HISTARCH Archives

HISTORICAL ARCHAEOLOGY

HISTARCH@COMMUNITY.LSOFT.COM

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Condense Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Sender:
HISTORICAL ARCHAEOLOGY <[log in to unmask]>
Subject:
From:
Ned Heite <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Thu, 10 Jun 1999 06:52:33 -0500
MIME-version:
1.0
Content-type:
text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Reply-To:
HISTORICAL ARCHAEOLOGY <[log in to unmask]>
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (49 lines)
Many years ago (but not in a galaxy far, far away), Bob Schuyler pointed
out that the IA clan appeared to have lodged at a certain level of
evolution, which was recordation without certain amounts of anthropological
theoretical baggage. Even earlier, Bob Vogel defended the study of
industrial process as a proper archaeological pursuit that does not
necessarily involve the exhumation of evidence. Every step along the way
has been paved with paper.

I'd hate to estimate the shelf footage devoted to this subject in the
literature.

Realizing that the issue will never be resolved, I would like to offer a
pair of definitions:

1. Industrial archaeology, as practiced, studies material evidence of
industrial processes and the workplace. Economic and social conclusions can
be derived from these studies.

2. Historical archaeology of industrial communities employs the standard
usages and practices of historical archaeology in the setting of the
industrial revolution.

At a recent conference, a paper on workers' housing was billed as
industrial archaeology, even though the factory in question was never
described. This was not industrial archaeology, but the historical
archaeology of an industrial setting. If we keep the distinction in mind,
there is little chance for confusion.

I must take retroactive issue with my friend Schuyler's ancient assertion
that industrial archaeology is unlikely to "make progress" to a loftier
intellectual plane. The study of process is a perfectly valid end in itself
worthy of investigation. Output from such studies can be employed for
anthropological, economic historical, or social historical purposes, just
as a study of ceramic tableware contributes to other archaeological
research.

At the moment, I am evaluating the value of studying fire hydrants as
archaeological artifacts. You'd be amazed at what your local fire hydrant
might have to say.

      _____
 ____(_____)__       It's another "Garfield" moment: The
  |Baby the\          local National Public Radio fundraiser
  |1969 Land\_|===|_   is on. The enthusiastic WHYY announcer
  |  ___Rover   ___ |o  told us how exciting it is to dial
  |_/ . \______/ . ||    their new toll-free number. Whee!
  ___\_/________\_/____________________________________________
  Ned Heite, Camden, DE  http://home.dmv.com/~eheite/index.html

ATOM RSS1 RSS2