Several people have recently written me seeking guidance on training in
 historical archaeology. Given the recent dialogue, I shall endeavor to add more
 fuel for the fire.
 
Tom Wheaton has written cogently on some aspects of the contracting realm. I
 generally agree with Tom's comments. I disagree on the issue of two tracks, one
 for CRM, one for teaching. That only maintains the status quo regarding the
 teaching end of things. Since most archaeology conducted in the USA is CRM
 work, shouldn't the teachers know something about it? First hand! A CRM class
 taught by a professor who does not have years of experience in doing CRM is
 like taking anatomy from someone who has never touched a cadaver. Book learning
 is important, but is never a substitute for experience.
 
CRM work involves survey, testing, and excavation as well as other kinds of
 research. In survey you are required by law to record all sites meeting the
 National Register criteria. This means lithic scatters and tin can dumps. If
 your training is only in prehistoric or historic archaeology you are not
 qualified to conduct a survey. You MUST have training in both fields. Basic
 excavation methods can be the same on historic and prehistoric sites. What
 distinguishes the two is the huge amount of documentary research which must
 precede the fieldwork and the vastly more varied assemblage which comes out of
 the historic sites. Historic site assemblages take more time to analyze because
 we know more about each kind of artifact than in prehistoric sites.
 
I believe the M.A. program should be more general, and should require exposure
 to prehistory and historical archaeology. In addition to the usual classes, I
 would strongly recommend the following classes for historical archaeology:
 
  1. historiography; method and theory in history
  2. survey class in American history
  3. regional histories
  4. oral history
  5. public history
  6. creative writing
  7. scientific illustration & photography
  8. Geographical Information System; remote sensing
  9. history of technology
 
This would probably add a year to the M.A. program, but these are skills which
 you must possess if you expect to get a job and be productive. If you do not
 take the courses, you need to acquire the skills. I would recommend familiarity
 with soils, zooarchaeology, palynology, as well as computers.
 
There are a lot of folk out there pretending to be historical archaeologists,
 but  have had training only in prehistoric archaeology or classical
 archaeology. They teach historical archaeology or get contracts in historical
 archaeology, but they are not qualified to do this. A few prehistorians or
 classicists have put the effort into spending the years necessary to re-train
 themselves in historical archaeology and they do a good job. But many more only
 give lip service to learning the discipline. This is one reason there are some
 really poorly done projects.
 
Being a third generation archaeologist got me started early. I worked on my
 first project in 1955 and spent the next 11 years reading about archaeology,
 working in a zooarchaeology lab, attending professional meetings, while in
 grade school and high school. As an undergraduate, I attended a field school at
 a French fur trading post, taught by a prehistorian who admitted he did not
 know what he was doing, but had found the funding for the dig. I really got
 interested in historical archaeology in 1971, while excavating a prehistoric
 site with an historic component. In 1972, I took a class in historical
 archaeology from Roderick Sprague at the University of Idaho. Since then, I
 have been doing historical archaeology all over the USA, as well as Canada,
 Israel, the Republic of the Marshall Islands, and in Yap. Despite having been
 involved in archaeology for nearly forty years and in historical archaeology
 for 26 years, there are vast amounts of information which I have not learn!
ed yet. I have been doing research full-time for 16 years, yet there are still
 many skills to learn. It took me at least ten years of work, after my PhD, to
 really feel comfortable with saying I was an historical archaeologist because
 the field is so broad. So, if you will pardon the personal aside, the point is
 that you don't just walk out of school with an M.A. or Ph.D. and become
 magically transformed into an historical archaeologist. You should plan on
 dedicating at least 10 years afterwards to learning the discipline and a
 lifetime to mastering it. Mastering it is a process, not an end result.
 
 
William H. Adams
P.O. Box 1177
Philomath, OR 97370-1177  USA
503-929-3102       -3264 fax
[log in to unmask]