FYI in Baja, California archaeologist from INAH basically classify everything as either prehispanic or hispanic.  This might have worked in New Mexico if it weren't for those darn Americans.  Oh well.  

"Boyer, Jeffrey, DCA" <[log in to unmask]> wrote:  Fortunately for you, David, you're still willing to admit your confusion. Hold onto that grad school naiveté as long as possible -- the real world will beat it out of you soon enough and you, too, will find yourself making pronouncements about how to define your field of study. Historical archaeology is like kivas in Southwestern Pueblo sites -- nobody knows how to define it but we're all pretty sure we know it when we see it.
Susan Walters' (admirably) short-and-sweet definition brings to my mind a situation on a project I'm working on now. We have sites that are Hispanic ranchos -- so, clearly historic in time (i.e., after the introduction of Europeans and written records), sites that are prehistoric Puebloan, and sites with components that are prehistoric Puebloan, historic Euroamerican, and historic Puebloan. How, oh, how to classify?
Although my co-directors and I euphemistically refer amongst ourselves to the resulting reports-in-progress as the historic and prehistoric volumes, we are actually calling the volume that will deal with the Hispanic components the"Euroamerican volume," while the volumes that will deal with the Puebloan (and Archaic) components will be the "Native volumes." That, of course, will offend some folks who will contend that, by the late 18th century (our oldest Hispanic component), Hispanics were natives of the area. The issue is not resolved by referring to Indians as Native Americans, since that term, too, could apply to the local Hispanics. In fact, my family has lived in northern New Mexico for about 150 years, so I (sometimes hautily) consider myself a native. But, we had to make a call, and we decided to group the components of Euroamerican origin(s), even though many of the artifacts were made by Indians, and to group the components of Indian origin(s), even though at
 least one will be "historic" in age.
Nothing, of course, prevents us from comparing assemblages across presumed ethnic and temporal boundaries.
We have stopped referring to "historic" artifacts and "historic artifact analysis" and gone to "Euroamerican artifacts" and "Euroamerican artifact analysis," admitting up front that items like Chinese porcelain and Haitian Phoenix buttons are not technically Euroamerican artifacts.
That's our happy little story, and we're sticking with it.
Has your confusion now given you a headache? If not, then I haven't done my job.
Jeff

Jeffrey L. Boyer, RPA
Project Director
Office of Archaeological Studies, Museum of New Mexico
mail: P.O. Box 2087, Santa Fe, New Mexico 87504
physical: 407 Galisteo Street, Suite B-100, Santa Fe, New Mexico 87501
tel: 505.827.6387 fax: 505.827.3904
e-mail: [log in to unmask]
"It might look a bit messy now, but just you come back in 500 years time." --Terry Pratchett


________________________________

From: HISTORICAL ARCHAEOLOGY on behalf of David Parkhill
Sent: Wed 7/18/2007 9:22 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Hysterical Archaeology



I am trying my best to understand all of the evaluations concerning the
terms "Historical Archaeology", "History"and "Archaeology". The more I
read, (it is all very good!) the more confused I become.

It seems to me some folks are trying to defend their "Sacred Positions",
which I find is usual among intellectuals, while others are trying to just
confuse the issue. Being a neophyte in this area of study I keep asking,
Huh? So if I may be so bold as to admit, "I don't know!" Then "What the
heck is Historical Archaeology ?"

With all due respect, I am really impressed with the quality and knowledge
of all of you and your willingness to share and support each other.

Best regards

______________________________________________________________________
This inbound email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System.
______________________________________________________________________




Confidentiality Notice: This e-mail, including all attachments is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential and privileged information. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited unless specifically provided under the New Mexico Inspection of Public Records Act. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender and destroy all copies of this message. -- This email has been scanned by the Sybari - Antigen Email System. 


       
---------------------------------
Yahoo! oneSearch: Finally,  mobile search that gives answers, not web links.