Susan:

I heartily agree.  As an "Hysterical Archaeologist", I would only add that 
the knowledge of ethnographic interviewing of informants is also very 
useful.  I would rather talk to an informant about a site, feature or 
artifact than to guess or go on the internet. That proved to be very 
beneficial, recently, in finding a "lost" Mexican Presidio in Arizona.

Richard J. Lundin, BA, MA, RPA, ISAP
Consulting Historical Archaeologist & Remote Sensing Specialist
Director, Wondjina Research Institute
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Susan Walter" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Wednesday, July 18, 2007 9:28 AM
Subject: Re: Hysterical Archaeology


> David,
> In my mind, the simplest explanation is that historical archaeology 
> concerns
> the study of people whose cultures had writing.  There are extenuating
> circumstances, but that applies to every discipline...fuzzy edges are
> common, everywhere.
> S. Walter
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "David Parkhill" <[log in to unmask]>
> To: <[log in to unmask]>
> Sent: Wednesday, July 18, 2007 8:22 AM
> Subject: Hysterical Archaeology
>
>
>> I am trying my best to understand all of the evaluations concerning the
>> terms "Historical Archaeology", "History"and "Archaeology". The more I
>> read, (it is all very good!) the more confused I become.
>>
>> It seems to me some folks are trying to defend their "Sacred Positions",
>> which I find is usual among intellectuals, while others are trying to 
>> just
>> confuse the issue. Being a neophyte in this area of study I keep asking,
>> Huh? So if I may be so bold as to admit, "I don't know!" Then "What the
>> heck is Historical Archaeology ?"
>>
>> With all due respect, I am really impressed with the quality and 
>> knowledge
>> of all of you and your willingness to share and support each other.
>>
>> Best regards
>