While I appreciate and agree to a considerable extent with Deb Rotman's
comments, I think I should make my own position clear.

Archaeology does not exist, as far as I can see, apart from other scholarly
disciplines.  It is a set of methods for the study of the material record of
the past.  The substance of any such study is to be found in other
disciplines.

Historical archaeology integrates text and document sources with the
material record to address any of a wide-range of topics in anthropology,
geology, sociology, economics, geography, architecture, and social,
cultural, technological, and material culture histories, and, yes, the
histories of spiritual beliefs and practices.

What I think is really at issue in these discussions is the theoretical
positions necessary to support the analysis of the more social and cultural
research topics.  I am not prepared to discuss the numerous problems with
functionalist and naive positivist (processualist) positions in this forum.
However, various aspects of post-modern social/cultural theory allow
historical archaeologists to reach beyond the technological functions of
objects to address their multifaceted uses and meanings in the everyday
lives of the people of the past.

Thanks for the use of the hall,
John


______________________________________________
FREE Personalized Email at Mail.com
Sign up at http://www.mail.com/?sr=signup