John McCarthy wrote:  Historical archaeology does not so much tell us things
we did not already "know" about the past, as provide new ways by which
we know that they are "true".
 
 
I think I know what John is trying to say, but I don't particularly like the use
 
of the word "true".  It makes me think that we are looking for a singular truth.
 
 There are many truths out there, it depends on how you look at it and
archaeology is not the bestower of truth.  It is just as bias as documents.  I
believe that historical archaeology is just another data source to enrich the
data we use to interpret the past.  Is it truth?  Maybe for someone.  But it is
not a singular truth.  I think that maybe John was eluding to this point and
that maybe I get a little flustered when people start talking about truth.
 
M. Jay Stottman
Kentucky Archaeological Survey