Dear Neil,
For such well documented historic periods I don't see there as being a
conflict between the periods devised by archaeologists and historians. True
we study material culture. Historians are interested in studying society as
much as "telling stories" and studying material culture is the means by
which we as archaeologists study society. The two are in my opinion
inseparably intertwined.
Martin Newman
Heritage Data
NMR English Heritage
-----Original Message-----
From: Neil Campling [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
Sent: 11 May 2000 12:13
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: RE: POST MEDIEVAL and MODERN
Dear Martin
As we are archaeologists, we do not have to fit into the regnal periods
devised by historians. Look at the real material cultural changes in the
real world (like pottery, agriculture, post-hole structures, gold
production, etc) rather than the "just so" stories of historians, and you
will see that the category 'Tudor' masks significant changes in material
production and culture. The Early Modern largely encompasses Tudor and
Stewart periods, but is related to material culture which we as
archaeologists study.
Martin Newman
Heritage Data
NMR English Heritage
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|