Indigenous Archaeologists Research Articles

Chapter 9 Arthur C. Parker: Equivocal Examples in Advocacy and Allyship

ABSTRACTArthur Caswell Parker (1881–1955) was one of the first Indigenous archaeologists. As a Seneca‐descended scientist from the Cattaraugus Indian Reservation, his cultural background aided with collaboration and research. Many archaeologists uncritically use Parker as an example of a Native archaeologist, anthropologist, and ethnographer. However, his career started at a time when the field of archaeology was still in its infancy, when practices now considered unethical were commonplace. Parker excavated and sold human burials, published records of sacred ceremonies, and provided images of False Face Masks and Snow Snakes. Yet, an examination of his personal correspondence illustrates both a concern for archaeological practice as well as efforts to prevent sensitive cultural aspects from being released to the wider, non‐Native public. These seemingly contradictory stances illustrate that Parker's practice was more nuanced than previously believed. Parker's writings and actions indicate a concern for the situation of the Seneca people and attempts to do what he thought best for others (even if they disagreed). Despite all this, the simplistic assumption that Parker, as an Indigenous archaeologist, always acted in the best interest of his people continues to influence how Euro‐Americans perceive how archaeology should be done. This belief must be interrogated in order that we may move archaeology forward to be a more respectful and equitable practice.

Chapter 4 Good Medicine: Prescriptions for Indigenous Archaeological Practice

ABSTRACTWhile the history of North American archaeology points to a long engagement with tribal elders and scholars, these encounters largely consist of unequal, extractive relationships wherein Indigenous collaborators and Indigenous archaeologists have been treated more as objects of study and pity—what Bea Medicine refers to as “creatures”—rather than as equal research partners. As an Indigenous woman and a settler Chicanx woman, we reflect on the life journey and scholarship of Bea Medicine, a Lakota scholar‐activist and mentor to Indigenous anthropologists. Dr. Medicine's work has provided generations of Indigenous anthropologists with the means to participate in the discipline with their whole selves and, importantly, on their own terms. We argue that Medicine's contributions provide good medicine for the field in the form of concrete strategies for continuing to decolonize the discipline and for doing work that centers the direct needs and perspectives of Indigenous peoples. When read alongside Indigenous archaeologies’ often overlooked grandmothers, mothers, and aunties, Medicine's work also highlights continuing disparities in archaeological practice, from our relationships with and to Indigenous nations to the relations we cultivate in the Academy as Black, Indigenous, and People of Color.

Doing Archaeology without Strings

AbstractIn the province of Ontario, Canada, it is estimated that 80% of archaeological sites are Indigenous, yet there are very few Indigenous archaeologists involved in management and decision-making about Indigenous heritage. Systemic barriers, particularly around licensing and regulations for curatorial facilities, continue to prevent Indigenous people from directly managing and protecting their own cultural heritage. Recognizing that Indigenous communities in northeastern Ontario have had little exposure or opportunity to learn about archaeology, for several years we have been involved in educational programs to train Indigenous youth, staff in First Nations government offices, and others. We illustrate with two examples: the monitor training program undertaken in northeastern Ontario and a project to catalog artifacts from the legacy collection from the La Cloche site.

Perspectives on Collector Collaboration

AbstractIn 2019, we launched the Northern Arizona Paleoindian Project to expand on findings from the Rock Art Ranch (RAR) Research Experiences for Undergraduates (REU; NSF#1262184). The REU recovered 24 Paleoindian artifacts in association with drainages. Expansion of the research required mitigation of the patchwork landownership in the area, which encouraged a collector-collaboration model following Pitblado (2014) and Douglass et alia (2017). We held public events in collaboration with a network of agencies, avocational groups, collectors, and landowners to assess potential for Paleoindian archaeology in the area. In March 2020, however, the COVID-19 pandemic halted our efforts, allowing us to evaluate our project and practice. We find that tapping into existing local networks of responsible resource stewards (RRS) can greatly accelerate project development. We also find that private collections are endangered, and preserving this portion of the archaeological record requires documentation and long-term curation. Most importantly, we find that archaeologists working with collectors are uniquely positioned to build bridges between Indigenous communities, RRS, and professional archaeologists to help stabilize legacy collections and that this focus should drive collector-collaboration research design. Ultimately, the project must move toward a community-based participatory research design to seek equitable and culturally appropriate curation plans for local legacy collections.

Pursuing Social Justice Through Collaborative Archaeologies in Aboriginal Australia

This paper identifies the emergence of the pursuit of social justice as a core focus of collaborative archaeologies in Aboriginal Australia. A wide range of case studies are examined, especially in relation to efforts to redress a ‘deep colonisation’ that silences Indigenous histories and fails to engage with Indigenous voices or experiences. This research is part of a wider global movement of community-based, activist and engaged archaeology that encompasses two principle approaches to social justice: the redistribution of resources and goods and the politics of recognition. It is informed by a more general concern with human rights, structural violence and ethical globalisation. In Australia, social justice archaeologies are both confronting, in terms of frontier violence, intentional structural violence and racism, but also inspirational/aspirational, in terms of Aboriginal nation building and the cultural facilitation of Aboriginal research ethics. The development of collaborative projects between Indigenous peoples and (Indigenous and non-Indigenous) archaeologists can be challenging. Indigenous archaeologists face particular challenges, including balancing sometimes conflicting expectations from communities with the demands of the profession. For non-Indigenous archaeologists, the challenge lies in the shift from working with Indigenous peoples to working for Indigenous peoples as part of a process in which social justice outcomes are a product, rather than a by-product, of archaeological research.

Proceedings of the 16th conference of the International Work Group for Palaeoethnobotany, Thessaloniki 2013

This volume of Vegetation History and Archaeobotany comprises a collection of papers presented at the 16th conference of the International Work Group for Palaeoethnobotany, held at the Research Dissemination Centre (KEDEA) of the Aristotle University of Thessaloniki (Greece) between June 16th and 22nd 2013. The conference was organised under the auspices of the School of History and Archaeology of the Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, the Municipality of Thessaloniki, the Hellenic Ministry of Education and Religious Affairs, Culture and Sports and the Hellenic Ministry of Rural Development and Food. The Museum of Byzantine Culture hosted the official dinner of the conference. The following institutions financially supported the conference: the Research Committee of the Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, the Institute of Aegean Prehistory, Foglip-ERC, the Ministry of Rural Development and Food, and Piraeus Bank. Various other sponsors supported the conference with donations in kind (gifts and food/drink): Agrino, Apivita, Archaeological Museum of Thessaloniki, Babatzim wines, Claudia Papagianni wines, Creta Carob, Gerovassileiou wines, Haitoglou, Holomon herbs, Ianos, I Kathimerini, Korres, Kyr Yianni wines, Ligas wines, Masticha Shop, MIET (National Bank of Greece Cultural Foundation), Mylelia, Pantopoleion tis Thessalonikis, Psichalos publications, Rayan Foods, Tea-Routes, Thessaloniki Chef’s Association, Thessaloniki Hotels Association, University Studio Press, Vaeni wines, Vivlia Chora wines, Yiam. In times of financial hardship their help has been invaluable. This is the first time an IWGP conference has been organised in Greece, where archaeobotany was initiated by German, Dutch and British colleagues, like Maria Hopf, Helmut Kroll, Willem van Zeist, Sytze Bottema, Glynis Jones, Jane Renfrew and James Greig, most of whom were among the pioneers of archaeobotany worldwide. These people sowed the seeds of archaeobotany in Greece as members of national archaeological school missions in various parts of the country, in those early days when archaeology was ‘losing its innocence’ as David Clarke epitomised the arrival of New Archaeology (Clarke 1973). Among the pioneers, colleagues such as Glynis Jones and Helmut Kroll not only ‘saved seeds’ (Jones et al. 1982) and broadened the horizons of Greek archaeobotany but, perhaps most significantly trained indigenous archaeologists into becoming the first native archaeobotanists. Thus, the 16th IWGP held in Thessaloniki (the second Mediterranean city to host an IWGP after Girona in Spain 2004) would simply not have happened without the work of these teachers and practitioners of archaeobotany. The conference went officially global this time, providing a podium to papers from regions not traditionally represented in the preceding IWGP meetings. Presentations on Inuit archaeobotany, South African hunter-gatherer survival strategies, Chinese burial offerings, Japanese prehistoric rice growing and consumption, and Argentinian early cultivation and food processing demonstrate the wide geographical range represented by the current IWGP. Various challenges had to be dealt with during the organisation of the conference including a large number of submitted oral presentations and posters, and a host country in deep financial S. M. Valamoti Department of Archaeology, School of History and Archaeology, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, 54124 Thessaloniki, Greece e-mail: sval@hist.auth.gr

PROBLEMS AND PROSPECTS in the Practice of Paleoarchaeology in Jordan

Using the Paleolithic in Jordan as an example, we review aspects of international, multidisciplinary collaboration that can lead to areas of conflict between foreign and indigenous archaeologists. We begin with some observations on the logic of inference to underscore problems arising from differences in the intellectual traditions involved in this research. This excursion into epistemology (how we know what we think we know about the past) is followed by an analysis of the practical considerations that can create difficulties in various aspects of the research process, from proposal writing through final publication. We conclude with suggestions to alleviate these problems and discuss where to situate paleoarchaeology within the larger context of transnational collaboration.

Seeds for the Future: The Materialities of Traditional Ecological Knowledge

Many collaborative projects between Indigenous peoples and archaeologists have focused on traditional ecological knowledge, emphasizing long-term use and patterns of continuity and innovation. Through an investigation of medicinal plant use at the Mashantucket Pequot Reservation, located in southeastern New England, archaeobotanical remains are considered the outcomes of everyday environmental interaction. The charred plant remains, which can be identified as the materials of traditional ecological knowledge, are viewed as evidence of efforts to preserve and modify current practice and as interventions to shape future practice. Through this collaborative, multi-dimensional examination, we can access the “seeds” for the future and explore how Indigenous peoples, specifically women, were historical actors during the process of colonization in North America.

Being and becoming indigenous archaeologists

Being and becoming indigenous archaeologists

Indigenous Research and Archaeology: Transformative Practices in/with/for the Ngarrindjeri Community

The relationships between Indigenous peoples and archaeologists in Australia have consisted of conflict, consultation and collaboration. The literature looks at very little the roles and challenges met by Indigenous archaeologists and the issues that arise as a result of working between two different knowledge systems. This paper therefore will discuss the question of how archaeologists could modify their practice for better answering the Indigenous communities and treats this particular question by presenting my own work among the Ngarrindjeri nation of southeast South Australia. By the means of a lived experiment of conducting research with/in/for my community, I will consider the effect of the personal identity related to community stories while also examining how the knowledge of the interior can be at the same time complex but very significant for the development of archaeology.

Guest Editor's Remarks: Decolonizing Archaeology

Guest Editor's Remarks:Decolonizing Archaeology Sonya Atalay (bio) The Wisdom of Chickens This collection of articles came about as the result of the professional relationships and friendships among a group of archaeologists who collectively call themselves the "Closet Chickens." The organization known as the Closet Chickens formally came into existence after extended e-mail discussions among a group of Native American archaeologists who had participated in a conference at Dartmouth College in 2001. The conference was titled "On the Threshold: Native American Archaeologist Relations in the Twenty-first Century," and it brought together a small group of Indigenous archaeologists from around the United States who were able to share their ideas and perspectives about being Native American archaeologists. The conversation started at this conference was continued via e-mail and resulted in the decision to maintain discussions as a more formal group. In early e-mail correspondence a discussion arose over what to name the group. One participant suggested the name "Funky Chickens," while another scholar suggested including the word "grease" in memory of the movie they were watching while having that original discussion at Dartmouth. Soon the naming suggestions included the word "closet," after one member rejected another's offer of a closet in her small, crowded apartment for temporary lodging. The group was officially titled the Closet Chickens, and members soon began to find appropriate chicken-related names for each other, including Greasy Chicken, Chicken Noodle, Chicken Strips, and Chicken–a-la-Queen. As the group's informal webpage notes: "One of the group's major goals is to ensure that there are too many Native American archaeologists [End Page 269] to fit into ANY closet." Additional members have been added to the Closet Chickens group, which now includes Native American and First Nations archaeologists and supporters. At recent archaeology and anthropology professional conferences, over a number of networking dinners and friendly coffee breaks, members of the group have developed a "secret" Chicken handshake, have been known to sing a Chicken song, and there are even plans to perform the Chicken Dance each year at the Society for American Archaeology professional meetings. Amidst the joking and silliness of the Closet Chickens tales is a profound story of strength and perseverance. As have First Nations and other Indigenous groups globally, Native Americans in this country have faced, as part of the colonial process, the theft, appropriation, and misrepresentation of our history, cultural heritage, and intellectual and cultural property. Even the bodies of our ancestors were not sacred in this assault. As David Hurst Thomas and others have demonstrated so powerfully, the rise of archaeology played an intricate part in the colonization process, and the results of this conflict remain with us to this day.1 However, Native people in North America are not simply helpless victims of colonization; they are people who have actively found ways to work against Western and colonial practices to retain aspects of their traditional knowledge and lifeways. In an effort to regain control of their cultural resources, ancestral remains, and heritage, Indigenous people around the globe have played an active role in creating positive change in the field of archaeology. Scholars and activists have critiqued the discipline and practices of archaeology and anthropology—for example, they have protested such practices as displaying open burials for tourism and the display of human remains and sacred objects in museums. They have also worked with archaeologists and museum professionals to develop NAGPRA, important legislation that has resulted in the reburial and repatriation of thousands of our ancestors and sacred objects.2 In addition to such community activism and academic scholarship focused on making changes in the practice of archaeology from outside the discipline, Indigenous people have also chosen to work actively to improve the discipline of archaeology by advancing change from the inside, as professional archaeologists, excavation monitors, scholars working in tribal or national museums, and academic archaeologists. Each of the Closet Chickens has taken on this charge, and they face the difficult task of learning to facilitate change in a way that is both productive and [End Page 270] effective. As a member of the Closet Chickens myself, I can speak from firsthand experience to...

Accelerated Climate Change and Australia's Cultural Heritage

In the early 1990's, cultural heritage places were identified as likely to be impacted by accelerated (greenhouse) climate change. Subsequently, both at the national and international levels, cultural heritage issues have not been mentioned in agendas requiring adaptive responses. In this paper it is argued that adaptive responses, which include cultural heritage issues, need to be developed. Numerous sites could potentially be impacted by accelerated climate change, particularly in coastal locations. These sites range from indigenous middens, to early European coastal engineering structures. Coastal middens in particular, apart from their obvious value to indigenous owners and archaeologists, are a vast store of palaeo-climate, sea level and biological systems information. They also have ecotourism values. Environmental managers need to be made aware of these broad heritage values, and cultural heritage managers need to assess their professional capabilities to deal with conservation and salvage issues if environmental change is rapid. There is a critical need to make indigenous owners aware of these issues and involve them at all levels of the debate.

The last 200,000 years (or thereabouts) in Eastern Africa: Recent archaeological research

Research in Eastern Africa is hampered by a variety of logistical constraints common in underdeveloped and politically fragmented regions. The later Middle and early Upper Pleistocene are attracting attention in the debate over the origins of anatomically modern humans. There has also been considerable field research and discussion of the development of specialized pastoralism. Archaeology, history and several other disciplines have combined to study the development of social complexity in the Great Lakes region and along the Swahili coast, the Aksumite civilization and African agricultural systems. Finally, the rise of a cadre of indigenous archaeologists is fostering debate over what constitutes explanation and over the relevance of the discipline within Africa.