Geoff Carver wrote:
 
>would anyone out there be interested in starting some kind of a >discussion
group
 
>specifically on what is wrong with how archaeology is done >where they are
and
>what they think should be done about it
 
I've been puzzled over a similar issue here in the Southeastern U.S.
Recently, I sponsored a skills workshop in urban archaeology in Alabama.  We
had several speakers.  Every skill presented was appreciated with great
enthusiasm, except one.  We had  Edward Harris  (himself) come and teach us
about using the "Harris Matrix."  My thought was that this was a useful
vehicle to help record and understand the complex stratigraphy  we find in
urban settings.  Unfortunately, most  of the archaeologists
present seemed unconvinced.  The primary problem appeared not to be his
presentation, but the fact that most of them opened up sites in arbitrary
levels.   Since then, I began to realize that I had grown up
(archaeologically speaking) in  a very different tradition than my
colleagues.  This horrified me.  We had been talking apples and oranges all
along .  My
reality about what lays beneath the soil is completely different than
theirs.  Suddenly, I was being ridiculed for seeing soil layers that in
their minds were impossible to see - except in profile.    And, I sincerely
believed as Dr. Harris so bluntly put it that day that  "if you can't see
the layers
as you dig them, you shouldn't be excavating, then should you? "  (got to
love him!)
 
So, my question is, what's going on here?   How, widespread is this
alternative point of view in the U.S.    Dig first, figure it out later in
the profile.   (I was taught that this was something we Americans
outgrew).  Or have I led a sheltered life and I'm actually holding the
alternative view?  ( hey, even the sane person  can begin to question his
saneness when living in a mental ward.)
 
Anyway, I'm concerned that regionalization of archaeologists - or
"inbreeding" between pairs of graduate schools - has created some VERY
different  excavation approaches  - and the differences are not related to
research designs but to very different basic understandings  about the very
nature of the resource.   But we are all pretending the differences don't
exist.  Anybody have a comment on this.?
 
Finally,  Let me add that I am very sincere in this posting, so please don't
abuse me too badly.
 
 
Linda Derry ([log in to unmask])
Old Cahawba Archaeological Park
Alabama Historical Commission