HI --
Well, I am glad to hear that we may be seeing a sea change in the training
of HAs. I think its overdue, but still encouraging.
But on the darker sider, I continue to remain shocked and dismayed at how
many newly crowned PhDs I meet at SHA meetings who tell me, upon my
questioning them, that they'd had no training in or exposure to history at
the college level - nor was it required in their HA program - and yet they
call themselves Historical Archaeologists.
One small step and hurrah for personal initiative!
Carl Barna
Regional Historian
BLM Colorado State Office
I was trained in the traditional anthropology route common in the US. As I
was specializing in historical archaeology, I assumed that I would be
taking courses in history and geography. Not only did I not meet with any
resistance from my faculty committee, they were laboring under the same
expectations as I, so I found courses from these disciplines readily became
a part of my program. Also, the faculty in history and geography in whose
classes I enrolled, were uniformly welcoming, even though I was not in
their own graduate program. Now I finished graduate coursework just over
20 years ago, so maybe the world of graduate studies has changed.
Tom Langhorne
>To respond to Carl's comment: While the archaeology departments may not
>list history classes in their catalogs, it's my experience from talking to
>the new generation of historical archaeologists that most of us who have
>chosen to get our degree in an archaeology department that do not
specialize
>in historical archaeology have taken all of their electives and additional
>classes in history. I don't think the problem is the education that the
>students are getting. I think it's academia. I know many historians who
>have to battle their professors to take archaeology classes and although,
as
>I said above, many of us historical archaeologists have a lot of training
in
>history, it is by our own initiative and sometimes tenacity that this is
so.
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: HISTORICAL ARCHAEOLOGY [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Carl
>Barna
>Sent: Friday, March 12, 2004 6:49 AM
>To: [log in to unmask]
>Subject: Re: Just the facts, ma'am
>
>Adrain --
>
>A perfect example of why students in Historical Archaeology need to be
also
>trained in History, not currently the situation in US anthro-oriented grad
>school HA programs.
>
>Carl Barna
>Regional Historian
>BLM Colorado State Office
>
>
>
>
> praetzellis
> <[log in to unmask] To: [log in to unmask]
> ET> cc:
> SCHAEOLOGY <HIOGY Subject: Just the facts,
>ma'am
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>"If you provide a research design that. explains why archaeological data
>are better than archival or historic sources for studying these questions,
>the THC will support it."
>
>Barile continues.
>
>".this statement re-emphasized the tendency to separate archaeology from
>the cohesive study of all historic cultural resources, including
>architecture, archival research, and oral history."
>
>
>Adrian Praetzellis
>Sonoma State University
W. Thomas Langhorne, Jr., Ph.D. [log in to unmask]
Pre-Health Professions Advisor (phone) 607-777-6305
Adjunct Assistant Professor-Anthropology (fax) 607-777-2721
Binghamton University
P.O. Box 6000
Binghamton, NY 13902-6000
http://harpur-advising.binghamton.edu/prehealth
This message and any attachments may contain information that is protected
by law as privileged and confidential, and is transmitted for the sole use
of the intended recipient(s). If you are not the intended recipient, you
are hereby notified that any use, dissemination, copying or retention of
this e-mail or the information contained herein is strictly prohibited. If
you have received this e-mail in error, please immediately notify the
sender by e-mail, and permanently delete this e-mail.
|
