In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

216 9 Retrospect and Prospect What is claimed as knowledge [must] be both testable and attainable by everyone. This rules out the claims of mystics, intuitionists, and faddists to transcendental knowledge based on special experiences, capacities, or faith.-Richard Watson (1991 :276) The thirty-year research and training experience that was the Field School at Grasshopper ended after the summer of 1992. The camp was closed down, its buildings moved, and the surrounding area was cleared and returned to the exclusive use of the Cibecue Apache. For thirty years, Grasshopper's students and staff had labored to uncover from its red dirt and stones the information that would help us reconstruct the lives of the Mogollon people who once had lived there. We had struggled to keep the camp from falling into complete disrepair and to support the fieldwork. We had worked just as hard to analyze the raw data, and we had assisted others in writing about Grasshopper's past. At the end of fieldwork, we were jubilant that our samples were now complete and we could finalize our tables at last. We had excavated seventeen rooms at Chodistaas Pueblo and 103 numbered rooms at Grasshopper Pueblo, and that was it. We would dig no more forever. These moments of euphoria and fragments of nostalgia for the lost pleasures of the field were tempered with a sober realization. Although the archaeological fieldwork had ended, the hardest work had just begun. The task facing us was as difficult as hefting wall stones out of a deep two-story room or backfilling by hand-to synthesize thirty years of research and explain what happened in prehistory at the place we call Grasshopper. In this final chapter, we conclude our historical overview by looking at the Field School's accomplishments and outlining its prospects for the future. Now that the fieldwork is finished, we can see with some clarity that more remains to done. Advanced Training through Research Participation The catalog of eminent archaeologists who trained at Grasshopper is unmatched by any other field school, except perhaps Point of Pines. As the yearly rosters of staff members and students demonstrate, an extraordinary percentage of Field School alumni have gone on to distinguished careers in the discipline. The catalog of important scholars in southwestern archaeology who graduated from Grasshopper is too long to include here, but the Field School also trained students who would emerge as scholars in other fields. With apologies to the respected researchers and teachers omitted, we can list Latin Americanists such as Mark Aldenderfer, Wendy Ashmore, Arlen Chase, William Fash, William Saturno, Izumi Shimada, Barbara Stark, and Rebecca Storey; historical archaeologists including James Ayres, Mark Leone, James Rock, and Robert Schuyler; and others who work in diverse areas, such as T.J. Ferguson, Margaret Hardin, Kathy Kamp, Susan Kus, William Rathje, Kenneth Sassaman, Polly Wiessner , and Alison Wylie. Students who have gone on to serve the discipline in cultural resource management, federal archaeology, and the USDA National Forest include Judith Connor, Nancy Curriden, John Hanson, Terry Klein, Linda Mayro, Shela McFarlin, James McDonald, Glen Rice, Gene Rogge, and Cherie Scheick. Field School alumni also have distinguished themselves as state archaeologists in several foreign countries. When we consider the second-generation archaeologists who trained under these well-known archaeologists and the many we not mentioned in this brief catalog, Grasshopper's direct and indirect contributions to teaching and training are enormous indeed. We think that the success of the Field School program can be to the notion set forth in Haury and Thompson's first National Science Foundation proposal (Haury 1964) and later elaborated by acre and Reid (1974). The Field School emphasized graduate student involvement in a long-term, multidisciplinary research program. Teaching and research were inseparable, strengthening both. Teaching was enhanced by involving students in ongoing research, and research was augmented by encouraging students to formulate new questions, probRetrospect and Prospect 217 lems, and hypotheses. This important positive-feedback situation existed throughout Grasshopper's history and was vital regardless of the theoretical and methodological paradigm that was dominant. As Longacre and Reid (1974) observed, only within the context of professional research can students acquire the theoretical and technical skills necessary to meet the demands of contemporary archaeology. As we have seen, the dedication of graduate students pursuing their research interests through master's theses, dissertations, and conference papers provided the primary outlet for publication of Grasshopper research results. This important body of work represents second major contribution of...


Additional Information

Related ISBN
MARC Record
Launched on MUSE
Open Access
Back To Top

This website uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience on our website. Without cookies your experience may not be seamless.