A word of warning. Don't upset Anita. In Australia we lost our discussion
list and its been much harder to keep in contact ever since.
Regards Gaye
-----Original Message-----
From: HISTORICAL ARCHAEOLOGY [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Robert
L. Schuyler
Sent: Tuesday, 31 March 2009 8:02 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: "Parents" and Historical Archaeology
I will do a longer piece on this issue later today but I want to tell
Anita:
(1) Do not give up HISTARCH. It is a vital tool for all those who
study Historical Archaeology, that is, the archaeology of the Modern World
(ca. AD 1400 to the Present). Other types of archaeologies of history have
their own discussion groups as they should.
God Bless Anita and HISTARCH. Ranging from questions of theory to
identifying specific artifacts, HISTARCH is one of our best research and
communication tools we have. SHA honored both Anita and HISTARCH with an SHA
Award of Merit for these services a few years back. HISTARCH has not grown
less important since that ceremony, it has increased every year in its
importance.
(2) Although the article I wrote, which Fontana refers to in his
message, was first published in 1970 (actually written in 1969), I am not
the real "Father of Historical Archaeology." That designation must belong to
people like J.C. Harrington, John L.
Cotter, Kenneth Kidd,
Art Woodward et al, et al, both in North America and elsewhere in the world
(e.g. the founders of the SPMA in Europe). Then there is a second generation
of ancestors - Jim Deetz, Stan South, Bunny Fontana, Judy Birmingham et al.
Finally there is my generation.
Thank you for the comment Anita, it is a great honor, but I was in
part a student of Deetz which is why I am still so young.
I will return today!
Bob Schuyler
At 08:18 PM 3/30/2009, you wrote:
>Geoff,
>
>The source is Dr. Schuyler's book, Historical Archaeology. IMHO, Bob is
>the father of Historical Archaeology as a discipline.
>
>On Mon, Mar 30, 2009 at 3:12 PM, geoff carver <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> > OK: so where did this definition come from? It must come from
> > somewhere, have a source, someone you can cite...
> > But that still leaves me hanging: part of what I'm doing is
> > historical (although I'd normally call the 19th & 20th century stuff
> > "modern"), part medieval, part Classical, & possibly some
> > prehistoric... except that the relation between historical &
prehistoric...
> > I'm confused... just give me the source & I'll read it myself
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> >
> > Historical Archaeology is the archaeology of the Modern World (AD
> > [or if you prefer CE] 1400 to the Present
> >
>
>
>
>--
>Anita Cohen-Williams
>Organic SEO and Social Media Marketing
>http://www.mysearchguru.com
>Twitter: @searchguru
|
