I have worked for various CRM firms in New Jersey, USA over the past 15
years and have found that some firms use historians for gather standard
information so that they can budget for their time in proposals, while
others, the better firms have historians that work with the archaeologists
to answer question that come from the material culture.  There are several
firms in the latter group which is clear during presentations at regional
conferences.
-----Original Message-----
From: geoff carver <[log in to unmask]>
To: [log in to unmask] <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Saturday, April 10, 1999 9:06 AM
Subject: historians and historical archaeology


just something that came up in relation to a lecture by a historian here in
dresden: just how much interplay is there between historians and
archaeologists
elsewhere? as in: do the historians use our information or otherwise take us
seriously, or do they just sort of continue plodding along with their
documentary evidence r.e. founding of towns/cities/whatever, regardless of
what
our evidence says to the contrary?

geoff carver
http://home.t-online.de/home/gcarver/
[log in to unmask]