Heh - maybe, maybe, although it's obviously much too long. But in all seriousness, the real problem may lie with the cultural people in your department - do they take seriously the notion that archaeological theory is anthropological theory? In your 'core' anth theory courses, do they give as much time to Binford as to Sahlins, for instance? I definitely get why archaeologists would feel that they are distinct - everyone treats them that way. But I don't know - I thought your dept. had a lot of science-oriented cultural ecology types who would see things in a broader way? And don't you have some nautical archaeologists who are thoroughly humanistic? I dunno, it's a mess.