Drew this in response to a linguistic anthropology discussion question. Oh, grad school.
Drew this in response to a linguistic anthropology discussion question. Oh, grad school.
On this episode we discuss PERIODS!! A lot of us have them, they can be really inconvenient, and dealing with them in the field is often less straightforward than normal. We discuss pros and cons of the various products on the market, how to deal with that ‘oops’ moment, and suggestions for making your life easier when you’re on your period.
The following may be a bit dry, but I love this stuff (i.e. I’m a huge CRM legislation nerd) . . .
What is the NHPA?
A major piece of cultural resource management legislation that provided laws for the protection of cultural resources and identified the need for increased public knowledge of cultural resources was the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA). The Urban Renewal Program launched by the Kennedy administration increased the destruction of natural and cultural resources (King 1998:15). City slums, which were once historic centers, were destroyed in the name of progress. As King (2000:16) notes, federal agencies “damaged or destroyed stuff that people valued because it embodied their history. . .This was sometimes necessary; the old often, maybe usually, had to make way for the new.” First lady Johnson coordinated a program during the Johnson administration to create a comprehensive report on historic preservation needs. The report recommended that Congress should create a national historic preservation program, outlining the legislative provisions in the National Historic Preservation Act (King 1998:15).
Signed into law by President Johnson on October 15, 1966, the National Historic Preservation Act established a process for preserving United States historic heritage, including historic properties. Congress declared in Section 1(b)(1)(3) that “ the spirit and direction of the Nation are founded upon and reflected in historic heritage. . . historic properties significant to the Nation’s heritage are being lost or substantially altered, often inadvertently, with increasing frequency” (United States Congress 1966:1). Government agencies would now have a compliance process that forced them to think and plan before inadvertently or purposefully destroy a property of significance on public lands. Such properties include both prehistoric and historic archaeological sites and historic buildings. Section 106 of the Act provides the specific compliance process for any Federal undertaking. As for public education, the Act sets provisions to not only protect and preserve significant properties for the benefit of the public, but also endeavors to involve the public.
NHPA and Public Outreach
Did you know that there is language in the law to provide education and outreach to the public? The language of the National Historic Preservation Act is explicit in stating the importance of preserving historic heritage for the public before it is lost through “progress.” The Act also states in Section 1(b)(2), “the historical and cultural foundations of the Nation should be preserved as a living part of our community life and development in order to give a sense of orientation to the American people” (United States Congress 1966:1). Therefore, “the preservation of this irreplaceable heritage is in the public interest so that its vital legacy of cultural, educational, aesthetic, inspirational . . .will be maintained and enriched for future generations of Americans” (United States Congress 1966:1). In order to pique public interest in historic heritage, Section 101(3)(G) states that designated State Historic Preservation Officers (SHPO) have the responsibility to provide the public information, education, training, and any technical assisted needed in historic preservation (United States Congress 1966:7). Section 401 describes the necessity of a coordinated National initiative to promote research, provide training, and distribute information on preservation (United States Congress 1966:43). Consequently, education is crucial for the public to understand the preservation process.
The Act does make provisions for public involvement during the Section 106 process to voice concern of the potentially negative effects of an undertaking on a significant property. Section 110(2)(E)(ii) of the Act notes that consultation with the interested public, including Indian tribes, is necessary in the identification and evaluation of historic properties (United States Congress 1966:21). SHPO developed education programs on historic preservation, as well as the National initiative to promote training in historic preservation, have the potential to provide the public with the necessary information to become a major voice during the Section 106 consultation process. The public has every right to demand a role in the compliance process and expect the government to hear their voice, due to the process outlined by Section 106.
King, Thomas F.
2000 Federal Planning and Historic Places: The Section 106 Process. Altamira Press, New York.
United States Congress
1966 National Historic Preservation Act of 1966:16 USC 470, October 15, 1966. Washington, D.C. U.S. Government Printing Office.
Interest in academic archaeology in service of the government and public in the United States can be traced to Thomas Jefferson in 1799 (Schroeder 2009:169). While president of the American Philosophical Society, Jefferson asked the organization to record antiquities before such artifacts were lost to future generations. Examples of both government and civic preservation include the protection of ancient earthen mounds throughout the Midwest (Schroeder 2009:172). The Ohio Company designated ancient mounds and earthworks in Ohio as important public places for preservation. However, unlike modern legislation in cultural resource management, government intervention was minimal until the 19th century and the pressure placed on the government by the concerned public over destroyed historic and prehistoric ruins. As Schroeder (2009:172), “most of the earliest efforts at preservation were accomplished by communities, civic groups, and other organizations exerting efforts to assure the protection of ancient monuments.”
During the 19th century, with the growing popularity of antiquities collections, European museums tended to focus on craft demonstration in order to generate a greater interest in antique material than the cultural aspect of material culture. However, American museums and preservation societies focused on material culture as opposed to artifact demonstrations, especially with historic houses (Anderson 1982:292). By the mid-19th century, Americans were keen on historic preservation efforts. This effort was rooted in the need to preserve what civic leaders and middle-class professionals considered to be traditional American beliefs and cultural values. Groups like Sons of the American Revolution and Society for the Preservation of New England Antiquities hoped to create a sort of shrine to the past, idealizing of the nation’s founding fathers and influential sites from the American Revolution (Durel 1986:230). Historic houses, such as George Washington’s home of Mt. Vernon, provided tangible access to the past, demonstrating a need for continued preservation of historic places and presenting history to the public.
Three major exhibitions brought Indian antiquities to the forefront: the Columbian Historical Exposition of 1892 in Madrid, Spain, and the 1904 World’s Columbian Exposition of in Chicago and the Louisiana Purchase Exposition in St. Louis, Missouri (Thompson 2000:210). The exhibitions displayed the material remains of recently excavated regions of the American Southwest. The display of Indian antiquities romanticized the American west and generated a demand for Indian antiquities and art. Growing interest in archaeological materials led to looting of ancient ruins in the American southwest with the discovery of monumental ruins such as the Mesa Verde Cliff dwellings in Colorado (Hutt et al. 1992:19). Railroad construction during the mid to late 19th century, “facilitated long-distance shipping of goods, including large, fragile collections of archaeological materials, which previously had been transported in wagons” (Hutt et al. 1992:19).
Public concern with the destruction of antiquities and the growing professionalization of anthropology provided a role for the government in preservation and archaeology. For example, Casa Grande in southern Arizona was the first federally preserved prehistoric archaeological site in 1892, due to petitions to Congress by supporters of preservation (Schroeder 2009:172). The need for federal legislation was brought to the forefront by archaeologist Edgar Lee Hewett. Knowing key members of Congress and professional societies, Hewett was appointed a member of the American Anthropological Association (AAA) to work towards creating antiquities legislation (Thompson 2000:236). Hewett’s work the AAA helped establish the language of the Antiquities Act of 1906 and the groundwork for future cultural resource management legislation. And the rest is history.
Important Cultural Resource Legislation in the United States
1984 Time Machines: The World of Living History. The American Association for State and Local History, Nashville.
Durel, John W.
1986 The Past: A Thing to Study, a Place to Go. In Public History: An Introduction, edited by Barbara J. Howe and Emory L. Kemp. Robert E. Krieger Publishing Company, Malabar.
Hutt, Sherry, Elwood W. Jones, and Martin E. McAllister
1992 Archaeological Resource Protection. The Preservation Press, National Trust for Historic Preservation, Washington, D.C.
2009 Thinking About a Public and Multidisciplinary Archaeology. Reviews in Anthropology 38: 166-194.
Thompson, Raymond Harris
2000 The Antiquities Act of 1906 by Ronald Freeman Lee. Journal of the Southwest 42(2): 197-269.
Check out the ARCH365 episode! You can listen to the episode on the Archaeology Podcast Network or download it from iTunes.
It’s a quiet and remote place in northwest New Mexico, surrounded by sandstone cliffs. Wind whistles through the canyon at high speeds, churning up the sandy soil. While wandering around the high desert landscape of Chaco canyon, it’s hard to imagine that this area was once a major cultural center about a thousand years ago, where thousands of prehistoric people gathered. There is marginal rainfall, little vegetation, and so on, but something about this area was special to the Ancestral Puebloans and their descendants. Chaco Culture National Historic Park in New Mexico contains a staggering number of pueblos, absolutely spectacular archaeological sites with hundreds of thousands of artifacts, which were created by the Ancient Puebloan peoples, also known as the Anasazi.
The Prehistory of Chaco Canyon
During the mid-1000s AD, the ancestral Puebloan people built ‘great houses,’ buildings containing hundreds of rooms, multiple stories, all with unique masonry, creating an easily recognizable Chacoan type of architecture. These buildings were typically constructed to face specific solar, lunar, and cardinal directions, and specifically placed in a spot surrounded by sacred features, like mountains or mesas. Evidence shows that some of these great houses took decades to centuries to construct, which isn’t too surprising considering how much went into each building. Pueblo Bonito, the largest of the great houses, would have covered 3 acres, contained more than 600 rooms, and was 4 to 5 stories tall! It also contained dozens of kivas, circular ceremonial rooms, and two large plazas. That’s a lot of planning and building!
Chaco Canyon developed further into a major ceremonial, administrative, and economic center in the Puebloan world by 1050 AD and it had far reaching influence, from building styles to pottery types. The Ancestral Puebloans built canals to direct water to farm fields to grow corn, beans and squash for an ever growing population. They created over 200 miles of roads, a sort of prehistory super highway, that connected not only the great houses of Chaco, but to over 150 pueblos throughout the region. The great houses of chaco were likely major hubs of ceremonial and commercial activities, with far reaching influence outside their social-cultural sphere. Chacoan influence can be seen at Mesa Verde National Park, a series huge cliff dwellings in Colorado. Also, Archaeologists have found macaw feathers and copper bells—indicating a complex trading network all over the southwest into Northern Mexico.
And then something happened. Was it drought? Was it conflict? During 11 and 1200s AD, building slowed down and influence waned. People began to leave Chaco Canyon migrating to different areas in the southwest, possibly due 50 years of drought conditions. Whatever the reason, the great houses were abandoned. Modern Southwest Puebloan tribes are the descendants of the Ancestral Puebloans and many the groups consider the creation and abandonment of Chaco as part of their migration story. Consequently, many Native Americans consider Chaco Canyon a spiritual place to be respected.
The Archaeological History of Chaco Canyon
Archaeologists, even after 100 years of studying Chaco Canyon, are still scratching their heads as to why did these people build in such a desolate place? Why were the buildings constructed where they were? Why was the area abandoned? And most of all, who WERE these people? Archaeologists have been carefully piecing together a story for Chaco Canyon, but there is still so much to discover and learn. The ruins were first documented by Euro-Americans during the early 19th century, but it wasn’t until 1890s that excavations were conducted by the American Museum of Natural History from New York. This was known as the Hyde Exploring expedition. Fred and Talbot Hyde were tipped off to the area by Richard Wetherill, a self-taught archaeologist who discovered the cliff dwellings of Mesa Verde—Wetherill hoped the brothers would finance an expedition and they ended up doing a 5 year excavation at Pueblo Bonito. The Wetherills actually moved to Chaco Canyon, building a house next to the west wall of Pueblo Bonito! Wetherill and the Hyde brothers excavated enough artifacts, and human remains, to fill an entire freight car at the end of just one season.
So, the scientific excavations weren’t what we would consider today as ‘best practices.’ Also, there was a lot of controversy that all of the artifacts were being shipped to the East, as opposed to staying in New Mexico. Rumors that artifacts were being sold to the highest bidder also were circulating. With the creation of the Antiquities Act of 1906 and the establishment of the Chaco Culture National Historic Park in 1907, Chacoan sites were better protected from will-nilly excavation. Other excavations, surveys and studies have taken place by the National Geographic Society, the University of New Mexico, and a number of multi-disciplinary research projects through the Chaco Center. Recent surveys have identified more than 2400 archaeological sites in the park boundary!
Fun facts and finds at Chaco Canyon:
When visiting Chaco Canyon, keep in mind that its far more than a tourist destination. For archaeologists, it is a place rich in prehistory and mystery. For the descendents of the Ancestral Puebloans, it is a place to be honored. Think of each great house, every archaeological site, as one giant museum that deserves careful consideration and respect.
Learn more about Chaco Culture National Historic Park: on the National Park Service or Unesco world heritage sites webpages.