Anita wrote: " Although the practice of historical archaeology seems to be alive and well in the field of cultural resource management, it apparently cannot get one a job in the academic world." How well I know. It is truly strange that historical archaeology has huge support in the public sphere, and in most places it generates considerable student interest. I have turned out quite a few B.A. students over the years who can't find grad programs, even when they've got excellent grades, GREs, etc. Academic anthro departments ar very slow in picking up the subject. Many of us who teach do it through Am. Studies, History, or, as in my own case, through a separate program based on historic preservation, CRM, etc. It i bad enough that socio-cultural anthropologists have traditionally viewed archaeologists with suspicion ( and sometimes with disdain). Now historical archaeology seems, as often as not, to be viewed the same way by other archaeologists. Meanwhile, the number of positions for historical archaeologists continues to grow by leaps and bounds in engineering firms, government agencies, public history museums, etc. Who is training the people for these jobs? And as for those of us who are historical archaeologists, and who want to teach...the job pickin's are extraordinarily slim. However, it is getting better--painfully slowly, of course. One or two new historical arch positions cme open this past year. Berkeley decided to hire another historical arch. after Deetz's departure, which was good. And are increasing opportunities for us in interdiscipinary programs. This is clearly a case, however, where academic anthro departments are way behind the curve. Dan Mouer