Anita wrote: " Although the practice of historical archaeology seems
to be alive and well
in the field of cultural resource management, it apparently cannot
get one a
job in the academic world."
 
 
How well I know.
 
It is truly strange that historical archaeology has huge support in
the public sphere, and in most places it generates considerable
student interest. I have turned out quite a few B.A. students over
the years who can't find grad programs, even when they've got
excellent grades, GREs, etc. Academic anthro departments ar very slow
in picking up the subject. Many of us who teach do it through Am.
Studies, History, or, as in my own case, through a separate program
based on historic preservation, CRM, etc.
 
It i bad enough that socio-cultural anthropologists have
traditionally viewed archaeologists with suspicion ( and sometimes
with disdain). Now historical archaeology seems, as often as not, to
be viewed the same way by other archaeologists. Meanwhile, the number
of positions for historical archaeologists continues to grow by leaps
and bounds in engineering firms, government agencies, public history
museums, etc. Who is training the people for these jobs?
 
And as for those of us who are historical archaeologists, and who
want to teach...the job pickin's are extraordinarily slim. However,
it is getting better--painfully slowly, of course. One or two new
historical arch positions cme open this past year. Berkeley decided
to hire another historical arch. after Deetz's departure, which was
good. And are increasing opportunities for us in interdiscipinary
programs. This is clearly a case, however, where academic anthro
departments are way behind the curve.
 
Dan Mouer