HISTARCH Archives

HISTORICAL ARCHAEOLOGY

HISTARCH@COMMUNITY.LSOFT.COM

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Claire Horn <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
HISTORICAL ARCHAEOLOGY <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Wed, 19 Oct 2005 22:51:39 -0400
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (41 lines)
One good article on this topic in NY state is LouAnn Wurst, Douglas
Armstrong & Elizabeth Kellar 2000 "Between Fact and Fantasy: Assessing
Our Knowledge of Domestic Sites" in Nineteenth- and Early
Twentieth-Century Domestic Site Archaeology in New York State, edited by
John Hart & Charles Fisher, New York State Education Department, Albany,
NY. 

Claire Horn
Anthropology Department
Binghamton University
 

-----Original Message-----
From: HISTORICAL ARCHAEOLOGY [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of
William & Irene J. Henry
Sent: Wednesday, October 19, 2005 8:12 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: excavation justification

With Sanborn maps, directories, land records, tax records, newspapers,
journals and a 
host of other historical documentation readily available over the
internet it is 
becoming harder and harder to justify Phase II and Phase III
excavations, 
especially of late 19th and early twentieth century sites. 

How many 19th/early 20th century farmsteads or urban houses need to be
excavated, 
and what new information can they provide?  

I was asked this question by a historian friend of mine and 
was just curious to hear comments and opinions from the list members.  I
was told 
that an article appeared several years ago on the subject but
unfortunately I 
have no source.

 
Bill Henry  

ATOM RSS1 RSS2