I agree with both sides.

Stay on historical archaeology subjects.

It is "Historical Archaeology" not "Historic" - I usually
interpret such use as the sign of a prehistorian who is not really
in our field. Let us all be consistent.

I hope the Queen Mary is still in situ and hasn't sunk in San
Pedro Harbor. See all your HISTORICAL archaeologists in Long
Beach. [Only Pinky and John were "historic" in our field.]










At 01:48 PM 12/14/2000 -0500, you wrote:
>"historic" or "historical"....I agree with Tim, I do feel the thread
>digressing somewhat from the whole HISTARCH vein.
>Just my 2 cents worth...
>Heather
>
>> ----------
>> From:         Austin, Stephen P
>> SWF[SMTP:[log in to unmask]]
>> Reply To:     HISTORICAL ARCHAEOLOGY
>> Sent:         Thursday, December 14, 2000 1:01 PM
>> To:   [log in to unmask]
>> Subject:      Re: the end of the world as we know it?
>>
>> "Historical Archaeology" Tim.  That was decided at the first SHA meeting
>> ;-)
>>
>> Stephen P. Austin
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Timothy K. Perttula [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
>> Sent: Thursday, December 14, 2000 11:41 AM
>> To: [log in to unmask]
>> Subject: Re: the end of the world as we know it?
>>
>>
>> In a message dated 12/14/00 11:39:20 AM, [log in to unmask] writes:
>>
>> << Are you mad? We should be thinking about how long umemployment will
>> stretch
>> under the RepubliKans. >>
>>
>> We ought to be thinking about something having to do with historic
>> archeology...?
>>
>
>
Robert L. Schuyler
University of Pennsylvania Museum
33rd & Spruce Streets
Philadelphia, PA l9l04-6324

Tel: (215) 898-6965
Fax: (215) 898-0657
[log in to unmask]