HISTARCH Archives

HISTORICAL ARCHAEOLOGY

HISTARCH@COMMUNITY.LSOFT.COM

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Condense Mail Headers

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

Print Reply
Content-transfer-encoding:
7bit
Sender:
HISTORICAL ARCHAEOLOGY <[log in to unmask]>
Subject:
From:
"William & Irene J. Henry" <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Wed, 19 Oct 2005 20:12:13 -0400
MIME-version:
1.0
Content-type:
text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Reply-To:
HISTORICAL ARCHAEOLOGY <[log in to unmask]>
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (16 lines)
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