Hey, Carol --

I just noticed that!! *****

Its no doubt a Republikan election-year plot.  But, I'll show 'em, and
type in a new posting line! They can't silence people like that !   ;o)

I think you posed a very litigimate question.  I think Bob Schuyler's
reply was appropriate.

The same situation holds in my part of the CRM area.  I get
prehistorically trained archaeologists telling me they are historians, can
do the same quality of research and evaluative work as historians, and see
no need to talk to or collaborate with historians on their research or
findings.  I've met a  lot of "historical" archaeologists who have the
same mindset.  Banish the thought and Lord forbid these guys even consider
joining a professional history group like the WHA or OAH, let alone going
to one of their meetings and giving a paper or engauging in the dialogs.

Did I and others like me invest time and $$$ into getting worthless
degrees?

Your question is an old one.  We have lots of BA types in the BLM,
grandfathered in after the Secretary's Standards were issued.  That's
probably true of the FS and other federal agencies.  This does lead to
resentment by some, as one already posted.  PhDs may get their dander up
when BAs or MAs review their work, but some of it IS shoddy work. I'd be
embarrased to submit some of what I've seen as a report, and then hold the
attitude "I'm Dr. Barna, and who are YOU, little BA'ling, to quesion MY
work?".  Our folks have the obligation to make sure that a project or
proposal is adequately addessed in terms of 106 compliance, and so does
the SHPO when there are areas of dispute between us.  Doesn't matter how
many degrees the contractor has.

I think you'll get still more thought-provoking replies, and that's good!

Cheers!

Carl Barna
Regional Historian
BLM Colorado State Office








Carol Serr <[log in to unmask]>
09/09/2004 11:52 AM

        To:     [log in to unmask]
        cc:
        Subject:        Re: definition of an 'archaeologist' ?


Hi Carl,

I am very puzzled..how did Robert Marcom (and Anita) set up his posting so
that when one replied, it only went back to him...not HISTARCH??

At 10:23 AM 9/9/2004 -0600, you wrote:
Hi Carol --

No.

What irks me is when archaeologists who have never had any training in
History claim that they are "historical" archaeologists. And it gets even
worse when they claim that they ARE historians!

I look forward to seeing the responses to your posted question.

Cheers!

Carl Barna
Regional Historian
BLM Colorado State Office





Ca

        To:     [log in to unmask]
        cc:
        Subject:        definition of an 'archaeologist' ?


At 04:36 PM 9/8/2004 -0500, V Noble wrote:

>I'm sure that many trained historians get irked whenever some smalltown
>librarian is called a "local historian" in the Gazette, and I'm enough of
>an elitist that I get a twinge in my gut even when someone with a B.A.
>calls himself an archaeologist, though he may do it every day for a
>living--