Well: the Romans did have written literature, so... given that on this side
of the Atlantic, the general tendency tends to be to draw the line between
"classical" & "prehistoric"... and every now & then I forget to translating
things from one context/paradigm to another before I press the "send"
button, but on this occasion I thought the excavations at Pompeii in & of
themselves do constitute historical archaeology: their gradual
disintegration constituting a site in progress, of supreme significance to
the history of archaeology (or even the archaeology of archaeology if you
prefer), and the problems of site preservation, tourism, politix, etc., are
basically relevant to all archaeologists, of whatever flavour, etc.
So anyway: sorry; my bad; maybe you can remind me again when history begins,
because I've obviously forgotten

-----Original Message-----
From: HISTORICAL ARCHAEOLOGY [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Anita
Cohen-Williams


Geoff,

This is NOT historical archaeology. Please limit your posts on this list to
historical archaeology topics.