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!)