-
7. Alternative Archaeologies and Their Impact on Disciplinary Practice
- University of Arizona Press
- Chapter
- Additional Information
135 7 Alternative Archaeologies and Their Impact on Disciplinary Practice I have heard it said in a variety of contexts that community-based practitioners are a small but vocal minority of the discipline who think they are making more of an impact on archaeological practice than they actually are. This chapter considers this statement by reviewing, evaluating, and reflecting on some of the contemporary impacts on the profession resulting from both Indigenous critiques of the discipline and the rise of communitybased practice. It begins with a look at the ways Indigenous communities, in North America particularly, are engaging with archaeology and the archaeological community. I then look at some of the impacts of community-based practice for cultural resource management (CRM) and, finally, its impacts on academic programs and the shifting expectations of the student body that comes to study archaeology. The impacts of community-based practice for disciplinary method and theory are discussed in chapters 1, 3, and 5 of this volume and are not touched on here. I write this chapter from my own vantage point and experiences as an independent heritage consultant. My work with Inuvialuit began as a Parks Canada archaeologist, but the partnership formed and expanded through my doctoral research and subsequent work as a consultant. Today, a few years after completing my PhD, I maintain one foot in the academic world and another in the CRM world, and I work with several First Nations and Inuit communities in Canada within a community-based approach. The ideas here are equally drawn from conversations with many of my colleagues from archaeological and Aboriginal communities across North America; my comments are largely limited to practices and experiences within Canada and the United States, with periodic reference to other English-speaking areas of the world. My approach to the issues outlined in this chapter is essentially pragmatic : my goal is to examine changing aspects of the discipline with a view chapter 7 136 to understanding where we are going and what skills, tools, and approaches will be needed for this task. I use the term alternative archaeologies in the title of this chapter as I have throughout this volume: as a broad category incorporating Indigenous, community-based, collaborative, and related approaches to archaeology that aim to decenter traditional roles and responsibilities, develop new theories and methods of practice, and re-enfranchise local and descendant communities into the process of telling their own, often marginalized, histories. Aboriginal Communities and Archaeological Engagement Beginning in the late 1960s, Aboriginal communities in North America began to demand changes to the ways that they interacted with government, working toward greater control of education, health care, social services, heritage, and other policies that directly affected their people. The American Indian Movement fostered an environment of questioning and dissent worldwide that would lead to a greater understanding of Indigenous histories and contemporary concerns (e.g., Brown 1970; Deloria 1969, 1974; Josephy 1971). In Canada, Prime Minister Trudeau’s infamous White Paper of 1969, which proposed to assimilate First Nations into the mainstream of Canadian society through the abolishment of the Indian Act, spurred many Aboriginal groups to action, including the pursuit of land claims across the north (Lyons, forthcoming). Indigenous demands and the negotiation of claims, combined with heightened public awareness, pushed the Canadian and US governments to review and in many cases rewrite policy and legislation surrounding heritage resources. In Canada, these processes have been propelled in large part by court decisions (Ferris 2003; Klassen et al. 2009; Tennant 1990). The social environment that has emerged in government, research, and other interactions between the mainstream and Aboriginal communities is in many ways more cautious and conciliatory than in preceding decades, and certainly more broadly aware of the Indigenous critique. Sweeping regulatory changes have been instituted as a result of this critique, including the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA) in 1990 in the United States (Hall and Wolfley 2003; Killion 2008; Watkins 2002, 2004, 2010a), while in Canada, repatriation mandates have been instituted through policy rather than legislation (Bell and Napoleon 2008). Contemporary land claims in Canada, and elsewhere, are increasingly recognizing the special relationship, rights, and responsibilities of Indigenous [54.198.37.250] Project MUSE (2024-03-29 02:45 GMT) alternative archaeologies and their impact 137 communities to the archaeological record, and developing institutions for the comanagement of these resources (Lyons, forthcoming). These policy shifts have also led to the development of community-responsive systems for permitting and, in many...