The judged "adequacy" of the "story" as understood from
documentary sources should have no bearing on the "need" to
excavate a site or not excavate a site. The documentary, oral,
and material records of the past each provide an way of
"knowing" the past- one is not necessarily any more "true" than
any other.
 
I agree that archaeologists and historians must work together to
truely advance our understanding of the past.  I can not,
however, accept the idea that any one profession has a "truer"
or more accurate set of theory and methods in working toward our
common goals. All have their respective strengths and weaknesses.
 
 
John P, McCarthy
Senior Archaeologist/Historian
Institute for Minnesota Archaeology/
IMA Consulting, Inc.
(P.S. Just for the record, my professional qualifications exceed
both the current and the more stringent proposed NPS guidelines
in the fields of prehistoric and historic archaeology, history,
and architectural history. Any "historic archaeologist" without
at least some formal training in the history of his/er
period/area of study is not worthy of the name!)