HI Ned --

I'd say that you hit an important nail right on the head.

An earlier poster was on the same track when they said that HA needs to
also combine the skills of an actor,  geographer, historian, etc., etc.
Your post is along the same line, i.e a 'mosaic that needs to be put
together.'

Like you, I have a combined background in History and HA.  HA, of all
fields, should being using an interdisciplinary approach.  Not a
multidisciplinary approach, an INTERdisciplinary approach.  There is a
world of difference.

Using an Interdisciplinary approach, historians, HAs, etc. should be
working together to formulate the questions to be addressed in project's
research design, interpret the findings, develop recommendations for new
lines of investigation, show how the site adds to or contributes to current
issues and questions in the different disciplines, etc.  This seldom
happens, but it should be SOP within the HA or CRM profession.  While this
approach might be too complex for small-scale 106 projects, it should be
SOP in the larger, more academically oriented projects.

What often happens instead is a multidisciplinary approach.  If you're
lucky, you might have a project historian involved who writes a token
section of the report.  It is often an isolated,  stand alone chapter that
is not incorporated into the over all body of the text, not used to help
shape questions to be addressed in the research design, not used in
interpreting the findings, or not used to set the findings within a broader
body of historical knowledge or understanding.  Its just there, like
somebody thought it might look good.

An example was the field school I was at.  We found a piece of type showing
the skull and crossbones symbol of the Stamp Act protest.  None of these
anthro students knew what the Stamp Act was, but they were going to
evaluate the significance of the site.  That kind of thing can be tolerated
in field schools, because they are a essentially training experiences.
Unfortunately, this also happens in real life where the site preservation
stakes are much greater, in which you have strictly anthro-trained folks
lacking any historical knowledge or background making pronouncements on the
significance of historic period sites all on their own. This is what I too
often see on my side of the business.

Cheers!

Carl Barna
Regional Historian
BLM Colorado State Office