheror not thisshould
will Abstract.Most applicationswill requirean abstractof
entaila reviewoftherelevantscholarlyliterature
formatof the application, specifiedlength.It shouldbe writtenafterthebodyof
dependupon the particular
butit shouldbe evidentthattheproposalbuildsupon theproposal,as it shouldcogentlysummarizetheproposal'smainpointsand cover,in brief,
thethreeessenpriorwork.
In sum,this partof the proposalshouldprovidean tial questions.Prepareyourabstractwithgreatcare.It
ofwhatyou aim to accomplishand maybe theonlypartoftheproposalreadforsomepurexplicitstatement
andit willbe usedby
yourgeneralplanfordoingso. It shouldalso makeclear posesin theprocessofevaluation,
whyyouwanttodo itandwhatwe willknowas a result mostreadersto remindthemofthecontents.
Title.Likean abstract,
a titleservestoprepare
thatwe don'tknownow.
readers
to remindthemlaterof
How you will go about doingit. For mostfunders forthecontentsoftheproposal,
does not necessarily whatwas init,andtoinform
thosewhowillnotreadthe
of anthropology,
"methodology"
andstraightforward
to proposalitself.Choosea descriptive
meana tightresearchdesignwithformalhypotheses
sumsup whattheprojectis about.
measures.However,it does titlethataccurately
be testedand quantitative
and cleverphrasings
ofthestepsyouwilltakein trying
to Grandioseclaims,metaphor,
are
meana statement
and maymislead.
achievethe aims of theproject.It musttellwhatwill usuallyinappropriate
the budgetportionof the proBudget.In preparing
be done to answerthe researchquestionsposed:what
the
are neededto answerthemand posal,it is essentialto reviewand followcarefully
kindsof information
These will state
will be obtained.The discussion budgetguidelinesand instructions.
how thatinformation
forchoosing whatbudgetitemsareallowedandwithinwhatlimits.
ofmethodshouldmakeclearyourrationale
includedshouldbe clearlyrelated
theseparticular
waysofgoingaboutthework.It should Each budgetcategory
showthatyou selectedthem(possiblyoveraltemative to theresearchplan as statedin theapplication;ifthe
becausetheyare bothfeasibleand likelyto relationis notobvious,it shouldbe spelledout.Itemize
strategies)
neededto answerthequestion(s) thebudgetin as muchdetailas is realistically
possible
yieldtheinformation
and showhowthebudgetfigures
posed.Includeas muchdetailon thespecifics
(site,pop- (andas spacepermits)
at ifthisis notself-evident.
to be exam- werearrived
Checkall arithulation,sampleorportionofthepopulation
or data-collecting
carelesserrorsmaysuggestsloppyretechniques,time- meticcarefully;
ined,instruments
table,etc.) as the applicationformatinvitesand space searchto follow.
allows.The objectis to showthattheplanforcarrying Althougha strongproposalwill not be turneddown
in thebudget,
thebudgetreflects
outtheresearchhas a goodchanceofrealizingtheaims becauseofproblems
on
forundertaking
theproject.The items
yourpreparation
oftheproject.
The statement
ofaims will al- requestedshouldbe thosenecessaryand adequateto
Whyit is important.
of the achievingthe aims of the project,and the estimateof
readyhave suggestedthe potentialsignificance
formats
thatstatement
In someapplication
may costsshouldbe realisticbuteconomical.Mostfunders
project.
be expectedto includea literature
requirefundreview,whilein oth- willhavebudgetlimitsthatmayin effect
ersthismaybe coveredin a separateitem.However,it ing fromothersources.If the fundsrequestedin the
areintended
tosupplement
fundsfromother
is essentialthattheproposalshowhow theprojectre- application
lates to workdone by othersand whyit wouldbe of sources,youshouldmakethisclear.It is also usefulto
butnotonlythespecialists explainhowyouwouldproceediffullfunding
werenot
toothers-including
interest
withtheparticular
concerned
time,place,and topicof obtained.
to
Bibliography.
Generally,some kind of bibliography
theproject.Whothe"others"arewillvaryaccording
and thestatement will be needed,eitherforcitationofliterature
referred
themissionoftheparticular
funder,
or as a broaderlistingofworksreleThe pointis to to in thenarrative
shouldvaryaccordingly.
ofsignificance
ifcarriedout,willcontributevant to the project.Needless to say, a bibliography
indicatehowtheresearch,
thatbe solvinga so- shouldbe accuratein all details,as it will be conspicuto somelargerenterprise-whether
habits.
cietalproblem,gainingknowledgeabouta worldarea, ous evidenceofyourscholarly

This content downloaded from 148.223.96.146 on Sun, 11 Jan 2015 11:51:28 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Volume 32, Number 4, August-October I99 I1489

it is intendedto HieroglyphicLiteracyin
is requested,
Ifa projectbibliography
and
withtherelevantliterature
revealyourfamiliarity
the AncientMayaland: Inferences
thathaveinfluenced
thespecificideasorapproaches
project.The readermayalso look to it forevidenceof
in otherlanguagesor fromLinguisticData'
awarenessof essentialliterature
thatdisagreeswiththe
otherdisciplinesor literature
should
yourown approach.However,thebibliography
listofrefer- CECIL H. BROWN
be selective,not simplyan indiscriminate
encestakenfromsomeothersource.The statedguide- Deparment ofAnthropology,NorthernIllinois
a clue as to how extensiveit should University,DeKalb, Ill. 6o0II5, U.S.A. 25 IV 91
linesshouldoffer
eachitem.
be,butthereshouldbe a reasonforincluding
of Classic Maya civilization(ca.
will A majorachievement
Curriculum vitae. The applicationinstructions
ofa complexsystem
butany A.D. 25o-goo) was thedevelopment
datato be submitted,
indicatethebiographical
witha truephoneticcomponent,
writing
shouldprovidethefullrelevantinformationofhieroglyphic
statement
throughinscriptions
and priorworkwithoutbeingin- a systemknownto us primarily
on yourbackground
carved
stone
monuments.2
After
theClassiccollapse
on
flatedor overlydetailed.It will be read to determine
writingcontinuedto be used by speakers
to carryout the projectproposed, hieroglyphic
yourqualifications
resultsfromearlierre- of Mayanlanguagesuntilafterthe arrivalof Spanish
yourtrackrecordin producing
FromtheendoftheClassicperiodon,most
and evidencethat the current conquerors.
search(if appropriate),
was done on barkpaper.Nearlyall of
glyphic
writing
frompastwork.
projectmakessenseas a development
thereshouldbe someindi- this was destroyedby the Spanishduringthe early
Ifit is a newareaofinterest,
cationthatyouhavetakenstepstoacquirethenecessary phases of the conquest (Tedlock i985:27). Fora number
to the
ofreasons,theSpanishpresencewas detrimental
background.
of knowledge,nativeor other,of Maya
preservation
In addition,it didnotpromotehistoriglyphicwriting.
FOLLOW-UP
cal documentation
concemingthenatureand extentof
formanyofthesamereaProbably
hieroglyphic
literacy.
Each funderwill have its own policieswithregardto
the
of
that
sons
Maya
glyphswerelostto the
meanings
decisions.
and
of
ofapplications handling
theprocessing
knowledgeof whichof the speakersof Mayan
withthe appli- world,3
communication
Theremay be further
cant priorto a finaldecision:additionalinformationlanguages produced and understoodthem was lost as
maybe requested;changesin thebudgetmaybe asked well.
literacyin anforor imposed;conditionsmaybe attachedto a tenta- 'rhenatureand extentofhieroglyphic
fromotherevidence.For
tive award.Eventually,
you will be notifiedwiththe cientMayalandcan be inferred
on stonemonuments
is made, example,thatClassicinscriptions
offerof an awardor a declination.If an offer
in
with
events
the lives of Classic
deal
almost
solely
make
a formalcontract;
acceptanceofit will constitute
(ScheleI982: I) suggests
to be- Mayarulersand theirretainers
sureyouunderstand
fullywhatyouare agreeing
thatreadingand writingmayhave been the exclusive
foresigningthis(oranyother)contract.
of the elite.At the same time,thatinscribed
domain
Some funderswill providecopies (or summaries)of
wereerectedinhighly
monuments
Classic
publicplaces
oronrequest.Otheitherroutinely
reviewsofproposals,
or reviewercom- suggeststhatlargenumbersofpeoplecouldread,ifnot
ers maypass on specificsuggestions
mentsin certaininstances,orthepolicymaybe to offer produce,them.
ofunsuccessful
appli- Durbin (I980) cites Kubler's(1973:I62) suggestion
no feedbackat all. Resubmission
cationsis generally
allowed,withinlimits.Ifresubmit- that "the originalpurposeof the Maya scholarswho
advisableto evaluatetheproposal composed them [inscriptionson stone] was perhapsto
it
of
course
is
ting,
fromthefields"
it. Ifyouare convincedthat makethemeaningclearto thefarmer
and attemptto strengthen
that
this
"would
mean
that
historicalinforand
argues
meritorious
butthereviewtheproposalwas eminently
mation
was
a
eliteto a lay
sophisticated
presented
by
whether
orappreciate
ersdidnotunderstand
it,consider
codices(inyou have statedyourcase as clearlyand as effectivelyaudience"(p. I I I). He findsthefewexisting
morecomplex
scriptionson barkpaper)considerably
as youmighthave.
Thereis alwaysthechancethata goodproposalwill
FoundationforAnthropological
notsucceedforreasonsthathaveto do withthenature i. ? I99I by the Wenner-Gren
I am
aboutpriori- Research. All rightsreserved oo0I-3204/91/3204-ooo5$I.00.
thefunder's
ofthecompetition,
judgment
to PamelaBrown,Michael Coe, WilliamL. Fash,Jr.,Dell
In that grateful
beyondyourcontrol.
ties,orothercircumstances
Hymes,JoeMalone,RonaldProvencher,
RalphGardnerWhite,and
involvesa certain an anonymousrefereeforreadingand commentingon an earlier
case,tryelsewhere.Researchfunding
and mistakesare inevitable;ev- draftofthispaper.
amountofguesswork,
erygrantmakerexpectsthatproposalsit has declined 2. Classic Maya writingis an extensiveelaborationof an earlier
workunderthesponsor- and muchsimplerwritingsystem(Coe 1976).
willonedayproduceimportant
3. Remarkableadvancesin deciphering
Maya hieroglyphic
writing
offered
herecarry have
The suggestions
shipofotherfunders.
been made in the last i 5 yearsor so. LindaSchele(personal
ofsuccess,butit is hopedthattheymay communication)estimatesthatat least 85% of inscriptionscan
no guarantees
now be understood.
to moreeffective
contribute
proposalwriting.

This content downloaded from 148.223.96.146 on Sun, 11 Jan 2015 11:51:28 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions