X-cc: |
|
Sender: |
|
Subject: |
|
From: |
|
Date: |
Mon, 24 Apr 1995 08:10:09 -0400 |
In-Reply-To: |
|
X-To: |
|
Reply-To: |
|
Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
I have been reading the discussion concerning Historic vs Prehistoric
Archaeology with some interest and find it quite disturbing. It is
unfortunate that we as archaeologists even think that there is or should
be a difference. The point of what we do, or should be doing, is to
study culture -- I doubt that many would argue against that. We define
and investigate problems of culture (now this is where an argument
begins -- process?, culture history??, cultural evolution??). We
investigate these problems through the study of artifacts and
archaeological sites. There should be little argument about this. I
really don't see that it matters very much if we are dealing with
prehistoric or historic sites. It is the problems that we define that
are important. The methods are really the same it is only the basic data
(the artifacts) that are different.
The historic vs prehistoric discussion would be like saying that Archaic
archaeology is different from Woodland. Both are really artificial
divisions and do little to further our understanding of the past. It is
unfortunate that Historic archaeologists seem to be lost in the shuffle
(David R.'s comments) at times but being primarily a Prehistoric person I
find what is going on in Historic archaeology to be refreshingly
innovative and interesting.
Another comment that came out of this string of discussion was that those
of us on the academic side are not preparing students for the reality of
archaeology and that is that most of it is in the world of CRM/contract
archaeology. Please clarify. Archaeology is archaeology. It is
unfortunate that we seem to be driven by CRM requirements and
restrictions but that is really nothing new. Much of the field work of
the 40's -- 60's was early CRM stuff. Even the WPA work was proto-CRM.
So what's the difference except the early work was generally done from
within academic institutions. How should we prepare people? Are courses
needed in CRM law, administration and the like? Should we include small
business courses in graduate school? Or should we be preparing our
students to be archaeologists? Those of you who have experienced this
please explain
Thanks
Karl Steinen
[log in to unmask]
West Georgia College
Carrollton, Georgia 30118
|
|
|