Jake Ivey wrote:


>     Making that hypothetical construct from the array of data is where
>     your personal theoretical basis for historical research will be most
>     obvious.  Whereas your archaeological theoretical basis will show up
>     in other areas, such as your pattern for deciding where to open the
>     next unit when you're in the field, or which way to go with the
>     statistical analysis when you're in the lab.

---  And here is the nub of the problem. It's perfectly okay to express
theoretical positions in the conclusion chapters. But if one allows
theoretical bias dictate the data to be collected, the results will be
skewed. Too frequently, archaeological and historical outcomes have been
distorted by theory-generated blind spots. I would submit, however, that
theoretical bias can influence which sources are used by historians.

  Ned Heite            _(____)_   The old one still works
  Heite Consulting    /Baby '69|  but our new email address
  Camden       _===__/88" Land || is [log in to unmask]
  Delaware    | ____ Rover__   || Maybe I should have
  19934      [||/ .\_____/ .\__|  some t-shirts printed,
 _____________  \__/_____\__/____ or maybe coffee mugs!
 http://home.dmv.com/~eheite