Friday May 19th,  2017 Morning Sessions - 9am-12pm

 

Session:  "Archaeology and Settler Colonialism"

 

Session Organizer:

 

Kristen Bos,  University of Toronto, Department of Anthropology

kristen.bos@mail.utoronto.ca

 

 

ABSTRACT: On the blog for their journal, Settler Colonial Studies, editors Edward Cavanagh and Lorenzo Veracini define settler colonialism as “a global and transnational phenomenon, and as much a thing of the past as a thing of a present” (2010). It is important to note here that settler colonialism is not colonialism. As Kēhaulani Kauanui (2016) reminds us, settler colonialism is “a structure, not an event” but settler colonial forms can operate within colonial forms as well as subvert and replace them. In archaeological thought, settler colonialism takes form in uncontested practices and categories, a lack of self-reflexivity, and the privileging of scientific thought over Indigenous Thought etc. What does settler colonialism mean to/for archaeologists? How does settler colonialism operate within archaeological practice and thought? How do we recognize the phenomenon of settler colonialism in the field and across sites (i.e., Canada, Peru, Israel, Aotearoa etc.)? How does the language we use as archaeologists (i.e., categorizations, analogies, narratives etc.) implicate us in the ongoing settler colonial project? Other questions might address: capitalism, gender, Indigenous Thought, decolonization, political temporalities, power and ritual, spatial constructs, White Supremacism, knowledge production. Since there is no blueprint for unsettling settler colonialism or decolonization, this session requires diverse voices but has no preference for medium: papers/stories, poems, performance pieces etc. are all welcome and encouraged.

 

  Inidividual papers:

 

 

 

 Materiality in Theory: Place-Based Reductions and the Indian in the Academy

 

Vanessa Watts, McMaster University

 

 Indigenous ways of knowing are dependent on an inheriting process both amongst humans and between human and non-human beings.  These multi-relationships cross material and immaterial borders as sites of knowledge production.  As such, the material aspects of place act as anchor to knowledge; Indigenous knowledges are not intended to be abstracted from their material beginnings.  As Indigenous peoples and communities increasingly become the subject of theory and praxis in the academy, the re-meaning of sacredly-held Indigenous relationships is both accelerated by, and contributes to, a practice of reducing upon Indigenous and non-human societies both within academia and without. This paper builds upon Smith’s (1999) claims that academic scholarship has largely developed theories about Indigenous peoples in the absence of Indigenous-based theories.  It further lays the groundwork for Indigenous understandings of social beingness that is reflexive of land-based pedagogies rather than colonial prescripts

 

 

 

The Unintended Continuation of Settler Colonialism in Ontario

 

Matthew Beaudoin, PhD, Western University

 

The archaeological practice in Canada is regulated and structured by the Federal and various Provincial governments. There are various structural mechanisms and interpretive conventions that serve to unconsciously guide archaeological practice in unconsciously replicating the dominant master narrative. These structures and conventions were developed within general archaeological practice, but in government codification they have become more rigid. This paper examines the current site registration and site update information required by the Provincial Government of Ontario to show demonstrate how these structure unconsciously guide archaeological interpretation to conform to the existing provincial master narrative, and some of the consequences of these invisible guiding hands that create an imaginary past that may not reflect the complexity of a lived reality. Furthermore, I will be exploring some options that can be used to subvert these existing structures to privilege alternative narratives and work towards unsettling how archaeological knowledge is recorded and perpetuated within the government systems.

 

 

 

 

Burdens and Boundaries : Exchanging Information within Settler Colonial Knowledge Systems

 

Emily Hayflick, The Field Museum of Natural History

 

This paper will focus on specific patterns within knowledge sharing practices between native and non-native individuals and communities. These exchanges, which take place both in academia/museums and popular forums, work both within and to continue to reify settler colonial power relationships. The structure, contextualization, and forms of knowledge exchange, specifically focused on how information is requested, absorbed, and reinterpreted need to be examined and critiqued as part of the larger decolonizing process of the many forms of knowledge. The ways in which non-native populations often request and synthesize knowledge from native people can be seen as a form of “settler moves to innocence,” (Tuck and Yang, 2012) and shifting responsibility from where it belongs, with settler communities, to native communities. I will specifically be focusing on facilitated forms of knowledge exchange, e.g. within social media discussions of protest movements and indigenous rights, and within museum research processes. This paper will build on discussions of privileging scientific and Euro-American knowledge over ‘traditional knowledge,’ as well as on decolonial and anticolonial theory in settler colonial environments.  This paper will discuss examples from both academic/museum and non-institutional settings, as knowledge practices within academia are not isolated from popular discourse and vice versa.

 

 

Archaeologies of Contemporary Native American/First Nation Protests (1969-Today)

 

April M. Beisaw, PhD, Vassar College

 

Since the occupation of Alcatraz by the Indians of All Tribes (1969-1971), Native American and First Nation protests have been well-documented through a variety of media. Unfortunately, many non-Natives lack the background necessary to understand and evaluate the messages being conveyed. For example, after the National Park Service began including the Alcatraz occupation in their site interpretation, I witnessed visitors discussing how inappropriate it was that a Native prison riot was being celebrated. More recently, the Standing Rock #NoDAPL protests have been a swirl of media messages and misunderstandings. One anti-protest advocate posted social media images of Native Americans throwing firewood off of a truck bed as evidence that they were indeed violent protestors. On the other hand, a single map published by the Huffington Post is being shared widely to explain the historical roots of this protest. The image, and similar animated GIFs are oversimplifying the issue(s) and response(s). More general protests, like Idle No More and the Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women (#MMIW) movements have been documented through countless videos and photographs that are widely ignored by mainstream media. Native American protest music (e.g. Buffy Sainte-Marie, A Tribe Called Red, etc.) is widely consumed, even when it’s underlying message is missed or ignored. Developing archaeologies of contemporary Native protests is just one way in which we can rededicate archaeology to the study of Native peoples and (re)educate those who misunderstand or ignore these media. In the spirit of "The Medium is the Message," this session invites participants to explore ways in which archaeology can be used to either contextualize the media being produced or to document the protests themselves in ways not unlike how we have documented Native pasts. We can map the creation, expansion, and movement of protest sites. We can use the time/date stamps and geotagged locations of images and videos to delineate sites and define its stratigraphic layers. We can describe and interpret the contemporary juxtapositioning of people, places, and objects that are often considered separate in space and/or time.

 

 

Unsettling Settler Colonial Archaeologies in Canada: An Indigenous Feminist Perspective

 

Kisha Supernant, PhD, University of Alberta

 

         In Canada, archaeologists are often centered as experts on indigenous pasts and rightful stewards of the archaeological record. However, most archaeological practitioners are settlers, primarily the descendants of immigrants from white, western European nations. Theories of archaeology are largely drawn from settler colonial contexts; for example, the recent ontological turn and rise of posthumanism in the social sciences are deeply indebted to Indigenous thought, but only when that thought was colonized by white scholars (typically without giving due credit to Indigenous thinkers) did it begin to inform the discipline. The methods of archaeology are based on analysis of material evidence using the scientific method, an approach based on the subject/object divide. In addition, archaeologists typically work either in an academic or a development context, both of which reinforce settler colonial and capitalist knowledge systems. In this paper, I explore how structures of settler colonialism inform archaeological practice in Canada and present a critique from an Indigenous feminist perspective. I use my research with Métis communities as a lens to focus on how my own exploration of identity is discursively informed by my research into my community, heritage, and history. I conclude by presenting a case for the future of archaeology where settler colonial discourses and knowledge systems are only one of many archaeologies practiced in Canada.

 

 

On Stories

 

Kristen Bos, University of Toronto

 

Despite considerable political efforts, the Métis remain on the peripheries of dominant discourse. While previous research has demonstrated the archaeological visibility of Métis populations, confined to architecture and the odd ceramic- or lithic-based approach, research has remained limited in material, method, and scope. The researchers cannot be blamed here: the material culture of the Métis is limiting. Although Métis culture developed in the more recent past (c. the mid-18th century onwards as beaver hides dwindled and the Métis turned towards the emerging buffalo and pemmican trade) and although Métis artefacts like jaw harps, embroidered sashes, and beaded leggings were “traded, sold, given, worn, acquired with force or as souvenirs, presented as diplomatic gifts [and] exchanged in marriage ceremonies” (Peers 1999, 55) for centuries, few survive with certain context and/or provenance. And without either? A good archaeologist will tell you that understanding is impossible. But is it? This paper uses stories to remember, envision, and create new paradigms for understanding Métis artefacts while also using stories to address the ongoing phenomenon of settler colonialism that permeates even the best intentioned decolonizing efforts.