Hello Chris (and others),
I enjoyed your comments, which were, I guess, directed at the afternoon TAG
session organised by Kate Giles and me. I certainly agree with you that
Mark Horton's comments at the end of the session were highly problematic -
especially the attempt to construct unhelpful boundaries:
prehistoric/historical; British/North American.
But this was an isolated few minutes in an enjoyable afternoon at
the end of a long semester. As you will recall, Kate and I both gave papers
which made precisely the points which you raise. We explicitly called for
further positive transatlantic and international exchanges, collaborations
between academic, professional and amateur archaeologists, and a rejection
of opposing histarch with medieval or prehistoric archaeology. My own paper
detailed the important potential which the interpretative tradition in
North American historical archaeology can make to practice in Britain, and
argued against the dismissal in some quarters of professionals and amateurs
as 'anoraks'. We both tried to explore (and contribute to) the friendly
atmosphere of creativity and inclusivity from which our field seems to
benefit at present.
These are exciting times for British archaeology, with fascinating
possibilities for new networks and unusual intersections. CHAT has helped
us all to start putting faces to names, providing a new venue to compare
notes, and for a variety of new collaborations to start to come about.
CHAT in Leicester in 2004 and SHA in York in 2005 promise to be equally
stimulating. The challenge for CHAT will be to retain the fluidity, open-
mindedness...and good humour.
All best,
Dan
.............
Dr Dan Hicks
University of Bristol
http://www.bris.ac.uk/Depts/Archaeology/staff/danhicks.html
|