And in addition to the Journal of Conflict Archaeology,
there's also the recent Schofield et al volume 'Materiel
Culture: The Archaeology of Twentieth-Century Conflict'.
There's a review (written by yours truly in a first-person
pronoun-heavy, and possibly rather biased, style) in Volume
38(2) of _Historical Archaeology_.

Full reference:

Schofield, J., Johnson, W.G. and Beck, C.M. 2002. _Material
Culture: The Archaeology of Twentieth-Century Conflict_,
Routledge, London.


Alasdair Brooks




[log in to unmask] Date: Fri, 10 Sep 2004 20:28:02 +0100
From: Tony Pollard <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: Relic Hunting Dialogue Anyone?
~~~~
"The point is that there's a lot more than zero on
even the narrow subject of battlefield archaeology, which of
course is not limited to the American Civil War (and from
his comment I didn't think he
was talking only about battlefield archaeology specifically,
but archaeology in general)."

It should perhaps be added that on a world-wide scale
battlefield archaeology is a relatively new sub-discipline,
with many reports still to filter through. I can't resist
making a shameless plug for The recently founded 'Journal
for conflict Archaeology', of which I am co-editor along
with Iain Banks (Doug Scott is on the editorial panel). This
journal, due to appear for the first time next year, will
provide battlefield archaeologists with an obvious place to
publish their work and a useful source for readers
interested in the subject. Its appearance is hopefully a
strong indication that this nascent discipline is growing up
and beginning to find its intellectual feet.

Tony Pollard
University of Glasgow