SAA a rchaeological record the

SAA a rchaeological record the
archaeological record
Winner, 2012 SAA Archaeology Week Poster Contest
Join the Conversation! Mention #SAA2013 on Twitter, Facebook, and now Instagram for all Annual Meeting Related Posts
NEW FOR 2013
Customize your membership with new 2013 renewal options!
Add one of SAA’s 3 new interest groups:
Island and Coastal Archaeology Interest Group
Military Archaeological Resources Stewardship Interest Group
Zooarchaeology and Bone Technology Interest Group
Select how you’d like to receive The SAA Archaeological Record:
Electronic only
Print and Electronic
Honolulu Sunset. Photo Credit: Hawaii Tourism Authority (HTA) / Chuck Painter.
April 3–7, 2013 •
See You in Honolulu, HI!
SAAarchaeological record
The Magazine of the Society for American Archaeology
Volume 12, No. 4
September 2012
Editor’s Corner
Jane Eva Baxter
From the President
W. Fred Limp
In Brief
Tobi A. Brimsek
Annual Meeting: Honolulu in 2013!
Kathy Kawelu and James Bayman
Creating a Successful Archaeology Month Poster
Judy K. Wolf
The SAA Archaeology Week/Month Poster Contest
Cathy Poetschat
What I Learned from My Experience as Editor of
American Antiquity (2009–2012)
Alison E. Rautman
Myth of the Moundbuilders
Trent DeBoer
Zero Waste Archaeology
E. Christian Wells and Melanie N. Coughlin
Practical Recording Issues at
Small and Large Scales in Maya Archaeology
Robert Warden and Thomas H. Guderjan
Special Forum on International Collaborations:
Editor’s Comments
Kisha Supernant
Collaborative, Community-Based Heritage Research
and the IPinCH Project
George Nicholas and the IPinCH Collective
The Ngaut Ngaut Interpretive Project:
Collaboration and Mutually Beneficial Outcomes
Amy Roberts and Isobelle Campbell
Working with Local Communities and Managing
Cultural Heritage in Iringa Region, Tanzania
Katie M. Biittner and Pamela R. Willoughby
Collaborative Research in New Caledonia
Ian Lilley, Christophe Sand and Frederique Valentin
The Inuvialuit Living History Project
Natasha Lyons, Kate Hennessy, Mervin Joe,
Charles Arnold, Stephen Loring, Albert Elias,
and James Pokiak
Shared Lives: A Collaborative
Partnership in Aboriginal Australia
Claire Smith and Gary Jackson
Call for Awards Nominations
In Memoriam: William L. Rathje
Norman Hammond
In Memoriam: Daniel E. Shea
William Green, Mario Rivera, and Henry Moy
In Memoriam: Phil Clayton Weigand
Helen P. Pollard, Eduardo Williams,
and Christopher Beekman
positions open
news and notes
SAAarchaeological record
The Magazine of the Society for
American Archaeology
Volume 12, No. 4
September 2012
Jane Eva Baxter
The SAA Archaeological Record
(ISSN 1532-7299) is published five
times a year and is edited by Jane
Eva Baxter. Submissions should be
sent to Jane Eva Baxter, [email protected], DePaul University,
Department of Anthropology, 2343
North Racine, Chicago, IL 60614
Deadlines for submissions are:
December 1 (January), February 1
(March), April 1 (May), August 1
(September), and October 1
(November). Advertising and placement ads should be sent to SAA
headquarters, 1111 14th St. NW,
Suite 800, Washington, DC 20005.
The SAA Archaeological Record is
provided free to members and institutional subscribers to American
Antiquity and Latin American Antiquity worldwide. The SAA Archaeological Record can be found on the
Web in PDF format at
SAA publishes The SAA Archaeological Record as a service to its members and constituencies. SAA, its
editors and staff are not responsible
for the content, opinions and information contained in The SAA
Archaeological Record. SAA, its editors and staff disclaim all warranties with regard to such content,
opinions and information published in The SAA Archaeological
Record by any individual or organization; this disclaimer includes all
implied warranties of merchantability and fitness. In no event
shall SAA, its editors and staff be
liable for any special, indirect, or
consequential damages or any
damages whatsoever resulting from
loss of use, data, or profits, arising
out of or in connection with the use
or performance of any content,
opinions or information included
in The SAA Archaeological Record.
Copyright ©2012 by the Society for
American Archaeology. All Rights
realize that volume numbers for The SAA Archaeological Record correspond to the
calendar year, but in many ways my editorial cycle begins in September and runs
through May, with summer being a time to cultivate new materials, work with
authors I’ve met through the previous SAA meeting, and plan out the issues in a way
that makes my editorship work while in the throes of an academic year. It’s hard to
believe that this cycle is to be my last, and that I have only five more issues to produce
as Editor. I can say that there are some really interesting articles and forums ahead, but
I also can say there is still plenty of room for authors who would like to publish something in the near future. Please contact me if you have ideas for submissions, as I’d be
happy to work with you. I am also seeking authors who are using social media to share
their archaeological work with others. Do you blog while in the field? Do you have a
Facebook group or a tumblr where you disseminate information to interested friends
or followers? Do you tweet about archaeology? If so, and if you think these are topics
you’d be able to write about, please let me know as they are aspects of contemporary
archaeology I’d like to see presented in upcoming issues.
I also have taken on a couple of extra projects as Editor that I wanted to share with you.
The first was the development of a set of guidelines specifically for authors publishing
in The SAA Archaeological Record. These guidelines are the first ever for the magazine,
and address many recurring concerns of authors. The guidelines will be available on
the SAA website by the time this issue comes to print, and they will be published in the
November issue of the magazine. I want to thank the Publications Committee for their
input and suggestions in the development of the guidelines, and their ultimate
approval of the document. Second, I have embarked on a project to index the first
twelve years of The SAA Archaeological Record. The index will include a listing of special forums, an author index, and a subject index. As the increasing use of electronic
sources in teaching and research leads people to favor publications with accessible
indices, this project ultimately will become a part of the SAA website and a useful tool
for those wishing to look at articles from The SAA Archaeological Record, particularly in
a historical or longitudinal fashion. This project should be completed by the end of my
term in May, so look for more information in upcoming issues.
This issue of the magazine is filled with a diverse array of really interesting articles. I am
particularly excited to have gotten Judy Wolf to write an article about those Wyoming
Archaeology Awareness posters that seem to be our favorites year after year. For those
of you who I’ve heard wondering out loud how she does it- it’s here in The SAA Archaeological Record. Finally, Kisha Supernant is to be commended for her work as special editor, and for bringing together such an exciting forum on behalf of the SAA Committee
on Native American Relations. Looking at collaborations occurring around the world
and in areas where collaborations are not mandated by any type of legislation provides
many exciting and novel approaches regarding longstanding disciplinary interests of
public archaeology, collaborative archaeology, and community-based archaeology. I am
pleased to have helped facilitate for the membership another forum sponsored by one
of the many committees who work so hard on behalf of our organization.
The SAA Archaeological Record • September 2012
Fred Limp
Fred Limp is the President of the Society for American Archaeology.
Dear Colleagues:
It has been a busy summer—and be sure to respond
to the fall call for committee membership. The last
few months have been active ones for the Society.
There was a time not so long ago when summer was
fairly quiet, with most members in the field. That
has changed! I’d like to update you on some of the
more important activities.
Over the last few months we have joined with many
other societies and organizations to work with the
National Geographic Society to develop guidelines
for metal detecting shows. The minutes of the
National Geographic Society and National Geographic Channel
Meeting on Archeological Preservation, Avocational Metal
Detecting, Ethics of Archeology meeting, along with a letter
from me to the SAA membership are posted on SAA web
(, describing the outcome of the process. Also this
summer task forces have been working closely with the publications committee to identify candidates for the editorship of
The SAA Archaeological Record (TSAR). A second task force and
the Publications Committee have also been working over the
summer to identify candidates for editor of the new journal. In
the fall meeting the Board will be making their selections from
the candidate lists.
While on the topic of journals, I want to remind you that the last
two years of both American Antiquity and Latin American Antiquity are now online and you can access them through the SAA
website. As each new issue comes out we will be sending an email blast to member subscribers alerting them to the new content. The Publications Committee and the editors are also working hard on guidelines for new supplemental materials. These
are materials that can be added to the journal website—things
such as color photographs, databases, videos, and others. We
hope to have recommended guidelines for the Board’s review in
the fall meeting.
This summer has also seen the first use of the new electronic
submission system. By the time this issue of TSAR is out submissions will be closed—but so far members have been pleased
with the new system, and the fact that we now have
a 200-word abstract limit provides authors with a
much better opportunity to describe their papers.
There have been a growing number of requests for
assistance from international sources. As a result we
have set up a new committee: The International Government Affairs Committee—IGAC—under the
able leadership of Dan Sandweiss. IGAC will be
developing its membership and a network of advisors over the next months.
The SAA, in conjunction with ACRA, SRI Foundation, National Trust for Historic Preservation, Cultural Heritage Partners, and Cultural Resource Analysts, Inc., is
working on a 3-part strategy for integrating historic preservation
compliance in shale gas exploration, development, and operation. The initiative is focused on private property where currently there are limited or no historic preservation compliance
requirements. The 3-part strategy involves compiling data to
demonstrate the magnitude of cultural resources at risk, engaging industry through candid discussions with private companies
which are voluntarily complying to develop a comprehensive
framework, and working with legislators and regulators to accept
the historic preservation-industry compliance framework.
Finally—please consider responding to the November “Call for
Committee Service.” We are now in our third year of this new
approach to committee formulation. Each year, through the
call, members are invited to submit a statement of interest.
The board liaison to the committee and the committee chair
use these statements of interest to select new members for the
committee. In our last member needs assessment nearly 1/3
of the members said they wanted to serve on a committee, and
we can have more statements of interest than we do open positions each year for a particular committee. If you are not
selected one year please resubmit your statement the next.
Remember that committee members may only serve a maximum of 2 two-year terms. So each year there are new openings
on committees. The Society is a volunteer organization and its
strength is based on the extraordinary interest and commitment by our membership.
September 2012 • The SAA Archaeological Record
Tobi A. Brimsek
Tobi A. Brimsek is executive director for the Society for American Archaeology.
Meetings, Meetings, A Few Questions
In the Memphis meeting evaluations, two general questions/
comments were raised. Since these questions do get asked periodically, each is addressed below.
Why does SAA not include coffee breaks at the Annual Meeting?
This question has been asked from time to time over the past
years. The simple reason is cost. Unbelievably, the cost for coffee service from a hotel or convention center would be in the
neighborhood of $14,000–$18,000! And that is for one coffee
break—not even for a full day. In addition to the cost of the coffee, there are service charges (generally in the arena of 21–24
percent) and local taxes on the coffee and service.
Why is SAA not going back to New Orleans?
SAA would very much like to bring the annual meeting back to
New Orleans. We have been trying to do so for a number of
years. Our most recent attempt is actually coming full circle
now. The simple answer is that New Orleans is a very desirable
destination, and our annual meeting does not meet the spending guidelines that the hotels seek for meeting contracts. In
addition, our meeting dates are during the peak meeting season
in New Orleans. It is this mismatch, combined with the high
demand for New Orleans that is preventing us from getting
there. There are numerous options and hotel packages. We have
recently been unsuccessful with all of them. What is the solution? We will keep trying, knowing that this is what our membership would like to see.
istration for “Camp SAA” is available from the link on the front
page of SAAweb ( Care is available in four hour
consecutive minimums. The fees per hour and registration are
handled directly by the childcare company. Should you have any
questions about the childcare program, please direct them to
SAA’s Executive Director, Tobi Brimsek ([email protected]
or 1-202-559-4580).
Hotel Information and Logistics
The meeting will take place at the Hawaii Convention Center,
and the Hilton Hawaiian Village, which is the headquarters
hotel. The convention center is about a 12–14 minute walk from
the Hilton Hawaiian Village. There are three additional hotels
exclusively for students (see below). The link to Hilton Hawaiian Village reservations is on the front page of SAAweb
( Please click on ‘Hotel Information.” The rate at
the Hilton Hawaiian Village is $209. Government-rate rooms
are currently sold out.
Special Note
The Hilton Hawaiian Village has extended the SAA rate for one
week before and one week after the meeting, knowing that
some attendees may want a bit more time in Honolulu.
Housing Exclusively For Students
78th Annual Meeting, April 3–7, 2013, Honolulu, HI
For the students, there are three designated student hotels, the
Ramada Plaza Waikiki ($119), the Aqua Palms Waikiki ($119),
and the Ambassador ($85). No extended rates have been offered
at these properties. The reservations information for these properties is also on the “Hotel Information” page of SAAweb.
Childcare Is Back!
A Free One Year Membership in SAA
As was decided by the Board of Directors, childcare will be available at the next three annual meetings (Honolulu 2013, Austin
2014, San Francisco 2015). After the third year, the Board will
revisit the issue again. The same company that provided the
care in St. Louis will be handling it for the next three years. Reg-
All you need to do for a chance at a free one year membership
in SAA is to register at the Hilton Hawaiian Village, the Ambassador, the Aqua Palms Waikiki, or the Ramada Plaza Waikiki by
The SAA Archaeological Record • September 2012
>IN BRIEF, continued on page 9
Kathy Kawelu and James Bayman
Kathy Kawelu (University of Hawai‘i–Hilo) & James Bayman (University of Hawai‘i–Mãnoa) are the local advisory chairs for the 78th Annual Meeting.
loha mai kãkou! We’re thrilled to host the Society for
American Archaeology’s annual meeting in Honolulu
this coming year. For the first time in the Society’s history, Hawai‘i serves as the conference destination. We hope the
unique island people, cultures, history, and environment will
make this a memorable experience. Your first glimpse of
Hawai‘i will be of the mountains that poke through the sea of
clouds, when you set foot on our shores the humidity will
embrace you, and you’ll hear ‘õlelo Hawai‘i (Hawaiian language)
peppered in the local pidgin and spoken by kanaka maoli
(Native Hawaiians), who perpetuate our culture. Northeasterly
trade winds cool you as you make your way to the Hawai‘i Convention Center and Waikı̄kı̄, storied home of chiefs and fertile
irrigated taro field-systems. In Waikı̄kı̄ you can swim at one of
the many beaches along the coast, hike to the top of iconic
Mount Leahi (Diamond Head), or shop to your heart’s content at
Ala Moana Center, the nation’s largest outdoor shopping center.
If you want to get away from the bustle of Waikı̄kı̄, and we suggest you do, take advantage of one of the scheduled fieldtrips.
Tucked away in Mãnoa Valley is the University of Hawai‘i Lyon
Arboretum and Botanical Garden, here you’ll get a guided ethnobotanical tour of nearly 200 acres of tropical rainforest. The
Lyon has more than 5,000 tropical plant species, an active precontact irrigation field-system, and a reconstructed traditional
thatched house.
Learn about Hawaiian history and royalty at Kaniakapupu, the
summer residence of Kauikeaouli, Kamehameha III. Experience the living culture while you give back to the local community, through service work with Aha Hui Mãlama O Kaniakapupu, a nonprofit organization that has cared for this National
Register of Historic Places site for many years.
Along with the Lyon Arboretum trip, the Fiber Perishables
Interest Group has organized a behind-the-scenes tour of the
ethnographic and archaeological collections at the Bernice
Pauahi Bishop Museum. Founded with the collections of three
chiefesses, the Bishop Museum is one of the foremost research
institutions in the Pacific, housing the most comprehensive
Hawaiian collection. With the vast majority of Hawaiian material culture constructed of perishable materials, and the damaging effects of our tropical climate, the collections in the Bishop
Museum are invaluable.
Another interest group, the Military Archaeological Resources
Stewardship group, which in part seeks to increase collaboration
between Department of Defense archaeologists and stakeholders,
has coordinated a tour of Makua Valley. The tour, jointly led by
U.S. Army archaeologists and local community members, provides a unique opportunity to access this culturally significant valley and discuss the challenges of balancing the needs of descendant communities, historic preservation, and military use.
For our last tour, the researchers at the Central Identification
Laboratory, the largest forensic skeletal laboratory in the world
and part of the team responsible for the recovery, identification,
and repatriation of Americans missing from past conflicts, have
offered to give our members a tour. The tour provides an
overview of the facilities and basic forensic analyses done,
including artifactual evidence, as well as a tour of a mock excavation and discussion of the various team positions.
Finally, an event which promises to be a good time is the Saturday night lū‘au. Set on the beautiful grounds of the Bishop
Museum in Kalihi Valley, we’ve steered you away from the
flashy productions, to a truly local-style party. Eat ‘ono (tasty)
Hawaiian food, hear good Hawaiian music, and see hula up
close and personal. The newly renovated Hawaiian Hall will also
be made available during the lū‘au, so when you’re finished filling your stomach you can feed your mind as well. Three floors
present a snapshot of Hawaiian culture, from the realm of gods
through the key moments of Hawaiian history and monarchical
rule. Pick up popular and academic publications, and locally
made crafts at the gift shop, a good peace offering for those left
back home. We look forward to seeing you in 2013.
September 2012 • The SAA Archaeological Record
Judy K. Wolf
Judy Wolf is Chief of Planning and Historic Context Development for the Wyoming State Historic Preservation Office and is the State Coordinator for
Wyoming Archaeology Awareness Month. She may be reached at [email protected]
archaeology poster. I strive each year to produce
eptember 2012 will mark the 20th
poster that not only has a strong archaeologianniversary of archaeology awareness
cal connection but is also a work of art that peopromotion in Wyoming. From its incepple would want to display, not just for a few
tion in 1992 as a weeklong celebration, the
weeks, but for years. Our posters hang in the
observance has grown to an entire month of
office and in the Washington offices
special public events, exhibits, and demonstraof each member of our congressional delegations in communities across the state. The
tion (all three of them!), and we design our
State Historic Preservation Office serves as the
posters with that fact in mind: is the poster
primary sponsor. By 1996, the program was
that a member of congress or our
already very popular with the public when the
governor would want hanging in his or her
state coordinator (Mary Hopkins) stepped
office as a message of what Wyoming archaeoldown and I volunteered to take on the posiogy is all about?
tion. As this is not a fully funded state program in Wyoming, this was in addition to my
Inspiration for our posters has come from
primary job duties in the State Historic Presermany different sources. Sometimes it begins
vation Office at that time—managing the
with a desire to commemorate an important
Review and Compliance program (not exactly Figure 1. New Mexico’s 1996 first place
historical event such as the 150th anniversary
a part time job!). I did not really know what I
of the Homestead Act (the 2012 poster). I once
was getting into or how much work it would
produced a poster to coincide with the publicabe, but it has become one of the most rewardtion
of a book on an important Wyoming site.
ing aspects of my job.
At other times, inspiration has come from an image I remembered seeing in the Wyoming State Archives collections, or
The centerpiece of Wyoming Archaeology Awareness Month
something I saw in an art gallery, in a museum display, in a
(WAAM) is the poster I produce every year. In the beginning, I
magazine, on a website, or heard in an archaeological lecture.
did not really know what I was doing, so I first took a hard look
the right image is critical and sometimes challenging.
at the posters we had received from other states around the
The prehistoric archaeology of Wyoming is comprised entirely
country. New Mexico’s really stood out (this poster later won
of the material remains of nomadic hunting and gathering
first place in the SAA’s State Archaeology Week Poster Contest)
they don’t leave much behind. While we have many
(Figure 1). To me, this poster was classy. It featured a beautiful
sites in the state we do not have sites with impresphotograph that drew me in and made me want to know more
sive architectural remains, and a scatter of waste flakes is not
about the site, the design was clean and uncluttered, and it was
especially photogenic. The ephemeral nature of most of our
printed on heavy weight, good quality paper; this poster was
often requires creative thinking on how to portray the
clearly something to keep and treasure. Included with the
signature in a photograph. I have found to my
poster was a message from Lynne Sebastian, who was then
dismay that sometimes it cannot be done. But, Wyoming does
New Mexico’s Deputy State Historic Preservation Officer and
have stunning landscapes and I’ve tried to use that strength to
State Archaeologist. I don’t remember Lynne’s exact words in
effect in many of our posters. Depicting the setting of the
that message, but it had something to do with being proud to
site helps people to understand it better and clearly
share a poster that was a work of art suitable for framing. This
ties the image to Wyoming.
became for me the key principle in creating a successful
The SAA Archaeological Record • September 2012
Figure 2. A three-fold educational brochure provides information about the life of the Eastern Shoshone artist, Cadzi Cody, and his hide paintings.
Although I run poster ideas by several colleagues, I avoid putting posters together by committee. Such posters usually display
multiple images representing every facet of a state’s archaeology from Paleoindian to historical archaeology, and, while well
intentioned, end up as a cluttered hodgepodge with no visual
impact. I also avoid putting too much text on the poster. The
poster should not be a lesson in and of itself, but rather is
intended to draw people in emotionally. Instead, I produce an
educational brochure that accompanies each poster, written by a
local authority, which gives more detail on the poster’s subject
(Figure 2).
The Wyoming Department of State Parks and Cultural
Resources, of which the SHPO is a part, is fortunate to have a
September 2012 • The SAA Archaeological Record
Figure 4. Wyoming SHPO staff modeling 2012 Archaeology Wear. From
left, Shane McCreary, Steven Sutter, Laura Holthus, Ragan Driver, Christina Servetnick, and Shannon Hopkins.
Figure 3. Protecting Wyoming’s Sacred Places poster won first place in the
2002 State Archaeology Week Poster Contest.
professional photographer on staff (Richard Collier) and I often
work with him to create a poster image with a particular look
and feeling. I have also had the good fortune to work with the
same professional graphic design artist (Elizabeth Rahel) on
every poster we have produced. She loves the challenge of working on this project and we share a desire to come up with a new
way of showcasing Wyoming archaeology every year. These two
individuals have been key to the production of a quality poster.
All of the posters require some level of consultation, often, obviously, with Native American tribes. For example, the 2001
Devil’s Tower-Sacred Places poster required two years of consultation with 24 tribes (Figure 3).
The SAA Archaeological Record • September 2012
The WAAM budget averages around $10,000 each year, but we
receive no state appropriation to cover this cost. Instead, our
posters are sponsored and financed through generous donations from federal and state agencies, archaeological consulting
firms, and professional and avocational organizations. We also
underwrite the cost by producing and selling Wyoming Archaeology t-shirts and caps each year (http://wyoshpo.state. (Figure 4). As
a result, 6,000 posters and brochures are produced each year
and are available free of charge. Wyoming Archaeological Society members help distribute the posters to schools, libraries,
museums, courthouses, chambers of commerce, and tourism
centers across the state. In addition to a financial contribution
to produce the poster and brochure, the Bureau of Land Management also assists with the mailing of hundreds of posters
across the state and nation. Posters are available in the State
Historic Preservation Office, the State Archaeologist’s Office,
the University of Wyoming’s Department of Anthropology, and
in the offices of various federal agencies across the state.
Wyoming has been honored with numerous awards in the State
Archaeology Week Poster Contest created by the SAA’s Public
Education Committee and now sponsored and run by the Council of Affiliated Societies. I am grateful for the acknowledgment
of the hard work that goes into creating our posters (Figure 5).
The awards have created publicity throughout the state with articles published in local newspapers. This has allowed us to reach
sectors of the public that may not have heard about the state
archaeology awareness program before. The awards have also
helped with fund-raising: some consulting firms have
IN BRIEF, from page 4 <
January 15, 2013, and your name will be entered into a drawing
for the one year membership. There will be a drawing at the
headquarters hotel and each of the three student properties.
Discount Airfare Options
SAA has arranged discounts for SAA attendees flying to Honolulu on two different airlines—American Airlines (10 percent)
and Alaska Air (7 percent). Check out these discounts by clicking on “Airline Discounts” on the front page of SAAweb.
Coming in November—
Open Call for Service on Committees
Figure 5. Judy Wolf by one of Wyoming’s posters. All of the posters and
awards are on display in a gallery in the University of Wyoming’s Department of Anthropology.
approached me offering to be a sponsor. The recognition by the
SAA has made me work harder to maintain the quality of each
poster we produce and it has inspired our photographer, graphic designer, and the printing firms we hire to do their best work.
Perhaps the greatest reward of all is the fact that interest and
demand for our posters seems to grow every year, and not just
in the state of Wyoming. In just the past few weeks I have filled
requests for posters from the states of Iowa, Kansas, Arizona,
Washington, and Oregon. I have also recently received requests
for the full series of posters from a law firm, an environmental
consulting firm, a nursing home, the University of Wyoming
library, and of all places the state’s new medium security prison.
The intent with each request was to frame and display the
posters in a public space.
Obviously, it’s not easy to produce award-winning posters year
after year. Doing so requires working with a team of qualified
and dedicated photographers, designers, and archaeologists. It
means preparing for upcoming opportunities (such as the
anniversary of the Homestead Act or the Antiquities Act). And
with fund-raising and consultation, it’s a year-round job. But the
benefits in terms of public recognition of the importance of
archaeology can pay off enormously.
This November marks the third year in which SAA has made
the process for volunteering for committee service an open one.
In early November 2013 SAA will put out (via email) an open
call to the membership to solicit volunteers interested in serving. Open committee slots will be posted and filled through this
call. Appointments will be made for slots available as of the
close of the Annual Business Meeting in Honolulu. Committee
appointments are generally for two years.
Last years, as in the previous year, for some committees there
were more volunteers than there were open slots. Please be
aware that the Society is extremely grateful for the high level of
volunteerism and commitment among SAA members. It is
regretful that there generally are fewer slots than volunteers. If
you were not selected, please try again.
Also please be aware that the requested statement is the way in
which you will introduce yourself to the committee and share
what you can bring to that committee. The statement is a key
factor in the decision-making process.
And a note to the students—most SAA committees are structured to have two slots specifically for students. This is a wonderful way for students to become more active within the Society.
All of the committee charges and memberships are listed on
SAAweb. We encourage you to check them out and think about
getting involved!
Staff Transitions
Alyssa Barnett joined the SAA staff team in July 2012, replacing
Lorenzo Cabrera as coordinator, Membership and Marketing.
Many of you will be chatting or emailing with Alyssa, as this is
a key liaison role to the membership.
September 2012 • The SAA Archaeological Record
Cathy Poetschat
Cathy Poetschat is the Chair of the Council of Affiliated Societies.
lthough you probably know that most states and
provinces have an annual poster as part of their archaeology week or month, did you know that there is a contest
for the best of those posters at the SAA Annual Meetings? And,
have you voted for your favorite poster in the SAA Exhibit Hall?
It’s fun deciding which poster to vote for! A ballot is included in
each conference registration packet and participants can make
their choice and deposit their ballot in the ballot box by the
poster display in the main exhibits hall. Awards for the top three
choices are presented at the SAA Business Meeting and photos
of all the years winning posters are available on the SAA website.
The Public Education Committee organized the first poster contest at the 1996 SAA Meeting, and the contest has been held
every year since then. Currently, the Council of Affiliated Soci-
1. Wyoming
2. Ohio
The SAA Archaeological Record • September 2012
eties (CoAS) runs the event, whose booth is near the poster contest. The CoAS booth can provide you with even more information about state and provincial archaeology societies. CoAS is
looking for societies to join us! Contact me at [email protected] to discover the benefits and how to make your society
a CoAS member.
You can make sure your state’s or province’s poster is entered
into the contest to be seen by SAA Meeting participants and perhaps get chosen to win an award. To see how, go to the SAA
Website, click on About the Society, click on Awards, and then
State Archaeology Week Poster Award. If you have any questions, contact Maureen Malloy at [email protected]
Below are photos of posters that won at the 2012 SAA Annual
Meeting in Memphis.
3. California
Alison E. Rautman
Alison Rautman is a faculty member in the Center for Integrative Studies at Michigan State University
and was the Editor of American Antiquity from 2009–2012.
y three-year term as Editor of American Antiquity
ended at the SAA meetings in Memphis in April 2012.
During the meetings, many people asked what it was
like to be Editor. People didn’t ask about the statistics of the journal; rather, they were more curious about what I learned about
writing, being a reviewer, dealing with reviews, and publishing,
as well as what I learned about my colleagues. I realized that
other members of the SAA also might be interested in these
questions, and I have tried to answer them here briefly.
What I learned about academic writing and re-writing
I found that the single-most common problem that authors
have involves connecting theory and data. As an author, one
must present some general expectations for the results of one’s
research, whether these expectations come from ethnography,
game theory, evolutionary ecology, or anyplace else. One must
tell the reader what those general expectations are. One must
then articulate how archaeological expectations were generated,
or in some other way explicitly make the link between the ideas
and the information being presented. One does not have to
frame these expectations as formal hypotheses, nor does one
have to test all conceivable explanations or scenarios (one can’t),
but one does have to provide clear, logical connections between
theory, method, and data.
Some people may say that scientific writing is linear, with the conclusions revealed at the end in a grand finale. That is NOT the
way that reviewers see it. Reviewers seem to appreciate an introduction that provides an overview of the ideas and theoretical
framework that the author will be using, the ideas the author will
be testing, and (importantly) a preview of the results. Reviewers
expect to see these same concepts repeated (with greater elaboration) as they read the manuscript. The introduction is also the
place where authors should set out the parameters of the study:
that is, what they hope to accomplish, and what they do NOT plan
to address. These parameters give the reviewer and future readers a more accurate sense of what information is forthcoming,
and what information is not going to be presented.
Reviewers do NOT appreciate seeing new data or ideas presented in the “Discussion” or “Conclusions.” In fact, it might be best
if an author imagines his or her “Discussion” section to be titled
“Evaluation” instead. In this section, reviewers expect the author
to step back and provide an evaluative voice. Reviewers expect to
see a discussion of how the research results were consistent
with, or diverged from, the author’s original expectations.
Reviewers expect to find some generalizing statements (“what
did we learn”) and also some forward-looking statements (“suggestions for future research”). The author might reiterate some
important or unexpected results that were noted previously, but
the “new” information here is the evaluation of those results,
not the results themselves.
Reviewers seem to appreciate a fairly short conclusion, which
re-caps concepts from the “Introduction,” but without adding
anything new and surprising. In fact, the most common revision that I recommend to authors involved “front-loading” text
from the “Discussion” or “Conclusion” (where the author originally placed it) into the “Introduction” or “Background” (where
the reviewer expected to find it).
What I learned about the process of journal publication
All of these strategies for composition help make a good, or
even great article, but they do not guarantee an article’s acceptance. One of the continuing goals for the journal is reducing the
time lag from acceptance to publication. Manuscripts are therefore evaluated not only according to abstract standards of excellence through the peer review process, but also then against one
another for page space. Sometimes, that means that an otherwise excellent manuscript will be rejected—and that is a very
difficult decision indeed.
I was surprised that the physical nature of page space affects
other aspects of publication. For example, the typeset manuscripts can get shuffled around to make efficient use of pages
within an issue of the journal. One minor but practical function
of short pieces such as book reviews and advertisements is to
September 2012 • The SAA Archaeological Record
provide some flexibility in this use of page space. My copy-editor and I also found that we needed to have about three “extra”
manuscripts of different lengths ready to swap into production
at a moment’s notice if one of the planned manuscripts did not
fit. Authors might therefore be sent proofs sooner than they
expected; alternatively, an author’s manuscript might be delayed
in publication. The physical nature of the journal therefore
makes it is impossible to guarantee that a certain manuscript
will appear in a specific issue.
What I learned about being a reviewer
The most helpful reviews provide enough detail to demonstrate
clearly that the reviewer actually read the manuscript. A single
sentence review saying, “This is great!” is not helpful. A good
review will summarize what the reader interpreted to be the
main point and the logic involved, and will state an honest
assessment of the manuscript’s potential.
If you are reviewing a manuscript, you may not know exactly
what is wrong with the manuscript, or be able to articulate exactly why you felt dissatisfied with it. In this case, if you are able to
describe your confusion or your frustration more specifically,
that information (together with the other reviews) will help the
editor figure out where the author should focus his/her attention for revision.
It is also appropriate to note the limits of one’s expertise. One
might say explicitly (for example), “I reviewed this manuscript
as a specialist in evolutionary theory and faunal analysis.” Likely, the editor has another reviewer who will cover other relevant
specialties such as the geographic area or methodology.
I hope that people will consider registering on the Editorial
Manager website as a prospective reviewer ( It is interesting to see how other people
construct an argument, and your service may count as a “minor
professional accomplishment” on your employee annual review.
There is also great personal satisfaction in seeing an article in
print knowing that you helped it along the way. Editorial Manager will ask you to list your geographic area of specialization,
and some topics that you would use to characterize your areas
of expertise.
What I learned about interpreting the
reviews of a manuscript
As an author, there are some specific strategies for dealing with
reviewer comments. An author can acknowledge the issue and
move on (the traditional phrase is “beyond the scope of this
research”). If the reviewer has misinterpreted something, an
author might re-package or re-phrase it so others don’t make the
The SAA Archaeological Record • September 2012
same mistake. In many cases, I have found it is helpful to use a
contrasting statement to make one’s meaning clear (as in, “I do
not mean to imply that....”). I’ve included examples of this strategy in this essay.
Often a couple sentences will go a long way in providing “road
signs” to keep readers on track. Sometimes this strategy is as
simple as moving the location of some information, using subheadings, or giving the reader a brief “head’s up” that indeed,
you will consider that important information later. Remember
that background, facts, and logical connections that are painfully obvious to you may not be so obvious to the reader.
Often reviewers will recognize that something is wrong, but
cannot articulate what to do to improve the manuscript. “Work
on your theory,” is my favorite example. I found that when
reviewers make such comments, they are usually referring to
the organizational structure of the argument. Solving this problem of vague reviewer dissatisfaction often involves front-loading a preview of your study’s parameters and results, and making a clear connection between ideas (theory) and specific
archaeological expectations.
If the reviews of a manuscript you submitted seem off base, or
you truly don’t know what to do to improve the manuscript, you
can contact the editor and ask if it would be appropriate to
schedule a phone call to discuss your options. Yes, reviewers can
be problematic. However, if you can tell that their comments are
really irrelevant, unreasonable, or inappropriate, the editor can
tell that also, and has probably already taken that into consideration.
What I learned about my colleagues
Many colleagues also asked about how other archaeologists
behaved. Did they seek to curry favor with me? Were they irascible, discourteous, or unprofessional? In fact, I found the vast
majority of authors and reviewers to be respectful, earnest, honorable, and helpful not only toward me, but also toward one
While of course there were some crises, some angry people,
some emotional venting, and some ambiguous ethical questions, in reality, the unpleasant or difficult situations were
extremely rare—perhaps one serious problem per year. My colleagues in the SAA and the RPA provided much advice and
assistance on specific practical matters. For more general advice
about dealing with people, I relied particularly on one book cited
below (Patterson et al 2009).
On a different note, I will also encourage young scholars and
graduate students to submit manuscripts to the journal. While
I didn’t research the correlation between experience/academic
rank and acceptance rates, I did learn that writing a clear,
thoughtful, and streamlined article is not easy. Even with their
greater experience, well-published senior scholars also struggle
to make the logical connections clear, and to include just
enough but not too much supporting detail. And, their manuscripts are not always accepted, either.
What I learned about being and becoming an editor
While the editorship is a responsible position and does take
time, most of the work is fairly steady, with scattered and unpredictable short-term emergencies. Many tasks are those of coordinator, synthesizer, or shepherd, and most decisions are fairly
clearly aligned with the peer review process. I had to have the
support of my Chairperson and Dean, who negotiated the
details of the editorship with the SAA. I had a course release (I
taught one-and-one for three years) and a half-time graduate
assistant. Use of Editorial Manager avoids all the paper mailings, and Internet searches help track down potential reviewers.
I do admire the previous editors who wrangled stacks of manuscripts and letters.
I’m glad to be done, but I enjoyed my term as editor. There are
many other SAA members who could do this job. I hope this
brief reflection has demystified some of the process for both
authors and reviewers, and will encourage those who might be
interested in volunteering in the SAA. If you are at all interested in becoming more active in the SAA, in whatever capacity, let
it be known. You don’t need to wait for people to come to you.
550-558, online at
num2/the-science-of-scientific-writing/1 (This is the single
best article I’ve seen on writing)
Landes, Kenneth K.
1951 A Scrutiny of the Abstract. American Association of Petroleum
Geologists, Bulletin 35: 1660.
1966 A Scrutiny of the Abstract, II. American Association of Petroleum Geologists, Bulletin 50: 1992-1999.
Patterson, Kerry, Joseph Grenny, Ron McMillan and A Switzler
2009 Crucial Conversations: Tools for Talking When Stakes Are High.
McGraw-Hill, NY.
School for Advanced Research
I thank particularly my Editorial Advisory Board (Tim Kohler,
Bob Kelly, and Miriam Stark), and also Deb Nichols (Chair of
the SAA Publications Committee). Nicole Raslich helped with
copy-editing and organizing for two years; Charlotte Cable and
Marieka Brouwer helped for shorter periods. My Chair, Bob
Hitchcock, and Dean Marietta Baba negotiated my support with
the SAAs, and I thank them for their practical support. SAA
managing editor John Neikirk did all the hard work of production. Ken Sassaman and I tried to make the transition as smooth
as possible, and I wish him the very best experience in his term
as editor (2012-2015).
Resident Scholar
Fellowships Offered
Fellowships are awarded to six scholars who have
completed their research and who need time
to complete books or doctoral dissertations
on topics of anthropological interest.
Deadline is November 1, 2012
Helpful Resources
Calkins, Frank C. and Herman R. Struck
1954 Word Saving, Good and Bad. Science, New Series, Vol. 120,
No. 3120 (Oct. 15, 1954), pp. 614-616.
Gopen, George D., and Judith A. Shaw
1990 The Science of Scientific Writing. American Scientist 78(6)
Resident Scholar Program
School for Advanced Research
PO Box 2188, Santa Fe, NM 87504
September 2012 • The SAA Archaeological Record
The SAA Archaeological Record • September 2012
September 2012 • The SAA Archaeological Record
The SAA Archaeological Record • September 2012
September 2012 • The SAA Archaeological Record
The SAA Archaeological Record • September 2012
E. Christian Wells and Melanie N. Coughlin
E. Christian Wells is Associate Professor of Anthropology and Deputy Director of the Patel School of Global Sustainability at the University of South Florida.
Melanie N. Coughlin is a graduate student in applied anthropology and a Sustainability Fellow at the University of South Florida.
arbage. Trash. Midden. Waste. Junk. Litter. Detritus.
Rot. Ruin. Discard. Rubbish. Call it what you like, it’s all
the stuff of archaeology. And, archaeologists are world
famous for studying it. Even today’s trash has become the subject of archaeological scrutiny. In 1973, William Rathje and his
students began applying modern archaeological methods to the
systematic analysis of municipal waste as a way to understand
consumption patterns (Rathje and Murphy 2001). They found
that who you are is what you throw away, even if you don’t always
admit it. While Rathje’s “Garbage Project” did not aim to draw
attention to the perils of a throwaway society, his work reveals
that people often do not recognize how much they consume or
sometimes even what they consume. And, somewhat paradoxically, archaeologists are no exception.
As we enter a new era of global grand challenges for the biosphere, it is important for archaeologists to serve as role models
for responsible consumerism. After all, we should know better
than others about the long-term civilizational consequences of
conspicuous consumption and overreliance on nonrenewable
resources (see Fisher et al. 2009). In this article, we offer a few
suggestions for “greening” your archaeological investigations,
with the greater goal of moving the discipline toward a “zero
waste archaeology.” (Don’t worry—there are still plenty of ways
in which our existence will be marked in the archaeological
record of tomorrow!)
Ecological Impact of Archaeological Research
To begin, it is worth pointing out why archaeologists—or anyone
else for that matter—should care about reducing waste. Beyond
the financial benefits accrued by consuming less, which archaeologists are already quite aware of, the fundamental concept is
that if the Earth’s resources are depleted faster than they can be
replenished, then we will end up with resource challenges that
we will not be able to resolve. In sustainability parlance, it means
meeting the needs of the present without compromising the
ability of future generations to meet their own needs (World
Commission on Environment and Development 1987).
A useful way to begin understanding the impact of archaeological research on the biosphere is to measure your “ecological
footprint,” or the amount of resources needed to satisfy your
energy use, farm your food, transport your goods and services,
and manage your waste. Thinking about the impacts of the
choices you make for your research can help make you aware of
the broader consequences for the planet. Ultimately, realizing
the ecological impact of archaeological research is about understanding and acknowledging the various ways in which research
processes and products are interlinked with local and global
ecosystems (Orr 2002).
There are many online interactive simulations that you can use to
measure the footprint of your research project. A useful learningcentered calculator is available from, which
adjusts the calculations for several different parts of the world.
While the calculator asks questions about you and your household, you can respond to the questions from the perspective of
your field project or laboratory. For our field school in Honduras,
for example, we selected “Columbia” as the closest approximation, and then proceeded to answer the questions as though all 15
students in the program were part of our household.
What You Can Do: In the Field
Given our often meager budgets for survey and excavation,
archaeologists have become experts at reducing, reusing, and
recycling materials in field work (e.g., White et al. 2004:27).
Over the years, however, many of us become comfortable with
our own proven strategies for getting the work done. Such complacency sometimes results in an unwillingness to embrace
new technologies or strategies that might otherwise help move
us toward zero waste archaeology. For example, recent innovations in smart phones and handheld computing devices have
greatly increased functionality and reduced startup costs to the
point where it is now easier than ever to go paperless in the field
(see for many recent case studies).
Reducing consumption of paper is important for zero waste
archaeology, because paper production has tremendous costs in
September 2012 • The SAA Archaeological Record
Roughly 50 billion disposable plastic bottles, which take up to a
millennium to degrade, end up in U.S. landfills each year.
When your equipment begins to wear out, instead of discarding
it you can donate it. Habitat for Humanity (,
for example, accepts tools (including trowels!) in good working
condition for use in building homes for those in need. Freecycle
( is a grassroots nonprofit network with the
goal of keeping items in circulation and out of landfills. Finally,
you can start including a new section in your project reporting
templates that explain how you have reduced waste (and costs)
for your clients or students. The Zero Waste Archaeologist even
goes so far as to add a statement in her conference papers and
posters about what she did to make her work zero waste.
What You Can Do: In the Laboratory
Figure 1. Biodegradable flagging tape from was used by University of South Florida students to mark surface collection units and excavation loci at the 18th C. settlement of Augusta, Roatán Island, Honduras.
wood, water, energy, pollution, and solid waste. Apart from the
environmental benefits of using less paper, digital data are
becoming increasingly important for records curation, integration with analytical software and online applications and repositories, as well as sharing and reporting information in a timely
manner (Kintigh and Altschul 2010; e.g.,,,
If you must use paper, consider purchasing paper with recycled
content. According to U.S. EPA guidelines (, recycled paper contains at least 30 percent post-consumer content.
Recycled paper used to be expensive, but now pricing is highly
competitive and affordable (besides, think of the unseen costs
associated with using non-recycled paper, including costs for
incineration, landfilling, health impacts, and so on). Of particular interest to archaeologists, many brands offer paper with
“smear-resistant” properties, ideal for outdoor, humid environments. Look for chlorine free recycled paper, since the bleaching process releases dioxins and other toxins and pollutants into
the environment. These chemicals have been shown to be
harmful to reproductive and immune systems in humans and
In addition to reducing paper consumption, there are other
strategies you can consider to help reduce your ecological footprint. For instance, use biodegradable flagging tape (Figure 1).
Made from non-toxic cellulosic material derived from wood
pulp (a mix of both pre- and post-consumer waste), this tape
completely degrades in up to two years, depending on environmental conditions. You can also choose recyclable aluminum
canteens instead of using disposable plastic water bottles.
The SAA Archaeological Record • September 2012
Research and conservation laboratories along with museums
typically consume more energy than office settings, because of
the use of analytical equipment, state and federal regulatory
requirements for air quality, and heavy (and sometimes around
the clock) use. There are a range of simple strategies one can
pursue to reduce energy waste. For example, if you maintain a
wet lab, lower the sash on your fume hood to reduce the amount
of energy it requires to vent the hood. Be sure to turn off lights
and computers and unplug electrical equipment at the end of
the day. Many devices and appliances drain energy, even when
they are turned off. According to the U.S. Energy Star program
(, up to 40 percent of the electricity that
home electronics use is consumed while the products are
turned off. Computers, monitors, modems, microwaves, and
cell phone chargers often draw 5 to 50 watts per day while in
standby mode. It has been estimated that the impact from the
“phantom load” of these “energy vampires” ranges from 6 to 26
percent of your electric bill. There are several novel devices on
the market that allow you to monitor the kilowatt hour consumption of an electrical appliance to learn how much it costs
to run in active and standby modes (e.g., ‘Kill-A-Watt’ by P3
Using motion activated light sensors is a practical way to save
energy in museums and other settings that experience intermittent traffic, such as storage rooms and bathrooms. Motionsensing light switches turn the lights on in a room or a display
when they detect any motion and then automatically turn the
lights off after a certain period of time if there is no motion
detected. Prices have come down considerably over the past few
years, such that many units now run only about $10-$20 per
unit. These settings are also ideal for energy efficient lighting,
such as CFL (compact fluorescent light) and LED (light emitting
diode) bulbs. One CFL bulb that produces light equivalent to a
60 watt bulb, for example, uses only 13 watts of power. An LED
bulb only uses 5 watts.
In addition to electricity, there are other strategies you can pursue in lab and museum settings to reduce waste. For example,
in a chemistry lab, use glass vials instead of disposable polyethylene vials for chemical extractions, and use glass instead of disposable plastic pipettes for transferring liquids. If you decide to
replace plastic with glassware, be sure to use an environmentally friendly phosphate-free soap for cleaning. Many commercial
soaps, especially anti-bacterial ones, contain methylisothiazolinone (an allergenic cytotoxin), triclosan and sodium lauryl sulfate (regulated pesticides and toxicants) along with a range of
petroleum based derivatives that can have adverse impacts to
waterways and wildlife. Finally, since the success of many waste
reduction practices is behaviorally dependent, communication
is essential. Creating a “zero waste protocol” for laboratory environments can be a useful way of involving lab users and gaining buy in. Strategically placed signage as reminders can help
connect policy and practice.
What You Can Do: In the Office
The U.S. EPA ( estimates that paper and cardboard
account for almost 40 percent of our garbage. Typically, the
largest source of waste in an office environment is paper. Office
paper is highly recyclable, but large amounts routinely are wasted. While recycling unwanted paper is an effective strategy,
waste reduction is more cost-effective than recycling, because it
reduces the amount of material that needs to be collected, transported, and processed. It also means lowering your costs for
mailing and storage. By using and discarding less paper, you are
conserving resources, reducing water and energy, and preventing pollution. The simplest strategy is to think before you print.
When printing a web page, for example, copy and paste the text
into a word processor so that it is formatted correctly for printing. Printing web pages “as is” often prints material that you do
not want. You can also print on both sides of the paper with most
modern printers. Another easy strategy is to adjust the margins
on your documents. The smaller margin of .75 inch (1.90 cm) is
becoming more common. You can even consider using eco-fonts
for draft copies (e.g., Eco-fonts are TrueType
fonts that contain microscopic holes in each letter, which saves
as much as 20 percent on ink toner.
Another strategy to consider is electronic document collaboration, such as Google Docs (, which allows
you to cooperatively edit documents, as well as track the
changes made by each person. Use email rather than paper mail
when you can. Use a USB drive (a “flash drive”) to transfer or
share electronic documents rather than printing them. Encourage people coming to meetings to bring their reports in electronic format, and for attendees to bring electronic storage of
their own (or share via an Internet-based document storage
In addition to controlling your paper appetite, there are other
strategies for the office and classroom or conference room that
you might consider. For example, buy a set of inexpensive coffee mugs to use for coffee breaks instead of using Styrofoam
cups. Styrofoam (polystyrene) is a petroleum-based plastic
made from styrene, which is classified as a possible human carcinogen by the U.S. EPA ( Toxic chemicals,
including unpolymerized styrene and benzene, can leach out of
these products and into the food that they contain, especially if
heated in a microwave. These products are also not biodegradable, and so amass in landfills and in waterways, threatening
wildlife. After you have enjoyed your cup of coffee (in a ceramic mug), instead of throwing away the coffee grounds, apply
them to your plants as a soil additive. When mixed with a bit of
lime (or wood ash) or composted with microbe-rich yard waste,
coffee grounds provide mild acidity as well as nitrogen, magnesium, and potassium to acid-loving plants, such as azaleas and
blueberries. Finally, to create a culture of zero waste in the workplace, save a small amount of time at the end of staff meetings
to share strategies, successes, and challenges for moving toward
a zero waste archaeology.
Whether in the field, lab, museum, office, conference room, or
classroom, there are numerous opportunities to engage zero
waste archaeology. As experts on the human past, we know better than most that those who came before us were not aware of
the global problems we face today, and those who come after us
will lack the capacity to do anything about them. For us, there is
still time.
References Cited
Fisher, Christopher T., J. Brett Hill, and Gary M. Feinman (editors)
2009 The Archaeology of Environmental Change: Socionatural Legacies
of Degradation and Resilience. University of Arizona Press,
Kintigh, Keith W., and Jeffrey H. Altschul
2010 Sustaining the Digital Archaeological Record. Heritage Management 3(2):264–274.
Orr, David W.
2002 Four Challenges of Sustainability. Conservation Biology
Rathje, William, and Cullen Murphy
2001 Rubbish! The Archaeology of Garbage. University of Arizona
Press, Tucson.
White, Nancy Marie, Brent R. Weisman, Robert H. Tykot, E. Christian
Wells, Karla L. Davis-Salazar, John W. Arthur, and Kathryn
2004 Academic Archaeology is Public Archaeology. The SAA
Archaeological Record 4(2):26–29.
World Commission on Environment and Development
1987 Our Common Future. Oxford University Press, New York.
September 2012 • The SAA Archaeological Record
Robert Warden and Thomas H. Guderjan
Robert Warden is the Director, Center for Heritage Conservation, Texas A&M University ([email protected]).
Thomas H. Guderjan is on the faculty in the Department of Social Sciences, University of Texas at Tyler & President,
Maya Research Program ([email protected]).
he RecorDIM initiative of the International Council on
Monuments and Sites (ICOMOS), International Committee for Documentation of Cultural Heritage (CIPA), and
the Getty Conservation Institute (
recordim/about.html )was an effort to overcome the gap that
exists between information providers (service providers) and
information users. This initiative predicted the current condition of many “information users” with respect to digital 3D data
resulting from tools such as laser scanners and photogrammetry. With an ever-increasing availability of 3D digital services,
users are faced with questions about how best to utilize these
proven technologies for their particular needs. The Center for
Heritage Conservation (CHC) at Texas A&M University works
with many end-users exploring how they might best utilize digital 3D data. These users are typically small offices or agencies
of Architects, Engineers, and Archaeologists that do not have
resources to hire or manipulate scan data on a regular basis.
The Maya Research Program (MRP) is a nonprofit organization
that explores the ancient Maya in northwestern Belize and elsewhere. MRP has a 20-year field research history that includes
discovery of dozens of masonry buildings in the Maya centers of
Blue Creek, Nojol Nah, Xnoha, Bedrock, Grey Fox and others
(i.e., Guderjan 2007). Additionally, a large corpus of project data
is available at Each summer session yields large exposures of excavated architecture, important artifact (special
finds), skeletal remains, and archaeological features. The architecture is surveyed, usually by hand, and drawings are produced
with basic measurements as a record of its form and size. Since
many of these sites are vulnerable when exposed, the work is
often completed in a single summer and architecture is
exposed, documented, and preserved through reburial.
Documentation of the work is always important, but when the
architectural evidence is covered and the artifacts removed, documentation becomes the central to our mutual goals. For the past
20 years, MRP has relied on conventional 2D products as the public record of our work. The CHC has been working with MRP to
explore alternatives for that 2D public record. This paper will
The SAA Archaeological Record • September 2012
cover the status of collaborative efforts between the CHC and the
MRP at understanding the value of digital documentation at various scales. To this end we will explore the use of LIDAR, Photogrammetry, and Structure Light Scanners for use at varying levels of detail and scale and utilization of 3D products.
Terrestrial Laser Scanning
Archaeological fieldwork presents challenges for documentation. Project locations can create adverse conditions for careful
documentation through dangerous or difficult contexts, the
need for speed, or complex conditions that require multiple
approaches. Archaeologists well understand these challenges
and also understand how to deal with them through conventional means. One of the embedded advantages of 2D products
like drawings and photographs is that they require strategic
analysis of site conditions in order to produce the drawings and
photographs required to adequately describe and interpret the
site. Tools that produce point clouds don’t require the same kind
of strategic thinking but are not completely void of planning
(Dibble 1988). Still, the promise of ubiquitous coverage with
point clouds can reinforce attitudes of false confidence in a
tool’s ability to correct what the operator might neglect.
In our work, laser scanning hasn’t come easily, though it is now
more common in archaeology in general (Nuebauer 2007).
Excavations often occur in deep forest contexts requiring transport of a large amount of equipment. Though new scanners are
emerging that are one-quarter the weight and size of our Riegl
390, we do not yet have the resources for them. Since we generally have one chance at recording excavated architecture and the
schedule is negotiated with the archaeologists in charge, we
must be certain that we have come away with appropriate data.
Data registration between scan positions is extremely important
so we spend a good deal of time in preparation for the actual
scan. Target locations and scan positions are mapped according
to object information. Negotiations between CHC and MRP
teams concerning the hierarchy of information usually occurred
before the CHC team visited the site and continued on location.
Figure 1. Setting up scanning equipment at Chum Balam Nal.
Chum Balam Nal
The Chum Balam Nal (CBN) is a residential group with a central elite courtyard, measuring approximately 60m by 30m
(Figure 1), that has been excavated during 2009–2011 (Preston
2011*). Because of the dense forest location and multiple level
changes it provides good reasons for adopting laser scanning
for documentation while also offering practical challenges for
it. The most important challenge is the location of targets and
scan positions to ensure the capture of critical object information and also provide excellent registration of project scans. To
accomplish this pre-scan arrangement requires detailed
understanding of the exposed architecture, but it also requires
knowledge of important context information such as relationships of buildings, location of artifact discovery zones, burials,
and possible burials. Even with excellent preparation, plans
can change depending on time, weather, and site conditions.
Knowledge of critical information requirements helps frame
scan resolutions at each position and decisions to create new
Figure 2. Chum Balam Nal Point cloud, viewed from “above.”
scan positions in the project. Given no malfunctions of operator or equipment the documentation in the form of point
clouds of this site was accomplished in 4 to 6 hours. What has
actually been accomplished at this point is the capture of many
individual scans with the promise of being able to register
them well. Though we try to create plenty of overlap with our
targets we always back up this system by locating targets with
a total station. With manual registration as an option this gives
us three possible means of registration to use independently
or in combination.
It is misleading to think that this six-hour field session constitutes documentation, but it already has created some benefit.
The organic qualities of the architecture coupled with large variations in elevation make hand measuring quite difficult. Plans
and sections that include relationships between buildings and
site features would require either a great deal of time or an abdication of certain forms of information. Still, there is something
Figure 3. Chum Balam Nal Point Cloud Section.
September 2012 • The SAA Archaeological Record
of value with hand measuring and drawing. The engagement
with the site required in hand measuring and drawing provides
the benefits of reflection and study. The team performing this
work will certainly become experts on site relationships and specific construction details, an expertise that may not be gained
even by the managing archaeologist.
With a digital point cloud, the archaeologist must rely on others
to create the final product. Is this really a problem? Archaeology is a multidisciplinary activity with many specialists contributing their expertise to the research. Yet, at this point, familiarization with digital scan information is still very limited. Even
if there were capabilities to handle translation of point cloud
data into knowledge products communicating research with
others is difficult. Thus we have suggested that products we produce for them should be 2D and easy to manipulate through
CAD or hand drafting. This is not to say that we think they
should rest at this point accepting our data and interpretive
products. So we also engage in educational experiences to foster
comfort with new digital tools that would allow exploration of
3D models and point clouds. But before they reach that point we
provide them with 2D orthographic images (Figures 2 and 3) of
the scan at a common scale that they can use in printed form or
digitally manipulate in graphics and CAD packages.
Figure 4. Point cloud created by using stereo pairs.
Laser scanners are expensive to own and operate and require
experienced personnel connected with the project to manipulate
point cloud data and mine information. The high prices of scanners ($30,000–$150,000) will keep experienced users in an elite
group preventing the creation of the casual user class. Photography was in this same situation 150 years ago, close-range photogrammetry just some 30 years ago (Anderson 1982), and digital photography had the same experience just ten years ago.
However, as prices have fallen and technical prowess has accelerated, digital photography has created a large class of casual
photographers. Though the point-and-shoot class may not
speak the same language as highly experienced amateurs or
professionals, they nonetheless know how to manipulate their
cameras and the resulting digital images. At a fraction of the
$50,000 and up for a laser scanner, digital cameras are available
for between hundreds and a few thousand dollars. With some
training in composing images and software such as Photomodeler equipment costs are reduced, field time is short and the
result is a 3D surface model or point cloud.
Figure 5. Carved and Inlayed Shell Disk.
Burials in Maya settlements are often discovered beneath plaster floors revealing themselves as faint indentions near doorways. These discoveries often bring with them the stress of
The SAA Archaeological Record • September 2012
Figure 6. Carved and Inlayed Shell Disk Model.
Figure 7. Bone Sculpture With Light Grid.
increased documentation requirements at the latter part of a
season when time is short. Because they often contain multiple
layers burials are documented multiple times. Each layer is
photographed and measured before removal of remains and
artifacts continues. Traditional documentation methods can
delay progress through the burial layers, as they require direct
access to each layer. If, however, field time consists of taking a
few photographs, work can continue immediately after the photographs are obtained. With Photomodeler Scan and a calibrated camera we were able to reduce field time to a few minutes
and provide orthographic images they needed to trace drawings. The only field requirements are positioning of camera
shots that lie within tolerances of stereo pairs, i.e., ratio of distance between shots to distance of object is on the order of 1/4
to 1. Multiple pairs of stereo shots are combined with shots at
various angles so that camera orientations may be calculated to
high tolerance. If one is pressed greatly for time, a single stereo
pair can give very good results. Figure 4 is a point cloud created by using stereo pairs used to create the point cloud. The
brighter areas of Figure 4 represent areas of higher resolution
processing (2mm point spacing). The burial at Bedrock is an
example of shots taken as backups for total station documentation but were processed into a model two years later. Processing time was less than one hour.
Inlayed Shell Disk
Large-scale objects can be modeled with surfaces and textures
but they can require a great amount of time and computing
resources depending on the resolution requirements of the
model. Small objects lend themselves to modeling but are challenging because the resolution of their information is quite high.
Another test of Photomodeler was the measuring and modeling
of a carved shell disk that had inlayed regions for stones and incisions on its surface. This disk depicts a Teotihuacan style scribe
and was, surprisingly, found in a Terminal Preclassic/Early Classic burial in a low status residential group known as Sayap Ha
(Guderjan 2007). Burial SH2 was found, as is common, buried
below the floor of a low platform for a pole-and-thatch residence.
The disk is 60 mm in diameter, which allows for easy access for
photography (Figure 5). Though many options exist for measuring and modeling the disk our interest is whether photogrammetry, with a relatively inexpensive package is up to the task in
terms of accuracy and resolution, but we also want to know if the
process is simple enough to be accessible to those with little photogrammetry background. Ideally one would aim for a completed model of front and back faces complete with edge detail. We
only tested the front face with its inlay notches. Using a Nikon
D200 with an 18–70 mm lens we created a single stereo pair.
After a few minutes of processing we reached the result in Fig-
September 2012 • The SAA Archaeological Record
Figure 8. Sculptured Bone Carving model.
ure 6. Creating a textured model that represents an abstracted
model is quick and simple, but one look at the shaded model
shows it to be a false representation. Without careful attention to
point and mesh quality one might take the automatic processing
to be successful. This doesn’t discount the quality of the photographs or even the initial point cloud processing. Creating final
accurate 3D models requires time.
Traditionally the documentation of this disk would be a stippled
drawing created through tracing a print of a rectified photograph. Artifacts of this caliber are sent for safe keeping to the
Institute of Archaeology, stored out of sight from public view. Do
2D drawings and photographs hold enough information to
understand this artifact? In many ways they do, but they necessarily exclude information that might be useful. It seems useful
to try and obtain a quality textured 3D model. Like most choices,
this goal is achievable at a small initial cost in time but modeling
time can be quite extensive. To achieve an accurate finished
model is not automatic for the average user, but it is possible.
Structured Light Scanning
Another promising technology for modeling small complex
objects is structured light scanning. A number of inexpensive (a
few thousand dollars) products exist that give good results. We
chose a product from 3D3 Solutions to test the ease of use on
artifact models. Though this particular model is a bit cumbersome compared to other mid-priced or higher priced products it
is easily transported and setup for work. Structured light scanners operate by projecting a known grid onto the object and calculating coordinates from a stereo pair of images of the
deformed grid as it is draped over the object. Figure 7 shows a
small 4cm bone sculpture with the resulting grid. This carved
The SAA Archaeological Record • September 2012
Figure 9. Bone Carving 3D PDF.
bone bib-head was also found in Burial SH2 under the floor of
a low-status household (Guderjan 2007).
One advantage of structured light scanners is very high sub millimeter resolution in their point clouds making them ideal for
very small complex artifacts. A drawback is the need for their
projected grid to be seen and photographed thus rendering their
use difficult or impossible in bright light conditions. This bone
sculpture was modeled from 12 scans from various angles (Figure 8). Like terrestrial laser scanning the individual scans were
registered together to form a single point cloud. Instead of
using the point cloud directly to create orthographic images for
producing 2D drawings, we explored advantages of a triangulated mesh, realizing of course the difficulties faced with creating
an accurate model. We chose to utilize 3D developments in
Adobe PDF to produce a 3D PDF of the model. Users do not
need to have the extended version of Acrobat to read and manipulate the model giving them great leverage in creating the products they need to enhance their research. Figure 9 is an example
of a section cut of a 3D PDF. Season Field reports will remain
2D when printed, but as digital documents, artifacts can be
viewed, manipulated, and analyzed in 3D.
Technologies used in all of these case studies are not now revolutionary. Scanning and photogrammetry have been around for
decades in various forms, but are typically reserved for disciplines with deeper pockets than archaeology. In each of these
cases, higher end equipment (or newest versions in the case of
terrestrial scanning) might offer better results more rapidly. But
>WARDEN, continued on page 60
September 2012 • The SAA Archaeological Record
Kisha Supernant
Kisha Supernant is an Assistant Professor at the University of Alberta and a member of the Committee on
Native American Relations (CNAR). She may be reached at [email protected]
ollaborative approaches to archaeological practice
have become increasingly common in the past 15-20
years (Atalay 2006; Colwell-Chanthaphonh and Ferguson 2007; Moser et al. 2002; Nicholas et al. 2007). Archaeologists are engaging with descendant and stakeholder communities in ways that are radically transforming how we do
archaeology (Colwell-Chanthaphonh and Ferguson 2007). In
the United States, much of the genesis for collaboration can
be traced back to the passing of the Native American Graves
Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA). By legislating
repatriation of human remains and burial objects, the law
created opportunities where archaeologists and Native
American groups could work together. Many members of the
post-NAGPRA generation of archaeologists have been raised
intellectually in an environment where consultation is a necessary part of doing archaeology (e.g., Silliman 2008). However, many collaborative archaeological projects, such as the
ones presented in this forum, have arisen without any legislation structuring the relationship between descendant communities and archaeologists. The SAA Committee on Native
American Relations (CNAR) is interested in exploring how
collaborative projects form and transform in countries and
context where legislation does not require consultation. With
this in mind, we approached several scholars who are actively involved in collaborative projects in international contexts
to reflect on how the collaborative project began and what
the outcomes have been. We received submissions from
around the world and highlight here are six different projects
that include collaborative efforts in six different countries:
Australia, Canada, New Caledonia, New Zealand, the United
States, and Tanzania. Some projects, such as those in Tanzania and New Caledonia, are among the first in their respective countries, while others, such as those in Canada and
Australia, are part of an ongoing national shift in archaeological practice.
The SAA Archaeological Record • September 2012
A number of key themes connect these diverse projects and
give some indication of the core principles of successful collaborations. The first is the importance of communication.
Communication is essential to building relationships of
trust and shifting communities’ perceptions about the purpose and practice of archaeology. For example, in Tanzania,
the members of the research team experienced a very different reaction from residents of the local village after the
archaeologists had made an effort to communicate, via
posters, the purpose and importance of archaeological information and heritage. In the Inuit Living History Project, a
collaborative ethic extended to how the different members of
the team worked together, whether they were academics,
researchers, or community members. A similar situation
arose in Australia, where Smith and Jackson encountered
early on the essential role of family relationships and connections in developing true collaborative research practices.
Another theme is the emphasis by local or indigenous communities on education. Lyons et al. created the Inuvialuit Living History Project to address the desire of local communities to develop tools where knowledge could be passed on to
younger generations. For Roberts, one of the key concerns of
the Mannum Aboriginal Community Association was to
educate tourists and visitors about their perspectives on the
past. Education, in this case, was about the community
members sharing their knowledge and changing perceptions about heritage. In Tanzania, the CHIRP project members are closely involved with the local school to provide support and materials that can be used in the classroom. In
Australia, one of the major challenges facing the remote
Aboriginal communities is access to education, so the project members worked with local communities to develop
training programs.
One final theme that runs throughout several of the articles
is the importance of the intangible aspects of heritage that
can be negatively impacted via colonial histories. Reclamation of objects, knowledge, and landscapes are essential to
the process of decolonization for many communities. The
IPinCH project and related case studies explicitly address
issues around the definition of cultural heritage in communities throughout the world.
These articles are just a small sample of the diverse types of
community-based archaeological research being undertaken
around the world. Even without heritage legislation formalizing a responsibility to descendant communities, archaeologists are working toward the decolonization of the discipline and building strong collaborative relationships with
descendant and local communities.
References Cited
Atalay, Sonya
2006 Indigenous Archaeology as Decolonizing Practice. American Indian Quarterly 30(3/4):280.
Colwell-Chanthaphonh, Chip, and T. J. Ferguson
2007 Collaboration in Archaeological Practice: Engaging Descendant Communities. AltaMira Lanham, MD.
Colwell-Chanthaphonh, Chip, and T. J. Ferguson
2007 Introduction: The Collaborative Continuum. In Collaboration in Archaeological Practice: Engaging Descendant Communities, edited by Chip Colwell-Chanthaphonh and T. J.
Ferguson, pp. 1–32. AltaMira, Lanham, MD.
Moser, Stephanie, Darren Glazier, James E. Phillips, Lamya Nasser
el Nemr, Mohammed Saleh Mousa, Rascha Nasr Aiesh,
Susan Richardson, Andrew Conner, and Michael Seymour
2002 Transforming Archaeology through Practice: Strategies for
Collaborative Archaeology and the Community Archaeology Project at Quseir, Egypt. World Archaeology
Nicholas, George P., John R. Welch, and Eldon C. Yellowhorn
2007 Collaborative Encounters. In Collaboration in Archaeological Practice: Engaging Descendant Communities, edited by
Chip Colwell-Chanthaphonh and T. J. Ferguson, pp.
273–298. AltaMira, Lanham, Maryland.
Silliman, S.W.
2008 Collaborating at the Trowel’s Edge: Teaching and Learning in
Indigenous Archaeology. University of Arizona Press, Tuscon.
Fellow Latin Americanists,
On behalf of the SAA Committee on the Americas, I write to request your support in broadening the distribution of
the Society’s flagship journal for the region, Latin American Antiquity. If we can get the journal into more institutional
libraries throughout Latin America, articles will find wider, more appropriately inclusive audiences. At the same time,
more of our colleagues will be inspired to submit to the journal and to consider joining the SAA themselves.
COA asks that you consider funding a gift subscription to Latin American Antiquity for a library at an institution with
which you and/or your Latin American colleagues have a close relationship, or in a country or region in which you
carry out your research. When you identify a library that you would like to support, you should write to them to determine whether or not they already receive LAA; if not, you will need the correct snail mail address for delivery. A gift
subscription for Latin America costs US$65 per year and your commitment would be one year at a time.
To order a gift subscription, please contact the SAA office at 1-202-789-8200 x109 or email [email protected] for
more information.
Thank you for considering this opportunity to continue strengthening the intra-hemispheric relations that are so
essential to American archaeology and so rewarding both personally and professionally.
—Dan Sandweiss, Committee on the Americas Advisory Network member
September 2012 • The SAA Archaeological Record
George Nicholas and the IPinCH Collective
George Nicholas is Director, Intellectual Property Issues in Cultural Heritage Project and Professor of Archaeology at Simon Fraser University.
hat does research on tangible and intangible heritage look like when done in collaboration with
descendent communities—especially when they
take a leading role? How does a more equitable decisionmaking process contribute to archaeological practices that
are relevant, responsible, and mutually satisfying? And how
can ensuring that communities benefit from research on
their heritage improve their relations with archaeologists
and heritage managers? These questions are currently being
explored in the course of a seven-year international project
on Intellectual Property Issues in Cultural Heritage
(IPinCH), based at Simon Fraser University. This initiative
brings together over 50 anthropologists, archaeologists,
lawyers, ethicists, heritage and museum specialists with
partners from 25 communities and organizations to explore
intellectual property-related issues emerging within the
realm of cultural heritage and their implications for theory,
policy, and practice ( We are supported
by a major grant from Canada’s Social Science and Humanities Research Council.
Descendant communities, archaeologists, and other stakeholders are today confronted by a sometimes bewildering set
of challenges regarding the appropriate use of cultural
images and designs; protocols for bioarchaeological
research; fair and appropriate access to archaeological data,
museum records, and other archives; cultural tourism and
commodification issues; changing legal interpretations of
cultural rights; and international heritage protection efforts
that purport to incorporate local conceptions of heritage—to
name just a few key topics. IPinCH aims to document and
learn from the diversity of principles, perspectives, and
responses that emerge from these and other contexts dealing
with intangible aspects of heritage, and from this to compile
and share examples of good practice and other resources. We
approach these goals through three complementary components: (a) collaborative, community-based research initiatives (discussed here); (b) an online library to compile and
distribute research materials, publications, and protocols;
and (c) nine thematic Working Groups exploring the theoretical, practical, ethical, and policy implications of intellec-
The SAA Archaeological Record • September 2012
tual property. Throughout IPinCH we ascribe to a critical
theory approach that seeks to foster positive change in the
lives of participants—including researchers, altering course
as the research process proceeds based on feedback and
ongoing critical reflection on intellectual property issues in
cultural heritage.
IPinCH Case Studies
Our project has tried to take a ground-up approach by utilizing a community-based participatory research methodology
(see Atalay 2012; Nicholas et al. 2011). We have been able to
provide support for 11 community-based studies, now at different levels of completion, situated within Indigenous communities in Canada, the United States, Australia, New
Zealand, and Kyrgyzstan. Each study begins with the community partner identifying issues of concern and then collaborating as a co-developer with one or more IPinCH team
members to propose a research design and budget. Research
methods may include focus groups, community surveys,
archival research, interviews with elders, or other information-gathering activities. Such an approach prioritizes community needs, while also fostering relationships that address
at least some of the long-standing issues surrounding academic research relating to mistrust, unequal power, and loss
of control over the process and products of research. Once
the study is complete, research products and data are
reviewed at the community level to determine what information can be released to the IPinCH team to inform various meta-level research questions. Community retention
and control of the raw data ensures another layer of protection for sensitive information or privileged knowledge. Each
case study undergoes multiple layers of ethics review—at the
community level, within the home institutions of academic
researchers, and at Simon Fraser University.
What is the nature of these case studies and what they are
targeting? Here are five examples.
How can we best collect and pass on knowledge about our land
and lifeways for use in guiding future development policies and
unlock the protective fence that presently surrounds the petroglyphs (Figure 2).
Figure 1. Young Chatham Islanders Jade Lomano and son Solomon
alongside a rakau momori (tree carving), which Moriori believe to be
the embodiment of ancestors. Photograph courtesy of Susan Thorpe.
Photograph by Robin Atherton.
decisions? The “Moriori Cultural Database, Chatham Islands,
New Zealand” study was developed by Susan Thorpe and
Maui Solomon from Te Keke Tura Moriori (Moriori Identity
Trust), in affiliation with the Hokotehi Moriori Trust and
Kotuku Consultancy. Their initiative has established a Moriori cultural knowledge database to record traditional knowledge and protect IP through appropriate protocols, and also
contributed to a youth-focused Hokotehi mentorship program on knowledge recording and archaeological methods.
Both initiatives contribute to management strategies and
development decisions that protect Moriori land and cultural heritage (Figure 1).
How do we protect, care for, and manage the sacred knowledge
embodied in ancestral sites while also sharing their lessons in culturally appropriate ways with the public? This question is at the
center of “Education, Protection and Management of ezhibiigaadek asin (Sanilac Petroglyph Site), Michigan.” Sonya Atalay (UMass-Amherst) with Shannon Martin and William
Johnson of the Ziibiwing Center of Anishinabe Culture &
Lifeways of the Saginaw Chippewa Indian Tribe of Michigan
are working to determine culturally appropriate ways of providing educational information about a petroglyph site containing over a hundred indigenous teachings to diverse public audiences while at the same time protecting the knowledge and images from inappropriate use. The goal is to utilize Anishinabe values and advice from spiritual leaders in
negotiations with Michigan State agencies. The Saginaw
Chippewa are again gathering at ezhibiigaadek asin for ceremonies but at this time still must have a state employee
What guidelines should apply to knowledge produced from analyzing ancestral remains? “The Journey Home: Guiding
Intangible Knowledge Production in the Analysis of Ancestral Remains, British Columbia” is an initiative being collaboratively developed by The University of British Columbia
Laboratory of Archaeology (LOA) and the Stó:lo Research
and Resource Management Centre (on behalf of the Stó:lo
Nation/Tribal Council). Susan Rowley (LOA), David Schaepe
and Sonny McHalsie (both with SRRMC) are working with
cultural advisers from the Stó:lo House of Respect Care-taking Committee to develop protocols for how to make decisions about the study of human remains. For the Stó:lo,
knowing as much as possible about these ancestors informs
their approach to repatriation and guides inquiry into multiple issues of scientific process, knowledge production, and
intellectual property. The project aims to develop guidelines
and protocols for repatriation and analysis of First Nation
ancestral remains. These models may then be adopted by
other groups as appropriate.
How do we assure the protection and inclusion of our own cultural principles and ways of knowing in government consultations affecting our heritage? The “Yukon First Nation Heritage
Values and Heritage Resource Management” study was
developed by Sheila Greer, Catherine Bell, and Partners
Figure 2. Members of the Saginaw Chippewa tribe hold regular ceremonies at Ezhibiigaadek asin, the Sanilac petroglyphs, but do not have
a key to the protective fence surrounding the site. Photo courtesy of
Stephen Loring.
September 2012 • The SAA Archaeological Record
Champagne & Aishihik First Nations (CAFN) Heritage, Carcross-Tagish First Nation Heritage, and Ta’an Kwach’än
Council. This study asks what heritage management based
on Yukon First Nations (YFN) values looks like in order to
improve their ability to fulfill their rights and obligations as
established under their respective Land Claim and Self-Government Agreements. Community-based ethnographic
research is being used to identify these values and how they
compare to those expressed in western heritage resource
management concepts and practices. The team is also examining how Yukon Indian values can reframe approaches to
the management of the heritage resources by self-governing
YFNs under their respective land claims.
How do we establish protocols for outsiders who work with culturally sensitive sites or information? “Developing Policies and
Protocols for the Culturally Sensitive Intellectual Properties
of the Penobscot Nation of Maine” was developed by Bonnie
Newsom (Penobscot Nation), Martin Wobst and Julie Woods
(both with UMass-Amherst). Here the goal is to combine the
tribal community voice and knowledge with ethnographic,
archaeological and legal information to create policies, procedures and protocols that protect Penobscot intellectual
property associated with their cultural landscape, while
maintaining compliance with state and federal historic
preservation and cultural resource management laws and
regulations. Included in this plan are Intellectual Property
(IP) and cultural sensitivity training workshops for outside
archaeologists and researchers. The Penobscot Nation has
established a community-based Intellectual Property (IP)
working group to identify aspects of their heritage that are
particularly sensitive. The working group is also creating a
formalized tribal structure to address IP and other researchrelated issues.
Other IPinCH-funded projects are “Cultural Tourism in
Nunavik” (Nunavut, Canada) led by Daniel Gendron and the
Avataq Cultural Institute; “Secwepemc Territorial Authority:
Honoring Ownership of Tangible / Intangible Culture”
(British Columbia, Canada), developed by Brian Noble (Dalhousie U.) and Arthur Manual (Secwepemcul’w); and
“Grassroots Resource Preservation and Management in Kyrgyzstan: Ethnicity, Nationalism and Heritage on a Human
Scale” (Kyrgyzstan), led by Anne Pyburn (Indiana U.) and
Krygyz colleagues. Two other IPinCH case studies—Inuvialuit and Ngaut Ngaut—are reported on in this issue. In all
of these studies, the incentive has come from the community, they develop and direct the study, and they are the primary
beneficiaries. Benefits also flow to IPinCH researchers and
team members, and from them to other academics, descendant communities, policy makers, and the public at large.
insights into the different value systems relating to “heritage,” which can contribute to successful heritage management, especially when coupled with an ethnographic
approach (Hollowell and Nicholas 2009).
At the same time, we have found that the process of collaborative research can be as illuminating as what it produces.
For example, we continue to learn from our community partners about the intrusive nature of research; they see this as
an opportunity to teach us how to conduct research in a
respectful manner. Constant critical reflection and willingness to respond constructively to critique are thus requisite.
Beyond the anticipated results of each case study, other benefits accrue with IPinCH partners coming together, finding
support for the challenges they face (e.g., archaeotourism)
and launching initiatives of their own. These may include
symposia and workshops on, for example, commodification
of the past, which are designed to meet the needs of community partners affected by loss of control over their heritage.
There are considerable challenges to collaborative research
(Colwell-Chanthaphonh and Ferguson 2008). It requires
considerable time and effort, even where participants are
building on relationships previously developed between the
community and one or more team members. Things take
longer than expected, and there are unavoidable and unanticipated delays. And because the outcome may be uncertain,
such research can be particularly risky for untenured scholars and graduate students. Finally, some of the biggest challenges our projects have faced involve the time and energy
required to work with multiple institutions—often
transnationally—to get funds flowing and ethics reviews
completed. In some instances we have to have three separate
ethics reviews for a single study. We have found that university financial officers and IRBs need and want to be educated about community-based research, which is generally
unlike anything they have dealt with before—the same holds
true for most archaeologists, who have not had to prepare an
ethics application.
If we hope to comprehend the nature and impact of heritagerelated issues upon people’s lives, it makes sense to see how
these play out on the ground, rather than limit this just to
discourse between scholars. We also need ensure that benefits flow both ways between community partners and academic researchers. A deeper understanding of what is at
stake will promote research relationships that are more equitable, responsible, and accountable. This can only be done by
working collaboratively with descendant communities.
What We Are Learning
Collaborative research has the potential to reveal important
The SAA Archaeological Record • September 2012
>NICHOLAS, continued on page 35
Amy Roberts and Isobelle Campbell
Amy Roberts is an archaeologist at the Department of Archaeology, Flinders University, Adelaide, South Australia and
Isobelle Campbell is the Chairperson of the Mannum Aboriginal Community Association Inc.
his paper details a collaborative endeavor between
Flinders University archaeologist, Amy Roberts, and
the Mannum Aboriginal Community Association Inc.
(hereafter MACAI). Together Roberts and MACAI began an
interpretive project for a significant site known as Ngaut
Ngaut to the Aboriginal community (named after an ancestral being). However, this place is invariably referred to as
Devon Downs in archaeological textbooks. Indeed, one of the
aims of the Ngaut Ngaut Interpretive Project has been to
reinstate the traditional toponym in broader literature. This
step is seen as just one way in which Indigenous peoples can
counter colonialism.
Located on the Murray River in South Australia this rockshelter site was the first in Australia to be “scientifically”
excavated. The excavations, conducted by Norman Tindale
and Herbert Hale, began in 1929 (Hale and Tindale 1930).
Their research provided the first clear evidence for the longterm presence of Indigenous Australians in one place (Figure 1).
Prior to Hale and Tindale’s excavations little systematic
research had been conducted in the field of Indigenous Australian archaeology. In fact, the thinking of the day was that
Indigenous Australians were recent arrivals to Australia and
consequently it was generally believed that the material culture of Indigenous Australians had not changed over time.
Hence, the research at Ngaut Ngaut provided a turning point
in the way the Indigenous Australian archaeological record
was viewed.
The impetus for the Ngaut Ngaut Interpretive Project arose
when Roberts was working as an “expert” anthropologist on
native title issues in the region in 2007 and visited the site
with MACAI representatives (although she had worked with
the community since 1998). During subsequent discussions,
it became clear that MACAI’s cultural tourism operations
were being hampered due to the fact that the Director of
National Parks and Wildlife had closed parts of the site as a
result of riverbank erosion during the recent and severe
drought suffered in many parts of the country. As a result,
MACAI were in need of interpretive materials that could be
used during such times—and so began the collaborative
MACAI had originally requested that Roberts provide photographic images they could use during park closures. However, as discussions developed it became clear that together
Roberts and MACAI could create a suite of interpretive materials (for both off and on-site purposes) that would benefit the
community’s cultural tourism ventures as well as their aspirations to educate the public about Aboriginal culture and to
foster greater cross-cultural understandings (Figure 2). Funding was obtained for Stage 1 of the project (from the Aboriginal Affairs and Reconciliation Division in South Australia)
and interpretive signs, educational posters (to be used during
closures) and brochures were produced.
The content of the signs, posters, and brochures specifically
incorporated the many tangible and intangible aspects and
values of this significant place. It was important for MACAI
that both tangible and intangible values relating to the site
were addressed in the interpretive content. Indeed, whilst
MACAI value the site’s archaeological history and the physical evidence of the excavations, they also wanted the site’s
cultural importance to be presented to the public. In particular, they wanted to present to the public some of the cultural complexities relating to Ngaut Ngaut and to redress the
standard, one-dimensional and arguably colonial archaeological story that exists in Australian textbooks.
Some of the many intangible values attached to the site that
required interpretation included: rock art interpretations and
cultural meanings, “Dreamings,” oral histories, discussions
about Aboriginal group boundaries, “totemic” issues and
“bushtucker” knowledge (see also Roberts et al. 2010). The
funding obtained for Stage 1 also allowed for the employment of a local artist to provide paintings to be used in the
interpretive materials to enhance some of the areas listed
above. Similarly, MACAI were engaged to produce the sign
frames rather than contracting the work out to a non-Indigenous company. Indeed, throughout the project Roberts and
September 2012 • The SAA Archaeological Record
As a result of these concerns, and through discussions with
George Nicholas and the IPinCH (Intellectual Property
Issues in Cultural Heritage) group, a second stage of the
project was devised and funded.
Figure 1 The cliffs at Ngaut Ngaut. Photograph by Amy Roberts.
Stage 2 has seen the development and near completion of
an online interpretive book (to be hosted by the South Australian Department of Environment and Natural Resources)
as well as a hard copy version, which will be published by
IPinCH. Indeed, prior to the prevalence of the Internet
MACAI were able to control the content shared with visitors
to Ngaut Ngaut. However, the Internet now poses significant challenges to the presentation and regulation of cultural information, site images and copyright issues. As such
the key differences between the IPinCH-funded work and
other Internet resources is that the materials have been
developed in a collaborative, structured and culturally sustainable manner.
MACAI worked to create additional community benefits as
further outlined below.
Throughout Stage 1 of the project it became apparent that
MACAI were becoming increasingly concerned about problematic online webpages about Ngaut Ngaut such as:
1. Brief, unfocused and/or inaccurate information on State
government and/or tourism websites. For example, tourism websites often only highlight one or two values relating to the site and this information tends to be replicated.
State government websites primarily discuss risk management issues or where detail is included (e.g., in management plans) some of this information is inaccurate
(e.g., incorrect dates have been reported for the site) and
again only certain aspects of the site are emphasised; or
2. Inaccurate and/or offensive information—generally blogged
by tourists who have visited the site or websites that use
images of the site and then claim copyright over them.
Figure 3 L-R: Isobelle Campbell and Amy Roberts presenting a paper at
the 2011 IPinCH conference in Vancouver. Photograph courtesy of
However, as was the case with Stage 1 of the project, additional community benefits were incorporated into the Stage
2 funding. For example, funding was obtained through
IPinCH for MACAI representatives to attend international
and national conferences/symposia to talk about the Ngaut
Ngaut Interpretive Project and to learn from their international and national Indigenous counterparts as well as from
other archaeological projects and practitioners (Figure 3).
Figure 2 Isobelle Campbell (MACAI chairperson) (left) talking about
one of the interpretive signs at Ngaut Ngaut. Photograph by Amy
The SAA Archaeological Record • September 2012
Similarly, funds were used to enable MACAI members to
visit the excavated Ngaut Ngaut collection, which is currently housed at the South Australian Museum. This visit proved
to be a significant and emotional event for the community
members who attended and excerpts from the interviews
conducted afterwards have been incorporated into the online
interpretive materials (Figure 4). Proceeds from the sale of
the hard copy version of the book will also be fed back into
Figure 4 L-R: Isobelle Campbell, Anita Hunter and Ivy Campbell
inspecting the excavated Ngaut Ngaut collection at the South Australian Museum. Photograph by Amy Roberts and courtesy of the South
Australian Museum.
Hale, Herbert, and Norman B. Tindale
1930 Notes on Some Human Remains in the Lower Murray
Valley, South Australia. Records of the South Australian
Museum 4:145–218.
Nicholas, George P., Amy Roberts, David M. Schaepe, Joe Watkins,
Lyn Leader-Elliot, and Susan Rowley
2011 A Consideration of Theory, Principles and Practice in Collaborative Archaeology. Archaeological Review from Cambridge 26(2):11–30.
Roberts, Amy L., Mannum Aboriginal Community Association Inc.
and van Wessem, A.
2010 The Ngaut Ngaut (Devon Downs) Interpretive Project –
Presenting Archaeological History to the Public. Australian Archaeological Association Conference, Batemans
Bay, 9-13 December 2010. Electronic document,
MACAI community initiatives and their management activities at Ngaut Ngaut.
Given that the Ngaut Ngaut Interpretive Project has truly
been a jointly conducted initiative it is situated at the progressive end of what Colwell-Chanthaphonh and Ferguson
(2007) describe as the “collaborative continuum.” While such
a collaborative undertaking requires a significant investment
of time and energy (see Nicholas et al. 2011 for additional
discussion) for both researchers and communities, this does
not mean that such projects cannot be mutually beneficial.
Indeed, as is clear in the discussion above all stages of the
Ngaut Ngaut Interpretive Project were designed to include
additional community benefits (above and beyond those
relating to the central tenets of the project). Similarly,
Roberts has also furthered her career as a researcher and academic by being able to publish various articles and a forthcoming book (often coauthored with MACAI or members of
MACAI). However, Roberts and her home institution
(Flinders University) have also benefited in other ways that
should also be acknowledged—e.g., with MACAI approving
graduate-level student projects on various aspects of the
Ngaut Ngaut collection and by hosting field schools at the
site. Indeed, university programs in Australia are now
dependent on Indigenous communities to provide such
approvals and their collaboration/participation in these programs needs to be accorded due recognition.
References Cited
Colwell-Chanthaphonh, Chip, and T. J. Ferguson
2007 Introduction: The Collaborative Continuum. In Collaboration in Archaeological Practice: Engaging Descendant Communities, edited by Chip Colwell-Chanthaphonh and T. J.
Ferguson, pp. 1–32. AltaMira, Lanham, MD.
NICHOLAS, from page 32 <
References Cited
Atalay, Sonya
2012 Community Based Archaeology: Research with, by, and for
Indigenous and Local Communities. University of California
Press, Berkeley.
Colwell-Chanthaphonh, Chip, and T.J. Ferguson (editors)
2007 Collaboration in Archaeological Practice: Engaging Descendant Communities. AltaMira Press, Lanham, Maryland.
Hollowell, Julie J., and George P. Nicholas
2009 Using Ethnographic Methods to Articulate CommunityBased Conceptions of Cultural Heritage Management.
Public Archaeology 8(2/3): 141–160.
Nicholas, George P., Amy Roberts, David M. Schaepe, Joe Walkins,
Lyn Leader-Elliot, and Susan Rowley
2011 A Consideration of Theory, Principles and Practice in Collaborative Archaeology. Archaeological Review from Cambridge 26(2):11–30.
September 2012 • The SAA Archaeological Record
Katie M. Biittner and Pamela R. Willoughby
Katie M. Biittner and Pamela R. Willoughby are with the Department of Anthropology, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada.
ince 2006, the Iringa Region Archaeological Project
(IRAP) has been conducting field research on the rich
archaeological and historic heritage of Iringa. IRAP is
a rapidly growing team, composed of academics,
researchers, and graduate students in Canada, the U.S., England, Australia, and Tanzania. The main goal is to investigate
the Upper Pleistocene and later history, in relation to models
of the African origins of Homo sapiens. Before our team
arrives in Tanzania, extensive preparations are required
including applying for research clearance from COSTECH
(The Tanzanian Commission on Science and Technology).
This is required for all participants, i.e., any individual who
will be a part of our team regardless of nationality or position. We also notify the Director of the Division of Antiquities, Ministry of Natural Resources and Tourism, Government of Tanzania, of our intent to apply for COSTECH clearance. This is because Antiquities will review our file and provide our excavation license. Without COSTECH clearance
we could not receive an excavation license and we will not
receive COSTECH clearance without the approval of Antiquities, the division responsible for historic resources on the
mainland of Tanzania. One of the requirements for receiving
COSTECH clearance is that foreign researchers must work
with a local collaborator, a Tanzanian national who “vouches”
for the quality of your research and your character. This
process of acquiring appropriate legal permissions to conduct archaeological fieldwork therefore necessitates successful (i.e., ethical and cordial) collaboration with local archaeologists, academics, and professionals. Once these two permits have been obtained we are assigned an Antiquities Officer who will accompany us for the duration of our field season and observe all aspects of our research.
Our official duties and obligations continue upon our arrival
in the field research area. We spend days greeting local officials from every branch of government and within every
community we visit to introduce ourselves and to explain our
reasons for conducting research in their jurisdiction. At any
time we could encounter resistance to our research and find
ourselves unwelcome; our acute awareness of the distrust
and suspicion faced by foreign researchers was one of the
The SAA Archaeological Record • September 2012
main motivations behind developing a research program
focused on communication and local collaboration.
Prior to IRAP’s investigations, little archaeological research
had been undertaken in this region. In 2006, preliminary
test excavations were undertaken at two rockshelters: Magubike and Mlambalasi. The purpose of this preliminary study
was to determine the archaeological potential, artifact density, and stratification of rockshelter sites in the region (Biittner et al. 2007). Mlambalasi rockshelter is located next to the
burial site of the nineteenth-century Uhehe Chief Mkwawa,
a leader in the resistance against German colonial forces,
and as such the site has important cultural and historic significance. Magubike rockshelter is located adjacent to the village from which the name is derived. Consequently, many
local people visited the site on a daily basis while we were
working and expressed a vested interest in what we were
doing on their land and with their resources. Although from
our perspective the field season was very productive and
rewarding, it was clear that local communities had concerns
about our presence and our motives.
In 2008, IRAP returned to undertake a large-scale regional
survey documenting the distribution of sites and stone raw
material sources. Surface materials were collected at 12 locations, including a number of previously unrecorded archaeological and heritage sites. Test excavation at Magubike rockshelter was continued to determine the extent of the archaeological deposits.
It was another successful field season but not just because of
what we accomplished archaeologically. 2008 was the first
time we brought along posters for distribution at local offices
and museums. The posters were prepared in both English
and Swahili, and described our research. Small handouts
were also prepared of the posters to give out everywhere—
offices, schools, museums, churches, and to anyone who
asked who we were and what we were doing. The reception
was astounding. We repeatedly heard comments like “many
foreigner researchers promised to bring back the information they learned from working on our land, you are the first
Figure 1: “The Archaeological Heritage of Iringa Region, Tanzania” poster distributed throughout Iringa region and on display in local schools, offices,
museums, hotels, and restaurants.
to actually do so.” Magubike village called a meeting and
invited us to attend. At this meeting they indicated that they
had previously been skeptical of what we were doing and
why, but after taking the time to read the poster they now
understood. We were formally invited to continue our work
at the site and asked to continue to share our information
with them. Many people commented on how they recognized us and our names from the posters. These posters
marked our first huge step in earning the trust of the communities with which we hoped to collaborate.
of human evolution, East African culture history, and, for the
first time, cultural heritage management. The school children,
in particular, were so excited by this poster of “their site.” At
the ceremony where we handed over these posters to the
school, the headmistress, teachers, and students all spoke
about the sense of pride they all felt knowing they had such an
important part of human heritage in their backyard.
We returned in 2010 for more fieldwork and brought more
posters. This time we created three posters: a regional one
similar to that distributed in 2008 (Figure 1), an East African
culture history overview (Figure 2), and one focused entirely
on Magubike rockshelter (Figure 3). The East African Culture
History poster was developed after recognizing that we were
using terminology with which many local people were unfamiliar. We prepared this instructional tool particularly for the
secondary school in Magubike, using images taken of artifacts, fossils, and skeletal specimens at the University of
Alberta, photographs taken by Biittner of sites, or open source
materials. We focused on Magubike rockshelter for another
poster to continue to build a trusting and collaborative relationship with the village of Magubike. The poster emphasized
the importance of Magubike rockshelter from the perspective
The posters have proved to be only one small, but important,
step in engaging local communities. Since we began our
poster “campaign” we have been approached by various community members and groups asking for support and assistance in education and economic development. Our
response to this request was to form the Cultural Heritage in
Iringa Research Program (CHIRP). CHIRP is a long-term
program which will involve the direct engagement of local
communities using interviews, public meetings, and workshops at schools in the region towards the collective and collaborative management of cultural heritage.
From Posters to Management: Cultural Heritage in
Iringa Research Program (CHIRP)
Through CHIRP we intend to:
1. provide support to local archaeologists, cultural, and
September 2012 • The SAA Archaeological Record
Figure 2: “East African Culture History” poster prepared as an instructional tool for the secondary school at Magubike village.
antiquities officers (including access to resources for the
development of professional and conservation skills);
2. improve public awareness regarding conservation of
movable and immovable cultural resources;
3. educate and work with local communities in fields related to cultural heritage and cultural tourism;
4. work with local communities in developing, documenting, and presenting their own local histories; and
5. work with educators to develop relevant curriculum connecting local archaeology with key events in human evolution.
We will continue to prepare and provide posters based on
information generated from both consultation with local
peoples and the result of our ongoing archaeological
research projects. We hope to expand our translations
beyond English and Swahili to include local, threatened languages like Kihehe.
As Magubike rockshelter is located so close to the secondary
The SAA Archaeological Record • September 2012
school (you can see it from the classroom), it provides an
excellent opportunity to give students hands on experience
doing archaeology including laboratory analysis and interpretation. This means the people who have a vested interest
in the information produced by our research will play a
direct role in constructing the narrative (what does it mean,
what are the implications of our findings) and in disseminating the results. We hope to work closely with local people
to find more culturally relevant or appropriate ways of disseminating our results. Illiteracy is an issue in Iringa, which
means our posters are not the best long term solution for
outreach. We must make all aspects of our research and our
discipline accessible.
In the long term we will continue to document the historic
and archaeological potential of Iringa, to improve conditions
on heritage sites and in collections, and to alleviate poverty
by supporting the cultural tourism industry in Iringa. By
partnering with local artisans and tour operators, we can
help to bring money into the local economy. A number of
Magubike villagers commented that they could not understand why, if the sites in Iringa are so important, tourists are
Figure 3: In response to concerns expressed by villagers of Magubike village, we prepared a poster highlighting the archaeological significance of their
not flocking to Iringa as they do to Arusha (the starting point
for safaris to Olduvai and the Serengeti). Much of the damage to existing sites across Tanzania can be attributed to
poverty. Local villagers now regularly report looting activity
stating that they understand the intellectual and cultural
value of sites and their potential to draw tourists to the
region because of our posters. Our posters are only the
beginning of what we hope will be a successful outreach program to engage local people.
Acknowledgments: Pamela Willoughby’s IRAP research has
been supported by the Social Sciences and Humanities
Research Council of Canada (SSHRC), by a Post-PhD
research grant from the Wenner-Gren Foundation and by a
Killam Research Grant from the Vice-President (Research),
University of Alberta. Katie Biittner’s research has been
funded by a Doctoral Fellowship from SSHRC, and by a Dis-
sertation Fellowship from the Faculty of Graduate Studies
and Research, University of Alberta. We thank COSTECH
and the Division of Antiquities, Government of Tanzania,
and the people of the villages of Magubike, Kalenga, Wenda,
Lupalama, Kibebe, and Iringa town for their continued support of both IRAP and CHIRP. Finally, we would like to
thank our IRAP team members Pastory Bushozi, Ben
Collins, Katherine Alexander, Jennifer Miller, Elizabeth Sawchuk, Frank Masele, Chris Stringer, and Anne Skinner for
their ongoing contributions to the project. Asante sana.
References Cited
Biittner, Katie M., P.M. Bushozi, and Pam Willoughby
2007 The Middle Stone Age of Iringa Region, Tanzania. Nyame
Akuma 68:62–73.
September 2012 • The SAA Archaeological Record
Ian Lilley, Christophe Sand, and Frederique Valentin
Ian Lilley may be reached at the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Studies Unit, University of Queensland 4072, Australia. Christophe Sand may
be reached at the Institut d’Archéologie de la Nouvelle-Calédonie et du Pacifique, Nouméa, Nouvelle-Calédonie. Frederique Valentin may be reached at
the Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, UMR 7041, Maison de l’archéologie et de l’ethnologie, René Ginouvès, Nanterre, France.
ur project concerns the tiny, remote island of Tiga,
smallest of the inhabited islands in New Caledonia’s
Loyalty Islands. New Caledonia is a largely
autonomous French territory some 1,200 kilometers off the
northeast coast of Australia (Figure 1). The territory’s main
island, Grande Terre, is geologically complex, while the Loyalties, which lie east of Grande Terre, are simple raised coral
reefs. New Caledonia’s indigenous people call themselves
Kanaks. Today, they share the islands with a substantial
number of settlers of European, Asian (primarily Vietnamese) and Polynesian background, virtually all of whom
live in and around the capital, Nouméa. Apart from one expatriate European family running the primary school and one
long-term resident from Tahiti, Tiga’s permanent population
of around 150 is entirely Kanak. There is no tourism and no
commercial industry. People live by gardening, fishing, and
hunting. Most people of Tigan descent live elsewhere, mainly on the neighboring and very much larger islands of Maré
and Lifou in the Loyalties, or in Nouméa.
Our work on Tiga includes local archaeologists and oral historians of Kanak, European and Asian descent as well as colleagues of European descent from metropolitan France and
Australia. We communicate with the local community in
French, which is New Caledonia’s lingua franca, as well as
local island languages. We have been exploring the limits of
‘translatability’ of archaeological objectives and findings on
the one hand and local conceptions of history on the other.
We have found that we can mesh certain details of both in a
way that works for archaeologists as well as local people. In
doing so, we have come to realize that commonalities of perception on a higher plane of abstraction are ultimately more
important to this process than lining up precise details.
Archaeologically speaking, the project was motivated by the
fact that New Caledonia is unique in Pacific prehistory. The
founding human occupation some three thousand years ago
occurred as part of the dispersal of the well-described Lapita
The SAA Archaeological Record • September 2012
cultural complex, but differed in several critical respects
from elsewhere in the Lapita distribution. Subsequent trajectories of change produced levels of cultural diversification
unparalleled further East in Remote Oceania, the vast region
beyond the main Solomon Islands chain. The problem for
archaeologists is that their interpretations of New Caledonia’s dynamic human history conflict with local Kanak views.
The latter are largely either versions of or a reaction to synchronic historical and ethnographic pictures developed
before modern archaeology started in the region. These latter scenarios paint “traditional” Kanak society as a smallscale and semi-nomadic one governed through petty chiefdoms. Such descriptions have been completely undermined
by the archaeological demonstration that the last millennium before European contact was characterized by a densely
inhabited landscape of labor-intensive horticulture organized by strong chiefdoms, which collapsed as a result of profound demographic and cultural disruption between initial
European contact in 1774 and the French takeover in the
This dramatic archaeological reappraisal of “traditional
Kanak culture” deeply unsettles many indigenous New Caledonians as well as the expatriate scholars who promoted prearchaeological views. These sentiments also are felt in relation to the archaeological demonstration that there were
major cultural shifts in the archipelago during the preceding
three millennia of human activity. On this basis, exactly what
archaeology is “for” in New Caledonia remains as unclear to
most Kanak, as it does to many other indigenous people
around the world. In reaction to attempts by settlers to characterize Kanaks as just another group of migrants who have
no more claim to land and cultural rights than any other
group in the modern population, Kanak activists and their
European sympathizers have attacked the entire concept of
history and long-term cultural change as a tool of neocolonial oppression. As in many other settler societies, activists
promote a two-step model in which a static precolonial
demonstrated significant expansions in habitation and subsistence gardening on the raised parts of the island during
the first and second millennium AD. This expansion extended into very rugged and difficult peripheral areas, in which
living and working would have required great effort. This
intensification suggests that there was a period of population
and subsistence stress on the island, as there was elsewhere
in New Caledonia at this time. Perhaps the most intriguing
thing we have found is that people on Tiga overcame a complete lack of surface water by creating imaginative and highly effective water catchment systems in the island’s many
caves (Figure 2).
Figure 1. Location map of Tiga Island, Loyalty Islands Province, New
Caledonia (showing selected sites not discussed in the text).
“Golden Age” was destroyed by Western colonization. In this
scenario, the population of New Caledonia is polarized as
“indigenous” or “invaders.” This division emerged in the late
1970s. It led to a major political emergency, including periods of undeclared civil war in the 1980s, the after-effects of
which have not entirely dissipated and make archaeology
impossible in a few places.
So, what have we done on Tiga against this backdrop? Over
four major seasons of fieldwork as well as several shorter visits we have explored a significant part of the island including
some of its many caves, and mapped and test-excavated a
number of sites from different periods in the island’s history back to an initial Lapita settlement. Before the start of the
archaeological fieldwork, the team’s Kanak oral historian
recorded oral histories and mythological traditions in great
detail. The archaeological survey started with the recording
of the sites that the local clans considered important in their
history, without any consideration for their archaeological
significance. Although analysis is not complete, we have
delineated a sequence of occupation that charts the movement of the population from an initial beach occupation in
Lapita times up onto the higher parts of the island where
nearly the entire population lived until European contact
when missionaries encouraged people to move back down to
the beach area where nearly everyone lives today. We have
We have been attempting to integrate these archaeological
findings with oral tradition and myth to produce long-term
history that makes sense to local people and us alike. While
there is certainly a reflective, theoretical dimension to our
work, our primary interest is quite pragmatic: to get local
people to engage with archaeology in whatever way best
works for them. Rather than try to match specific archaeological and oral-historical/mythological details, which in our
experience frequently bogs down in Melanesia in irreconcilable differences of opinion, we have chosen to meld our
results with local historical perspectives on a more abstract,
thematic level, emphasizing the sweep of history and the
classes of events and processes within which the archaeological nitty-gritty is situated. Archaeological details are thus
still crucial, providing the “beef” as it were, but they are
framed in a larger context of meaning which better reflects
the shared ‘meta-interests’ of locals and archaeologists. Such
meta-interests are captured well by Tim Ingold (2000:189),
who, quoting Adams, recognizes that “for both the archaeologist and the native dweller, the landscape tells—or rather
Figure 2. Artificial subterranean water-harvesting feature, Tiga Island
(Author’s (CS) hand and green torch for scale to left).
September 2012 • The SAA Archaeological Record
Les chercheurs d’eau :
Mythes, histoires et archéologie de Tokanod
Introduction : contexte
Chapitre I. Premier peuplement – le souffleur de conque
• Origine géologique de Tokanod
• Mise en place de la dune
• Première installation Lapita et ses caractéristiques
2500-2700 BP
• Données de LTD018
Chapitre II. La montée sur le plateau – les explorateurs
de l’eau
• Données pédologiques et le gouano
• Les plus anciennes datations des grottes 2100-2300
• Les données de Cholé et abri LTD076
Chapitre III. L’humanisation du plateau – Siwen
• La traversée des animaux (rat et poule sultane) 10002000 BP
• Transformations de la végétation
• Les sites de plateau, en abri et en enclos, mise en
place de tas
• Liens avec Maré
Chapitre IV. La côte est et les liens avec la Grande Terre
– histoire des Dawas
• Les données de l’abri des Dawas (dates et peintures
murales) 1200-2000 BP
• Données sur le plateau de la côte Est (zone sans
sépultures, très peu de coquillages)
• Liens archéologiques avec le Grande Terre (poteries,
herminettes etc)
Chapitre V. Conflits et évolutions sociales/environnementales – Les deux géants
• Changements environnementaux (dune, tectonique)
• Densification des occupations (datations sites et enclos plus récents) <1500 BP
• Cimetières étudiés
• L’implantation des Kiamu Xetiwaan
Chapitre VI. Les dernières chefferies du plateau - La
guerre de Ruet
• Les données archéologiques (four du plateau, Cholé
etc) <500 BP – ethnographique
• La chefferie d’Umewac et la division du plateau
• La christianisation et l’histoire du maïs
• La descente vers le bord de mer
Conclusion. La nature du lien entre mythes, histoires et
archéologie ?
ANNEXES. Textes en langue, mot à mot, traduction
Figure 3. Tentative contents of Tiga community publication, showing
integration of local and archaeological histories.
The SAA Archaeological Record • September 2012
is—a story, ‘a chronicle of life and dwelling’ (Adam
1998:54).” To put it simply, we have discovered that historical
particulars do not need to match exactly to match effectively.
We have found that archaeology and local narratives can
agree, for instance, that certain broad types of activity
occurred, perhaps even in generically similar locations in
roughly equivalent sequences. To use archaeological terms,
on Tiga we have shared interest in the physical origins of the
island, for example, as well as in first colonization, the introduction of domesticates and other exotic fauna, variations in
population movement to the island and the shifting directions of such movement.
We have been able to collate these shared interests together
in our community publication, a tentative outline of which is
shown in Figure 3 (Tokanod is the Maré word for Tiga). The
first chapter concerns Tiga’s physical origins, where we
recount the story of a man raising the island from the sea by
blowing a conch trumpet before we relate geological understandings of the process, including the formation of the
main beach area where first colonization occurred. That
occupation is then discussed. The second chapter considers
the movement to the plateau and the discovery or at least initial major harvesting of subterranean water sources, introduced by a local story concerning the latter. The remaining
chapters move through the archaeological sequence tying in
myth and oral history as appropriate, up to the “last chiefdoms on the plateau” and the return to the beach in missionary times. We are aware that much of the oral history
and myth is not sequential in the way we have ordered it to
blend with the archaeology. We are also well aware that once
committed to print, such a sequential scheme may become
cemented as the traditional truth of things. We have done no
harm to the traditions and stories themselves though, and
Tigans both on and off island are more than capable of
understanding what we have done and why. They are comfortable with our approach and appreciate our efforts to
“meet them halfway.” On that basis, we claim some success
in helping them understand “what archaeology is for,” which
in turn we hope will help us win greater acceptance of and
interest in archaeology elsewhere in New Caledonia.
Acknowledgments. We thank the people of Tiga for their
friendship and collaboration. David Baret and Dan
Rosendahl produced Figure 1.
Reference Cited
Ingold, T.
2000 The Perception of the Environment. Routledge, London.
Natasha Lyons, Kate Hennessy, Mervin Joe, Charles Arnold,
Stephen Loring, Albert Elias, and James Pokiak
Natasha Lyons is a Ph.D and Partner in Ursus Heritage Consulting; Kate Hennessy is an Assistant Professor in the School of Interactive Arts
and Technology, Simon Fraser University; Mervin Joe is an Inuvialuit Resource Management and Public Safety Specialist, Parks Canada;
Charles Arnold is an Adjunct Professor in the Department of Archaeology, University of Calgary; Albert Elias is an Inuvialuit Elder and
professional interpreter; Stephen Loring is a Museum Anthropologist at the Smithsonian Institution’s Arctic Studies Center;
James Pokiak is an Inuvialuit Elder and big-game hunting outfitter.
he Inuvialuit Living History Project was initiated in
November 2009 with a visit by Inuvialuit community
members and non-Inuvialuit collaborators to the
Smithsonian Institution’s MacFarlane Collection: 300
remarkably preserved ethnographic objects and nearly 5,000
natural history specimens. These items were acquired by
Hudson’s Bay trader Roderick MacFarlane while running a
fur trade post among Anderson River Inuvialuit in the 1860s
(Figure 1). Elders, youth, seamstresses, anthropologists,
archaeologists, educators, and media specialists traveled
from the Western Arctic and other locations across North
America to learn more about this ancestral collection, which
few Inuvialuit or museum professionals have ever seen or
studied (Figure 2; Loring et al. 2010; Morrison 2006). The
MacFarlane Collection is not eligible for repatriation under
NAGPRA because the Inuvialuit community resides in
Canada, making alternative forms of access to the collection
a priority.
Our project seeks to generate and document Inuvialuit and
curatorial knowledge about the objects in the MacFarlane
Collection, with a wider view to sharing and disseminating
this knowledge in the Inuvialuit, anthropological, and interested public communities. We have conducted extensive
interviews with Inuvialuit Elders and knowledgeable community members, held workshops with Inuvialuit students
and teachers in several Western Arctic communities, and
carried out material culture research on the objects in the
collection at the Smithsonian. These research activities have
culminated in our recently launched website––––which brings together curatorial descriptions of the collection, Inuvialuit knowledge of
objects, media documenting our trip to the Smithsonian in
2009, and subsequent community projects related to the
objects (Figure 3) (Inuvialuit Cultural Resource Centre
2012). The website represents the MacFarlane Collection as
a “Living Collection”––Inuvialuit Pitqusiit Inuuniarutait in
Inuvialuktun––because the project has spurred many Inu-
vialuit to begin discussing, re-creating, and using these historic objects in their everyday lives (Hennessy et al. 2012).
The Inuvialuit Living History Project has depended on collaboration between team members, partners, and funders.
We are particularly supported in our work by relationships to
Inuvialuit Cultural Resource Centre, the Smithsonian’s Arctic Studies Center, the Museums Assistance Program, Parks
Canada, the Prince of Wales Northern Heritage Centre, the
School of Interactive Arts and Technology and the Intellectual Property in Cultural Heritage (IPinCH) Project, both
housed at Simon Fraser University. The present forum has
created an opportunity for our team to collectively evaluate
what processes and elements attend a successful collaborative research project, to identify the challenges that we continue to face, and to assess the response to our project so far.
To this end, we developed a series of general questions about
our project and interviewed our project team members, who
comprise the authors of this paper. Below, we present a summary of responses rather than individual quotations due to
the brevity of this article.
What do you think has made our project successful?
All of our team members noted the diverse strengths of individuals as a main contributor to the success of our project.
Our team came together with a shared interest to learn more
about the MacFarlane Collection, particularly from an Inuvialuit perspective, and to share this knowledge with the
broader Inuvialuit community. Our team members have
been dedicated to this purpose, and have taught one another
a great deal about creating products and media that are
appropriate, relevant, and interesting to the community
(Lyons et al. 2011). While our team comes from different personal and professional backgrounds, we have significant
overlap in skills and interests. These interests include community-based heritage, digital repatriation, material culture
research, and anthropological and museum policy and prac-
September 2012 • The SAA Archaeological Record
Figure 1. Communities of the Inuvialuit Settlement Region in the Canadian Western Arctic.
tice. Team members have provided access to their professional and community social networks, knowledge of funding opportunities, and technical resources. This combination of knowledge, perspectives, skills and resources has
aided our work immeasurably, and allowed us all to do collectively what we could not achieve individually.
Another element of our project’s success is our deliberate
attention to group process (Lyons 2011, forthcoming). We
have made effective communication a priority for our project
team, and have created space for dialogue about all aspects of
the project—our goals, how they are prioritized, and how we
will achieve them. We discuss these issues on an ongoing
basis as the project evolves. Part of our commitment to
process involved setting the terms for our project team interactions, in the form of a project charter which specified individual and collective roles and responsibilities, and how we
would resolve differences of opinion. The different perspectives of respective team members has led to a cross-fertilization of ideas and also raised important intellectual property
questions related to access, control, and representation of
Inuvialuit culture and ideas.
The SAA Archaeological Record • September 2012
What have been the major challenges of the project?
Our major challenges have revolved around time and
expense, and issues of control and meaningful community
engagement. Northern projects are exceptionally expensive
due to northern cost of living, large distances between communities, and air travel. While our project has represented a
long-term, well-funded, and wide-ranging effort, we have
still had to work hard to keep our goals reasonable and to
stay focused on them. We have coordinated interviews, discussions, meetings, and workshops with Inuvialuit Elders,
youth, and other community members and their organizations from many towns and hamlets. Elders are frequently
busy with their families and their work on the land. Accommodating their schedules has been a significant priority for
the team.
A particular challenge of producing a virtual exhibit is the
amount of time required to manage and present the data collected. We have worked with both Inuvialuktun and English
speakers, and have a great deal of raw data to transcribe,
translate, and convert into a format suitable for the Inuvialuit Living History website. We have sought to reflect
munity presentation, a young woman called Mervin Joe a
hero for making the collection accessible to Inuvialuit people. Other cultural communities have been inspired by our
work and talked about pursuing the same kind of relationships with their ancestral collections. The tremendous interest in the website within the Inuvialuit community engendered considerable impatience for its completion. This is
one of very few online projects representing Inuvialuit culture, and the community is anxious to use and circulate
resources such as the virtual exhibit, lesson plans, and interactive place name maps.
Figure 2. Elder Albert Elias sporting a pair of snow goggles from the
MacFarlane Collection (Kate Hennessy photo).
community goals and interests through the website, requiring extensive community consultation. This focus on local
knowledge has required us to negotiate interpretive control
with the Smithsonian establishment. We have also had to
negotiate the requirements and constraints of major heritage
institutions and funders.
Once launched, obtaining meaningful community feedback
and input on the site’s content has been an ongoing challenge, largely because teachers are busy, settlements are
widespread, access to the internet is not universal, and not
all of us live in the north to help with this work. We look
ahead to the challenges of long-term hosting and preservation of digital information, and to ensuring that this valuable
information will be accessible for generations to come.
These factors have required us to be both creative and proactive in our consultation efforts, which are ongoing.
How has the project been received in the Inuvialuit
and anthropological communities?
The Inuvialuit community has embraced this project with
enthusiasm. Many Inuvialuit Elders once knew or used specific types of objects in the collection, and they are very interested in passing knowledge about these items, and the
lifestyle they represent, to their grandchildren and great
grandchildren. Inuvialuit hunters, seamstresses, and material culture specialists are actively studying objects in the collection and experimenting with making and using them.
Seamstress Freda Raddi traced clothing patterns during our
visit to the Smithsonian and sewed traditional boots for her
grandchildren. One of our project team Elders, James Pokiak, carved a pair of snow goggles like those he’d seen in
Washington for his daughter. Other project team members
have had the opportunity to share our experiences with the
MacFarlane Collection through lecture tours. After one com-
Our project has also sparked interest in the archaeological
and anthropological communities. The project has been
widely presented and discussed in archaeological venues and
meetings. Our relationship to the IPinCH Project, an international network of cultural heritage scholars and local practitioners, has provided a forum for critical discussions of
community-based practice and intellectual property issues,
as have other opportunities to present the project, such as
the workshop “After the Return: Digital Repatriation and the
Circulation of Indigenous Knowledge” at the Smithsonian’s
National Museum of Natural History in January 2012 (Christen et al. 2012). The launch of the Inuvialuit Living History
website has led to many requests for information from scholars and communities worldwide about our work, methods,
and deliverables.
Contemporary archaeology and ethnology are increasingly
characterized by new approaches to the study of material culture, and by cooperative working relationships across cultural and disciplinary borders (Lyons forthcoming). Through the
Inuvialuit Living History Project, we have sought to engage
with a collection of ancestral objects and to share this knowledge in its source community. We have been very encouraged
by the excitement with which Inuvialuit are re-creating and
using these objects in a modern context. Community interest
is also spurring us towards archaeological investigations at
the Fort Anderson trade post, and mapping Inuvialuit knowledge and stories about the Anderson River landscape.
For our research team, the Inuvialuit Living History project
has represented a collaborative process, and a final product
that we are proud of; however, we also see the website as a
beginning, more than an end in itself. The digital platform
that we have developed to show the MacFarlane Collection and
its significance in Inuvialuit communities is designed for
ongoing contributions and contextualization with local knowledge and media documentation. Our challenge will be to sustain the momentum of the project into the future and for our
group to persist in the self-conscious negotiation of group priorities, responsibilities, and ethical research practices.
September 2012 • The SAA Archaeological Record
Figure 3. Search page from the Inuvialuit Living History website.
References Cited
Christen, Kim, Joshua Bell, and Mark Turn
2012 Digital Return. Electronic document,, Accessed April 1, 2012.
Kate Hennessy, Ryan Wallace, Nicholas Jakobsen, and Charles
2012 Virtual Repatriation and the Application Programming
Interface: From the Smithsonian Institution’s MacFarlane
Collection to “Inuvialuit Living History”. Proceedings of
Museums and the Web 2012, San Diego, edited by N. Proctor and R. Cherry. Archives and Museum Informatics, San
Inuvialuit Cultural Resource Centre
2012 Inuvialuit Pitqusiit Inuuniarutait: Inuvialuit Living History.
Electronic document,
,accessed April 1, 2012.
Loring, Stephen, Natasha Lyons, and Maia LePage
2010 Inuvialuit Encounter: Confronting the past for the future.
An IPinCH Case Study. Arctic Studies Center Newsletter No.
17: 30–32.
The SAA Archaeological Record • September 2012
Lyons, Natasha
Where the Wind Blows Us: The Practice of Critical Community Archaeology in the Canadian North. The
Archaeology of Colonialism in Native North America
Series, University of Arizona Press, Tucson, in press.
Lyons, Natasha, Kate Hennessy, Charles Arnold and Mervin Joe,
with contributions by Albert Elias, Stephen Loring,
Catherine Cockney, Maia Lepage, James Pokiak, Billy
Jacobson, and Darrel Nasogaluak
2011 The Inuvialuit Smithsonian Project: Winter 2009–Spring
2011. Unpublished report on file with Department of
Canadian Heritage, Ottawa. Online at:
Morrison, David
2006 Painted Wooden Plaques from the MacFarlane Collection:
The Earliest Inuvialuit Graphic Art. Arctic 59(4):351–360.
Claire Smith and Gary Jackson
Claire Smith and Gary Jackson are affiliated with the Department of Archaeology, Flinders University, GPO Box 2100, Adelaide. S.A. 5001.
Australia, and may be reached at [email protected] and [email protected] respectively.
his paper ruminates on the collaborative partnership
that we have developed with the Barunga, Wugularr,
Manyallaluk and Werenbun communities in the
Northern Territory, Australia, over the last two decades. We
use “Barunga” as a shortened term to refer to all of these
communities, as we are usually based at Barunga. We have
structured the paper around points of change to give a cumulative sense of how our collaborations have developed over
The communities that we work in are located in a remote
area of northern Australia (Figure 1). The populations of
these communities are overwhelmingly Aboriginal, and
range from 35 people at Werenbun (Rachael Willika personal communication 2012) to 511 at Wugularr (Australian
Bureau of Statistics 2012). The only non-Aboriginal people
living in these communities are teachers, nurses and administrators, met almost invariably in formal situations. The
first language in the region is Kriol, a creole that emerged
during the contact period of the early to mid twentieth century (Smith 2004). Many community people are not fluent in
English and are shy or reticent in their interactions with nonAboriginal people. The economic status of communities is
very low, with under-employment or unemployment of
around 50 percent and subsequently low incomes (Australian Bureau of Statistics 2012), low levels of car ownership, infant mortality rates that are 1.8 to 3.8 times as high
as those for non-Indigenous children and life expectancies
that are 10–12 years shorter than those of non-Indigenous
Australians (Australian Indigenous HealthInfoNet 2012;
Council of Australian Governments 2011).
Starting Point: First Evening
We went to Barunga in 1990 to conduct Smith’s (1996) doctoral research on the social and material variables of an Aboriginal artistic system. The first evening we agreed to drive a
group of eight people forty kilometers to the neighboring
community of Beswick. We agreed to do this partly because
we wanted interaction with local people, and partly because
we feared that no one would want to talk to us, that we would
not be able to collect rich ethnographic data. The decision to
drive people to Beswick was a mistake. It was the equivalent
of putting a flashing neon light over our caravan, with the
sign “taxi” or “free taxi,” and for many months we were given
“humbug” at all hours of the day and night by people who
wanted us to drive them somewhere, sometimes hundreds
of kilometers away.
This dilemma did not dissipate until we were accepted into
the extended family of senior lawman, Peter Manabaru and
his wife, Lily Willika. Then, at Peter’s suggestion we sent
people to get permission from him, since he was “boss” for
our car. We found ourselves under the auspices of a senior
lawman, and the problem was resolved.
Point of Change:
From Researchers and ‘Informants’ to Family
We started with a clear focus on Smith’s doctoral research on
Aboriginal art (Smith 1996). Though he is an anthropologist
now, Jackson started his academic foray as an English major
accompanying Smith on her field trips, where he thought he
could just stay in the background. Wrong! Smith would ask
the old men questions and they would sit facing Jackson and
give him the answers as though Smith wasn’t present. So we
learned that there was no right to knowledge and that the
transition of knowledge was determined by gender. Moreover, it seemed that our Aboriginal teachers saw Jackson’s
casual or reluctant attitude to research as an attribute and so
he was taught much without having to question people. The
best teaching occurred when people were in the bush, which
acted as a mnemonic that made questions unnecessary.
Gary Jackson’s main teacher was Peter Manabaru. Over the
years these two became best friends. Manabaru lived with
September 2012 • The SAA Archaeological Record
of the kinship system, Gela. She said “No, his Aboriginal
name” ... and when we continued to look blank she said “His
name is Lamjerroc, the same as my father.”
At the time we were pleased, but we had no real idea of the
honor we had been awarded. For the rest of her life, Phyllis
demonstrated her acceptance of us to family, community,
and strangers by reminding people that she had named our
son after her father. She also told Lamjerroc that when he
grew up he had to look after her people. He is the only person alive with that name. Looking back with the hindsight of
twenty years, we understand that the naming of our son was
a way of tying us to the community with gossamer threads
that transcend generations.
Point of Change:
From One-way Research to Two-way Education
Figure 1. Location of Study Area.
Smith and Jackson whenever they were in the community
and he stayed in their home away from the community for
close to a year at a time. One difficulty of this situation is that
you end up with middle class researchers talking with upper
class Aboriginal teachers, so there is a class bias in the data.
Also, the responsibilities of family means a lot of extra effort,
as with any family: “Could you drive me to visit family in hospital tonight?” where the hospital is a 160 kms round trip.
Or, “We have to take sticks and bash up that other family
tomorrow because they went to the police about your
nephew injuring one of their family.” These costs and benefits come together as part of the package of collaboration.
Peter recently walked away. That is, he was called to join
familiar spirits in the countryside and disappeared. No footprints are ever found as these “clever men” walk above the
ground and the local police called Jackson to fly up to help in
the search. Jackson spent two weeks searching the local bush
in vain. Initially, he was very keen to find Manabaru but after
a while he wondered what he would do if he did discover him
in a cave. Manabaru was doing what was right and had told
family members of a spirit wife, son, and daughter who lived
in a cave and were presumably helping him on this adventure. Jackson is now pleased he did not have to decide what
to do. Manabaru has never been found.
Point of Change: Jimmy Becomes Lamjerroc
When conducting Smith’s doctoral research we worked
closely with the senior traditional owner, Phyllis Wiynjorroc.
Towards the end of a year of living in the community, after
one interview she pointed to our 18-month-old son and said
“What’s his name?” We gave his name, Jim, but she said
“No, his Aboriginal name.” We gave his “skin” name, as part
The SAA Archaeological Record • September 2012
We started off conducting research into Aboriginal culture
and society. Informed by the interests of the community,
however, this developed into a philosophy of two-way education, in which knowledge is exchanged equally between
members of two cultural groups: Aboriginal people teach
about their culture and heritage at the same time that they
learn about non-Aboriginal culture and heritage, and about
the practices of non-Aboriginal communities.
We have conducted many field schools on Jawoyn lands, giving students an opportunity to undertake archaeological
work while experiencing our style of working with Aboriginal communities. The field schools include national and
international scholars, and students in these field schools
have had an opportunity to learn from people such as Martin
Wobst, Bob Paynter, Heather Burke, Sven Ouzman, George
Nicholas, Jane Balme, Ines Domingo, Didac Roman, Paul
Faulstich, Graeme Ward, Cristina Lanteri, Alejandro Haber,
Carol Ellick, and Joe Watkins. Many of these scholars developed their own relationships with members of the community. Community people travelling to other parts of Australia
and to South Africa, France, the UK, and the USA have
cemented these national and international relationships.
A number of our Honors students have conducted their own
research in the region, most recently Ralph (2012) and
Slizankiewicz (2012). Some of our students have gone on to
become strong community researchers themselves, and all
have developed their own styles of collaborating with Aboriginal people, for the particular situations in which they find
Point of Change: Manyallaluk Comes to Adelaide
In January 2011 Rachael Willika, the daughter of Lily Willika, phoned us and told us that she was coming to live with
us, and that she would be bringing two of her children and a
A practical outcome of this collaborative partnership is the
development and trialling of a new method of training for
Aboriginal communities in remote and regional areas, in
which skills are transferred from one family member to
another. This approach means that skills gap training is delivered with minimal embarrassment, and that it is cultural and
linguistically literate and embedded in lifetime relationships.
The critical innovation of this project is recognizing that Aboriginal people who have skills are uniquely placed to transfer
their skills to other Aboriginal people—they have cultural and
language literacy, know the limitations of family members,
and have lifetime relationships of trust.
Figure 2. Peter Manabaru and Gary Jackson, Barunga, 2005.
grandson. She was living in Manyallaluk, a community of
105 people (Australian Bureau of Statistics 2012), and wanted to come “south” to get a better education for her children.
We turned one living room of our house into a bedroom for
Rachael and the children. In the middle of the year, another
grandchild joined her, so there were four children. In early
2012, two more children joined her and Rachael moved into
a house of her own, a short distance from our house. We see
each other on a day-to-day basis.
Rachael’s actions are exceptional. Normally, community people do not attempt to live beyond the safe perimeters of family. The transition to living in a non-Aboriginal culture without the immediate support of family is challenging and most
community people assume that defeat is inevitable. Rachael
has demonstrated that it is possible to live away from the
community, and to prosper in this situation. Over the last 18
months the children have learnt to speak English well, and
they now go to school every day (Figure 2). During this period, Rachael obtained her driver’s licence, passed the Finders
University Foundation Course, and became the first Jawoyn
person to enroll in a university course.
Rachael’s experience of living in “mununga” (European)
society is a mirror to our own fieldwork with her mother and
stepfather. As Lily and Peter helped us to understand the cultural practices of their society, so we have helped Rachael to
understand the cultural practices of our society. The achievement of which we are most proud is that we were able to help
Rachael and the children succeed in their forays into a nonAboriginal world.
Innovations emerge from collaboration. Our proximity to
Rachael allowed the three of us to develop new learning
together. By pooling our respective knowledge we were able
to identify barriers and enablers to Aboriginal people achieving success in a range of contexts—school, university, dealing with government—and to develop strategies that could
be used to support Aboriginal success.
The benefits of a family-based approach to training are twofold: teaching increases the confidence of those who teach at
the same time that it imparts knowledge and skills to those
who seek them. If successful, this project will form a first
step in a very substantial contribution to the Australian Government priority of Closing the Gap of Indigenous disadvantage (Australian Indigenous HealthInfoNet 2012; Council
of Australian Governments 2011), by establishing the basis
of a new approach to training, education and employment in
remote and regional communities. It could constitute a genuine breakthrough in Indigenous training, education, and
employment. This program would not have been envisioned
if Rachael had not moved to Adelaide.
Things have changed since our first evening at Barunga. Our
ideas about research have changed, we have changed, and
the people we work with have changed.
What have we learned over the last 20 years? We have
learned that it is important for a researcher to become part of
a family in the community, and that this brings responsibilities and occasional difficulties as well as benefits. We found
that we could not work with people without becoming
engaged in their struggles, and using our skills for their purposes. We have learned that what you write has an impact at
a community level, and that having a long-term commitment
to a group and being patient will provide the best quality
research results. We have learned that change is possible,
that it is undertaken in small steps, and that small differences are large differences when compared to the nothing
that would have happened otherwise. In this process, we
have become a living archive for the history of the community, and our home and office a repository of historical and
cultural knowledge, photos and articles.
Our collaborative partnerships with people at Barunga started with a clear focus on Smith’s doctoral research into Aboriginal art, but developed into something much richer, with
the capacity to make a difference to the lives of the people
with whom we work, and to deepen our own lives in unex-
September 2012 • The SAA Archaeological Record
Figure 3. From Left: Kayla Willika, Rachael Willika, Claire Smith,
Samuel Willika, Jessalina Rockman, Marlene Lee, Jasmine Willika,
Adam McCale, Cristina Lanteri, Gary Jackson, Adelaide, 2012.
pected ways. Our journey is documented in the products
from our research and teaching, which range from books
(Smith 2004), scholarly papers (Jackson and Smith 2005),
and theses (Ralph 2012; Slizankiewicz 2012; Smith 1996) to
opinion pieces in national media (Smith and Jackson 2008a),
community publications and reports (Smith et al 1995; Jackson and Smith 2002), and submissions to government
(Smith and Jackson 2008b).
We started off doing research about Aboriginal culture but
ended up doing research for Aboriginal people. In the
process, we changed from going to Barunga to do research
to doing research so we could go to Barunga. Our situation
today is one in which our personal futures and those of people in the community are entwined. Our collaborations are
such that it is impossible to imagine separate lives, lives that
not do intersect and enrich each other’s.
Acknowledgments. This paper emerges from our collaborations with many, many people, and we thank them all. The
photos produced here are published with the permission of
the people who are in them and, in the case of Peter Manabaru, with permission from Rachael Willika and Peter’s son
Cedric Manabaru.
References Cited
Australian Bureau of Statistics
2012 Electronic document,
/data, accessed June 21, 2012.
The SAA Archaeological Record • September 2012
Australian Indigenous HealthInfoNet
2012 Closing the Gap, Web Resource on the Closing the Gap
Commitments of the Council of Australian Governments,
Electronic document,,
accessed June 21, 2012.
Council of Australian Governments
Electronic document,, accessed June 21, 2012.
Jackson, Gary, and Claire Smith
2002 “A Good School with Good Teachers”: Educational Aspirations of Indigenous People in the East Katherine Region,
Northern Territory. Report for the Jawoyn Association Aboriginal Corporation, Northern Territory. Available from the
Northern Land Council Library, Darwin.
Jackson, Gary, and Claire Smith
2005 Living and Learning on Aboriginal Lands: Decolonising
Archaeology in Practice. In Indigenous Archaeologies:
Decolonising Theory and Practice, edited by Claire Smith
and H. Martin Wobst, pp. 326–349. Routledge, London.
Ralph, Jordan
2012 Convenient Canvasses: An Archaeology of Social Identity and
Contemporary Mark-Making Practices in Jawoyn Country,
Northern Territory, Australia. Honours dissertation,
Flinders University, Adelaide.
Slizankiewicz, Michael
2012 Foot First. A Study of Regional Variation in Rock Art in
Jawoyn Country, Northern Territory, Australia. Honours dissertation, Flinders University, Adelaide.
Smith, Claire
1996 Situating Style: An Ethno-Archaeological Study of Social
and Material Context in an Australian Aboriginal Artistic
System. Ph.D dissertation, University of New England,
2004 Country, Kin, and Culture: Survival of an Australian Aboriginal Community. Wakefield Press, Adelaide.
Smith, Claire and Gary Jackson
2008a Income Management in the NT: Food for Taxis. ABC Opinion On-line. Electronic document,, accessed June 21, 2012.
2008b A Community-based Review of the Northern Territory Emergency Response. Submitted to the Northern Territory Emergency Response Review Board. Electronic document,, accessed June
21, 2012.
Smith, Claire, Lily Willika, Peter Manabaru, and Gary Jackson
1995 Looking after the Land: the Barunga Rock Art Management
Programme. In Archaeologists and Aborigines, edited by Iain
Davidson, Christine Lovell-Jones and Robyn Bancroft, pp.
36–37. University of New England Press, Armidale.
The Society for American Archaeology calls for nominations for its awards to be presented at the 2013 Annual Meeting in
Hawaii. SAA’s awards are presented for important contributions in many areas of archaeology. If you wish to nominate someone for one of the awards, please send a letter of nomination to the contact person for the award. The letter of nomination should
describe in detail the contributions of the nominee. In some cases, a curriculum vita of the nominee or copies of the nominee’s
work also are required. Please check the descriptions, requirements, and deadlines for nomination for individual awards. Award
winners will receive a certificate. An award citation will be read by the SAA president during the annual business meeting, and
an announcement will be published in The SAA Archaeological Record.
Book Award
Award Description: The Society for American Archaeology
annually awards two prizes to honor recently published
books. One prize is for a book that has had, or is expected to
have, a major impact on the direction and character of
archaeological research. The other prize is for a book that is
written for the general public and presents the results of
archaeological research to a broader audience. The Book
Award committee solicits your nominations for these prizes,
which will be awarded at the 2013 Annual Meeting of the
SAA. Books published in 2010 or more recently are eligible.
Who Is Eligible to Submit Nominations or Apply for the
Award: The Book Award committee solicits nominations for
these prizes. Books published in 2010 or more recently are
eligible. In the Scholarly Book Award category, the first
author must be a member of the SAA, and all members
receive the award. In the Popular Book Award category, all
authors may be members or non-members of the SAA and
all authors receive the award.
Nomination/Submission Materials Required: One copy of
the nominated book must be sent to each member of the
Nomination/Submission Deadline: December 2, 2012
Committee Contact Information: Nominators must arrange
to have one copy of the nominated book(s) sent to each of the
five members of the committee listed below. For further
information, please contact Committee Chair Lisa LeCount.
Lisa LeCount, Chair
([email protected])
Department of Anthropology
19 ten Hoor Hall
University of Alabama
Tuscaloosa, AL 25487-0210
Susan Toby Evans
([email protected])
409 Carpenter Bldg.
Penn State U.
PA 16802-3404
Evan Peacock
([email protected])
Cobb Institute of Archaeology,
PO Box AR,
Mississippi State,
MS 39762
Anne Underhill
([email protected])
For regular mail:
Department of Anthropology
Yale University
PO Box 208277
New Haven, CT 06520-8277
For Fedex, DHL:
Department of Anthropology
Yale University
10 Sachem Street
New Haven, CT 06511
Ruth Van Dyke
([email protected])
Department of Anthropology
Binghamton University – SUNY
Binghamton, NY 13902-6000
Crabtree Award
Award Description: The SAA presents the Crabtree Award
annually to an outstanding avocational archaeologist in
remembrance of the singular contributions of Don Crabtree.
Nominees should have made significant contributions to
advance understandings of local, regional, or national
archaeology through excavation, research, publication, site
or collections preservation, collaboration with the professional community, and/or public outreach.
Who Is Eligible to Submit Nominations or Apply for the
Award: Anyone may submit a nomination. The committee
does not accept self-nominations. Awardees may be members or non-members of the SAA.
Nomination/Submission Materials Required: Nominators
should submit a current curriculum vita, a letter of nomina-
September 2012 • The SAA Archaeological Record
tion, and letters of support.
Nomination/Submission Deadline: January 4, 2013
Committee Chair Contact Information: Patricia Gilman,
Dept. of Anthropology, Univ. of Oklahoma, Norman, OK
73019; ph: (405) 325-2490; e-mail: [email protected]
Dienje Kenyon Fellowship
Award Description: In honor of the late Dienje M. E. Kenyon, a fellowship is offered to support the research of women
archaeologists in the early stages of their graduate training.
An award of $500 will be made to a student pursuing
research in zooarchaeology, which was Kenyon’s specialty. To
qualify for the award, applicants must be in the early years of
an M.A. or Ph.D. graduate degree program focusing on
archaeology. Strong preference will be given to students
in the first two years of their graduate program working with
faculty members with zooarchaeological expertise.
Who Is Eligible to Submit Nominations or Apply for the
Award: Female graduate students in archaeology are eligible
to apply, with preference for students in first two years of
training working with faculty members with zooarchaeological experience.
Nomination/Submission Materials Required: A submission
for the Dienje Kenyon Fellowship is required to have (1) a
statement of proposed research related to zooarchaeology,
toward the conduct of which the award would be applied, of
no more than 1,500 words, including a brief statement indicating how the award would be spent in support of that
research; (2) a curriculum vita; and (3) two letters of support
from individuals familiar with the applicant’s work and
research potential. One of these letters must be from the student’s primary advisor, and must indicate the year in which
the applicant began graduate studies. The statement of proposed research and curriculum vita should be sent as an
email attachment in Microsoft Word to the committee chair.
Letters of support should be e-mailed separately by the people providing them.
Nomination/ Submission Deadline: The statement and curriculum vitae should be sent as an email attachment in
Microsoft Word. Letters of support should be e-mailed separately by the people providing them. Applications are due no
later than December 15, 2012.
Committee Chair Contact Information: Barnet Pavao-Zuckerman, School of Anthropology; Univ. of Arizona, Tucson,
AZ 85721; ph: (520) 626-3989, fax: (520) 621-2976; email: [email protected]
Dissertation Award
Award Description: Members (other than student members)
of SAA may nominate a recent graduate whose dissertation
they consider to be original, well written, and outstanding.
Who Is Eligible to Submit Nominations or Apply for Award:
Nominations must be made by non-student SAA members
The SAA Archaeological Record • September 2012
and must be in the form of a nomination letter that makes a
case for the dissertation. Self–nominations cannot be accepted. Awardees must be members of the SAA.
Nomination/Submission Materials Required: Nomination
letters should include a description of the special contributions of the dissertation and the nominee’s current address.
Nominees must have defended their dissertations and
received their Ph.D. degree within three years prior to September 1, 2012. Nominees are informed at the time of nomination by the nominator and are asked to submit one copy
of the dissertation IN PDF FORMAT ON CD-ROM to the
committee by October 15, 2012 (to be mailed to the committee chair). IF THIS FORMAT IS NOT POSSIBLE, PLEASE
Nomination/Submission Deadline: October 15, 2012
Committee Chair Contact Information: Katina Lillios, Dept.
of Anthropology; Univ. of Iowa; Iowa City, IA 52242; ph:
(319) 335-3023; e-mail: [email protected]
Douglas C. Kellogg Fund for
Geoarchaeological Research
Award Description: The Douglas C. Kellogg Award provides
support for thesis or dissertation research, with emphasis on
the field and/or laboratory aspects of this research, for graduate students in the earth sciences and archaeology. Under
the auspices of the SAA’s Geoarchaeology Interest Group,
family, friends, and close associates of Douglas C. Kellogg
formed a memorial in his honor.
Who Is Eligible to Submit Nominations or Apply for the
Award: Recipients of the Kellogg Award will be students who
have an interest in (1) achieving the M.S., M.A. or Ph.D.
degree in earth sciences or archaeology; (2) applying earth
science methods to archaeological research and (3) pursuing
a career in geoarchaeology.
Nomination/Submission Materials Required: The application should consist of a research proposal no more than
three pages long that describes the research and its potential
contributions to American archaeology, a curriculum vita,
and two letters of support, including one from the dissertation chair that indicates the expected date of completion of
the dissertation. Electronic submissions as pdfs sent to the
committee chair are preferred.
Nomination/Submission Deadline: November 29, 2012
Committee Chair Contact Information: Sarah Sherwood;
Environmental Studies Program; Sewanee: The University
of the South; Sewanee, TN 37383; ph: (931) 598-1000; e-mail:
[email protected]
Excellence in Archaeological Analysis Award
Award Description: This award recognizes the excellence of
an archaeologist whose innovative and enduring research
has made a significant impact on the discipline. This award
now subsumes within it three themes presented on a cyclical
basis: (1) an Unrestricted or General category (first awarded
in 2001); (2) Lithic Analysis; and (3) Ceramic Analysis. The
2013 award will be presented for Excellence in Archaeological
Analysis: General Category.
Who Is Eligible to Submit Nominations or Apply for Award:
Any SAA member may nominate an individual for this
award. Awardees must be members of the SAA.
Nomination/Submission Materials Required: Nominators
must submit a letter that describes the nature, scope, and
significance of the nominee’s research and analytical contributions, as well as the nominee’s curriculum vita. Support
letters from other scholars are welcome, as are any other relevant documents. Please send submissions to the committee
Nomination/Submission Deadline: January 4, 2013
Committee Chair Contact Information: Anna Prentiss; Dept.
of Anthropology; Univ. of Montana; Missoula, MY 59812; ph:
(406) 243-6152, fax: (406) 243-4918, email: [email protected]
Excellence in Cultural Resource
Management Award
Award Description: This award will be presented to an individual or a group to recognize lifetime contributions and
special achievements in the categories of program administration/management, site preservation, and research in cultural resource management. It is intended that at least one
award will be made each year and the category will rotate
annually. The 2013 award will recognize important research
contributions in cultural resource management. The candidates may include individuals employed by federal, state, or
local government agencies. This category is intended to recognize long-term, sustained research efforts and may
encompass more than one site.
Who Is Eligible to Submit Nominations or Apply for the
Award: Any professional archaeologist may submit a nomination for this award. Awardees may be members or nonmembers of the SAA.
Nomination/Submission Materials Required: Nominators
must submit a curriculum vita along with any relevant supporting documents. All nomination materials are to be submitted electronically.
Nomination/Submission Deadline: January 10, 2013
Committee Chair Contact Information: Linda Mayro; Pima
County Cultural Resources and Historic Preservation Office;
Pima County Public Works Center; 201 North Stone Avenue,
6th Floor; Tucson, AZ 85701; ph: (520) 740-6451;
email: [email protected]
Excellence in Latin American and Caribbean
Archaeology Award
Award Description: The Award for Excellence in Latin Amer-
ican and Caribbean Archaeology will be presented annually
to an individual who has made a lasting and significant contribution to the practice of archaeology and/or to the construction of archaeological knowledge in Latin America or
the Caribbean. In selecting the recipient of this award, the
committee will pay particular attention to the cultural context in which the nominee works and to the different pathways to creating and promoting excellence in Latin American and Caribbean archaeology. The award is open to individuals at any point in their careers.
Who Is Eligible to Submit Nominations or Apply for Award:
Any SAA member may nominate an individual for this
award. Awardees must be members of the SAA.
Nomination/Submission Materials Required: Nominators
are required to submit (1) a nomination letter, (2) a detailed
curriculum vita of the nominee that includes a complete bibliography of local and international research publications, (3)
brief description of the academic and/or cultural impact of
research, publications and other relevant activities and (4) at
least two supporting letters; one supporting letter should be
from a Latin American or Caribbean archaeologists and one
supporting letter should be from a Latin Americanist/
Caribbeanist. All nominations and supporting documents
are requested in PDF format to be sent via email to the committee chair.
Nomination/Submission Deadline: January 4, 2013
Committee Chair Contact Information: Adolfo Gil; Museo
de Historia Natural de San Rafael; Parque Mariano Moreno
s/n; San Rafael; Mendoza, Argentina, 5600; p: 0054-260154632558; email: [email protected] and/or [email protected]
Excellence in Public Education Award
Award Description: This award acknowledges excellence in
the sharing of archaeological information with the public.
The award is conferred on a rotating, 3-year cycle of categories. The category for 2013 is the Media Category.
Who Is Eligible to Submit Nominations or Apply for the
Award: Any member of SAA may submit a nomination file,
although awardees are not required to be members of the SAA.
Nomination/Submission Materials Required: Nominators
will work with the Chair to assemble a nomination file that
will include (1) the nomination form and (2) a formal letter
of nomination that identifies the nominee and summarizes
their accomplishments. These accomplishments should be
contextualized by addressing the following types of questions: How does it fit within the practice of public education
and archaeology? What is the impact on relevant publics
beyond the discipline of archaeology (general public, special
interest groups, pre-collegiate or non-traditional students,
others)? In addition, the nomination file should include a
copy (or samples) of the specific achievement and supporting materials that document results. This material should
clearly demonstrate the case being made in the nomination
September 2012 • The SAA Archaeological Record
letter. For example, supporting evidence might document
the impact of a specific program in terms of the numbers of
the public involved, personnel qualifications and deployment, the frequency or longevity of programs offered, formal
evaluation results, and/or feedback from the audience.
Endorsement from secondary nominators are welcomed
(please, no more than three). Prior nomination does not
exclude consideration of a nominee in subsequent years.
Designers of programs or products may nominate their own
work. Electronic submissions are encouraged. If a nomination package is mailed, six (6) copies of the nomination package (including supporting materials) must be submitted.
Nomination/Submission Deadline: January 10, 2013
Committee Chair Contact Information: Jeanne Moe, National Project Archaeology Lead, 2-128 Wilson Hall, Montana
State University, Bozeman, MT, 59717, ph: 406-994-7582,
email: [email protected]
Fred Plog Fellowship
Award Description: An award of $1,000 is presented in
memory of the late Fred Plog to support the research of a
graduate student with ABD who is writing a dissertation on
the North American Southwest or northern Mexico or on a
topic, such as culture change or regional interactions, on
which Fred Plog did research.
Who Is Eligible to Submit Nominations or Apply for the
Award: All student members of SAA in good standing who
are ABD by the time the award is made at the Annual Meeting of the SAA are eligible to apply for the award.
Nomination/Submission Materials Required: The application consists of (1) a research proposal no more than three
pages long that describes the research and its potential contributions to American archaeology, (2) a curriculum vita,
and (3) two letters of support, including one from the dissertation chair that indicates the expected date of completion
of the dissertation.
Nomination/Submission Deadline: December 9, 2012
Committee Chair Contact Information: Wesley Bernardini,
Dept. of Sociology and Anthropology; University of Redlands; Redlands CA 92373; ph: (909) 748-8707; fax: (909) 3355307; e-mail: [email protected]
Fryxell Award for 2014
Award Description: The Fryxell Award is presented in recognition for interdisciplinary excellence of a scientist who need
not be an archaeologist, but whose research has contributed
significantly to American archaeology. The award is made
possible through the generosity of the family of the late
Roald Fryxell, a geologist whose career exemplified the crucial role of multidisciplinary cooperation in archaeology. The
award cycles through zoological sciences, botanical sciences,
earth sciences, physical sciences, and general interdisciplinary studies. The 2014 Fryxell Award will be in the area of
The SAA Archaeological Record • September 2012
physical sciences. The award consists of an engraved medal,
a certificate, an award citation read by the SAA president
during the annual business meeting, and a half-day symposium at the Annual Meeting held in honor of the awardee.
Who Is Eligible to Submit Nominations or Apply for Award:
Any professional archaeologist may submit nominations for
this award. Nominees must be SAA members by the time of
their nomination.
Nomination/Submission Materials Required: Nominators
must submit a letter that describe the nature, scope, and significance of the nominee’s contributions to American
archaeology, as well as the nominee’s curriculum vita. Support letters from other scholars are helpful. Four to six are
suggested. Please email submissions in pdf format to the
committee chair.
Nomination/Submission Deadline: February 4, 2013
Committee Chair Contact Information: Michael Glascock,
Archaeometry Laboratory, Department of Archaeology, University of Missouri Research Reactor, 1513 Research Park
Drive, p: (573) 882-5270, fax: (573) 882-6360, email: [email protected]
Gene S. Stuart Award
Award Description: An award is made to honor outstanding
efforts to enhance public understanding of archaeology, in
memory of Gene S. Stuart (1930-1993), a writer and managing editor of National Geographic Society books. The award
is given to the author of the most interesting and responsible original story or series about any archaeological topic
published in a newspaper or magazine.
Who Is Eligible to Apply or Submit Nominations: The award
is given to single or multiple authored articles, stories, or
series of stories published in newspapers or magazines. The
emphasis is on publications available to the general public
(rather than limited distribution newsletters), and online
publications are not excluded. The award honors good writing that brings awareness of archaeology to the public eye.
Nominations can be submitted by authors themselves, by
magazine/newspaper editors, or by readers. Authors or
newspaper editors will work with the committee chair to
assemble and submit a nomination file. Awardees may be
members or non-members of the SAA.
Nomination/Submission Materials Required: Nominators
will work with the committee chair to assemble a nomination
file that will include the nominated article, which should have
been published within the calendar year of 2012. An
author/newspaper editor may submit no more than five stories or five articles from a series. Nomination packets may be
submitted electronically as PDFs via email to the committee
chair. If submitting hard copies, six copies of each entry must
be submitted by the author or an editor of the newspaper.
Nomination/Submission Deadline: January 18, 2013
Committee Chair Contact Information: Kirk D. French;
Dept. of Anthropology; The Pennsylvania State Univ.; University Park, PA 16802; ph: 814-865-1142, fax: 814-863-1474,
email: [email protected]
Lifetime Achievement Award
Award Description: The Lifetime Achievement Award is presented annually to an archaeologist for specific accomplishments that are truly extraordinary, widely recognized as
such, and of positive and lasting quality. Recognition can be
granted to an archaeologist of any nationality for activities
within any theoretical framework, for work in any part of the
world, and for a wide range of areas relating to archaeology,
including but not limited to research or service. Given as the
Distinguished Service Award between 1975 and 2000, it
became the Lifetime Achievement Award and was awarded
as such for the first time in 2001.
Who Is Eligible to Submit Nominations or Apply for the
Award: Any professional archaeologist may submit nominations for this award. Nominees must be SAA members by
the time of their nomination, and the strongest nominees
will have made significant contributions to both the organization and to the range of archaeological practice that in
which SAA members participate.
Nomination/Submission Materials Required: Nomination
letters should include a letter of nomination, outlining the
nominee’s lifetime accomplishments, as well as a curriculum vita of the nominee. Additional letters of support are not
required, but the strongest nominations, historically, have
included a minimum of five (5) letters of support; some have
had more than fifteen (15) letters of support. Nominators are
required to collate all nomination materials into one single
Adobe Acrobat pdf document to be emailed to the committee chair, Miriam Stark.
Nomination/Submission Deadline: January 4, 2013
Committee Chair Contact Information: Dean Snow; 409 Carpenter Building; Pennsylvania State Univ.; University Park,
PA 16802; ph: (814) 865-2937; fax: (814) 863-1474; e-mail:
[email protected]
Student Paper Award
Award Description: This award recognizes an outstanding
student conference paper based on original research.
Who Is Eligible to Submit Nominations or Apply for the
Award: All student members of SAA in good standing whose
paper abstract has been accepted by the SAA for the upcoming annual meeting are eligible to participate. All co-authors
must be students, and the first author must be a member of
the SAA. All co-authors receive the award.
Nomination/Submission Materials Required: The paper
abstract must be accepted by SAA for the upcoming annual
meeting. All co-authors must be students, and the first
author must be a member of the SAA. The paper must be
double-spaced, with 1-inch margins and 12-pt font. Please do
not submit raw data unless they are to be presented as part
of the paper itself. An average 15-minute paper is approximately 8 pages long (double-spaced, not including references cited). Any paper longer than this will be docked
points. The student must submit electronic copies of 1) a
separate title page with name and full contact information;
(2) the conference paper containing slide call outs and references; and (3) pdfs of all PowerPoint slides, with numbered
captions, to be used in the oral presentation. Please DO NOT
put your name anywhere besides the cover sheet so that your
paper may be reviewed anonymously by the committee.
Please send submissions to the committee chair. The student must have a faculty or supervisory sponsor review the
paper before the student submits it to the Student Paper
Award Committee. The faculty/supervisory sponsor must
send an email to the submission address at the time of paper
submission saying that he/she has read and approved the
paper being submitted.
Nomination/Submission Deadline: March 1, 2013
Committee Chair Contact Information: Mary Ann Levine;
Dept. of Anthropology, Franklin and Marshall College; Lancaster PA 17604; ph: (717) 291-4193; fax: (717) 358-4500; email: [email protected]
Student Poster Award
Award Description: This award acknowledges the best student presentation of archaeological research in poster sessions. Student posters will be evaluated as electronic submissions made directly to the Student Poster Award committee.
Who Is Eligible to Apply or Submit Nominations: All student
members of SAA in good standing whose poster abstract has
been accepted by the SAA for the upcoming annual meeting
are eligible to participate. All co-authors must be students,
and the first author must be a member of the SAA. All coauthors receive the award.
Nomination/Submission Materials Required: The poster
abstract must be accepted by SAA for the upcoming annual
meeting. All co-authors must be students, and the first
author must be a member of the SAA. The Student Poster
Award committee evaluates the originality and significance
of student research presented in the poster as well as visual
aspects such as graphics and design. The completed poster
must be submitted to the Poster Award Committee Chair as
an electronic entry in pdf form by the submission deadline.
No late submissions will be accepted.
Nomination/Submission Deadline: March 1, 2013
Committee Chair Contact Information: M. Kathryn Brown;
Dept. of Anthropology; Univ. of Texas at San Antonio; San
email: [email protected]
September 2012 • The SAA Archaeological Record
ill Rathje was one of the most conceptually and practically innovative of modern American archaeologists.
His Tucson Garbage Project in the 1970s combined the
methods of sociology and archaeology to produce a famous
study of what people bought and later threw away, and how
that differed from what they said they did.
He began professional life as a Maya archaeologist, earning his doctorate under Gordon R.
Willey at Harvard in 1971 with a study of burial patterns that suggested decreasing social
mobility as Classic Maya civilization became
more complex and class-structured. This was
followed by a project on the island of Cozumel,
jointly directed in 1972–73 with Jeremy A.
Sabloff, studying ancient Maya trade patterns.
Rathje had by then returned to his alma mater
at the University of Arizona, where he taught
from 1971 until his retirement.
Cozumel had been a noted pilgrimage shrine
of Ix Chel, the moon goddess, at the time of
Spanish contact, and also a trading emporium
off the coast of Yucatan. Rathje and Sabloff
wanted to find out whether it was a “trading
port”, where normal maritime commerce
occurred, or a “port-of-trade,” a locus where
powerful and otherwise hostile polities could meet on neutral
ground for mutual benefit.
The results were ambiguous, although much evidence of trading installations was found, but one striking thing was that
Cozumel had no massive temples or large towns. Another,
which struck Rathje strongly, was that almost everything they
were finding out was from material discarded by the ancient
It was the Tucson Garbage Project, begun in 1973 and running for three decades, that made him famous. It was a logical development from collecting ancient Maya rubbish: but
now modern trash was collected from certain census tracts in
Tucson by the city authorities, sorted on tables behind the university’s football stadium by Rathje’s student team, and then
correlated with sociological information from the census for
each tract and from doorstep interviews asking about purchasing habits.
The SAA Archaeological Record • September 2012
What Rathje was testing, with numerous student volunteers
learning “the archaeology of us,” was whether assumptions
that wealthier residents would be purchasing higher-end
products (as evidenced by discarded wrappings and containers) were correct. Rathje’s team found significant differences
from these expectations: the rich bought expensive foods and
drink, and used them up. Lower down the social scale, economic pressures and advertising often
induced people to buy in bulk to get discounts,
and then found they had spoiled food that had
to be thrown away. Sometimes poor families
bought unexpectedly expensive items, and
sometimes threw them away unused. Almost
all levels of society underreported the amount
of alcohol they bought and drank. Households
that claimed to subscribe to high-end magazines such as Foreign Affairs in “front-door”
interviews were putting out Hustler with the
trash, Rathje once reported.
From Tucson’s garbage (and similar projects
spawned in other American cities), Rathje
moved on to investigating landfill, the ultimate destination of rubbish: using a huge
bucket auger to cut vertical sections through
the layers of fill, he controverted numerous
aspects of conventional wisdom. Instead of
decomposition, he found perfectly preserved hot dogs and salads, legible newsprint decades old, and much less polystyrene
and disposable nappies than Americans believed contributed
to waste. This led to a popular book, Rubbish! The Archaeology
of Landfills (1992, with Cullen Murphy)
The data on food waste aroused the interest of the meat industry, and Rathje found himself courted by corporations: his
nickname among students was “Uncle Meat.” Both U.S. Government agencies, notably the Department of Agriculture,
and state and city authorities—the latter as far away as
Australia—put grant money into Rathje’s garbage studies: he
had shown how archaeological thinking could help to tackle
modern problems of over-consumption and waste of
—Norman Hammond
an Shea, professor of anthropology at Beloit College,
died of a heart attack on June 19, 2012, while leading
a Beloit College field school in Iquique, Chile.
Dan was born in Oshkosh, Wisconsin, on November 5, 1941.
He earned his bachelors (1963), masters (1968), and doctorate
(1969) degrees in anthropology from
the University of Wisconsin-Madison.
He was a student of Donald E. Thompson and conducted his thesis research
at Huanuco Pampa and Wari-wilka in
the central highlands of Peru.
Dan taught at Beloit for his entire
career, handling introductory and
advanced archaeology courses as well
as courses on contemporary peoples of
Latin America, Precolumbian art and
architecture, the history of anthropology, quantitative methods, senior seminars, and special topics. Students especially enjoyed his field anecdotes, his
participation in Anthropology Club events, and his famed lectures on Moche sex pots.
South American archaeology was Dan’s constant focus and
passion. In the 1980s he collaborated with William Denevan
on studies of prehistoric settlement and agricultural terracing
in southern Peru. In 1992, Dan and Mario Rivera designed
and co-directed the Atacama Field School in northern Chile.
Over the next 20 years, the field schools received over 100 students, many of them today’s professionals. The field schools
surveyed and excavated extensively in the Tarapacá region and
focused for many years on the site of Ramaditas. Fieldwork
also focused on shell mounds and megafauna finds as well as
historic mining-related sites in the Taltal, Pisagua, and La Serena areas.
Dan’s position as research associate at Beloit’s Logan Museum
of Anthropology helped him integrate collections into his
teaching and helped the museum with collections research
and exhibit development. Dan also served as research curator
for the Museum of the Red River (Idabel, OK), directed by his
former student Henry Moy. There, in addition to providing
information on specific objects, Dan worked with area college
students in material culture studies and provided curatorial
assistance for major exhibits featuring Andean material. He
planned to spend more of each year with the museum in
anticipation of easing into retirement. He was to begin work
in 2012 on Contact America!, an exhibit featuring Aztec, Maya,
and Inka material.
Dan published in both Spanish and English on South American archaeology and population history as well as statistical
methods and the history of Beloit’s archaeological field
schools. He received NSF grants to
support South American fieldwork
and regularly presented at regional,
national, and international meetings.
An advocate of historic preservation,
Dan served for many years on the
Beloit Landmarks Commission.
Colleagues, friends, and former students miss Dan’s dry wit and encyclopedic knowledge of anthropology.
Departmental colleague Rob LaFleur
has always told his students that Dan
anthropology—he read everything
and was interested in everything.
English professor Tom McBride says, “No one blended Dan’s
ferocious if quiet brilliance with such a droll sense of humor
and pervasive, gentle kindness. He was a real character: intellectual, hunter, digger, student of popular culture, raconteur,
and all around laconic good guy.”
Dan had a tremendous capacity for capturing the essence of
life. Through his quiet, thoughtful, and, at the same time, passionate personality, he inspired young people and helped
them gain confidence. Teaching from the heart, he would
spend long hours instructing students in the field, never complaining because of the hot weather, the adversity of the environment, or the long work hours. He was a good man, a first
class friend, an ardent worker, and an excellent teacher about
Dan is survived by his wife, Jennifer, son, James Shea, daughter, Genevieve Shea, granddaughter, Lucy Carney, along with
two sisters and many nieces, nephews, and cousins. With the
approval of the family, a scholarship fund has been set up in
Dan’s honor. To make a gift to the Dan Shea Memorial Scholarship visit Beloit College’s online giving form, select “Financial Aid” as your designation, and include “Dan Shea” in the
remembrance field.
—William Green, Mario Rivera, and Henry Moy,
with assistance from William Gartner and Shannon Fie.
September 2012 • The SAA Archaeological Record
r. Phil Weigand left an indelible
imprint on the anthropology of
West Mexico. As an archaeologist,
ethnographer, and ethnohistorian, he carried out original investigations in the
Mexican states of Jalisco, Colima, Nayarit,
Michoacán and Zacatecas, among others,
as well as in the Southwest of the United
States, over the course of four decades.
Perhaps the biggest contribution of Dr.
Weigand was the definition of the Teuchitlán tradition, characterized by circular
architecture associated with the better
known shaft tombs, and his studies of obsidian sources and
settlements such as Los Guachimontones. No less important
are his ethnographic and ethnohistoric studies of the Wixarika (Huicholes) of Nayarit and Jalisco, as well as his works on
the Rebellion of New Galicia in the XVI century. He pioneered
the perspective that societies in far western Mexico were more
complex than previously supposed.
Phil Weigand was born in 1937 in Nebraska to an Air Force
doctor and rural school teacher mother. He received his BA
from Indiana University in 1962; his MA from the University
of Southern Illinois in 1965; and his Ph.D. from Southern Illinois in 1969 under J. Charles Kelley, Pedro Armillas, Walter
W. Taylor, and Carroll L. Riley. His dissertation was based on
ethnographic work with the Huicholes of Jalisco and Nayarit.
During this research he married Acelia García Angiano, with
whom he collaborated for the rest of his life. They had one
daughter (Celia Imelda), four grandchildren, and two greatgrandchildren.
He taught at Southern Illinois until 1970, when he joined the
department at Stony Brook University (SUNY) and rose to
Professor. In 1989 he left Stony Brook to create the archaeology program at the recently formed Colegio de Michoacán,
Zamora, Mexico. For many years he continued CRM work in
Arizona and maintained a tie to the Museum of Northern Arizona. Once joining the Colegio de Michoacán Phil began
training MA and Ph.D. students working in the Bajío and
Jalisco, supervising 11 MA and 4 Ph.D. students.
During his career he had received funding from NSF, the
New York Research Foundation, the Wenner-Gren Foundation for Anthropological Research, the state government of
Jalisco, and FAMSI. The funding from the state of Jalisco
The SAA Archaeological Record • September 2012
allowed excavation and reconstruction at
the largest Teuchitlán site known as Los
Guachimontones, now open for the public and part of a UNESCO Heritage Zone.
Shortly before his death he was informed
of the decision to name the site museum
after him, a singular achievement for an
Phil published more than 28 books and
monographs as author, joint author, editor, or coeditor and about 150 articles or
book chapters. He brought an interest in
settlement patterns, survey, architecture,
landscapes, and theoretically informed archaeology to a
region generally ignored, and dominated by culture-historical
Partial List of Publications
Articles/Book Chapters
Weigand, P. C.
1968 The Mines and Mining Techniques of the Chalchihuites
Culture. American Antiquity 33:45–61.
1970 Huichol Ceremonial Reuse of a Fluted Point. American
Antiquity 35: 365–367.
1985 Evidence for Complex Societies during the Western
Mesoamerican Classic Period. In The Archaeology of West
and Northwest Mesoamerica, edited by M. S. Foster and P. C.
Weigand, pp. 47–91. Westview Press, Boulder.
Weigand, P. C., G. Harbottle, and E. Sayre, E.
1977 Turquoise Sources and Source Analysis: Mesoamerica and
the Southwestern U.S.A. In Exchange Systems in Prehistory,
edited by T. Earle and J. Ericson, pp. 15–34. Academic
Press, New York,
Weigand, P. C., and A. García de Weigand
1996 Tenemaxtli y Guaxicar: las raices profundas de la rebelión de
Nueva Galicia, Colegio de Michoacán, Zamora.
Williams, E., P. C. Weigand, L., López Mestasand, and D. C. Grove
2005 El antiguo occidente de México: nuevas perspectivas sobre el
pasado prehispánico, Colegio de Michoacán, Zamora.
Weigand, P. C., C. Beekman, and R. Esparza (editors)
2008 Tradición Teuchitlán, Colegio de Michoacán, Zamora.
—Helen P. Pollard, Eduardo Williams,
and Christopher S. Beekman
position: cultural resources senior
project manager
location: denver, colorado
SWCA Environmental Consultants. We
are an employee-owned company of
environmental professionals who specialize in natural and cultural resource
management, environmental planning
and regulatory compliance. The dynamic professional we seek will assist in the
continuing development of our cultural
resource program and expand our professional reputation in cultural
resources consulting. Qualifications:
Master’s degree or higher in Archaeology, Anthropology or related field preferred. 3+ years of project management
experience. How to Apply: For completed job description and application
process, please click the link below to
niversity Press of Colorado Adds
Content to the Digital Archaeological Record (tDAR). Working
with digital curators at the Center for Digital Antiquity, the University Press of Colorado has added to the Digital Archaeological Record (tDAR) information about
27 of its books on archaeological topics.
The subject matter of the books includes
a wide range of topics and locations,
including the Maya area, Amazonia, Colorado, and the American Southwest.
Registered tDAR users may download
the books’ tables of contents and introductions from the tDAR record. One of
the most recent books in the UPC catalog, Surviving Sudden Environmental
Change: Answers from Archaeology, edited
by Jago Cooper and Payson Sheets, may
be downloaded in its entirety,
This arrangement adds to the archaeological information already available
through tDAR, whose content is indexed
for searches by Google and other main
search engines, and exposes the University Press of Colorado’s archaeological
catalog to searchers who otherwise may
be unaware of its available books. You
can find the tDAR collection that lists
the UPC publications here.
he Seventh World Archaeological
Congress (WAC-7) will be held in
Jordan at the King Hussein Bin
Talal Convention Center on the Dead Sea,
January 14-18, 2013. WAC-7 will feature
an engaging international academic program, lively social activities, and optional
tours of Jordan's outstanding natural and
cultural heritage. WAC-7 presentations
may take many forms, including symposia, workshops, forums, debates,
reports, and demonstrations. The WAC-7
Program will be organized into large
themes, each containing several sessions
that relate to the same overall issue (e.g.
Archaeology as: Business, Entertainment, Heritage Conservation). Proposals
for sessions and individual contributions
are now being accepted. The deadline for
session proposals is August 30th, 2012.
Register and submit proposals early to
take advantage of lower registration costs.
For further details and the most up-todate WAC-7 information, including submission, registration, and travel grant
deadlines, visit: or contact the
WAC-7 Program Committee at: [email protected]
he Zooarchaeology and Bone Technology Interest Group (ZBTIG) is
seeking members. The purpose of
the ZBTIG is to create a forum for SAA
members to exchange information about
zooarchaeology and bone technology
research and issues. ZBTIG focuses on
the study of hard tissue faunal remains
(i.e., bone, antler, shell) to gain insight
into different relationships between past
behaviors, environments, and social systems. The group is interested in explor-
ing anthropological, biological, and
taphonomic topics, as well as the interpretation of faunal data. The group is also
interested in theory, methods, and new
technologies that can advance the discipline. ZBTIG plans to sponsor symposia,
workshops, and events during annual
meetings. Overall, the group aspires to be
a central resource for questions, dialog,
inspiration, and networking for all SAA
members that share an interest in faunal
research. SAA members who would like
to join the group can do so by selecting
ZBTIG on their membership renewal
form. There is no fee to join. The first
business/social gathering will be held
during the SAA 78th Annual Meeting in
Honolulu, Hawaii.
The Fourth Conference on Eurasian
Archaeology. Fitful Histories and
Unruly Publics: Rethinking Community
and Temporality in Eurasian Archaeology. Cornell University.
The American Cultural Resources Association and Continuing Legal Education
International are co-sponsoring the
international conference, Cultural
Resources: Section 106, Historic Preservation, and Tribal Consultation, Washington, DC.
111th AAA Annual Meeting, San Francisco, CA (
September 2012 • The SAA Archaeological Record
MARCH 26–31
The ICOMOS International Scientific
Committee on Archaeological Heritage
Management (ICAHM) will hold its
2012 annual conference in Cuzco, Peru,
27–30 November. The theme of the conference is Archaeological Heritage Management at the 40th Anniversary of the
World Heritage Convention. The conference website is:
International Rock Art Congress will be
held at the Marriott Pyramid North Hotel,
Albuquerque, New Mexico, USA. Hosted
by American Rock Art Research Association (ARARA). Registration and more
Contacts: Conference Co-Chair: Donna
Gillette [email protected], 805-3432575; Conference Co-Chair: Peggy Whitehead [email protected], 303-426-7672.
ARARA website
The Society for Historical Archaeology’s
annual Conference on Historical and
Underwater Archaeology; Ramada
Leicester Hotel and University of Leicester, Leicester, England, UK. Abstract
submission deadline: July 9, 2012. Contact: Dr. Sarah Tarlow, School of Archaeology and Ancient History, University of
Leicester, Leicester LE1 7RH, Leicester,
England, UK; email [email protected]; fax
+44 (0)116 252 5005
78th Annual Meeting of the Society for
American Archaeology. Honolulu,
MAY 26–31
International Rock Art Congress. Albuquerque, NM.
The Seventh World Archaeological Congress (WAC-7) will be held in Jordan at
the King Hussein Bin Talal Convention
Center on the Dead Sea, January 14-18,
2013. For further details and the most
up-to-date WAC-7 information, including submission, registration, and travel
grant deadlines, visit: or contact
the WAC-7 Program Committee at:
[email protected]
2a Conferencia Intercontinental, Lima,
The SAA Archaeological Record • September 2012
WARDEN, from page 26 <
it should be noted that there is no magic
to gaining high quality 3D results.
Errors in procedure, equipment, and
software create errors in models that to
the casual observer seem correct. There
are no tools whose casual use, automatically result in high quality 3D products.
Drawing requires expert abstraction of
3D information into 2D planes. 3D
products require different expertise for
their creation but at least equal or
greater amounts as their 2D counterparts to ensure quality.
Archaeology has been making the move
towards this creative expertise for some
time, now it must begin to make strides
in manipulating and reading 3D products. As new ubiquitous software solutions such as 3D PDF and web based
point cloud review become commonplace the power of 3D will incentivize its
acceptance as the new data form.
References Cited
Anderson, Richard C.
1982 Photogrammetry: The Pros and
Cons for Archaeology. World
Archaeology, 14(2):200–205.
Dibble, Harold L.
1988 On the Computerization of Archaeological Projects. Journal of Field
Archaeology 15(4):431–440
Guderjan, Thomas H.
2007 The Nature of an Ancient Maya City:
Resources, Interaction and Power at
Blue Creek, Belize. University of Alabama Press, Tuscaloosa.
Neubauer, Wolfgang
2007 Laser Scanning and Archaeology,
GIM International 21: 10
¡Ya viene la
Lima, Perú
Agosto, 2014
Espere más información pronto
American Archaeology Magazine
On The Web
You can now read complete back issues
of American Archaeology on the Web.
The available issues range from
Spring 1997, American Archaeology’s
debut issue, to Fall 2010.
There will be a two-year lag between
the most recent print and Web issues.
American Archaeology also has a subject
index on the Web that is searchable by key
word as well as a list of all the books that
have been reviewed in the magazine.
1111 14th Street, NW, Suite 800
Washington, DC 20005
Change Service Requested
Non-Profit Org
For the 78th annual meeting in Honolulu, Hawaii, SAA is seeking enthusiastic volunteers
who are not only interested in archaeology but also looking to save money and have fun.
In order for volunteers to have more meeting flexibility, SAA will again only require 8 hours
of volunteers’ time! The complimentary meeting registration is the exclusive benefit for your
Training for the April 3-7 meeting will be provided from detailed manuals sent to you electronically prior to the meeting along with on-the-job training. As always, SAA staff will be on
hand to assist you with any questions or problems that may arise.
For additional information and a volunteer application, please go to SAAweb (
or contact Alyssa Barnett at SAA: 1111 14th Street, Suite 800, Washington, DC 20005, Phone
+1 (202) 559-7382, Fax +1 (202) 789-0284, or e-mail [email protected]
Applications will be accepted on a first-come, first-served basis. The deadline for applications
is February 1, 2013, so contact us as soon as possible to take advantage of this wonderful
See you in Honolulu!
Was this manual useful for you? yes no
Thank you for your participation!

* Your assessment is very important for improving the work of artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project

Download PDF