Lecture Notes Week Twelve: Anthropology 3291 © 2001 Michael Deal

Modern Native Issues and Archaeology

Regional prehistory courses typically follow a culture historical framework that emphases archaeological sites and artifacts, and a reconstruction of past cultural adaptations in relation to long-term environmental changes. Although a direct link with modern cultures is recognized, coverage often ends with European settlement. However, native concerns about archaeological methods and interpretations have had a tremendous effect on current archaeological practice in this region. These concerns were addressed recently in the Canadian Archaeological Association's "Statement of Principles for Ethical Conduct Pertaining to Aboriginal Peoples . This document was developed in consultation with First Nations Peoples across the country, and explicitly recognizes the link between modern native groups 96 and past populations. The basic principles include consultation, aboriginal involvement, sacred sites and places, and communication and interpretation. Consultation is done under the assumption that aboriginal peoples are concerned with the protection and management of archaeological resources, and that they have a voice in how archaeological research is conducted on aboriginal sites. With respect to this principle, archaeologists can seek aboriginal input into their research plans and permit applications. The notion of Aboriginal stewardship of prehistoric resources could also be addressed here, since both groups have an interest in preventing the looting of sites and illicit sale of artifacts. Aboriginal involvement entails the development of partnerships between archaeologists and native groups, and the recruitment and training of aboriginal students. The principle of sacred sites and places recognizes the spiritual bond between Aboriginal peoples and special places and features on the landscape, and the burial sites of ancestors. The complex issue of reburial and repatriation falls under this principle. Finally, communication and interpretation deals with alternate ways of interpreting the archaeological record and the archaeologist's responsibility to inform aboriginal groups of the progress and results of their research. The latter can be easily done through public presentations and newsletter reports addressed at the non-professional reader. Archaeologists are generally guilty of ignoring native reconstructions of prehistory that are based on oral tradition and traditional practices. Much information on prehistoric land and resource use is generated by archaeological research, which could be synthesized and used to strengthen Aboriginal land claims.

The following case studies, drawn from the experiences of archaeologists and native groups in the Maritime Provinces, illustrate the close relationship between modern native issues and the study of prehistory in the region. These case studies relate to stewardship, partnership, sacred sites, and Aboriginal land rights.

Stewardship

As mentioned above, stewardship concerns the protection and preservation of archaeological resources and their documentation. Archaeologists have a professional obligation in this regard, but First Nations groups are also beginning to take an active role in the stewardship of prehistoric sites. Archaeologists spend much of their time in the field trying to identify and assess sites that are endangered due to natural processes such as coastal erosion, or cultural practices such as farming or construction. A significant example of site protection is the work of Albert Ferguson at Minister's Island in 1978.An assessment of the area indicated that this shellmidden area eroded at an alarming rate. The New Brunswick government provided funds for the construction of an artificial breakwater to prevent further erosion. The beach in front of the site was cleared of driftwood and the outer one meter of the site was excavated. This resulted in a straight beach face, against which a wall of gambion wire cages filled with rock was built.

Helen Keenlyside's work with the Fort Folly Mi'kmaq band at Dorchester, illustrates an example of Aboriginal stewardship . The band obtained funding from the Access to Archaeology and Pathways programs for an excavation at the historic Mi'kmaq site at Beaumont, where ancestors of many of the band had lived. This funding allowed them to hire a professional archaeologist and support a two year excavation program. Ultimately, the band managed the project and took responsibility for housing the materials recovered from the excavation.

Partnership

Partnerships are an increasingly important vehicle for Aboriginal involvement in the archaeology of the region. The recent Jemseg Crossing Archaeological Project is an excellent example of how archaeologists and native groups can cooperate on a major project. A prehistoric site at Jemseg Crossing was threatened by the construction of a highway bridge over the Jemseg River. In the Fall of 1996 Susan Blair, was contracted on behalf of Archaeological Services to conduct a salvage excavation at the site. A partnership was developed through the formation of the Jemseg Maliseet Advisory Committee. This committee of Maliseet Elders provided informaiton to Maliseet communities and provided a workforce for the project . A Maliseet project manager, Pat Polchies, was also appointed. Despite this promising start, there was considerable controversy over the excavation, as other native groups claimed that there was not enough consultation and feared that burials might be secretly excavated. In the end, it was the discovery of a possible burial feature that brought a stop to the excavation and prompted the government to relocate the bridge. Events surrounding this project were widely covered in the press and many issues of aboriginal rights and archaeological ethics were addressed .

Sacred Sites

One of the most sensitive and complex issues dividing natives and archaeologists is that of the reburial of human remains. This has been a major cause of friction between the two groups since the 1970s. As archaeology became more scientific during the 1960s, new techniques were being applied to the study of archaeological human remains in all parts of the world. The Canadian Association of Physical Anthropologists recognized specific categories of information that can be collected from human skeletal remains . In a regional context these included the study of physical characteristics, such as stature and body build and how these varied among different populations; genetic elements, which could indicate the degree of relatedness between past and present populations; demographic factors, which help define a population in terms of age groups, sex ratios, and birth and death rates; pathological characteristics which tell us about the diseases and accidents that afflicted past populations; and the treatment of the dead, which reflect the religious life and social organization of past populations. Native groups across North America began to interpret such studies as disrespectful to their deceased ancestors and another form of discrimination . In the early 1970s, native political power was increasing and there was a backlash against the practices of physical anthropology .

Protests against the excavation of native burials in the Maritimes began in 1970 over the excavations of the Archaic cemetery at Cow Point . In 1983, protest brought a stop to the excavations at Ste. Anne's Point . Ultimately, government agencies relented and the repatriation and reburial of prehistoric skeletal remains began in earnest. In Nova Scotia, skeletal remains excavated at Bear River in 1959 2 were repatriated and reburied in 1984 . In Prince Edward Island, native skeletal remains were eroded from a beach face at Blooming Point after a storm in 1959 . These remains were kept in storage until they were analysed and repatriated in 1992 . Coastal erosion was also responsible to the exposure of a burial at Skull Island, in Shediac Bay. In this case, a salvage operation was sanctioned by the executive of the Union of New Brunswick Indians with the condition that the bones be returned for reburial after analysis . A traditional burial for these remains was conducted by the Fort Folly First Nation at Beaumont on July 16, 1994. One other prominent case in New Brunswick was the excavation of the prehistoric burial mound at Red Bank in the 1970s . 7This work was conducted with the full support and involvement of local Mi'kmaq when the site was in danger of being destroyed by a gravel pit operation. The skeletal materials for this site were reburied in two separate events in the 1980s. Archaeological work at this and other sites in the Red Bank area was a catalyst for the revival of traditional teachings . A second burial mound was salvaged at White's Lake in Nova Scotia , after it had been bulldozed during the construction of a subdivision. The site location was purchased by the provincial government and the single cremation was reburied at the site after analysis .

In 1995 the museums of New Brunswick made a blanket return of Aboriginal remains .1 A special ceremony was held in Fredericton on June 1st of that year, in which native spiritual leaders received the bones for reburial. Nova Scotia has also made an effort to repatriate all prehistoric skeletal remains, and in 1999, a important "Memorandum of Understanding" was signed by Mi'kmaq leaders and governmenat agencies, which recognized the sacred nature of all Aboriginal human burial sites and the need for native consultation before any burials are considered for excavation . The message here for archaeologists is that conducting biological research is a privilege, not a right, and that all human remains should be treated with respect .

Aboriginal Land Claims

The basic premise for all land disputes is that organized Aboriginal societies occupied and used Canadian lands and resources before European colonization . Aboriginal land rights can include notions of self-government, language, culture, as well as hunting, fishing, forestry, and use of natural resources. Case studies on recent native claims demonstrate that traditional ties to the land and resources have not been relinquished. In fact, the 18th century treaties with First Nations in the Maritimes stressed peace and friendship, and not the surrender of lands . A 1999 Supreme Court of Canada decision upheld Mi'kmaq Donald Marshall's rights to fish eels out of season, without a license and with an illegal net . When several bands began to fish lobster out of season, clashes with non-native fishermen led to a moratorium. Mi'kmaq bands at Burnt Church, New Brunswick, and Indian Brook, Nova Scotia, held out and continued to defy fisheries officials. The Supreme Court was forced to clarify their original decision, and ruled that the government would still be able to regulate native fishing for the purposes of conservation.

Archaeological research is often used to confirm Aboriginal land rights, through the documentation of land and resource use over time. In 1998, I was contracted to produce a background paper on the prehistoric land and resource use in New Brunswick . Although the archaeological evidence is far from complete, it is obvious that prehistoric populations of the Maritimes exploited a broad and diverse range of natural resources. Faunal resources recovered from archaeological sites represent a wide range of the available modern species, as well as extinct species such as sea mink and great auk. Fur-bearing mammals were widely distributed throughout the province. Anadromous and catadromous fish species were a particularly valuable riverine resource, and especially Atlantic salmon. Shellfish were important in certain areas, and especially during the early late prehistoric period. Archaeological evidence of plant use is beginning to accumulate, but at a slow pace due to considerable preservation problems. The present archaeological evidence is obviously only a small fraction of the species once collected in prehistoric times. Nutshells and seeds from various wild fruits are represented in charred form, but the green parts of plants and flowers used for herbal medicines and beverages do not survive in the acidic soils of the province. Wood, bark, and plant fibres have survived only under exceptional preservation conditions.

Certain rock and mineral resources were also important to aboriginal populations in the region. In the late prehistoric period, knappable lithics were the raw materials for the hunting and processing tools. Native populations in the Northeast sought out the best quality lithic materials in each region and certain higher quality lithics were distributed over long distances. Cherts from coastal Labrador and the Quebec interior made their way to the Maritimes and Maine, and especially toward the end of the prehistoric period. Cherts, chalcedonies, and rhyolites from certain Nova Scotian quarries were also prized. Ground stone raw materials and clay for pottery-making were widely available within the region. Copper was an important material for making both ritual and domestic items throughout the late prehistoric period. Only small amounts of local copper were available, so raw copper was most likely acquired through trade, at first from long distance native sources, then regional native sources, and eventually through trade with European fishermen.