transportation archaeology

The value of non-academic archaeology

I’m a PhD candidate at a major research university. I’ll be defending my NSF-funded dissertation this fall and – finally! – graduating with that long-sought doctorate. And like most freshly-minted PhDs, I’ll be navigating the job market over the coming months and hoping for validation of the blood, sweat, and years I’ve put into earning this degree. But unlike many of my colleagues, I got my start in cultural heritage management (CRM) archaeology, and I currently work for my state government as a transportation archaeologist. This post is all about why the non-academic, contract-based (but still professional!) work – the sensitivity assessments, the pre-construction field surveys, the endless negotiations with engineers, developers, land owners, and bureaucrats, and the reports (oh, the reports!) – is every bit as important to our field as the comparatively glamorous work of  research-focused archaeology (which, I won’t hesitate to admit, has the potential to be a lot more exciting a lot more often).

First of all, CRM exists for a very good reason – the National Heritage Preservation Act (1966) and the Archaeological Resources Protection Act (1979) were both enacted in recognition of the fact archaeological and cultural resources are put at risk whenever developments (new construction, re-alignment or renovation of existing infrastructure, etc.) occur. CRM firms, and state and federal archaeology programs, fulfill the mandate of those acts to protect tangible and intangible cultural resources in the face of development.

Beyond this well-known reason, though, lies another facet of non-academic (or “mitigation”) archaeology: it’s inherently public. Public archaeology, as a practice within academia, has gained increasing attention of late for its engagement of local communities, its usefulness as a “face” for our discipline, and its contribution of alternative perspectives on both history and prehistory. It is, in part, the answer to the complaint that academics only talk to each other. Federally-mandated professional mitigation archaeology, on the other hand, has always been outward-facing. Those endless negotiations with engineers, developers, land owners, and bureaucrats – taxing as they can be – mean we are constantly talking about what we do and why we do it to non-archaeologists of many stripes.

As a transportation archaeologist, I might get sent anywhere in the state for any number of kinds of projects, I have to be ready to interface with construction workers, residents of soon-to-be-developed land (who may be soon forced out of their homes), tribal representatives, fellow state employees, curious passers-by, you name it. My job description might not state, per se, that I am required to “sell” the value of archaeology to anyone, but it’s built in to what I do. And beyond just acting as (hopefully) good PR for our discipline, I get to hear what non-archaeologists think of our work and of the past that we study. I don’t always want to hear person X’s theory on why aliens built the pyramids (ugh) – but I never get tired of being told how fascinating the past is. I never get bored with being reminded of how unusual and how extraordinary an archaeologist’s work is. More importantly, I get to be a part of cross-disciplinary dialogue, even if on a small scale. And if there’s one thing I never tire of, it’s talking to people about archaeology.

A Day in Archaeology from a Desk in Connecticut

This is my third Day of Archaeology as an archaeologist at the Connecticut Department of Transportation (CTDOT).  Honestly, I really tried to find an excuse to get out and do some “field work” so I could impress you all with my exciting job.  However, the truth is most of my work is done from my desk.  Before I begin I do want to put in a plug for CTDOT’s latest publication “Highways to History: The Archaeology of Connecticut’s 18th-Century Lifeways.”  The book has been in such high demand here that our office is currently out of hardcopies.

On to my day – Today I’m preparing for the ADC50 Summer Meeting next week in San Antonio.  ADC50 is the Committee on Historic and Archaeological Preservation in Transportation that’s a part of the larger Transportation Research Board.  My paper, “Public Outreach and the Section 106 Process: A View from the Connecticut Department of Transportation” is part of the electronic symposium, “Then and Now: Perspectives on Effectively Engaging the Public.”  Our papers were submitted early so participants and attendees can read them ahead of time.  Participants will only give a 5 minute presentation, leaving most of the time for discussion.  I’m really excited about this arrangement after attending the latest SAA conference and finding that the forums and panels where discussion took place were far more interesting than the paper sessions.  So I’ve got to read the other papers in the session so I’m well prepared!

Today I’m also working on a project review for a rail bridge in Norwalk over Osborne Avenue (Osborne Ave Bridge).  The rail bridge, built in 1894, is in need of a new superstructure, and the masonry substructure will be rehabilitated.  For all the projects I review I compile current and historic maps to gauge the potential for a project to impact archaeological or historical resources.  The map, created in ArcView GIS, looks like this: CTDOT Review Map.  (The large circles on the right side indicate known archaeological sites.  The symbols are enlarged to prevent specific site locations becoming public knowledge.)  Maps like this are shared with the State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) and involved federal agencies to help determine the effect a project will have on historic properties.  Clearly this project in Norwalk does not have any archaeological sensitivity because of past disturbance.  The soils within the project area are classified as Urban Land.  Replacing a superstructure on a bridge that’s 120 years old may be another matter that I will be discussing with SHPO.

Outside of my paid job today I will be working on a Survey and Planning Grant application for the Friends of the Office of State Archaeology, who are applying for funding from the SHPO to research and record some archaeological sites with the intention of designating them as State Archaeological Preserves.  I am also looking forward to reading all about other archaeologists’ exciting adventures!