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

3 Prelude to Grasshopper, 1919-1962 All undertaking the course must be able to ride horseback and camp out. The trip will entail some hardship because most of the work done will be on the Navajo Reservation in the midst of "The Great American Desert," where water is scarce and where the only roads are Indian trails. To one who enjoys the Rockies, with their rugged peaks, stretches of lofty mesas and deep-cut box canyons, the country is a delight and the climate full of tone and vigor. To those who enjoy out-of-door life, such a six weeks' experience adds a decade to their allotted three score and ten.-Byron Cummings (1919), quoted in Gifford and Morris (1985:399) The Grasshopper Field School did not emerge de nouveau from the red dirt of the Fort Apache Indian Reservation. It was the product of many summers of archaeological research undertaken in a field-school context by the University of Arizona. We trace the history of the Arizona field schools from Byron Cummings's first venture into the cliff dwellings of the Four Corners region to the last field school before Grasshopper . In so doing, we also highlight general patterns in the early history of southwestern archaeology, portray some of the Southwest's best loved and most important personalities, and explore one of its greatest controversies. Historical Themes in Grasshopper Archaeology: Growth of an Arizona Field-School Tradition Anthropology at Arizona has first and foremost meant archaeology. Anthropology was taught in the Department ofArchaeology, rather than the 41 reverse, during Cummings's tenure from 1915 until 1937. Although Cummings strove from the beginning to develop a "program in anthropology ," the department's title was not changed to "anthropology" until Emil Haury replaced Cummings as head. Until1980, the three heads of the department-Cummings, Haury, and Raymond Thompson-were archaeologists, and they were also directors of the Arizona State Museum . The dual role of director and head gave these early archaeologists a powerful academic and political base from which to influence the scope and direction of Arizona archaeology, and the leadership of the department remained primarily in the hands of archaeologists after Thompson's retirement from the position. The field school is a major expression of the UA's emphasis on archaeology. An Arizona field school is more than a summer course with a venerable history. It is also a set of purposes and procedures for conducting archaeological research and teaching, which do not always work smoothly in tandem. Between the two there is often a dynamic tension or a dialectic struggle that can have synergistic effects of increasing productivity and responding to change. Additionally, teaching can add an essential democratizing force to an enterprise that leans naturally toward the autocratic. A field school is a vastly different research context than either the rarified atmosphere of the academic project supported by the National Science Foundation or today's businesslike data-recovery efforts by cultural resource management firms. To comprehend Grasshopper archaeology, one must understand first the field-school context within which it took place. Arizona is not unique in its attention to archaeological field schools. The American Southwest has a long history of such outings, of which the Arizona tradition is both a part and a product (Joiner 1992; Mills 2005). It is unclear what facets of the regional tradition were incorporated into the Arizona experience, and an investigation in this direction would not be germane to our account, which focuses on how the Arizona field-school tradition influenced Grasshopper archaeology. The reader can find summaries of southwestern field schools in the accounts by Gifford and Morris (1985) and Mills (2005). Four themes underlie the history of Grasshopper research as it was formulated and carried out within the Arizona field-school tradition: (1) an exploration or, in Walter Taylor's (1954) words, an "expedition" tradition; (2) a strong emphasis on teaching field methods and laboratory techniques; (3) a commitment to scholarly research and publication (regardless of the controversy it might provoke); and (4) a deep respect for Native Americans, especially the Western Apache. To convey a sense 42 CHAPTER 3 of the development of these themes within the Arizona field-school tradition , we summarize its history and chart the dynamic tension between teaching and research. In the early days of American archaeology, exploration and observation of broad regions were sufficient to begin comprehending the similarities and differences of prehistory's remnant pieces. As understanding increased and questions became more focused...


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.