For all their talk about "uniformitarianism" & so on, the historians & many
theorists of archaeology never seem to put historical/industrial archaeology
in the right place
If we were really serious about uniformitarianism - the present being the
key to the past & moving from the known to the unknown - then we would have
systematically started excavating & doing work from the present & then going
further & further into the past, into times of ever-decreasing amounts of
"history" (supportive documentation)
Instead conservative Brits decided to put more emphasis on Roman &
prehistoric archaeology, in part to undermine popular interest in the
supposedly more liberal/egalitarian medieval period that was manifesting
itself in the form of the arts & crafts movement, etc.
So maybe you do need more theorising: at least in terms of seeing industrial
as an extension of experimental archaeology, something we have some means of
testing & confirming


-----Original Message-----
From: HISTORICAL ARCHAEOLOGY [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Timothy
Scarlett
Sent: September 28, 2006 21:21
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Industrial Archaeology vs. Industrial Heritage

I've never found humor to transfer well via email on this group, so  
I'll stay on the serious side