We tend to forget that "historical archaeology" has rapidly evolved and  
broadly expanded over the past fifty-years and means many things to many people.  
There are also deeply stratified layers between the senior citizens of this 
new  field and the current graduate students in what is taught and what they 
take  away. Most of us simply hang on for the ride and take post graduate 
coursework  or training where we can find it. Even the syntheses of what has been 
happening  tend to be regionally specific and reflect changes within certain 
academic  centers. I would love to see a history of historical archaeology that 
includes  the evolution from across the Western World and encompasses Alaska, 
Hawaii,  California and the rest of North America.
 
Ron May
Legacy 106, Inc.
 
 
In a message dated 3/7/2009 8:58:44 A.M. Pacific Standard Time,  
[log in to unmask] writes:

Reminds  me as well that the situation in the English-speaking world is  not
necessarily typical; my wife got her MA in medieval history in Spain,  where
they either don't or at least didn't used to have archaeology as a  first
degree topic; you had to switch to it later...
Also thinking of  some great examples of historical archaeology: "In small
things forgotten,"  for example
On the other hand, I'm increasingly convinced, from comparing  histories of
archaeology with the original historical documents (i.e. site  "reports" from
pre-1880) that archaeologists make pretty lousy  historians...


**************A Good Credit Score is 700 or Above. See yours in just 2 easy 
steps! 
(http://pr.atwola.com/promoclk/100126575x1219957551x1201325337/aol?redir=http:%2F%2Fwww.freecreditreport.com%2Fpm%2Fdefault.aspx%3Fsc%3D668072%26hmpgID
%3D62%26bcd%3DfebemailfooterNO62)