With reference to at least one part of Bill Frazers comments on the
presence/absence of historical archaeology as a subject discipline in UK
universities:
 
It would appear to me that over the last couple of years professional
archaeologists have in fact been turning to documentary archives in
increasing numbers. Not I fear from any new found respect for the
'post-medieval' period (a term I also dislike) but in response to
changes in planning regulations and market forces. Before any development
project can go ahead in the UK an environmental impact assessment must be
undertaken, such assessments must incorporate potential risks to the
archaeological record. Consequently, the production of such reports has
become an important part of professional archaeological work, and so is
also a significant source of unit income.
 
EIA reports are by their nature (at least in the first instance) paper
based, initially using SMRs and published/archived archaeolgical reports,
but also a variety of historical documentary sources. (It is no coincidence
these reports have become known as 'desk-tops'). So visit any UK record
office and you'll probably find an archaeologist or two sifting through
documentary material from the 'recent' past, it's rare for such units to
employ the services of trained historians to do such work.
 
I fear that such cursory uncritical (and most importantly
un-historically-informed) trawls through the more available parts of
the paper record may be finding their way into archived and published
archaeological reports, unashamedly presented as historical research.
Historical survey they may be, critical research they are not. Such activity
mis-uses the term historical archaeology for commercial ends.
 
However, if this is to be the pattern for the activities of professional
archaeologists in the immediate future, it may be that historical archaeology
will begin to a higher profile in both academic and professional circles in
the UK. Is it also the case that a graduate student trained in historical
archaeology will be more employable than an 'old-fashioned' dirt one? If so
then I'd suggest that such students must be given not only training in
documentary research but also have at least some of the well theorised work
currently being undertaken by social/cultural historians and historical
geographers presented to them.
 
If that is done perhaps these new 'desk-top' archaeologists will be able
to use the documentary sources in a more constructive way and contribute
directly to the future direction of archaeolgical research. If not they
will continue to perform an undertheorised, and unrespected, supporting
function while the diggers of more 'valuable' medieval and Roman
archaeology will continue to clear sites down to the 'interesting levels'!
 
Craig Spence
 
Craig Spence, BSc, MA, MIFA.
Department of History,
Royal Holloway College,
University of London,
Egham, Surrey TW20 0EX
email: [log in to unmask]
Phone RHBNC: 01784 443362
(Phone CMH/IHR: 0171 636 0272 ext.239)