Taking Our Water for the City

Arthur Caswell Parker (1881–1955) was one of the first Indigenous archaeologists. As a Seneca‐descended scientist from the Cattaraugus Indian Reservation, his cultural background aided with collaboration and research. Many archaeologists uncritically use Parker as an example of a Native archaeologist, anthropologist, and ethnographer. However, his career started at a time when the field of archaeology was still in its infancy, when practices now considered unethical were commonplace. Parker excavated and sold human burials, published records of sacred ceremonies, and provided images of False Face Masks and Snow Snakes. Yet, an examination of his personal correspondence illustrates both a concern for archaeological practice as well as efforts to prevent sensitive cultural aspects from being released to the wider, non‐Native public. These seemingly contradictory stances illustrate that Parker's practice was more nuanced than previously believed. Parker's writings and actions indicate a concern for the situation of the Seneca people and attempts to do what he thought best for others (even if they disagreed). Despite all this, the simplistic assumption that Parker, as an Indigenous archaeologist, always acted in the best interest of his people continues to influence how Euro‐Americans perceive how archaeology should be done. This belief must be interrogated in order that we may move archaeology forward to be a more respectful and equitable practice.

Section: Parker's Paternalismmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, Parker was perhaps the most vocal of this cohort (Smithers 2013), and his political views impacted his practice of anthropology (Thomas 2000). For more on the role of archaeologists in the passage of the Indian Citizenship Act see Beisaw ([2023], Chapter 10) in this volume.…”

Section: Parker's Political Advocacymentioning

confidence: 99%

Chapter 9 Arthur C. Parker: Equivocal Examples in Advocacy and Allyship

Witt

2023

“…April Beisaw ([2023] this volume, Chapter 10) and David Witt ([2023] this volume, Chapter 9) provide histories and legacies of three American archaeologists who were not just colleagues but also good friends. Arthur C. Parker, Alanson B. Skinner, and Warren K. Moorehead worked in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, going on collection expeditions for the American Museum of Natural History, the Harvard Peabody, and the Robert S. Peabody Institute of Archaeology.…”

Section: Archaeologists and Indigenous Peoples Past And Presentmentioning

confidence: 99%

Chapter 1 Confronting America's Archaeological Legacies

Beisaw¹,

Kirakosian²,

Witt³

et al. 2023

American archaeology is rooted in the behaviors of our predecessors, yet our criticism of those forbearers is often disconnected from the issues of today's practice. Contributors to this volume seek to bridge that gap with a healthy dose of reflection. First, this introduction touches on some issues that are not more fully covered in the chapters that follow, specifically the #MeToo movement and field/conference safety, race, and class inequalities especially the costs of field schools and unpaid internships, and the need for inclusive practices for those who are differently abled. Then we summarize those issues that this volume does focus on, pointing out connections and interrelationships. Three major themes are explored: (1) how the identity of an archaeologist can impact their legacy; (2) how the careers of celebrated “big men” and “big projects” are often misrepresented; and (3) the relationship of archaeology to Black and Indigenous peoples, women, and other marginalized groups, including those who are archaeologists. To conclude, each editor presents a reflection of their own relationship to American archaeology and how that inspired this volume.

“…She pointed out that every anthropologist in America had “profited directly or indirectly from the state of the American Indians” and challenged the discipline to take responsibility for this through monetary support (S.R. Binford 1973b; see Beisaw [2023] this volume, Chapter 10, and Witt [2023] this volume, Chapter 9, for discussion on archaeologists as Indian advocates). When Sally settled in San Francisco in 1980, her political activism only intensified.…”

Section: Socially Responsible Archaeology: “I Have a Very Low Toleran...mentioning

confidence: 99%

Chapter 6 “… and his wife Sally”: The Binford Legacy and Uncredited Work in Archaeology

Quinlan

2023

Often mentioned as an afterthought in sentences about her more (in)famous husband, Sally R. Binford has long been a focus of feminist archaeological discussion. She helped create the ‘New Archaeology’ and thus set the stage for an academic revolution, yet she has become one of the discipline's hidden figures, overshadowed by the lengthy career of Lewis Binford. Sally's own words allow us insight into the dynamic between the two Binfords; a case study on academic exploitation that may be more of a rule than of an exception. Rossiter's (1993) ‘Matthew/Matilda effect’—the paradigm whereby the work of influential scientific men can often be directly attributed to their unpublished or otherwise disenfranchised wives—is a useful analytical lens with which to expand discussions of ethics in citation, collaboration, and mentorship. How does archaeology as a discipline reconcile the legacy of unattributed fieldwork and research that has bolstered its growth? A review of publicly available documents on authorship and attribution reveals a lack of clear guidance on the subject. Institutional frameworks can ensure that students and faculty have these types of discussions early and often.