Archeology Theater

I have been thinking quite a bit lately how much of what goes on in CRM is really just Archaeology Theater. Archaeology Theater is creating and maintaining the pretense of doing archaeology, but not really doing archaeology. Basically, Archaeology Theater is what non-archaeologists think archaeology looks like. It's most prevalent with field methods (excavation and recording), but is also manifest in the myths, memes and shibboleths common in CRM. Archaeology Theater is actively harmful to doing good archaeology. Probably the worst thing about Archaeology Theater is that now archaeologists are convincing themselves that these practices constitute good archaeology. 
 

The Archaeology of The Dalles Area: Precontact Settlement and Subsistence

to be published somewhere soon...

The Archaeology of The Dalles Area: Precontact Settlement and Subsistence
by Paul S. Solimano and Daniel M. Gilmour

Introduction

The stretch of the Columbia River around The Dalles, Oregon, holds a special position in Pacific Northwest anthropology. Before twentieth century hydropower development, the Columbia River was recognized as one of the greatest salmon-producing rivers in the world (Butler and O’Connor 2004; Northwest Power Planning Council 2000), with the ten mile stretch between The Dalles and the mouth of the Deschutes River a foremost North American precontact Native fishery. (Butler and O’Connor 2004; Netboy 1980) (Figure 1). Ethnographic and ethnohistoric accounts detail large, dense populations, villages, and complex seasonal movements (DeSmet 1978; Moulton 1991; Stern 1998; Wilkes 1844). Records show the area was the center of an extensive travel and trade network connecting people from as far away as the Pacific coast, Canada, California, and the Bitterroot Mountains (Anastasio 1972; Hayden and Schulting 1997; Stern 1998). Intensive fishing with complex systems of rights and access is also documented (Boyd 1996; French 1961; French and French 1998; Spier and Sapir 1930). Ninety years of archaeological work, albeit with varying degrees of professionalism, has revealed numerous large, dense sites with deposits spanning the Holocene and containing some of the most extraordinary precontact material culture known on the Columbia Plateau (Minor 1988a, 1988b). 

As a result, Northwest archaeologists have generally viewed The Dalles area as having some of the most complex cultural systems on the Plateau during the precontact period (Ames et al. 1998; Butler 1993; Hayden and Schulting 1997; Minor 1988b, 1988c, 2012). Minor (1988c:76) succinctly expresses the common view among archaeologists when he states:  

“If the assumption is accepted that elaboration in material culture in the form of wealth items, mortuary goods, and portable and rock art are intimately associated with social organization and ideological systems, then the level of cultural complexity in the Dalles-Deschutes area was higher than in any other area of the Columbia Plateau in prehistoric times, perhaps rivaling the classic cultures of the Northwest Coast.”

Despite this special place in the region and a large number of recorded sites, numerous and sometimes vast excavations and staggering numbers of collected artifacts, our understanding of precontact settlement and subsistence for The Dalles area remains nearly non-existent. 

1/8-inch Mesh Screen

One of the main things I have taken on concerns screen size.  Here in the Northwest, the trend has been towards using fine mesh (1/8-inch mesh) for all archaeological investigations.  This is not simply sub-sampling with fine mesh, but processing all excavated sediment through fine mesh.  

There are many reasons for this trend, with probably the biggest being the emotional appeal.  That is, it just seems more science-y.  It feels right.  It feels rigorous.  We get lots more stuff and since archaeologists want stuff, isn’t more stuff better?  

What’s always missing, however, is a discussion of what we are losing by only using fine mesh.  I often get strange looks when I ask this question.  “We are not losing anything,” is the response, “that’s why we are using fine mesh.”  Unfortunately, you are losing stuff.   Lots of it.   

I have said it before and will say it again. The dramatic increase in the use of fine mesh is a disaster for regional archaeology.  

M.I.A.

Clearly, I have not written in quite a while.  I have simply been too busy.  I don't think that will change, but I am hoping to post on a more regular schedule.  My original goal for this blog was to post some musings, random thoughts and observations.  Mainly some stuff on things I did not really understand or things that were interesting but not worth writing a whole article about.  I was also hoping to generate some conversations on archaeology-related topics.  Specifically, contract archaeology-related topics.  And even more specifically, contract archaeology in the Northwest-related topics.  

Theory, Prehistoric Land Use and Archaeology

It seems to me that archaeologists use many terms and concepts which are not really defined. This is particularly true in CRM archaeology. In fact, I would say it is rampant in CRM archaeology. I often feel like much of what I read is a bunch of terms and phrases strung together, without a real feel for what those terms actually mean or how they are used.

Great Quote

I should like to record an overwhelming impression that many students [of prehistory] are but slightly reformed antiquarians. To one who is a layman in these highly specialized realms there seems a great deal of obsessive wallowing in detail of and for itself. No one can feel more urgently than this writer the imperative obligation of anthropologists [particularly archaeologists] to set their descriptions in such a rich context of detail that they can properly be used for comparative purposes. Yet proliferation of minutiae is not its own justification (Kluckhohn 1940:42).

From Introduction, by Lee Lyman and Michael J. O’Brien. In Method and Theory in American Archaeology by Godon R. Willey and Philip Philips, 1958. Reprinted 2001. The University of Alabama Press, Tuscaloosa and London.

I think I need to read Kluckhohn.

Kettle Falls

I am heading up to Kettle Falls, Washington today. Was invited to a ceremony by the Colville Tribe. As I worked along the Upper Columbia every spring from about 1997 to 2003, it will be like going home again. It was definitely one of my great jobs in archaeology, although I wish I knew then what I know now. Working up there was like archaeology camp, archaeology all day, every day, with nothing else to do but drink (at least for the crews). The area has been built up these days, but back then there was no or limited internet and cell phone connections were very sporadic. Houses were scattered and not many people were around. There was no one to bother you, no way to really get a hold of you. It was wonderful. I think crews today don’t know what they are missing by having technology.