Archaeologists as Activists: Can Archaeologists Change the World?

8. Reconnecting Community: Archaeology and Activismat the Portland Wharf

8 Reconnecting Community Archaeology and Activism at the Portland Wharf MattheW e. PrybylSKi and M. Jay StottMan INTRODUCTION With the development and evolution of public archaeology over the last couple of decades came the realization that archaeology is much more than just discovering the past, it has the power to connect that past with the present and touch people’s lives.Within the framework of a critical theoretical perspective that illuminates self-reflection and emphasizes the importance of the political and ideological environment of archaeological research, we now begin to seek an application of archaeology for the benefit of the public. The next step beyond public archaeology is our collaboration with community to use archaeology and the past to benefit the present. Ian Hodder states that archaeology is “a diversity of stakeholders” and that any archaeological site will provide a focus for interactions between many groups, from developers and contractors, to local governments, local residents , descendents, tourist, and archaeologist. It is the role of the archaeologist to attempt to work between and in relation to all the stakeholders while continuing to play the role as a member of that society.(Hodder 1999) Archaeology within this perspective represents an applied and civically engaged archaeology, as described in the introduction of this book. There is no lack of evidence for archaeology benefiting and collaborating with communities in the present (Colwell-Chanthaphohn and Ferguson 2008; Reconnecting Community • 127 Derry and Malloy 2003; Little, ed. 2002; Little and Shackel 2007). The idea of a “public” form of archaeology seriously began taking root in a few special communities across the United States. As most of us know or have seen, places like Alexandria, Annapolis, and Colonial Williamsburg, to name just a few, started archaeology projects for research or historic preservation. However , these places quickly realized the potential of these unique initiatives to use cultural tourism, public history, and archaeology to help their communities grow economically and culturally (Potter 1994; Slick 2002).More recently archaeologists have begun to design projects to create such effects at the onset of their projects, such as efforts in St. Louis focused on community identity through historic preservation (Baumann et al.2008) and Paul Mullins’s (2003) use of archaeology to reconnect a displaced community with the history of its extinct neighborhood. It is this conscious use of archaeology to affect change in the present and advocate for communities that is an activist archaeology as defined in this book’s introduction. The Portland Wharf Park project located in the Portland neighborhood of Louisville, Kentucky, represents an application of an activist archaeology as the conscious use of archaeology by civically engaged archaeologists to collaborate with and benefit a community. PORTLAND: AN ILLUSTRIOUS PAST AND DEPRESSED PRESENT Portland was founded as an independent town in 1811 at the base of the Falls of the Ohio River. The Falls of the Ohio, formed millions of years ago, are a spectacular natural feature located on the Ohio River between Portland and Louisville and are the only obstacle in navigation on the Ohio and Mississippi rivers between Pittsburgh and New Orleans (Kleber 1992). Portland was located at the terminus point of the lucrative portage service around the Falls and was an early rival to Louisville.Both Louisville and Portland prospered greatly by increased river traffic due to the development of the steamboat and rose from small towns to bustling mercantile centers. During the mid-nineteenth century nearly one-third of the cost to ship cargo from New Orleans to Pittsburgh was spent on the three-mile portage around the Falls (Munro-Leighton and Munro-Leighton 1979). Because the portage business was so important to Louisville and Portland, it became the source of much friction between the rival ports. The high cost of transport and the condition of the road between the two was often the subject of commentary and complaints. To eliminate the need for the portage, a canal to bypass the Falls had been proposed as early as the 1790s. However, it was not until 1825 when the Louisville and Portland Canal Company was 128 • Matthew E. Prybylski and M. Jay Stottman chartered, and construction of the canal began the following year. However, the canal did little to improve transportation around the Falls as it quickly became obsolete because it was too narrow and shallow for the new generation of steamboats that dominated shipping on the Ohio River. As a result, the overland...