-
Synthesis & Conclusions
- University of Ottawa Press
- Chapter
- Additional Information
205 Synthesis & Conclusions Archaeological evidence for the destruction of Old Man’s Playing Ground may be disappointing from a heritage management perspective, but the fate of the rock alignment may have little bearing on the significance of the site.Textual sources suggest it was built in close proximity to the Oldman River (Fidler, HBCA E.3/2; Dawson 1886; MacGregor 1966) and that its degradation was a gradual process that occurred over the span of a century or more.The low-lying flat that best corresponds with descriptions of the playing ground’s location has indeed been severely impacted by numerous recent flood events.At this location , even prehistorically, periodic maintenance of the site would have been required to keep it in the excellent condition that Peter Fidler observed in 1792.The slow process of attrition by which the site was destroyed was as much a function of a failure to keep the rock alignment maintained, then, as it was a result of any cataclysmic natural event. The abandonment of the site may have been triggered by a number of factors in the period following European contact:disease,escalating warfare,and a disruption of traditional modes of trade.All access was abruptly interrupted,however,by the imposition of the reserve era, accompanied by severe restrictions on First Nations’ abilities to perform traditional practices including intergroup gatherings such as those described as taking palce at Old Man’s Playing Ground. In spite of this, memory of the place is maintained in the oral traditions of several First Nations communities; it is here that the true significance of the place lies. There is much that can still be preserved in the Oldman Gap: in this chapter, I will discuss the reasons for associating archaeological site DlPo-8 with Old Man’s Playing Ground, and what the data from DlPo-8 can tell us about prehistoric occupation of the locale in which the playing ground was a major part.The fieldwork conducted in 2010 was only a preliminary assessment,though.Much of this discussion is directed at identifying fruitful avenues for future enquiry, particularly as pertains to linking historic groups to the prehistoric occupants of the Gap, and to the social implications of the site as an intergroup rendezvous point where gambling occurred.The discussion of intergroup meeting at the site goes beyond the purely academic. Oral traditions and other sources indicate which historic groups have a continuing connection to the site;this connection is particularly well expressed among the Piikáni, but also appears in other communities.While further collaborative research with First Nations members is called for to preserve existing knowledge about the site, the data available are sufficient to advise that meaningful consultation with these communities be included in any future management plans for the locality. Old Man’s Playing Ground and DlPo-8 A connection between archaeological site DlPo-8, on a high terrace at the south end of the Oldman Gap,and the rock alignment described in Peter Fidler’s journal (HBCA E.3/2, fo. 17) was first proposed by members of the Glenbow Foundation archaeological survey team in 1960 (GA M2105-4). No stone features matching Fidler’s description were found 206 SYNTHESIS & CONCLUSIONS during that study. Remains of a possible rock alignment and scattered cairns in a badly disturbed context were identified on this landform byYanicki (1999);these do not conform with Fidler’s description of the site, and their origins are not speculated upon further in this report.A low riverside terrace that more closely corresponds with historic descriptions of the site’s location was not investigated in these previous studies. Archaeological testing conducted on this landform in the summer of 2010 revealed no traces of buried cultural features, but did show considerable impact from flood events, probably within the past century.If this was the location of Old Man’s Playing Ground,all trace of it appears to have been destroyed. The archaeological site on the higher terrace, DlPo-8, is then the only remaining window through which to assess the prehistoric occupation of the playing ground.The two landforms are part of the same locality, being adjacent to each other and separated by only 5 m of elevation; should archaeological materials have been found on the lower landform, it is uncertain whether they would be considered to be from a separate site.This association is natural,considering the needs of the people who would have gathered to play the hoop-and-arrow...