>> Mike Polk raises an important point when he asks whether there are sites tha
t are not worth excavating and points out that CRM archaeologists deal with this
 question all the time. I'd like to hear some opinions concerning the treatment
of late 19th early 20th c. homesteads.  Most federal land managers (especially t
he national Forests) have tens of thousands of these to deal with. How much cons
ideration should they be given? How much info are they likely to yield? I, too c
an think of many research questions that could be framed around particular homes
ites, but what about the other 10,000?
 
Charles R Ewen Associate Professor <<
 
Charles,
 
I attended the Southeastern regional SHPO conference last year in Mississippi.
At this meeting I learned that the State of Mississippi refuses to even give sit
e numbers to late 19th and 20th century archaeological sites.  Also at that conf
erence, a paper was given by a forest service archaeologist suggesting that they
 preserve or test only a pure random sample of these sites.
 
I can't speak to the significance of these sites or how a sample should be selec
ted because it is not my specialty.  However, at the time, their presenations re
ally upset me.  It struck me that the way they were handling the problem was obv
iously the approach a group of prehistorians would use when dealing with histori
c sites they knew very little about and cared even less about.  What ever happen
ed to the planning process in which we were supposed to develop contexts for the
se sites within each of our states? (this is not a rhetorical question, I'm seri
ous, what has happened to it?)  In this process it would probably be good idea t
o seek out historians and archaeologists that specialize in a particular era and
 ask them what the current research topics are and how archaeology could contrib
ute.  Of course we would have to stop being so provincial.  In some states there
 are many "mound digging" prehistorians and few if any historically trained hist
orical archaeologists.  So, we might have to ask for help outsid
e of our own state boundaries.
 
From my humble viewpoint, I often think that the growth of contract archaeology
has tempted or maybe even forced many archaeologists to undertake projects that
better qualified individuals should be handling. Afterall how can each of us kee
p up with so many journals, reports, conferences and specialties.   I would like
 to think that ethical archaeologist would know his or her limits and bow out wh
en outside their expertise, but I doubt this will happen in the real world of CR
M.  So that is why we should be working toward building and updating these histo
ric contexts and making them known in the archaeological communities.
 
Charles,  would you ask the same question about the 10,000 woodland sites in the
 national forests?  Just curious because, boy, if I've seen one piece of woodlan
d pottery, I seen a ten thousand! ha
 
 
 
Linda Derry
Old Cahawba Archaeological Park
Alabama Historical Commission
[log in to unmask]