Open Collections

UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

Saving and naming the garbage : Charles E. Borden and the making of B.C. prehistory, 1945-1960 West, Robert Gerard 1995

Your browser doesn't seem to have a PDF viewer, please download the PDF to view this item.

Item Metadata

Download

Media
831-ubc_1995-0429.pdf [ 4.89MB ]
Metadata
JSON: 831-1.0086931.json
JSON-LD: 831-1.0086931-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 831-1.0086931-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 831-1.0086931-rdf.json
Turtle: 831-1.0086931-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 831-1.0086931-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 831-1.0086931-source.json
Full Text
831-1.0086931-fulltext.txt
Citation
831-1.0086931.ris

Full Text

SAVING AND NAMING THE GARBAGE: CHARLES E. BORDEN AND THE MAKING OF B.C. PREHISTORY, 1945-1960 by ROBERT GERARD WEST B.A., The U n i v e r s i t y of Calgary, 1992 A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF ARTS i n THE FACULTY OF GRADUATE STUDIES Department of H i s t o r y We accept t h i s t h e s i s as conforming tQ the re q u i r e d standard THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA J u l y 1995 © Robert Gerard West, 1995 In presenting this thesis in partial fulfilment of the requirements for an advanced degree at the University of British Columbia, I agree that the Library shall make it freely available for reference and study. I further agree that permission for extensive copying of this thesis for scholarly purposes may be granted by the head of my department or by his or her representatives. It is understood that copying or publication of this thesis for financial gain shall not be allowed without my written permission. Department of Hv STORM The University of British Columbia Vancouver, Canada Date A o ^ \ DE-6 (2/88) 11 ABSTRACT Professional archaeologists f i r m l y control the p r e h i s t o r y of B r i t i s h Columbia (more commonly ref e r r e d to today as "pre-contact" h i s t o r y ) . This has been the case since Dr. Charles E. Borden, a German professor at the U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia, p r o f e s s i o n a l i z e d the archaeological d i s c i p l i n e between 1945 and 1960. The purpose of t h i s paper i s to c r i t i c a l l y examine and explain the process by which t h i s monopolization occurred, and to suggest the massive ra m i f i c a t i o n s that have followed. Relevant approaches to the h i s t o r y of archaeology are reviewed, and a "contextual" strategy i s adopted as the best way to unravel, but preserve, the richness of the l o c a l h i s t o r y of archaeology i n B.C. A mixture of n a r r a t i v e and a n a l y t i c a l s t y l e i s employed i n explaining the r i s e Borden and p r o f e s s i o n a l archaeology i n the 1950s. I t i s argued that Borden produced knowledge by drawing on an e x i s t i n g network of North American archaeology to create, and substantiate, h i s a u t h o r i t a t i v e p o s i t i o n . In the context of archaeological s i t e destruction, during the 1950s, Borden was able to p u l l unrelated members of the B.C. populous to h i s cause, including p r o v i n c i a l o f f i c i a l s , through the passing of the "Archaeological and H i s t o r i c Sites Protection Act," i n 1960. Amateur archaeologists and Aboriginal people lacked the means to amass the powerful a l l i a n c e s that Borden did, and therefore amateurs and Natives were unable to o f f e r a persuasive a l t e r n a t i v e to Borden's authority. I t i s concluded that because of the professional encapsulation of B.C. archaeology, we, as non-specialists, have to put our f a i t h i n archaeologists, and assume that the knowledge they produce i s t r u t h f u l and v a l i d . I t i s suggested that professional archaeologists have joined other human s c i e n t i s t s i n a r a p i d l y s p i r a l l i n g s c i e n t i f i c a t i o n of humanity. This i s s i g n i f i c a n t because s p e c i a l i s t s inform the State about who we are as c i t i z e n s , and impose i d e n t i t i e s on us which p a r t l y dicate how the State regulates our access to resources. The example of Natives i n B.C., who have recently appropriated I l l p r o f e s s i o n a l archaeology to t h e i r own cause of s e t t l i n g land-claim disputes, i s o f f e r e d to show how alienated components of our i d e n t i t i e s can be returned to us through p o l i t i c a l action. i v TABLE OF CONTENTS Abstract i i Table of Contents i v L i s t of Figures v Acknowledgement v i Body of Text 1 Notes 44 Bibliography 63 Appendix 1 Maps: B.C. Archaeological Sites, 1945-1960 71 Appendix 2 Photo: Whalen Farm Excavations, 1949 73 V LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1 Map: Fraser Delta Sites Excavated by Charles 71 Borden, 1945-1960 Figure 2 Map: Major B.C. Sites Surveyed and Excavated by 72 Charles Borden, 1945-1960 Figure 3 Photo: Whalen Farm Midden Excavation Trench, Point 73 Roberts, Washington, 1949 v i ACKNOWLEDGMENT I wish to express ray gratitude to Dr. Dianne Newell for taking a strong personal i n t e r e s t i n my project from the very beginning. Her constructive c r i t i c i s m and suggestions have been instrumental i n the completion of t h i s paper. I also thank my colleagues and in s t r u c t o r s , who over the past year, have provided a comfortable and stimulating environment for i n t e l l e c t u a l growth. I am also indebted to the s t a f f at the UBC Archives, and Lynn Maranda and Wilma Wood, Director of the Vancouver Centennial Museum, for s p e c i a l treatment that made my research go smoothly. I also g r a t e f u l l y acknowledge the help of Paul Pat for p r i n t i n g the graphic reproductions i n t h i s manuscript. F i n a l l y , I salute my family for p o s i t i v e encouragement, and above a l l I thank Karen for coping with me and the midden of paper I accumulated i n our living-room over the past months. 1 That archaeologists control what we know of the pre h i s t o r y of Canada i s evident i n government and pri v a t e l y - f i n a n c e d museum c o l l e c t i o n s , u n i v e r s i t y c u r r i c u l a , and protected heritage s i t e s . In B r i t i s h Columbia, t h i s has been true since archaeology became pr o f e s s i o n a l i z e d beginning i n 1945. In that year a U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia (UBC) German professor, Charles E. Borden, began excavating Aboriginal refuse p i l e s , known as middens, on Point Grey i n Vancouver. Before Borden B.C. prehistory was a r e l a t i v e l y wide-open f i e l d . A b o r i g i n a l people knew t h e i r past and o r a l l y recorded and passed on ancient family h i s t o r i e s , myths, and totem pole s t o r i e s to succeeding generations. Local amateur archaeologists, such as Charles H i l l - T o u t , excavated the ubiquitous middens that dotted the coastal shores and r i v e r estuaries of the province, and developed t h e i r theories about B.C. prehistory. But i n the 1950s, Charles Borden p r o f e s s i o n a l i z e d B.C. archaeology, drove amateurs from the p u b l i c sphere, and concurrently silenced Native claims about the past, a process f i r s t begun on the B.C. coast when professional anthropologists a r r i v e d i n the l a t e 19th century. The legacy of Borden's p r o f e s s i o n a l i z a t i o n of archaeology i s that the prehistory of t h i s extremely r i c h and ancient c u l t u r e -area of North America i s monopolized by archaeologists. This monopoly i s guaranteed by protective l e g i s l a t i o n passed i n 1960, which l i m i t s access to p r e h i s t o r i c materials to archaeologists, who use the materials to b u i l d t h e i r careers and advance the d i s c i p l i n e . This s i t u a t i o n has t r a d i t i o n a l l y been to the disadvantage of contemporary Aboriginal people, who have had t h e i r material culture and h i s t o r y apprehended, examined, and displayed, without much input. The l e v e l of control that archaeologists exercise over the o r i g i n s and h i s t o r y of Natives, and the r a p i d l y increasing importance of archaeology i n current Native land claims, demands a c r i t i c a l i nquiry into the formation of B.C. archaeology. My purpose then i s to expose the process by which Borden's archaeology came to control B.C. prehistory, and to suggest the massive consequences t h i s has had, and w i l l continue to have, on the l i v e s of a l l 2 B r i t i s h Columbians. Approaches to the h i s t o r y of archaeology do not include examinations of how the science became established i n p a r t i c u l a r places and times. A d i v i s i o n i n the h i s t o r y of science e x i s t s between " p o s i t i v i s t i c i n t e r n a l i s t " studies, ones that depict the development of the d i s c i p l i n e as s e l f contained and in s u l a t e d from influence by s o c i a l change, and " s o c i a l e x t e r n a l i s t " h i s t o r i e s which locate archaeology within an larger s o c i a l context. 1 T r a d i t i o n a l l y , archaeologists themselves write the h i s t o r y of North American archaeology as i n t e r n a l i s t s . Gordon R. Willey and Jeremy A. Sabloff's, A History of American Archaeology, has since the e a r l y 1970s been the most s i g n i f i c a n t proponent of t h i s type of h i s t o r i c a l study, although Glyn Daniel pioneered the approach i n England i n the 1950s.2 I n t e r n a l i s t s argue that the h i s t o r i c a l development of p r o f e s s i o n a l archaeology has been driven e n t i r e l y from within by ever increasing s c i e n t i f i c i t y i n a u n i l i n e a r and i n e v i t a b l e fashion. The " r a t i o n a l objective knowledge" produced by archaeology i s a l l that i s needed to explain i t s success, or so the argument goes, while s o c i a l factors are o f f e r e d to account for those instances i n the past when the r a t i o n a l path appears to have been l o s t . 3 L o c a l l y , the i n t e r n a l i s t approach dominates the h i s t o r i e s of B.C. archaeology, which include Knut R. Fladmark's " B r i t i s h Columbia Archaeology i n the 1970s," Roy L. Carlson's "History of Research i n Archaeology," and "Archaeology i n B r i t i s h Columbia," Roderick Sprague's "The P a c i f i c Northwest," William Noble's "One Hundred and Twenty-Five Years i n the Canadian Provinces," and, most recently, a chapter i n R.G. Matson and Gary Coupland, The Prehistory of the Northwest Coast. 4 These B.C. accounts, which include several graduate theses i n anthropology, 5 are very d i s c i p l i n a r y i n t h e i r approach, and the authors d i s p l a y no i n t e r e s t i n questioning the assumptions of what archaeologists do. There i s a d i s t i n c t tendency to r e l y on the published works of s i g n i f i c a n t i n d i v i d u a l s , such as Charles H i l l - T o u t and Charles Borden, and 3 a powerful propensity to chronicle excavation pr o j e c t s . This strategy suggests that these works are designed to e s t a b l i s h a h i s t o r i c a l pedigree for ongoing research i n the province, rather than explain why past excavations were conducted. The authors no doubt consider the l a t e r point s e l f evident. Some archaeologists, epitomized by Bruce G. Trigger, A History of Archaeological Thought. 6 have located archaeology within a larger h i s t o r i c a l s o c i a l context. Thomas C. Patterson and other " e x t e r n a l i s t s , " i n c l u d i n g Jim Wright for Canada, explain archaeology as an outgrowth of the socio-economic m i l i e u i n which i t i s p r a c t i s e d . 7 However, these scholars stop short of the more r e l a t i v i s t a s s e r tion that archaeological knowledge i s nothing but a r e f l e c t i o n of contemporary s o c i a l concerns. Instead, they argue that despite the impingement of external factors, such class ideology or nationalism, over time archaeology has s t i l l managed to progress and accumulate an objective core of f a c t u a l data. 8 The problem with e x t e r n a l i s t works i s the predominantly one-way causal arrow pointing from the s o c i a l m i l i e u to changes i n archaeology, and also the lack of a c l e a r explanation of how o b j e c t i v i t y i s maintained under the circumstances of massive s o c i a l influence. Ultimately, both approaches create an i l l u s i o n a r y d i v i s i o n between i n t e r n a l and external influences to account for d i s c i p l i n a r y developments. Recently, some s e l f - s t y l e d " c r i t i c a l " scholars, following the "post-processual" archaeology of Ian Hodder and the sociology of knowledge approaches, have suggested that there i s an unceasing flow of influences i n and out of the d i s c i p l i n e . 9 They r e j e c t i n t e r n a l i s t s as Whig h i s t o r i a n s , and they c r i t i c i z e e x t e r n a l i s t s for smothering l o c a l d i s c i p l i n a r y change under the cover of c l a s s ideology or other broad s o c i a l f o r c e s . 1 0 Best described as "contextualists, " scholars such as CM. Hinsley, A l i c e Kehoe, Sergio Chavez, Donald McVicker, and V a l e r i e Pinsky opt to study p a r t i c u l a r h i s t o r i c a l cases, i n order to understand the i n t e r p l a y of i n t e r n a l and external pressures, i n a m u l t i p l i c i t y of micro-contexts of time and space. 1 1 4 Because of the r e l a t i v e i s o l a t i o n i n which archaeology has developed i n the province, the contextual approach i s w e l l - s u i t e d to B.C. Proceeding contextually, I hope to explain Charles Borden's monopolization of B.C. p r e h i s t o r y as an i n t e r p l a y of i n t e r n a l and external forces i n numerous s p e c i f i c contexts. For t h i s purpose, i n addition to the t r a d i t i o n a l published sources, I have consulted contemporary newspaper accounts to gauge p u b l i c r e a c t i o n to archaeology, and government documents for the o f f i c i a l view. Most important, however, were the r i c h a r c h i v a l c o l l e c t i o n s - correspondence, l e c t u r e notes, and unpublished essays - from the well-ordered personal papers of Borden and other relevant archaeologists. Borden i n p a r t i c u l a r seems to have saved and cross- referenced every scrap of paper he came into contact with, and the post-mortem deposition of h i s papers at UBC suggests he d i d not want h i s c e n t r a l r o l e i n the formation of B.C. archaeology to be misunderstood or t r i v i a l i z e d . Among other uses, t h i s c o l l e c t i o n has proven invaluable for understanding how Borden produced knowledge, a process that i s i n v i s i b l e i f only h i s published works are studied. By emphasizing the c o n s t r u c t i v i s t nature of knowledge, I run the r i s k of being u n f a i r l y accused of r e l a t i v i s m . A contextual approach does not imply that t r u t h i s r e l a t i v e even though t r u t h i t i s c e r t a i n l y influenced by personal and s o c i a l l o c a t i o n . I believe that i n every societ y there i s an economy of tr u t h i n which some knowledge i s considered more t r u t h f u l than other knowledge. It was the case i n B.C., between 1945-1960, that Borden's s c i e n t i f i c knowledge of p r e h i s t o r y came to be accepted, p u b l i c l y and p o l i t i c a l l y , as more t r u t h f u l than knowledge generated by e i t h e r "amateurs" or Aboriginal people. To understand t h i s process, which i s absolutely c e n t r a l to how archaeologists con t r o l prehistory, I prefer to think of professional archaeology and other knowledge producing systems, as networks within which there are resources that are manipulated to construct knowledge. 1 2 Archaeologists use u n i v e r s i t i e s , research funding agencies, professional associations, and s p e c i f i c methods and 5 theories to form heavily f o r t i f i e d strongholds from which to produce facts and knowledge. The success of professional archaeology i n B.C., as I w i l l demonstrate, can be a t t r i b u t e d to a very r e a l set of h i s t o r i c a l circumstances i n which Charles Borden gained access to the p r e v a i l i n g network of p r o f e s s i o n a l archaeology, i n North America i n the l a t e 1940s, and fashioned himself i n t o the authority on B.C. prehistory. The professional and p u b l i c acceptance i n the 1950s, of Borden's interpretations and standards, was dependent upon his a b i l i t y to draw as many people, groups, and governmental a l l i e s as p o s s i b l e into t h i s network. This occurred i n many ways on d i f f e r e n t l e v e l s , and i n the process both amateurs and Natives were marginalized. They were, I argue, unable to formulate competitive networks. As a r e s u l t , i t w i l l be shown, only one seemingly objective and t r u t h f u l discourse on B.C. p r e h i s t o r y emerged a f t e r 1960, and i t p e r s i s t s today with monumental consequences. The novelty of professional archaeology i n Canada immediately a f t e r WWII cannot be overstated. Despite a b r i e f fluorescence i n eastern Canada i n the nineteenth century, by 1950, only three professional archaeologists worked i n the country, including Charles Borden at UBC.13 Borden himself r e f l e c t e d incredulously, i f not immodestly, on t h i s e a r l y period: "In 1955 there were only s i x people p r o f e s s i o n a l l y employed i n Canada as s p e c i a l i s t s i n Can. prehistory. A career i n Can. archaeology seemed scarcely more p r o f i t a b l e than a career i n poetry. U n t i l the l a t e 1950's I was the only archaeologist west of Ontario!" 1 4 Borden grew up as a German national, but was an American by b i r t h , and l i k e most archaeologists i n Canada he was educated i n the United States. 1 5 A f t e r he returned to the U.S. from Germany i n 1927, at the age of 22, Borden completed hi s A.B. i n German at UCLA and f i n i s h e d h i s studies i n 1937, a f t e r r e c e i v i n g an M.A. and Ph.D. at Berkeley i n the same subject. 1 6 He a r r i v e d at UBC i n 1939 to take a f a c u l t y post i n the German department, where he remained u n t i l retirement i n the 1970s. 1 7 As u n l i k e l y as i t seems, Borden choose to make h i s academic career i n 6 archaeology. Former colleague Roy L. Carlson explains: I once asked him why he took up l o c a l archaeological research, and he r e p l i e d that he had become so f r u s t r a t e d with the U.B.C. l i b r a r y i n attempting to obtain copies of o r i g i n a l material with which to pursue Germanic studies, that he turned to archaeology, i n which he had been interested since h i s school days i n Germany when he a s s i s t e d h i s teacher i n excavating Hamburgian s i t e s . 1 8 Borden's passion for archaeology appears to have ling e r e d throughout h i s years at Berkeley, where he apparently sat i n on anthropology l e c t u r e s . 1 9 I t was here that Borden surely encountered the ubiquitous Boasian d i s c i p l e , A l f r e d Kroeber, who was one of the pioneers of the culture-area c l a s s i f i c a t i o n scheme which continues to be c e n t r a l to how Aboriginal cultures are studied. 2 0 While Borden received no formal t r a i n i n g i n anthropology or archaeology, h i s amateur i n t e r e s t enticed him to devour a substantial number of works on the subject during the 1940s. This probably a l e r t e d him to the dearth of even remotely academic works on the archaeology of the Northwest Coast (NWC).21 Preeminent among the slender choices was the 1943 monograph by C a l i f o r n i a n anthropologist P h i l i p Drucker, on B.C., e n t i t l e d Archeolocrical Survey on the Northern Northwest Coast. 2 2 As an ethnographer i n t e r e s t e d p r i m a r i l y i n l i v i n g Nootkan peoples of Vancouver Island, Drucker's archaeological f i e l d work of 1938 was l i m i t e d to s i t e surveys, minor excavations, and an a r t i f a c t typology. E s p e c i a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t for Borden was the passionate cry that Drucker issued for systematic archaeological work on the o r i g i n s of p r e h i s t o r i c c o a s t a l peoples: The t r u t h of the matter can be determined only by c a r e f u l and extensive i n v e s t i g a t i o n s . My aim here, however, i s not to soar o f f into the realms of speculation, but to point out a s e r i e s of problems, and s p e c i f i c a l l y at t h i s point, the v i t a l need for more r i g i d l y c o n t r o l l e d excavations i n the Fraser-Columbia region as well as on the adjacent coast. 2 3 In the mid 1960s Borden would r e f l e c t i n the essay, "Review of Archaeological Research Carried Out i n B r i t i s h Columbia," that Drucker's words i n s t i g a t e d h i s 7 e a r l y amateur involvement i n B.C. archaeology: "Drucker's report . . . had a profound influence on the present writer. I t was the d i r e c t impact of h i s p u b l i c a t i o n which i n 1945 prompted me to i n i t i a t e a ser i e s of salvage projects at p o t e n t i a l l y important but r a p i d l y vanishing s i t e s within the c i t y l i m i t s of Vancouver." 2 4 Early salvage excavations from 1945 to 1947 were conducted by Borden and h i s f r i e n d , Dr. A.V.P. Akrigg, at numerous loc a l e s on Point Grey (Figure 1, p. 71) . 2 5 Although an unsanctioned hobby, Borden's 1947 unpublished "Preliminary Report on the Archeology of Point Grey," indicates the seriousness with which they worked: "Though archaeology i s not our major f i e l d , but an avocation, we are t r y i n g to follow accepted procedures and to avoid, as much as possible, the errors and sins of omission commonly committed by amateurs." 2 6 By looking to professionals for guidance, Borden was already distancing himself from other l o c a l amateurs and preparing himself to command pr o f e s s i o n a l f i e l d archaeology i n B.C. The l o c a l amateur t r a d i t i o n that Borden rejected was deeply entrenched. It dated from the f i r s t excavations by English immigrant Charles H i l l - T o u t , who moved from Ontario to Vancouver i n 1890. He was p r i n c i p a l of h i s own p r i v a t e school, and a fellow of both the Royal Society of Canada and the Royal Archaeological I n s t i t u t e of Great B r i t a i n , and considered himself eminently 27 q u a l i f i e d to excavate l o c a l s i t e s . In p a r t i c u l a r , he worked on the massive midden discovered i n Marpole (then Eburne) during road construction from 28 Vancouver to Sea Island i n 1888 (Figure 1, p. 71) . The r e s u l t s of h i s work on what he dubbed "The Great Fraser Midden," were published as a p r o f e s s i o n a l a r t i c l e i n 1895, e n t i t l e d "Late P r e h i s t o r i c Man i n B r i t i s h Columbia," i n the Transactions of the Roval Society of Canada, 2 9 under George M. Dawson, Dir e c t o r of the Geological Survey of Canada. H i l l - T o u t met Dawson i n the 1880s through Daniel Wilson, the President of the Un i v e r s i t y of Toronto. Wilson, along with George Dawson's father, John William Dawson, and Horatio Hale, i n i t i a t e d i n s t i t u t i o n a l i z e d archaeology i n Canada when they formed the Committee on the 8 North-Western Tribes of Canada, as a branch of the B r i t i s h A s s o c i a t i o n for the Advancement of Science, i n 1884.30 This Committee sponsored Franz Boas' f i r s t ethnographic f i e l d t r i p s to B.C. (1888-1894), and, Douglas Cole argues, established Boas' e a r l y dominance i n Canada. 3 1 In 1897, George Dawson chaired the newly-formed Committee on an Ethnographic Survey of Canada of the B r i t i s h A s sociation. H i l l - T o u t was chosen by Dawson as the B.C. anthropologist and contributed to the Committees' 1902 report. 3 2 The d e c i s i v e moments for Canadian archaeology began with the 1901 death of George Dawson, following s h o r t l y a f t e r the deaths of Dawson's father. Hale, and Wilson, i n the 1890s. 3 3 The death of these giants of Canadian archaeology l e f t no p r o f e s s i o n a l l y - t r a i n e d h e i r s , and with the l i q u i d a t i o n of the Ethnographic Survey i n 1903, H i l l - T o u t and other amateurs across Canada were e s s e n t i a l l y abandoned to t h e i r l o c a l p u r s u i t s . 3 4 During the same time, from 1897-1902, Boas, as Professor of Anthropology at Columbia U n i v e r s i t y and Curator of the American Museum of Natural History i n New York, l e d the Jesup North P a c i f i c Expedition to B.C. The major goal of the Jesup Expedition was to salvage Native material culture and o r a l t r a d i t i o n s , which were perceived by anthropologists to be i n grave danger of e x t i n c t i o n i n the face of c a p i t a l i s t Western culture. The focus of the Jesup Expedition on c o l l e c t i n g for museum purposes, was consonant with other expeditions to the NWC, from the mid-1870s to the 1920s, which depleted the area of v i r t u a l l y a l l material culture, i n a massive exodus to major American and European c i t i e s such as New York, Washington, Chicago, London, and B e r l i n . 3 5 The Jesup Expedition conducted ethnographic surveys and the f i r s t p r o f e s s i o n a l archaeological surveys under the d i r e c t i o n of Harlan Smith. Methodologically Smith was very s i m i l a r to H i l l - T o u t , excavating r a p i d l y , with l i t t l e measuring, and focusing on the procurement of a r t i f a c t s and skeletons according to the standards of the day. L i t e r a l l y thousands of skeletons, s k u l l s , and material a r t i f a c t s were acquired through excavation, purchase, or 9 t h e f t and shipped back to the American Museum of Natural History i n New York. 3 6 Aside from cont r i b u t i n g to the c u l t u r a l exhaustion of B.C., the impact of the Jesup Expedition on H i l l - T o u t and the future of B.C. archaeology was monumental. It i s evident that Boas had a strong personal d i s l i k e f o r H i l l - T o u t from e a r l y on. In 1897, despite H i l l - T o u t ' s devotion, experience, and generosity (he gave f i v e Native s k u l l s to Boas), 3 7 Boas f l a t l y denied H i l l - T o u t a p o s i t i o n i n the Jesup Expedition, while h i r i n g other l o c a l s such as James T e i t , who had absolutely no p r i o r experience or t r a i n i n g . T e i t was married to a Native woman and provided Boas with v i t a l contacts, while h i s lack of education gave Boas the opportunity to mould T e i t to his brand of anthropology, something he could not have done with H i l l - T o u t . 3 8 Boas also t r i v i a l i z e d H i l l - T o u t ' s c e n t r a l argument, a r i s i n g from h i s excavations at Marpole and based on a few s k u l l examinations, that an e a r l i e r "long-headed" people were replaced by a l a t e r "broad-headed" race r e l a t e d to the contemporary Native populations. 3 9 Boas dismissed H i l l - T o u t ' s assessment, arguing that the long-headed s k u l l was merely an unremarkable example of r i t u a l deformation. 4 0 When consulted by R.W. Brock of the Geological Survey, i n 1910, about candidates for the job of ch i e f ethnologist at the new V i c t o r i a Museum i n Ottawa, Boas advised: " I t seems to my mind that the few Canadians who are interest e d i n anthropological work have not s u f f i c i e n t s c i e n t i f i c t r a i n i n g for the p o s i t i o n that you intend to f i l l . " He continued, "I mention p a r t i c u l a r y Mr. H i l l - T o u t , who besides, has a most remarkable a b i l i t y of exasperating everyone with whom he comes into contact, who i s a good c o l l e c t o r , but thoroughly u n s c i e n t i f i c i n h i s conclusions." 4 1 The job went to a Boas student, the American Edward Sapir, who had also worked on the B.C. coast. Sapir i n turn appointed Harlan Smith, the Jesup Expedition archaeologist, as Canada's national archaeologist, thereby completing the Boasian encapsulation of professional anthropology and archaeology i n Canada. 4 2 10 In the succeeding decades, Sapir demonstrated a d i s t i n c t preference for profe s s i o n a l s from the Americanist school of Boas, and the work of amateurs i n Canada was neglected. 4 3 In a l e t t e r from 1912, H i l l - T o u t chastised Sapir f o r ignoring the work of Canadian anthropologists. 4 4 Sapir reciprocated i n 1916 when President Wesbrook, of the newly-formed UBC, inquired as to Sapir's opinion of H i l l - T o u t for the Chair of the Un i v e r s i t y Anthropology Department. Sapir r e p l i e d "To be p e r f e c t l y frank, I do not think Mr. H i l l - T o u t would altogether answer the needs of a u n i v e r s i t y . " 4 5 Ultimately, West Coast amateurs, l i k e H i l l - T o u t , were barred by Sapir from access to the Geological Survey's ethnology journal, and had to publish e i t h e r l o c a l l y or outside of the country. A f t e r 1910, owing to the Boasian control of Canadian anthropology under Sapir, B.C. archaeology limped along i n a p a r t i c u l a r y l o c a l and in s u l a t e d manner from the re s t of North America, u n t i l Borden st a r t e d digging i n 1945. The Art, H i s t o r i c a l , and S c i e n t i f i c Association of which H i l l - T o u t was a charter member from 1894, operated the Vancouver C i t y Museum and continued to sponsor l o c a l excavations, p a r t i c u l a r y those of Hermann Leisk at Marpole, 1927-1932 . 4 6 H i l l - T o u t and other museum members were tremendously popular i n Vancouver during the f i r s t h a l f of the 20th century, i s s u i n g t h e i r own Arts Notes p u b l i c a t i o n , holding public lectures, and using the Vancouver newspapers as t h e i r p r o f e s s i o n a l forum. H i l l - T o u t also had a sub s t a n t i a l following i n England, where the London I l l u s t r a t e d News provided extensive coverage of the r e s u l t s of h i s Marpole work. Despite Boas' r e j e c t i o n of him, and h i s further marginalization by Sapir, H i l l - T o u t ' s two-race replacement model remained the working thesis of l o c a l amateurs well into the 1940s. 4 7 H i l l - T o u t died i n 1944 jus t as Borden began his own digs into- B.C. p r e h i s t o r y . 4 8 I t i s of paramount s i g n i f i c a n c e that Borden chose to r e j e c t the l o c a l amateur archaeological lineage, and pursue the professional Boasian Americanist t r a d i t i o n , when he began his 1945 Point Grey excavations. I t would have been 11 e a s y f o r h i m t o have assumed t h e r o l e o f c h i e f l o c a l amateur a f t e r H i l l - T o u t d i e d i n 1944. However, most l i k e l y B o r d e n ' s e x p o s u r e t o K r o e b e r and t h e B o a s i a n s c h o o l i n C a l i f o r n i a , and h i s d e s i r e t o b u i l d a r e c o g n i z e d p r o f e s s i o n a l c a r e e r had t a u g h t h i m t o m a i n t a i n h i s d i s t a n c e f rom t h e l o c a l t r a d i t i o n , w h i c h a t t h i s p o i n t h a d no i n f l u e n c e on p r o f e s s i o n a l N o r t h A m e r i c a n a r c h a e o l o g y . I n s p i t e o f t h e m e t h o d o l o g i c a l s i m i l a r i t y o f H a r l a n S m i t h ' s " p r o f e s s i o n a l " and H i l l - T o u t ' s "amateur" t u r n - o f - t h e - c e n t u r y work a t M a r p o l e , 5 0 B o r d e n c o n s c i o u s l y e s t a b l i s h e d h i m s e l f a t t h e t e r m i n u s o f S m i t h a n d D r u c k e r ' s t i n y l i n e a g e o f p r o f e s s i o n a l f i e l d a r c h a e o l o g y . W h i l e B o r d e n a c k n o w l e d g e d H i l l - T o u t i n h i s w r i t i n g , he c a r e f u l l y a v o i d e d any d i r e c t a s s o c i a t i o n w i t h H i l l - T o u t ' s amateur p e d i g r e e . The f u s i o n o f B o r d e n , p r o f e s s i o n a l B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a n f i e l d a r c h a e o l o g y , UBC, and t h e e x i s t i n g ne twork o f s c i e n t i f i c N o r t h A m e r i c a n a r c h a e o l o g y o c c u r r e d o f f i c i a l l y i n 1948, and was d e s c r i b e d b y B o r d e n i n a 1977 l e c t u r e t o t h e A r c h a e o l o g i c a l S o c i e t y o f B . C . : When D r . H a r r y Hawthorn was a p p o i n t e d t o a t e a c h i n g p o s t a t UBC i n 1947 ( the f i r s t a n t h r o p . a t a u n i v e r s i t y i n w e s t e r n C a n ! ) he l o o k e d w [ i t h ] f a v o r on o u r s a l v a g e a r c h a e o l [ o g y a t P o i n t G r e y a n d ] ; i n t h e f a l l o f 1948 D r . H a s k e d me t o u n d e r t a k e a t r i a l t e a c h i n g f i e l d p r o j e c t as p a r t o f h i s c o u r s e on B r i t . C o l . I n d i a n s . T h i s was c a r r i e d out s u c c e s s f u l l y a t t h e M a r p o l e s i t e i n l a t e 1948 [and] e a r l y 1949. I t s s u c c e s s l e d t o t h e i n t r o d u c t i o n o f a c o u r s e i n t h e A r c h a e o l . o f B r i t . C o l . a t UBC. The c o u r s e has been t a u g h t t h e r e 51 s i n c e . The s i g n i f i c a n c e o f t h i s sequence o f e v e n t s i s p a r a m o u n t . As a Y a l e e d u c a t e d member o f t h e A m e r i c a n a n t h r o p o l o g i c a l e s t a b l i s h m e n t , H a r r y Hawthorn was a b l e t o f o r m a l l y c o n n e c t B o r d e n t o h i s ne twork o f i n s t i t u t i o n s and c o l l e a g u e s i n t h e U . S . , a n d a l l o w e d B o r d e n t o d e r i v e h i s a u t h o r i t y f r o m them, r a t h e r t h a n t h e r a n k s o f l o c a l a m a t e u r s . By t a k i n g t h e t i t l e " L e c t u r e r i n A r c h a e o l o g y " i n 1949 5 2 a t a m a j o r p r o v i n c i a l u n i v e r s i t y , B o r d e n a d o p t e d t h e academic s t a t u s o f h i s new c o l l e a g u e s i n A m e r i c a n u n i v e r s i t i e s . The A m e r i c a n A n t h r o p o l o g i c a l A s s o c i a t i o n q u i c k l y 12 made Borden a member, and h i s short a r t i c l e on f i e l d methods, "A Translucent Shelter for F i e l d Work i n Regions with High P r e c i p i t a t i o n , " appeared i n the January 1950 e d i t i o n of the premier journal i n the f i e l d , American A n t i q u i t y . 5 3 His recognition as an expert i n NWC archaeology led to p u b l i c a t i o n of Borden's short report, "Fraser River Delta Archaeological Findings," and i n v i t a t i o n s to write two reviews i n 1951, including one for a book by U n i v e r s i t y of Washington archaeologist, Arden King. 5 4 Thus, i n s p i t e of h i s lack of formal t r a i n i n g i n archaeology, Borden was by the e a r l y 1950s, a f u l l y recognized member of the academic community of professional archaeologists, with f u l l access to t h e i r s o c i e t i e s , conferences, and p u b l i c a t i o n s . 5 5 He had, i n e f f e c t , become the conduit through which the network of Americanist archaeology with i t s c o l l e c t i o n of approved methods, theories, and goals b u i l t up by p r o f e s s i o n a l s over decades, intersected with the l a r g e l y unearthed pr e h i s t o r y of B.C. For the f i r s t h a l f of the 20th century, p r o f e s s i o n a l archaeologists i n the U.S. had followed the Boasian h i s t o r i c a l school of anthropology, which achieved i t s f u l l e s t expression i n Sapir's seminal 1916 work, Time Perspective i n A b o riginal American Culture. A Study i n Method. 5 6 By Borden's day, i n the 1940s, pr o f e s s i o n a l archaeologists, armed with new f i e l d methods, continued to agree, for the most part, that the reconstruction of c u l t u r a l h i s t o r y and "area syntheses" of p r e h i s t o r i c American cultures was t h e i r purpose. 5 7 The e s s e n t i a l task of "area synthesis" was the development of regional charts and chronologies, that defined and located "cultures" temporally and s p a t i a l l y according to " a r t i f a c t " d i s t r i b u t i o n s . S p a t i a l d i s t r i b u t i o n was c o n t r o l l e d by typologies that grouped a r t i f a c t s according to how they were manufactured, 58 material type, and t h e i r o r i g i n a l function. The r e l a t i v e s i m i l a r i t y and d i f f e r e n c e of a r t i f a c t types across space, i t was assumed, could define the l i m i t s of cultures. These "cultures" were mapped s p a t i a l l y and c o r r e l a t e d with the geographic areas derived by Kroeber. 5 9 For temporal c o n t r o l , archaeologists i n the U.S., i n the 1930s and 1940s, employed s t r a t i g r a p h i c techniques 13 developed i n the 1910s and 1920s. Stratigraphy involved the assumption that a r t i f a c t s found i n lower layers i n s i t e s during excavations were deposited f i r s t , and therefore are nec e s s a r i l y older than objects found c l o s e r to the surface. 6 0 The objective of excavating and a r t i f a c t c l a s s i f i c a t i o n was to e s t a b l i s h these v e r t i c a l l y temporal, and h o r i z o n t a l l y s p a t i a l , maps or latticeworks of Aboriginal cultures. In the l a t e 1930s and 1940s Clyde Kluckhohn, W.D. Strong, F.M. Setzler, and J u l i a n Steward among others, fervently c r i t i c i z e d c ulture h i s t o r y . 6 1 They argued that archaeology needed to pursue s c i e n t i f i c generalizations about cul t u r e processes, rather than focus too c l o s e l y on s p e c i f i c instances of cult u r e h i s t o r y . Kluckhohn, i n p a r t i c u l a r , issued a damning indictment of culture h i s t o r y as devoid of theory, and posed a d e c i s i v e question: "Is the 'structure of the modern world' to be revealed by flashes of i n t u i t i o n catalyzed by h i s t o r i c a l i n s i g h t or by the inductive generalizations of science?" 6 2 Many North American archaeologists chose the l a t t e r path and issued a stringent c a l l to tighten controls on excavations i n the name of s c i e n t i f i c o b j e c t i v i t y . The pinnacle of s c i e n t i f i c i t y was achieved i n the 1940s by the landmark work of Walter W. Taylor e n t i t l e d A Study of Archeology. 6 3 Taylor's scheme, c a l l e d the "conjunctive approach," advocated a convergence of a l l p o s s i b l e forms of evidence to answer s p e c i f i c archaeological questions. 6 4 Central was s c i e n t i f i c a l l y systematic data c o l l e c t i o n : The gathering of data from archeological s i t e s , i n nearly every instance, involves the destruction of the o r i g i n a l record. Only to the extent to which that record i s transposed to the archeologist's notes i s i t preserved for study e i t h e r by the c o l l e c t o r himself or by other students. A good axiom f o r archeologists i s that " i t i s not what you f i n d , but how you f i n d i t , " and i t i s superfluous to point out that "how you f i n d i t " can be t o l d only from notes and not specimens. An archeological f i n d i s only as good as the notes upon i t . Therefore only one objective can be sanctioned with regard to the actual excavation of archeological s i t e s : that of securing the most complete record as possible, not only of those d e t a i l s which are of i n t e r e s t to the 14 c o l l e c t o r , but of the en t i r e geographic and human environment. That which i s not recorded i s most often e n t i r e l y l o s t . In such a s i t u a t i o n , s e l e c t i o n implies wanton waste. 6 5 The goal of archaeology was to be able to reproduce the o r i g i n a l a s s o c i a t i o n of a r t i f a c t s and c u l t u r a l and environmental d e t r i t u s i n the lab, i n order to discover the function of a r t i f a c t s i n t h e i r o r i g i n a l c u l t u r a l and environmental contexts. Taylor's i n t e r e s t i n functionalism was drawn from the B r i t i s h s o c i a l anthropology of Bronislaw Malinowski and A.R. Radcliffe-Brown who both taught i n the U.S. i n the 1930s. 6 6 The timing of Taylor's 1948 work i s c r i t i c a l for understanding the development of pro f e s s i o n a l archaeology i n B.C. and Borden's ascendency within i t . The empiricism of the conjunctive approach dovetailed p e r f e c t l y with Borden's p r o c l i v i t y for f i e l d rigour evidenced at Point Grey. Taylor's work a c t u a l l y became the core around which Borden's own archaeological ideas coalesced, and were expressed i n the classroom. Borden's commitment to s c i e n t i f i c archaeology was a r t i c u l a t e d i n h i s f i r s t lectures to archaeology students at UBC i n 1949: "Among the d i s c i p l i n e s which comprise the wide range of the f i e l d of anthropology the science of archaeology occupies an important p l a c e . " 6 7 He went on to make a case for s c i e n t i f i c archaeology, c i t i n g the turn-of-the-century Jesup Expedition work of Harlan Smith as an example of how permanent value was l o s t , because of a lack of " s c i e n t i f i c c o n t r o l and p r e c i s i o n . " 6 8 In h i s standard class lecture, "Objectives + Methodology of Modern Archaeology," Borden made statements that c l o s e l y p a r a l l e l e d those of Taylor: "The modern archaeologist seeks to construct as complete a p i c t u r e as possi b l e of past human l i f e i n terms of i t s human and geographic environment both on a sing l e time plane and i n successive periods." 6 9 In a clas s l e c t u r e from September 1954, Borden a c t u a l l y read pages 154-156 of Taylor's book, containing the section reproduced above. 7 0 The importance of s c i e n t i f i c i t y was not l o s t on the students. Borden's p r i z e d i s c i p l e , Wilson Duff, e x p l i c i t l y 15 stated i n h i s Anthropology 401 report for Borden, on excavations at Marpole i n 1949, that "the method of presentation of t h i s report i s a modification of that suggested by Walter Taylor i n A Study of Archeology." 7 1 The constant emphasis that only standardized excavation and lab techniques could reveal knowledge of the past was the c e n t r a l theme i n Borden's teachings. Despite Taylor's focus on s c i e n t i f i c i t y , he, unlike Kluckhohn, d i d not r e a d i l y divorce culture h i s t o r y and anthropological g e n e r a l i z a t i o n : "The conjunctive approach i s not concerned as to whether the p a r t i c u l a r archeologist has for h i s objective historiography or anthropology. But i t does bel i e v e that, to j u s t i f y i t s e l f as a s o c i a l science as opposed to antiquarianism, archaeology must at l e a s t write history, must at l e a s t construct the f u l l e s t 72 p o s s i b l e c u l t u r a l contexts." Borden, i n agreement, suggested i n c l a s s that the s c i e n t i f i c archaeologist's "chief goal i s to write culture h i s t o r y , " and for him t h i s task took p r i o r i t y , i n the l a t e 1940s and 1950s, because not even basic chronologies or area syntheses had been formulated for B.C.73 Indeed, the ultimate legacy of the encapsulation of NWC archaeology within a context of Boasian anthropology, by Sapir and Smith from Ottawa, and from the western U.S. by Kroeber, Drucker, Frederica de Laguna, and Borden the self-taught Boasian, i s that culture h i s t o r y i s s t i l l the main thrust of archaeological research i n B.C.74 This s i t u a t i o n i s d i f f e r e n t from other areas of North America i n which the s c i e n t i f i c anthropology of Kluckhohn, Steward, Setzler, Taylor, and others l e d to the r e j e c t i o n of culture h i s t o r y , i n the l a t e 1950s and 1960s, as p a r t i c u l a r i s t , non-explanatory, and thus u n s c i e n t i f i c . The r e s u l t i n g "processual" or "new archaeology" of Gordon Willey, P h i l i p P h i l l i p s , and Lewis Binford, which dominated American archaeology from the e a r l y 1960s u n t i l the 1980s, i s oriented toward discovering general s c i e n t i f i c laws of culture change. Processualists draw heavily on neo-evolutionary ideas and a n t i - h i s t o r i c a l B r i t i s h s o c i a l anthropology to argue that archaeology i s anthropology (meaning a generalizing science) or i t i s nothing. 7 5 To the 16 contrary, Borden remained within the Boasian h i s t o r i c a l school through the 1960s and 1970s, and yet drew on the s c i e n t i f i c rigour and functionalism of Taylor, without i r r e c o n c i l a b l y s p l i t t i n g h i s t o r y and science as Kluckhohn and others d i d . 7 6 So the s c i e n t i f i c culture h i s t o r y that was u n i v e r s a l i n the l a t e 1940s and 1950s i n North America, continued i n B.C. through Borden's tutelage, while i n the 1960s i t was rejected i n other parts of North America by a p o s i t i v i s t urge to i d e n t i f y general laws of c u l t u r a l development. During the 1950s, i n t h i s early period of chronology b u i l d i n g and area synthesis, Borden began to monopolize B.C. prehistory. How he was able to do t h i s stems from the differences between how he produced knowledge about pr e h i s t o r y as a professional, compared to how l o c a l s continued to produce knowledge as amateurs. The s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e i s not an issue of the "truth" of Borden's knowledge versus the " f a l s i t y " of amateur knowledge, but rather an economy of truth. When Borden dug into the prehistory of B.C. he d i d so not only as an i n d i v i d u a l , but as a representative of the massive network of North American professional archaeology, with i t s u n i v e r s i t i e s , museums, labor a t o r i e s , s p e c i a l technology, standard language, known methods, and approved theories. His knowledge-production enterprise involved drawing on t h i s network to b u i l d a l l i a n c e s of authority that would support and promote h i s work. Borden spoke for professional archaeology i n B.C., and p r o f e s s i o n a l archaeology confirmed Borden's authority. In contrast, most amateur archaeologists i n B.C. were i n d i v i d u a l s working alone, unconnected, and without communication l i n e s , publications, c o l l e c t i v e language, theories or methods, and d e r i v i n g t h e i r authority s o l e l y from pe r s o n a l i t y and common sense. When i t came to making claims about prehistory i n the public forum, the weight of a l l i a n c e s became de c i s i v e . Excavations i n the summer 1949, at a large midden on the Whalen family farm at Point Roberts Washington (Figure 1, p. 71), are t y p i c a l of how Borden conducted s c i e n t i f i c culture h i s t o r y and mustered resources and a l l i a n c e s to 17 construct knowledge. The Point Roberts excavations were conducted as a f i e l d school for UBC and U n i v e r s i t y of Washington (UW) archaeology students. Although i t was financed by UW, Borden d i r e c t e d the excavations, and published most of the r e s u l t s i n Anthropology i n B.C. and B r i t i s h Columbia H i s t o r i c a l Quarterly i n 1950, which were among his f i r s t p u b lications as a p r o f e s s i o n a l archaeologist. 7 7 In these a r t i c l e s , Borden makes i t c l e a r to the reader that he i s personally responsible for producing what l i m i t e d knowledge exis t e d on the c u l t u r a l l y r i c h Fraser Delta area: Among the s i t e s that have been investigated i n the Vancouver area are the following: Point Grey, one mile northeast of Point Grey proper; Locarno Beach, a mile and a h a l f nearer to the business centre of Vancouver; and Marpole (Eburne), the well-known and much abused s i t e on the North Arm of the Fraser River. A surface c o l l e c t i o n has also been made at the two v i l l a g e s i t e s on the 78 Musqueam Reserve at the mouth of the North Arm. He conveniently, and understandably, d i d not mention that most of these excavations were c a r r i e d out by him as amateur a c t i v i t i e s . Indeed, he likened them to the p r o f e s s i o n a l 1946 San Juan Islands excavations of Arden King from UW.79 Borden also took t h i s opportunity to c i t e Drucker's c a l l f o r " r i g i d l y • • 80 c o n t r o l l e d excavations" as the impetus behind the Whalen farm p r o j e c t . The elaborate r i t u a l of excavation at the Whalen s i t e , as i n a l l of Borden's subsequent excavations, proceeded methodically using recognized f i e l d methods borrowed from A Manual of Archaeological F i e l d Methods, edited by Robert F. Heizer from the U n i v e r s i t y of C a l i f o r n i a at Berkeley. 8 1 The process o u t l i n e d i n Borden's published reports on the project began with the p h y s i c a l l o c a t i o n of the s i t e : "Before the excavation proper began, the students were busy with alidade, plane-table, and stadia rod, surveying, f i x i n g datum points and benchmarks, and preparing contour maps of the s i t e . " 8 2 As the actual digging progressed, "every f i n d , upon discovery, immediately received an i d e n t i f i c a t i o n number and i t s l o c a t i o n was measured three-dimensionally with reference to datum point and bench mark."83 Objects i d e n t i f i e d during the 18 excavation were treated c a r e f u l l y : "One a r t i f a c t record-sheet, the s i z e of standard typewriter-paper, was devoted to each f i n d f o r the recording of these and other data." 8 4 The record-sheets that were used at the Whalen s i t e were d i r e c t l y adapted from UW forms and Heizer's manual. 8 5 In a d d i t i o n to the a r t i f a c t s themselves, the physical context or matrix was also " s c i e n t i f i c a l l y " apprehended: "Associated material, such as food remains, d e t r i t u s of manufacture, charcoal, samples of ash and other midden material from the various s t r a t a , was c o l l e c t e d i n s p e c i a l bags and i t s o r i g i n recorded." 8 6 As a f i n a l measure, s t r a t i g r a p h i c p r o f i l e s were copied onto graph paper and hundreds of photographs taken. "In t h i s fashion a trench 80 feet long, 5 feet wide, and 12 feet deep was excavated during the nine weeks of the f i e l d - t r i p . " 8 7 (Figure 3, p. 73) Because i t was generally understood, from Taylor's writings, that archaeological s i t e s are destroyed during excavation, exacting f i e l d methods ensured that the s p a t i a l and temporal r e l a t i o n s h i p s of a l l recovered items were "frozen," so to speak, for transport to the archaeology laboratory where t h e i r meaning could be derived. The a r t i f a c t sheets and extensive f i e l d notes recorded l i t e r a l l y tons of data, meticulously encoded i n the standardized three dimensional language of professional archaeologists, and deposited at UBC i n massive booklets. 8 8 A f t e r completion of the excavations at Point Roberts, the UBC archaeology lab received crates of raw data and boxes of notes for a n a l y s i s . Borden attempted to r a t i o n a l i z e the massive e f f o r t s of meticulous record-keeping as necessary to reveal the true story about the past: The reward for a l l t h i s care i n the f i e l d came l a t e r i n the laboratory when, a f t e r the o r i g i n a l p o s i t i o n of each f i n d had been p r e c i s e l y p l o t t e d on the p r o f i l e drawings, the a r t i f a c t s were l a i d out on a large table i n t h e i r proper a s s o c i a t i o n and sequence. Although not one of the a r t i f a c t s was very spectacular by i t s e l f , as the finds l ay spread out i n t h i s fashion they began to t e l l the 89 story of two i n t e r e s t i n g chapters i n the p r e - h i s t o r y of t h i s area. For Borden, following Taylor's functionalism, lab analysis was the c r u c i a l 19 process whereby the relationships between artifacts and other materials, encoded on paper, were "revealed." Taylor had noted the primacy of the relationships in the raw data: "I refer to what may be called the affinities existing between the material remains: between individual cultural objects, between groups of objects, between groups of objects and the natural environment. These a f f i n i t i e s are as much facts and as much integral parts of the archaeological data as are the material objects themselves."90 The f i r s t step in revealing the meaning of relationships between material objects, was to group them into artifact types. For this task Borden turned to the classification scheme developed by Philip Drucker for his 1943 survey of NWC archaeology. As the pioneer in NWC artifact classification, Drucker provided the most expedient and applicable typology. He was really the only one to whom Borden could turn for the analysis of the Whalen ar t i f a c t s . 9 1 Drucker described the rationale behind his classification scheme: A heterogeneous lot of material objects may be cla s s i f i e d in various ways. Theoretically, i t should be advantageous to group them primarily according to a single one of the several possible c r i t e r i a — form, material, or function. To follow this procedure consistently would mean that i t would be possible to compare components widely separated in time and/or space. In practise, any single criterion is insufficient for specific and detailed classification. The present body of material has been cla s s i f i e d according to whichever of the three aspects -- material, form, or function — seemed to meet immediate demands. In some cases, material seemed the primary factor of classification; in others, function or form played this role. This procedure has the advantage of f l e x i b i l i t y , which outweighs i t s theoretically objectionable inconsistency. 9 2 By employing Drucker' s typology to formulate hypotheses about the relationships of artifacts, Borden incorporated into his alliance system both Drucker, and Drucker 1s colleagues and predecessors in classification from M.C. McKern back to Linnaeus. 9 3 Artifact classification allowed Borden to hypothesize that two cultures 20 with d i s t i n c t o r i g i n s were present at d i f f e r e n t times at the Whalen midden. 9 4 He concluded that the a r t i f a c t c o l l e c t i o n contained two d i s t i n c t assemblages of a r t i f a c t s ; that i s , i t represented a sequence of two d i f f e r e n t Indian cultures. Although there are c e r t a i n s i m i l a r i t i e s , the differences between the two are more numerous, and some of these are very s t r i k i n g . The t r a n s i t i o n from one to the other i s quite abrupt, with a d i s t i n c t d i v i d i n g l i n e between the two groups. 9 5 Differences i n the a r t i f a c t assemblages including the s i z e , material type, and method of manufacture of p r o j e c t i l e points, adzes, a n t l e r wedges, and of other important wood-working implements, substantiated h i s claims for the two d i s t i n c t cultures, which he designated Whalen I and Whalen I I . 9 6 Assigning a r t i f a c t s to types and a t t r i b u t i n g c u l t u r a l s i g n i f i c a n c e to them required inference from the ethnographic known to the archaeological unknown.97 Viewed as most r e l i a b l e for both the c l a s s i f i c a t i o n of a r t i f a c t s and the i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of t h e i r c u l t u r a l meaning was the " d i r e c t h i s t o r i c a l approach." This method had been widely employed i n North America since the e a r l y 20th century, and counted Kroeber and prominent archaeologists W.D. Strong and 98 J u l i a n Steward among i t s developers. This method r e l i e d on a s c e r t a i n i n g the known function of tools, from d i r e c t descendants of o r i g i n a l occupants of p r e h i s t o r i c s i t e s , as a basis for i n f e r r i n g the function of tools and a corresponding subsistence pattern and s o c i a l behaviour i n the unknown past. 9 9 Drucker used t h i s approach i n his survey to formulate h i s a r t i f a c t typology, and Borden himself employed the d i r e c t h i s t o r i c a l approach during h i s analysis of materials excavated from middens on the Musqueam Indian Reserve along the North Arm of the Fraser i n 1950 and 1951 (Figure 1, p. 71). 1 0° Since i t was not app l i c a b l e to the Whalen s i t e , which was not contemporaneously occupied at the time of excavation, ethnographic knowledge from other l o c a l e s was applied to c l a s s i f i e d a r t i f a c t s to i n f e r c u l t u r a l s i g n i f i c a n c e . For comparative ethnographic information on NWC cultures, Borden r e l i e d on the extensive data 2 1 compiled by the Jesup Expedition. 1 0 1 With a r t i f a c t s s a t i s f a c t o r i l y nominated, but before applying ethnographic analogy, Borden sought to reconstruct the geographical context within which tools had been used. He d i d t h i s by analyzing f l o r a l and faunal material found i n a s s o c i a t i o n with the a r t i f a c t s . For the Whalen s i t e , students were assigned the task of compiling data on s p e c i f i c aspects of the p r e h i s t o r i c p h y s i c a l environment and analyzing the data i n the lab. Wilson Duff, for example, contributed the botanical report. His approach was that of UW Boasian anthropologist, Erna Gunther, and drew on the ra t i o n a l e o f f e r e d by Taylor, that the c u l t u r a l meaning i n a r t i f a c t s was only ascertainable i n t h e i r p h y s i c a l context. 1 0 2 Interpreting the Whalen a r t i f a c t s , which Borden c l a s s i f i e d as "adzes," "wedges," and "pounding-hammers," i n l i g h t of ethnographic data and contextual material, Borden made powerful conclusions about the s o c i a l behaviour of the p r e h i s t o r i c occupants: From ethnographic sources we know that such tools were used f o r s p l i t t i n g o f f planks from large cedar logs. The presence of t h i s configuration of wood-working tools i n the upper horizon suggests, therefore that the l a t e r occupants of the Whalen s i t e had a w e l l -developed wood-working industry, and that they probably l i v e d i n large plank houses of the h i s t o r i c Coast S a l i s h type. Conversely, the absence i n the lower horizon of a l l three of these heavy-duty tools may indicate that wood-working was not highly developed among the e a r l i e r occupants, and that they l i v e d i n houses of a d i f f e r e n t . 103 type. Borden went even further to i n f e r a d i f f e r e n t i a l subsistence pattern for the two cultures based on sea animal remains found i n as s o c i a t i o n with key a r t i f a c t s . 1 0 4 These inferences of a r t i f a c t function and the meaning of contextual d e t r i t u s were presented by Borden, i n the pro f e s s i o n a l l i t e r a t u r e , as fundamental "facts" from which a broader i n t e r p r e t a t i o n could, and would be made. To order the "facts" and account for the apparent culture change i n the Whalen midden, Borden took from h i s professional r e p e r t o i r e , the c l a s s i c 22 Boasian explanatory mechanism of c u l t u r a l transference. D i f f u s i o n and migration, explained culture change as e i t h e r the t r a n s f e r of ideas/technology or of e n t i r e populations, rather than as the product of indigenous innovation. 1 0 5 Arranged t h i s way, the archaeological " f a c t s , " from the Whalen excavations, suggested to Borden "that an e a r l y group of Indians who had l i v e d at t h i s s i t e f or a considerable time, and whose ent i r e o r i e n t a t i o n was evidently coastal by long t r a d i t i o n , was eventually overwhelmed by i n t r u s i v e Indians whose culture e x h i b i t s strong t i e s with the I n t e r i o r . " 1 0 6 Adding comparative l i n g u i s t i c s to the archaeological evidence, Borden went further out on a limb to conclude that At an e a r l y period extensive d i s l o c a t i o n s among the Indian groups of the North-west were caused by repeated waves of migration of Athabaskan-speaking peoples sweeping from northern regions southward along the Coast i n through the I n t e r i o r . Great unrest was caused among the S a l i s h . I t appears that Salish-speaking groups were j o s t l e d out of positions i n the I n t e r i o r of Washington and migrated towards the Coast, where they adapted themselves to a new , . j- 107 l i f e . While admitting a lack of evidence to explain who had been displaced by the S a l i s h , Borden indicated i n a d i f f u s i o n i s t manner, that based on t o o l types, the c u l t u r e of the Whalen I people may have "derived i t s main stimulus from the Far North rather than from the East." 1 0 8 This hypothesis l e f t open the p o s s i b i l i t y of introducing new "facts" to the i n t e r p r e t a t i o n as they became a v a i l a b l e . I t might appear at t h i s stage of the analysis, several l e v e l s removed from the data, that Borden was i n danger of f a l l i n g i nto the amateurish trap of speculating beyond what the data could support. This, however, was not the case to Borden's professional colleagues, who recognized that he stayed s a f e l y within the range of acceptable i n t e r p r e t a t i o n allowed by the methods and a u t h o r i t i e s he employed i n h i s support. P u b l i c a t i o n was the culmination of the knowledge-production enterprise because acceptance or r e j e c t i o n by peers determined whether excavation r e s u l t s 23 became t r u t h f u l f a c t u a l knowledge, to be used a u t h o r i t a t i v e l y , or academic 109 a r t i f a c t s to be discarded. Borden published a r t i c l e s i n a number of leading journals, i n c l u d i n g American A n t i q u i t y . 1 1 0 Most important for Borden l o c a l l y , was the introduction of the journal Anthropology i n B r i t i s h Columbia, which appeared i n 1950 as a p u b l i c a t i o n of the P r o v i n c i a l Museum, under the e d i t o r i a l helm of Borden's former student and protegee, Wilson Duff. 1 1 1 Borden's success i n having his i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s graciously received into the academic community 1 1 2 stemmed from his effectiveness i n mustering a l l i e s i n the f i e l d . By using established p r o f e s s i o n a l techniques, methods, and theories, Borden demonstrated to h i s peers, mostly i n the U.S., that he was prepared to conform to the inner l o g i c of the archaeological d i s c i p l i n e . This l o g i c was d i c t a t e d by a devotion to the s a n c t i t y of empiricism i n excavation, c l a s s i f i c a t i o n i n analysis, and inference from analogy during i n t e r p r e t a t i o n . These current cornerstones i n the d i s c i p l i n e were v i t a l to the a b i l i t y of archaeologists to transform raw data, such as salmon bones, crushed s h e l l s , and smooth stones, i n t o subsistence patterns, modes of labour, and patterns of s o c i a l organization. The d i s c i p l i n a r y l o g i c of professional archaeology, i n the 1950s, was constantly reproduced through the production and spread of archaeological knowledge that endorsed the work of predecessors. A d d i t i o n a l l y , the p r e v a i l i n g inner l o g i c severely circumscribed the range of i n t e r p r e t a t i o n a v a i l a b l e to p r o f e s s i o n a l archaeologists, thereby guiding research along a narrow band of p l a u s i b l e explanations, and u l t i m a t e l y guaranteeing the accumulation of uniform knowledge over time and the "progress" of the d i s c i p l i n e . C l e a r l y , p r o f e s s i o n a l archaeology had changed s u b s t a n t i a l l y , i n terms of f i e l d methods and i n t e r p r e t i v e rigour, from the time of Smith's work at Marpole i n the 1890s, to Borden's at Point Roberts i n the 1950s. To the contrary, l o c a l amateur work, had remained i n v i r t u a l s t a s i s from the days of H i l l - T o u t ' s 1890s excavations, to those by members of the Vancouver museum at Marpole i n the 1940s. One amateur, Hermann Leisk, described h i s excavation methods i n 24 1944 as s i n k i n g a p i t in to a midden and then c u t t i n g away at a face with a s t e e l rod "in some methodical fashion, or whenever the leads seem most promis ing . You can z ig -zag to and fro under b i g trees , f i l l i n g the d i r t i n behind you. . . . 1 , 1 1 3 Le i sk e a r l i e r , i n 1937, i n d i c a t e d i n a l e t t e r to The Vancouver Sun, that i n two years work he had recovered about 1000 skeletons from Marpole, most of which were thrown away because of i n s u f f i c i e n t storage space at the C i t y Museum. 1 1 4 These excavations were conducted e n t i r e l y to r e t r i e v e a r t i f a c t s for d i s p l a y with l i t t l e being done to e s t a b l i s h t h e i r s p a t i a l or temporal l o c a t i o n s , and note keeping was m i n i m a l . 1 1 5 L e i s k c laimed to T . P . O . Menzies, the museum curator , that despi te h i s l e ss than r igorous methods, g iven s u f f i c i e n t time he could go through h i s notes, match them up with the unmarked museums c o l l e c t i o n s by memory, and o f f e r and i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of the a r t i f a c t s , although t h i s was apparent ly never done . 1 1 6 The amateur ana lys i s of a r t i f a c t s sometimes proceeded from a bas i c knowledge of Native ethnology, but u s u a l l y from simple "common-sense," which al lowed a massive range i n the form and r e l i a b i l i t y of i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s . The more f a n t a s t i c a l of these rece ived l o c a l p u b l i c i t y . A l o c a l amateur named R . A . Brooks, who owned a Vancouver antique shop, excavated a s i t e on the Fraser i n 1944, and concluded from the stone heads he discovered that the s i t e was a Maya 117 outpost . During the 1930s and in to the 1950s, p r o v i n c i a l newspapers of ten ran s t o r i e s about amateur d i scover ies that concluded Aztecs l i v e d i n B . C . , l ikened Marpole to King T u t 1 s tomb, or descr ibed i t as the s i t e of a major p r e h i s t o r i c b a t t l e evidenced by stone swords and s k u l l - c r u s h i n g c l u b s . 1 1 8 While considered f a n t a s t i c and f o o l i s h by Borden and h i s p r o f e s s i o n a l as soc ia tes , these amateur i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s r e f l e c t the h i g h l y i n d i v i d u a l , in formal , and personal nature of B . C . amateur archaeology. Amateurs were s o l i t a r y experts . They had no labs , no agreed upon vocabulary, no systematic "coded language" that a l l could read, no a u t h o r i t i e s behind them, and no conf in ing and confirming l o g i c . P u b l i c a t i o n out l e t s for amateur ideas were 25 l i m i t e d i n number and q u a l i t y , and consequently there was no feed-back mechanisms to insure the formation of knowledge. In short, amateurs were "unconnected" beyond the a s s o c i a t i o n of a few with l o c a l museums and newspapers. They appear on the B.C. archaeological landscape as independent dots rather than a t i g h t l y woven network. In a contest for discovering the t r u t h about B.C. prehistory, no amateur could compete with the authority that Borden exercised from the archaeology lab at UBC, and displayed for the approval of h i s a l l i e s from North American archaeology. A d d i t i o n a l l y , unlike Borden, most amateurs had absolutely no desire to be connected to anything nor to produce knowledge; many of them desired only to amass personal c o l l e c t i o n s for fun or p r o f i t . I f the p r o f e s s i o nal acceptance of Borden as the voice of authority about B.C. p r e h i s t o r y was guaranteed by the i n d e l i b l e l i n k of d i s c i p l i n a r y l o g i c and s c i e n t i f i c journals, how can h i s equally broad acceptance be explained among the vast majority of n o n - s c i e n t i f i c B r i t i s h Columbians who were outside of the network? The answer lay i n Borden's a b i l i t y to make archaeology seem both relevant, and i n some cases, indispensable, to the l i v e s of B r i t i s h Columbians. During the 1950s, Borden's success i n e s t a b l i s h i n g popular c r e d i b i l i t y and a monopoly over B.C prehistory was h i s a b i l i t y , and need, to involve ordinary people i n h i s archaeological projects as a l l i e s i n the knowledge-production process. This need was generated by the nature of archaeological excavations i n the 1950s, which were l a r g e l y conducted i n a climate of c r i s i s i n the face of post WWII urban expansion and i n d u s t r i a l development. In h i s A p r i l 1947 report on the Point Grey excavations, Borden grimly acknowledged that "at the time of writing, the thickets of salmonberry are being removed and the stands of maple and alder thinned. A t r a c t o r i s churning the surface [of the midden] as i t pushes around the f e l l e d t r e e s . " 1 1 9 He ends the report by s t a t i n g that " i n the immediate future the camp on the upland northwest of the ancient canoe runways w i l l be excavated i f at a l l possible, for the land i s 26 being cleared and s l a t e d to be plowed within a few weeks." 1 2 0 I t was at such threatened s i t e s that diverse members of the B.C. populous were drawn into close proximity with Borden's archaeological network, and l i n k e d to i t i n subtle and overt ways, making them important a l l i e s i n preserving archaeological s i t e s , which was obviously c e n t r a l to the production of knowledge. Borden began e n l i s t i n g the public to the cause of knowledge-production e a r l y i n h i s career as a s c i e n t i f i c archaeologist. His p u b l i c discourses took a v a r i e t y of forms, including lectures, radio broadcasts, and newspaper interviews. On 8 March 1948, for example, Borden's CBR radio t a l k to Vancouverites, "The Middens of B r i t i s h Columbia," introduced the notion that the s c i e n t i f i c study of garbage p i l e s , l i k e "Indian middens," could reveal a wealth of knowledge, and also contained an abridged version of h i s Point Grey r e s u l t s . 1 2 1 He ended the broadcast with a b r i e f explanation of the purpose of p r o f e s s i o n a l archaeology i n B.C.: "Modern Archaeology i s not content with the mere c o l l e c t i n g of museum pieces for e x h i b i t i o n purposes. One of the c h i e f aims i s the reconstruction of the prehistory of the d i f f e r e n t regions. This task i s far from complete on t h i s continent, indeed, i n Canada i t has hardly begun." 1 2 2 In other popular publications Borden suggested that s c i e n t i s t s could read middens l i k e books, and i n the newspapers he c r i t i c i z e d amateurs for doing 123 "science a d i s - s e r v i c e . " In his radio broadcasts and newspaper a r t i c l e s , Borden's c a r e f u l a l i g n i n g of resources and the massive number of contingent factors i n the production of knowledge, such as assigning a r t i f a c t s to a r b i t r a r y typologies, drawing inferences and so forth, were i n v i s i b l e to the audience. What the public received were synthesized r e s u l t s cloaked i n the catch phrase of " s c i e n t i s t s say." 1 2 4 To most people t h i s meant the r e s u l t s were unambiguous, true, and lent popular c r e d i b i l i t y to Borden's e f f o r t s . Concurrent with Borden's public education campaign, and f a c i l i t a t i n g media access and p u b l i c i n t e r e s t , were the intense p o l i t i c a l struggles over the 27 preservation of p a r t i c u l a r l y h i g h - p r o f i l e archaeological s i t e s . These involved even broader s o c i a l linkages to the preservation of archaeological s i t e s and the process of knowledge-production. Borden's former student, Wilson Duff, i n s t i g a t e d the i n i t i a l crusade to preserve archaeological s i t e s , i n the f a l l of 1950, from his new p o s i t i o n as Assistant i n Anthropology at the P r o v i n c i a l 125 Museum of Natural History and Anthropology, i n V i c t o r i a . Duff sent Borden and his UBC colleague, Harry Hawthorn, a serie s of recommendations based on the assessment that p r o v i n c i a l archaeological s i t e s were i n danger of destruction, by both urban expansion and proposed h y d r o - e l e c t r i c dam p r o j e c t s . 1 2 6 Duff recommended r e s t r i c t i n g access to s i t e s to professionals only, designating some s i t e s as permanent monuments, regulating excavations by researchers from outside of B.C., and c o n t r o l l i n g the exportation of a n t i q u i t i e s . 1 2 7 Borden strongly advised that l e g i s l a t i o n go even further by urging that developers pay for salvage excavations: "We cannot prevent urban expansion and i n d u s t r i a l development, but by i n t e l l i g e n t l e g i s l a t i o n they could be turned from a bane to a boon to archaeology. I can get a l l excited about the p o s s i b i l i t i e s . " 1 2 8 Duff and Borden together reviewed the e x i s t i n g p r o v i n c i a l a n t i q u i t i e s l e g i s l a t i o n , the " H i s t o r i c Objects Preservation Act," dating from 1948. This l e g i s l a t i o n barred the desecration of any object or s i t e designated by the Lieutenant-Governor i n Council as valuable, although the lack of researchers to assess value r e a l i s t i c a l l y prevented i t s a p p l i c a t i o n . 1 2 9 Through consultation with a lawyer, Duff had determined that the proper channel for developing fresh and more comprehensive l e g i s l a t i o n was the P r o v i n c i a l M i n i s t e r of Education, W.T. S t r a i t h , who oversaw the P r o v i n c i a l Museum.130 The assault on S t r a i t h by Duff and Borden for l e g i s l a t i o n began i n December of 1950 with a l e t t e r and memoranda e n t i t l e d , "Preservation and Salvage of Threatened Archaeological S i t e s . " 1 3 1 Duff b r i e f l y explained the s c i e n t i f i c s i g n i f i c a n c e of p r o v i n c i a l archaeological s i t e s and lamented that middens ranging from Marpole and Locarno beach, to Prince Rupert, had already 28 been destroyed by urban developers, commercial sea-shell mining, souvenir hunters, and c u l t i v a t o r s and now faced the onslaught of massive river-dam p r o j e c t s . Duff dismissed e x i s t i n g l e g i s l a t i o n as inadequate and urged immediate government action for greater s i t e p r o t e c t i o n . 1 3 2 The January 1951 announcement, of the Aluminum Company of Canada, Ltd (Al-Can) Kenney dam pr o j e c t on the Nechako r i v e r i n c e n t r a l B.C., prompted Duff and Borden to temporarily abandon e f f o r t s for l e g i s l a t i o n , and pursue immediate funding for emergency s i t e surveys and excavations i n the threatened area. 1 3 3 In a barrage of l e t t e r s from e a r l y 1951, to S t r a i t h and the M i n i s t e r of Lands and Forests, E.T. Kenney, Borden and Duff of f e r e d t h e i r services and requested $2000 i n s p e c i a l grants for archaeological work i n the summer of 1951 . 1 3 4 Duff met personally with S t r a i t h i n A p r i l to plead for the grant, which was advanced through a s p e c i a l act of cabinet i n l a t e A p r i l of 1951 . 1 3 5 J u l y and August were spent by Borden and Duff and a small team i n the Nechako r i v e r drainage i n Tweedsmuir Park (Figure 2, p. 72), mapping s i t e s and i d e n t i f y i n g those that promised r i c h rewards i f excavated. 1 3 6 At the urging of Wilson Duff, Borden sent S t r a i t h a d e t a i l e d report of the summer of 1951 surveys, as a follow-up exercise designed to maintain the momentum and secure a d d i t i o n a l funding for more fieldwork i n the summer of 1952. Duff advised Borden to "shuck o f f some of your s c i e n t i f i c hyper-caution and make i t good - you have the e x c i t i n g material to do i t with. Press releases should be jour n a l i z e d (I won't say sensationalized) as w e l l . You should begin your campaign for more money soon, and t h i s would be a way to 137 s t a r t . " I t worked. Claiming that the eyes of the world were on B.C., Borden spent the winter of 1951-1952 securing promises from S t r a i t h f o r a d d i t i o n a l funding. A grant was approved by s p e c i a l act i n March of 1952 for the amount of $8650, supplemented by contributions of $5000 from Al-Can and $900 from the UBC Research Committee. 1 3 8 This unprecedented f i n a n c i a l backing f a c i l i t a t e d extensive surveys and excavations i n the summer of 1952. The r e s u l t s were 29 published i n the same year i n Anthropology i n B.C.139 Colour films of t h i s f i r s t - e v e r government backed salvage operation were made by the P r o v i n c i a l Museum and used i n i t s educational s e r i e s . 1 4 0 A d d i t i o n a l concerns over major power developments such as the 1954 Kootenay-Libby project, the Quesnal r i v e r dams, and the 1954 Frobisher project among others dominated B.C. archaeology i n the 1950s. 1 4 1 Perhaps the most s i g n i f i c a n t methodological r a m i f i c a t i o n of the Al-Can pr o j e c t was Borden's invention, and public a t i o n , of a uniform s i t e designation scheme for Canada. Known as the Borden System, and s t i l l i n o f f i c i a l use across Canada, t h i s scheme assigns a l l archaeological s i t e s a four l e t t e r coordinate corresponding to a precise l a t i t u d i n a l and l o n g i t u d i n a l l o c a t i o n , on maps from the National Topographic S e r i e s . 1 4 2 The issue of l e g i s l a t i o n , dormant during the Al-Can project, resurfaced again i n 1955 over the continued destruction of the Great Fraser Midden at Marpole, i n the face of the construction of the Fraser Arms H o t e l . 1 4 3 Borden i n i t i a t e d salvage excavations i n May of 1955 but was stymied when funding from UBC ran out and students l e f t the project for other summer employment.144 A f t e r an outpouring of media coverage, and negotiations by Borden, the Vancouver C i t y Museum granted Borden $350 to f a c i l i t a t e excavations i n exchange for a l l a r t i f a c t s that were recovered. A crew of volunteers turned out to do the labour. 1 4 5 While orchestrating untrained workers, Borden also encountered amateurs whom he chastised i n newspaper interviews: "One of the hazards of research work i s Sunday afternoon archaeologists who come down to [Marpole] to 'pot hunt'." 1 4 6 In August of 1955, members of the Marpole Chamber of Commerce joined the crusade to save the midden and formed the Great Fraser Midden Foundation i n the autumn with Borden as honourary president. 1 4 7 Months l a t e r came a media frenzy over Borden's radio-carbon dates of 1950 years +/- 125 years for organic debris from, the Marpole s i t e . 1 4 8 This, combined with Borden's p u b l i c lectures, favourably influenced some l o c a l business people with 30 government connections. As a r e s u l t , the Marpole issue had already reached l e g i s l a t i v e c i r c l e s by the time Wilson Duff resumed h i s pressure on the government for new l e g i s l a t i o n . 1 4 9 Duff wrote to the new Minister of Education, Ray W i l l i s t o n , i n October 1955: "For several years Dr. Borden and I have been working i n close cooperation toward the protection and salvage of threatened archaeological remains. We regard the problem as one of great c u l t u r a l importance to t h i s Province." 1 5 0 Duff emphasized the wide-ranging support for preservation of the Marpole s i t e both l o c a l l y and n a t i o n a l l y . Duff also o f f e r e d p r o f e s s i o n a l advice i n formulating l e g i s l a t i o n that would ensure the p r o t e c t i o n of s i t e s , f a c i l i t a t e funding for salvage excavations from developers and government, and co n t r o l the actions of excavators through an advisory board. 1 5 1 Despite renewed media i n t e r e s t and the continuing hotel project, because of i n s u f f i c i e n t funding, no excavations were undertaken at Marpole i n the summer of 1956. 1 5 2 Borden resumed excavations the next summer using a grant from an anonymous Vancouver i n d u s t r i a l i s t , apparently prompted by an e d i t o r i a l i n 153 The Vancouver Sun. This dig, and the completion of the Fraser Arms Hotel project, chewed-up the remaining undisturbed sections of the midden, which once spanned a remarkable 4.5 acres i n area 1 5 4 and had been under constant seige for seven decades. Despite the f a i l u r e to preserve any p o r t i o n of the midden for l a t e r research, e f f o r t s to b u i l d a park and display case housing a r t i f a c t s on a t i n y p o r t i o n of the exhausted midden, s t i l l owned by the C i t y of Vancouver, continued i n vain into the e a r l y 1960s. 1 5 5 Borden's well-documented professional career demonstrates that i t i s the seemingly i n s i g n i f i c a n t and disparate l e t t e r s of suggestion, minor but w e l l -placed newspaper a r t i c l e s , p ublic lectures, radio interviews, receptions for volunteers, and tedious grant a p p l i c a t i o n s 1 5 6 that explain the success of p r o f e s s i o n a l archaeology i n the public sphere i n the 1950s. These were the minute p o l i t i c a l actions that spun almost i n v i s i b l e threads, l i n k i n g the 31 complex i n t e r n a l network of a l l i a n c e s within p r o f e s s i o n a l archaeology to the larger p u b l i c forum. Within the network of s p e c i a l i s t s , Borden aligned a p a r t i c u l a r group of methods, theories, i n d i v i d u a l s , technologies, and i n s t i t u t i o n s from across North America to construct a strongpoint from which to produce knowledge. So, too, d i d he and Wilson Duff over more than a decade l i n k t h i s d i s c i p l i n a r y network with the l i v e s and objectives of often unrelated i n d i v i d u a l s and i n s t i t u t i o n s across B r i t i s h Columbia. A l e t t e r to the p r o v i n c i a l minister of education, a phone c a l l to Al-Can, a press release to The Vancouver Sun, discussions with the Whalens about access to t h e i r farm, and a radio t a l k about middens were subtle, often unconsciously formed, but cumulative bonds. The commonality to these threads and l i n k s , too numerous and d i f f u s e to count, i s that they s p l i c e d the l i v e s of ordinary and unrelated people to the successful production of s c i e n t i f i c knowledge. Each t i n y act of preservation, whether through volunteering, w r i t i n g an a r t i c l e , or donating money, helped stymie the destruction of archaeological s i t e s , f a c i l i t a t e d the production of s c i e n t i f i c knowledge, made archaeology a p u b l i c issue, and thus gave i t power i n the public sphere. This currency simply d i d not e x i s t i n 1946-1947 , when Borden watched h e l p l e s s l y as bulldozers razed the Point Grey middens. A decade l a t e r , as Marpole was under-seige, Borden's science spoke i n defense of the midden and there were many people who stood with him, l i s t e n e d , and understood the s i g n i f i c a n c e of what was being said; because they had been implicated, however tenuously or temporarily, i n Borden's network. I do not want to exaggerate the numbers of people involved or the l e v e l of p u b l i c concern over s i t e destruction. The numbers were very small, but highly concentrated at the c r i t i c a l junctures where c o n f l i c t occurred, and included i n f l u e n t i a l c i t i z e n s . At Marpole, Borden, with his a l l i a n c e of volunteers, newspaper columnists, and Chamber of Commerce members, could not be ignored as he was a decade e a r l i e r at Point Grey. For the hotel developer to continue towards a 32 completion of h i s project required him to take issue with p r e h i s t o r y as i n t e r p r e t e d by Borden, not to mention the whole network h i s knowledge rested upon: UBC, Harry Hawthorn and h i s Yale education, Walter Taylor, Robert Heizer, P h i l i p Drucker, M.C. McKern, J u l i a n Steward, Erna Gunther, A l f r e d Kroeber, Harlan Smith, Edward Sapir, James T e i t , and even Franz Boas. A dissenter would have had to meta-physically engage the v a l i d i t y of empiricism, c l a s s i f i c a t i o n , and inference from analogy, concepts most people would have been i l l - e q u i p p e d to tackle, had they even wanted to. If necessary, t h i s a l l i a n c e system could have been extended to include other parts of science i n c l u d i n g geology, comparative anatomy and phy s i c a l anthropology, botany, zoology, and even chemistry and physics, which were li n k e d to archaeology through radiocarbon dating. For the developer to dismiss the Marpole midden as nothing more than a worthless garbage p i l e required r e f u t i n g the combined weight of a l l of these people and i n s t i t u t i o n s . Of course, we know that the Fraser Arms Hotel was completed and the Marpole midden v i r t u a l l y destroyed i n the summer of 1957. Even though the developer may have recognized the value of the midden to archaeologists and the pub l i c , h i s own objectives were i n no way impeded by c a l l s from Borden, the media, or the Chamber of Commerce to protect the s i t e . In other words, the developer was not formally required to address the concerns of p r o f e s s i o n a l archaeologists and he d i d not, so to speak, have to detour through the UBC archaeology lab on the way to f u l f i l l i n g h i s objectives of b u i l d i n g a h o t e l . The whole p o t e n t i a l confrontation between the developer and Borden's powerful a l l i e s f a i l e d to m a t e r i a l i z e . The archaeological network was simply too f r a i l and too incomplete to entrap everyone whose own goals involved the de s t r u c t i o n of archaeological s i t e s , developer and souvenir-hunter a l i k e . So despite Borden's e f f o r t s , i t could not be ensured that i n times of c o n f l i c t , when f i n a n c i a l and other stakes were high, people would value the preservation of s i t e s and a r t i f a c t s over development and economic growth. This guarantee 33 required yet stronger a l l i e s to be e n l i s t e d i n the knowledge-production enterprise. With a resounding majority, b i l l 67 passed three readings without debate 1 5 7 and was committed to law as the "Archaeological and H i s t o r i c S i t e s Protection Act," on 18 March 1960 by the L e g i s l a t i v e Assembly of B r i t i s h Columbia. 1 5 8 The culmination of a decade of p o l i t i c a l a g i t a t i o n by Borden and Duff, t h i s l e g i s l a t i o n fused the network of professional archaeology to the penal code of B r i t i s h Columbia, making p r o v i n c i a l power the ultimate a l l y i n the p r o f e s s i o n a l production of knowledge. Sections 2 and 3 of the Act defined and q u a l i f i e d the make-up of archaeological s i t e s and materials i n the pr o f e s s i o n a l vocabulary: 2. In t h i s Act, unless the context otherwise requires, "archaeological s i t e " means an archaeological s i t e designated as such under section 3; "archaeological object" means any object i n or from an archaeological s i t e ; 3. (1) The Minister may designate any (i) Indian kitchen-midden; ( i i ) Indian shell-heap; ( i i i ) Indian house-pit; (iv) Indian cave; (v) other Indian habitation; (vi) c a i r n ; ( v i i ) mound; v i i i ) f o r t i f i c a t i o n ; (ix) structure; (x) painting or carving on rock; (xi) grave or other b u r i a l - p l a c e ; or (xi i ) other p r e h i s t o r i c or h i s t o r i c remain as an archaeological Though many of these terms pre-dated professional archaeology, the meaning they took i n the Act was that of t h e i r formal usage i n pr o f e s s i o n a l archaeology. A "kitchen-midden" which may have been formerly known as a place to c o l l e c t "Indian r e l i c s " on a Sunday afternoon, became a l e g a l l y - d e f i n e d and r e s t r i c t e d e n t i t y i n 1960. The new Act also ensured that the goals of developers would necessitate a t r i p through the archaeology lab, not to mention the bank. Provisions i n the 34 l e g i s l a t i o n i n s u r e d t h a t a l l n e c e s s a r y s a l v a g e work w o u l d be f i n a n c e d b y p r o s p e c t i v e d e v e l o p e r s , and d i c t a t e d s t r i n g e n t p r o f e s s i o n a l s t a n d a r d s f o r s i t e a s s e s s m e n t : 10. Whenever , i n t h e o p i n i o n o f t h e M i n i s t e r , any p r e h i s t o r i c o r h i s t o r i c r e m a i n , whether o r n o t d e s i g n a t e d as a p a r t o f an a r c h a e o l o g i c a l o r h i s t o r i c s i t e u n d e r t h i s A c t , i s t h r e a t e n e d w i t h d e s t r u c t i o n b y r e a s o n o f c o m m e r c i a l , i n d u s t r i a l , o r o t h e r a c t i v i t y , t h e M i n i s t e r may r e q u i r e t h e p e r s o n s u n d e r t a k i n g t h e a c t i v i t y t o p r o v i d e f o r adequate i n v e s t i g a t i o n , r e c o r d i n g , and s a l v a g e o f a r c h a e o l o g i c a l o r h i s t o r i c o b j e c t s t h r e a t e n e d w i t h d e s t r u c t i o n as t h e M i n i s t e r may d i r e c t . 1 6 0 T h i s s e c t i o n e n t a n g l e d a l l m a j o r p e r p e t r a t o r s o f a r c h a e o l o g i c a l r e s o u r c e d e s t r u c t i o n i n t h e k n o w l e d g e - p r o d u c t i o n p r o c e s s , b y r e q u i r i n g a g u a r a n t e e o f f i n a n c i a l s u p p o r t , and ample t i m e f o r p r o f e s s i o n a l e x c a v a t i o n s . R e s t r i c t e d a c c e s s t o a r c h a e o l o g i c a l s i t e s was i n s u r e d b y a s e r i e s o f p r o h i b i t i o n s , b a c k e d by p e n a l t i e s o f i m p r i s o n m e n t and f i n e s , 1 6 1 d e s i g n e d t o p r e v e n t a l l b u t v a l i d p e r m i t h o l d e r s f rom m a n i p u l a t i n g p r e h i s t o r i c m a t e r i a l s : (4)No p e r s o n s h a l l k n o w i n g l y d e s t r o y , d e f a c e , o r o t h e r w i s e a l t e r , e x c a v a t e , o r d i g i n any I n d i a n k i t c h e n - m i d d e n , s h e l l - h e a p , p i t -h o u s e , c a v e , o r o t h e r h a b i t a t i o n s i t e , o r and c a i r n , mound, f o r t i f i c a t i o n , o r o t h e r s t r u c t u r e , o r any o t h e r a r c h a e o l o g i c a l r e m a i n on Crown l a n d s , whether d e s i g n a t e d as an a r c h a e o l o g i c a l s i t e o r n o t , under t h e p r o v i s i o n s o f t h i s A c t , e x c e p t t o t h e e x t e n t t h a t he i s a u t h o r i z e d t o do so by a v a l i d and s u b s i s t i n g p e r m i t i s s u e d u n d e r t h i s A c t . 1 6 2 The i s s u i n g o f p e r m i t s was a t t h e d i s c r e t i o n o f t h e M i n i s t e r , whose powers were e x e r c i s e d t h r o u g h an a d m i n i s t r a t i v e A d v i s o r y B o a r d composed o f "the D i r e c t o r o f t h e P r o v i n c i a l Museum o f N a t u r a l H i s t o r y and A n t h r o p o l o g y o r h i s r e p r e s e n t a t i v e , t h e P r o v i n c i a l A r c h i v i s t o r h i s r e p r e s e n t a t i v e , a n d a r e p r e s e n t a t i v e from t h e a p p r o p r i a t e depar tment o f t h e U n i v e r s i t y o f B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a , o r any two o f t h e m . 1 , 1 6 3 T h i s B o a r d was g r a n t e d t h e c e n t r a l i z e d power t o d e v e l o p p r o v i n c i a l p o l i c y , manage a l l a r c h a e o l o g i c a l s i t e s and r e s o u r c e s , and hence c o n t r o l k n o w l e d g e - p r o d u c t i o n about B . C . p r e h i s t o r y . 1 6 4 W i l s o n D u f f c h a i r e d t h e A d v i s o r y B o a r d , w h i c h h a d i t s i n a u g u r a l m e e t i n g 35 on 15 August of 1960, and included Charles Borden, W.E. Irekland, and L.J. Wallace. 1 6 5 Measures for assessing and c o n t r o l l i n g p r o v i n c i a l archaeological resources were s w i f t l y adopted. Duff assumed the r e s p o n s i b i l i t y of drawing up the s t i p u l a t i o n s of permits and a p p l i c a t i o n forms for access to archaeological s i t e s , and the Board adopted Borden's national s i t e designation system to catalogue B.C. s i t e s . 1 6 6 Immediate plans were made to survey and assess the threatened archaeological resources on the Peace River, Columbia River, and along the proposed route of the P a c i f i c Northern Railway. 1 6 7 The burning issue of the future r o l e for amateur archaeologists was a c e n t r a l concern of the Board at the f i r s t meeting. The Act e f f e c t i v e l y s p l i t amateurs i n t o two groups. Those who i n s i s t e d on continuing the i n d i s c r i m i n a t e c o l l e c t i o n of a r t i f a c t s from s i t e s on public land - the " i r r e s p o n s i b l e s " -were barred from access under the threat of prosecution. Amateurs who wished to continue to investigate B.C. prehistory - the "responsibles" - were brought under the wing of professionalism. Augustin M i l l i k e n was e l e c t e d to the Advisory Board as the representative of responsible amateurs. 1 6 8 Their r o l e , i t was agreed, "should be l i m i t e d to s i t e surveys and small-scale t e s t p i t s , followed by corresponding reports on the r e s u l t s obtained. I t was further agreed that beyond t h i s point, a c e r t a i n amount of danger existed that amateurs could do serious harm and even contribute to the destruction of an archaeological s i t e . " 1 6 9 To explain the l e g i s l a t i o n , i n s t i l l a "sense of moral 170 r e s p o n s i b i l i t y , " and delineate between the actions of professionals and amateurs, Wilson Duff published the pamphlet, "Preserving B r i t i s h Columbia's Prehistory: A guide for. Amateur Archaeologists." 1 7 1 This brochure provided an extensive summary of the goals and objectives of modern s c i e n t i f i c archaeology with a heavy emphasis given to rigorous record keeping and the importance of 172 context. Amateurs were encouraged to carry out surface surveys using s p e c i a l forms and send t h e i r r e s u l t s to UBC or the P r o v i n c i a l Museum, where the s i t e s would be assigned coordinates, and the forms kept on f i l e pending future 36 173 planning. I t was suggested that "responsible amateurs, e s p e c i a l l y those a f f i l i a t e d with a museum or s i m i l a r public i n s t i t u t i o n , " could obtain permits. 1 7 4 But i t was repeatedly emphasized that excavation was the job of prof e s s i o n a l s , and amateurs should dig only i n cases of emergency, and then should follow the accepted procedures ou t l i n e d i n books by Robert Heizer and R.E.M Wheeler. 1 7 5 A l l of t h i s was to insure that amateurs who d i d continue to enjoy t h e i r hobby would be tethered to professionals at UBC and the P r o v i n c i a l Museum. While amateurs were eit h e r eliminated or co-opted by the l e g i s l a t i o n , the d e l i b e r a t e dismissal of what Aboriginal people had to say about p r e h i s t o r y was a t r a g i c bi-product of p r o f e s s i o n a l i z a t i o n that had begun decades before. E a r l y 19th century ethnographers were the f i r s t to study the family h i s t o r i e s and o r i g i n myths of coastal Natives through the o b j e c t i f y i n g lens of science. From Franz Boas to James T e i t , Charles H i l l - T o u t , P h i l i p Drucker, Wilson Duff, and Charles Borden, Native knowledge systems were treated as things about which knowledge was produced. Indeed, Americanist anthropology, archaeology included, has always been constructed around the Western s c i e n t i f i c o b j e c t i f i c a t i o n of the indigenous "other." 1 7 6 There i s a c l e a r j u x t a p o s i t i o n i n the l i t e r a t u r e between Native " b e l i e f s " about h i s t o r y and s c i e n t i f i c "knowledge" gathered from comparative ethnography and archaeology. In 1902, Boas noted the d i f f i c u l t y i n f i g u r i n g out NWC Native h i s t o r y : "Naturally i t i s impossible to u t i l i z e h i s t o r i c a l t r a d i t i o n s of the t r i b e s for the construction of t h e i r h i s t o r y , because a l l of them are more or less of a mythical character. It i s p o s s i b l e to reconstruct the h i s t o r y only by comparative study of a l l the elements of t h e i r c u l t u r e . " 1 7 7 In p a r t i c u l a r , he advocated archaeology as a 178 means to o b j e c t i v e l y check the subjective h i s t o r i c a l b e l i e f s of Natives. Drucker i n t h i s 1943 work argued that "archaeology may thus be the means of determining the actual h i s t o r i c a l worth of these [family h i s t o r i c a l ] t r a d i t i o n s ; should they prove reasonably sound they could become an a i d to research i n the regional p r e h i s t o r y . " 1 7 9 While few anthropologists denied the 37 value of Indigenous h i s t o r i e s , they saw them as having l i m i t e d merit outside of Native c i r c l e s , and no independent or objective truth-value i n the anthropological sense. There i s some evidence to suggest that non-Natives viewed the idea of Natives taking a s c i e n t i f i c i n t e r e s t i n t h e i r h i s t o r y with stunned d i s b e l i e f . A newspaper headline from 1955 marvelled at the sight of an "Indian" amongst Borden's Marpole teams: "FIRST IN B.C. YOUNG INDIAN PROVES KEEN AS ARCHAEOLOGIST." The author continued: "Andy 'Smitty' Charles, a handsome 22 -year o l d Indian of the Musqueam Reserve, i s unique among his people. To a l l known records he i s the f i r s t B.C. Indian to s c i e n t i f i c a l l y explore [sic] and excavate into the pre-history remains of h i s ancestors." 1 8 0 There are other examples i n which Aboriginal people are portrayed as ignorant and d i s i n t e r e s t e d i n t h e i r own history, e s p e c i a l l y with regard to the pro t e c t i o n of p r e h i s t o r i c materials, such as the 1960 Chase b u r i a l mound " a f f a i r . " A headline i n The Vancouver Sun. 10 June 1960, exclaimed: "BURIAL MOUND A MYSTERY SHUSWAP INDIANS UNEARTH RELICS OF FORGOTTEN PAST. 1 , 1 8 1 Natives discovered the b u r i a l mound during road construction on a Shuswap reserve. The columnist describes what happened next: "Whatever i t was they had found, the Indians were soon taking i t home, gi v i n g i t away or — i n some cases — s e l l i n g i t to souvenir hunters who flocked to the diggings." The alleged rampage was only stopped by a p o l i c e o f f i c e r who interceded, warned the Natives that the materials belonged to the province, and then c a l l e d the Kamloops Museum Association, which contacted Borden at UBC.182 The o v e r a l l impression given i s that u n t i l the level-headed Whites intervened to determine what was r e a l l y going on, the Natives were bent on destroying the valuable s i t e . I think i t i s l i k e l y that the erroneous popular idea that Natives were unconcerned with h i s t o r y stemmed from dichotomous views of what composed " r e a l " h i s t o r y . T r a d i t i o n a l Aboriginal h i s t o r y was o r a l l y constituted and transmitted through the generations i n complex i n t e r a c t i o n with c u l t u r a l l y s p e c i f i c 38 material objects and geographic features. The tr u t h of o r a l t r a d i t i o n s to Natives was based on v a s t l y d i f f e r e n t premises concerning the r e l a t i o n s h i p of time, space, material objects, and concepts of causation, than those of Western 183 s c i e n t i s t s . The past was not found i n the archaeological record but i n the words of elders. On the other hand, for anthropologists and archaeologists, as culture h i s t o r i a n s t r a d i t i o n a l l y obsessed with a r t i f a c t s , the "universal" t r u t h of h i s t o r y was located i n the physical r e l a t i o n s h i p s of objects of study, 1 8 4 and could be extracted through s c i e n t i f i c grids of analysis and made to v e r i f y or deny the v a l i d i t y of Aboriginal h i s t o r i e s and myths. This b e l i e f escalated i n the 1950s and 1960s as Native studies i n B.C. became i n c r e a s i n g l y empirical, and thousands of people v i s i t e d museum exhibits f i l l e d with material c u l t u r e 1 8 5 and heard Borden and Duff advocate preservation of the archaeological record i n the name of science. In such an environment there i s l i t t l e wonder that the c u l t u r a l l y s p e c i f i c and highly i d e a t i o n a l views of h i s t o r y that Natives had, were considered merely " b e l i e f s , " while the apparent disrespect by Natives, for archaeological remains, a l l e g e d l y proved ignorance or d i s i n t e r e s t i n " r e a l " h i s t o r y as discovered by s c i e n t i s t s . With the suppression of other voices and the fusion of p r o v i n c i a l l e g a l power to the network of professional archaeology, a f t e r 1960 the objectives of profes s i o n a l s became the p o l i c y of the province, and v i c e versa. The ultimate goal of Borden and those who followed him was to protect the raw materials of pre h i s t o r y for archaeological research (and c o n t r o l ) , and d i s p e l misconception and speculation about prehistory by speaking i t s " s c i e n t i f i c t r u t h . " The p u r i t y of t h i s objective was transmitted to B r i t i s h Columbians, by Borden, over CBU P a c i f i c Network i n March of 1960: It i s from the evidence which l i e s buried i n the deposits of ancient occupation s i t e s that archaeologists a l l over the world reconstruct the prehistory of man. Indications are that an important portion of t h i s story transpired i n B r i t i s h Columbia. The ethnic and c u l t u r a l d i v e r s i t y of her a b o r i g i n a l population as well as the limited, archaeological evidence now at our disposal 39 point to the fact that for many thousands of years t h i s province played a s i g n i f i c a n t part i n the peopling and c u l t u r a l development of the New World. The data to document these happenings can be obtained only through systematic archaeological excavations at ancient s i t e s . Obviously, i f great numbers of such s i t e s are destroyed [by c o l l e c t o r s or development] before they can be properly investigated, the archaeologist i s deprived of h i s indispensable source materials, and large and permanent gaps i n the p r e h i s t o r i c record are the i n e v i t a b l e r e s u l t . I t i s fortunate that the p r o v i s i o n for adequate salvage archaeology i n t h i s act w i l l prevent such a calamity from occurring i n t h i s province. The c i t i z e n s of B r i t i s h Columbia can be proud of, and the c i v i l i z e d world w i l l be g r a t e f u l . 1 8 6 While i t i s c l e a r that Borden, Duff, and t h e i r contemporaries saw t h e i r goal, and that of the province, as the pursuit of pure s c i e n t i f i c knowledge for i t s own sake and the benefit of c i v i l i z a t i o n , they unfortunately f a i l e d to i n d i c a t e exactly what these benefits were. My study suggests that the production of t r u t h f u l knowledge simply served to j u s t i f y the continuance of inquiry, hence generating ever more knowledge and j u s t i f y i n g more research, i n a s e l f - s u s t a i n i n g cycle of accumulation. At base, Borden, too, was a c o l l e c t o r . Without i n q u i r i n g too deeply into the function of archaeological knowledge i n B.C. since the 1960s, I would l i k e to suggest some of the important e f f e c t s of Borden's professional monopolization of p r e h i s t o r i c knowledge production. Presently the record of B.C. prehistory, both material cul t u r e and f i e l d notes, i s l i t e r a l l y concentrated i n a small number of r e p o s i t o r i e s such as UBC187 and the P r o v i n c i a l Museum, and c o n t r o l l e d by a l i m i t e d number of acknowledged archaeologists. In t h i s circumstance, any serious student of archaeology could e a s i l y master the pr e h i s t o r y of the province. They could do t h i s without even going into the f i e l d simply by looking at a map, i d e n t i f y i n g a s i t e from i t s Borden coordinates, l o c a t i n g the appropriate s i t e surveys at the designated repository, reviewing the f i e l d notes, and p o s s i b l y handling the a r t i f a c t s i n the museum. Extensive notes, maps, s t r a t i g r a p h i c p r o f i l e s , and photos would allow them i n an instant to know 40 what had taken other archaeologists months or years to compile. They could locate any a r t i f a c t i n the province to within millimetres of i t s o r i g i n a l l o c a t i o n without ever leaving t h e i r chair, and even t h i s hassle could be avoided by simply reading the s c h o l a r l y l i t e r a t u r e which introduces the pr o f e s s i o n a l mode of thinking, and also synthesizes the complex empirical data into c l e a r prose. In an instant, archaeologists can dominate the actions of thousands of people of numerous languages and customs, through the mill e n n i a , and across the e n t i r e province. In e f f e c t , wherever there are s i t e coordinates, maps, known datum points, and s t r a t i g r a p h i c p r o f i l e s i . e . the empirical grids of archaeology, so, too, i s there the power of the archaeologist to control prehistory p h y s i c a l l y , and d i c t a t e i t s i n t e r p r e t a t i o n i n contemporary society. As no n - s p e c i a l i s t s , unaware of what goes on i n the archaeology lab and how knowledge i s manufactured, we must r e l y on the assumption that the knowledge that archaeologists produce and disseminate to us through museums, films and classrooms, i s the truth. On t h i s point, archaeology j o i n s the other sciences that study humans, i n providing us with coveted " t r u t h f u l knowledge," which has great power i n our society. Michel Foucault has argued that "there can be no possible exercise of power without a c e r t a i n economy of discourses of t r u t h which operates through and on the basis of t h i s a s s o c i a t i o n . We are subjected to the production of truth through power and we cannot exercise power 188 except through the production of truth." The power of these discourses of tru t h i s that they provide many of the c r u c i a l descriptors we use as i n d i v i d u a l s to construct our i d e n t i t i e s , and more importantly that the state uses to describe us as c i t i z e n s . Human sciences such as archaeology, s o c i a l geography, sociology, psychology, criminology, and pathological sciences give us the a n a l y t i c a l categories and labels to describe ourselves ever more p r e c i s e l y and enhance our i n d i v i d u a l and group i d e n t i t i e s . At the same time, however, these human 41 sciences also circumscribe our l i v e s . At every turn there i s a human s c i e n t i s t quantifying, l a b e l l i n g , and diagnosing our behaviour - t e l l i n g us who we are, why we do things, and what our problems are. This would be r e l a t i v e l y unimportant except that the state i s dependent on human s c i e n t i s t s to describe, quantify, and categorize c i t i z e n s and inform p o l i c i e s , which regulate our access to many resources from health-care and education, to s o c i a l welfare payments, taxes, hunting licences, and archaeological permits. Reciprocally, the human sciences have become dependent on the state through regulations that c o n t r o l educational requirements, funding, and q u a l i t y standards f o r p r a c t i t i o n e r s . In B.C. since the 1960s, t h i s linkage of the state and archaeology has insured the constant reproduction of " t r u t h f u l knowledge" through t i g h t l y c o n t r o l l e d access to a l l resources such as the raw archaeological materials, entrance to educational f a c i l i t i e s , f i n a n c i a l support, c a p i t a l intensive laboratories, p u b l i c a t i o n o u t l e t s , conferences and so f o r t h . The net r e s u l t i s that the regulatory power of the state over our l i v e s i s growing i n d i r e c t r e l a t i o n to the production of " t r u t h f u l knowledge" 189 by the human sciences, i n a s e l f - s u s t a i n i n g cycle. The proof of t h i s s p i r a l i n B.C. archaeology i s c l e a r . At numerous times i n h i s career Borden commented that the science of archaeology has j u s t begun to in v e s t i g a t e prehistory. In 1994 Matson and Coupland commented: "The future of Northwest Coast archaeology holds great promise because there i s so much 190 work yet to be done." I am quite confident that i n another f i f t y years some future archaeologist w i l l again repeat t h i s sentiment. I see no end i n sight to t h i s s p i r a l l i n g empiricism and regulation of humanity that threatens us with entrapment i n almost l i m i t l e s s grids of analysis and state power. Ultimately t h i s causes me to regard Borden's archaeology with great ambivalence. On the one hand, the vastness of h i s personal papers and sometimes overt displays of ego i n d i c a t e that he was ambitious, and h i s magnificent career l a r g e l y v i n d i c a t e s t h i s generous view of him. As a student of h i s t o r y and archaeology, 42 I applaud h i s dismissal of amateurism and dedication to empiricism, and strongly approve of the protective l e g i s l a t i o n for which he was l a r g e l y responsible. On the other hand, I recognize that the impalatable legacy of Borden's career i s the continued s c i e n t i f i c a t i o n of B.C. preh i s t o r y and apprehension of other peoples' c u l t u r a l heritage, which began a century ago i n the name of preservation, and thus archaeologist's unenviable r o l e i n the much larger trend of the empiricism of a l l aspects of humanity, and increasing state c o n t r o l over our l i v e s . As foreboding as the ongoing empiricism of humanity may be, recent events i n B.C. suggest that while we may not be able to stop t h i s process, we can contr o l how " t r u t h f u l knowledge" a f f e c t s our l i v e s on a l o c a l l e v e l . With Natives, archaeologists and anthropologists define the r e a l i t y of t h e i r past from the outside as demonstrated i n museum displays around the province. H i s t o r i c a l l y , t h i s has often been to the disadvantage of Natives and t h e i r own voices about who they are have been p u b l i c l y and p o l i t i c a l l y ignored, such as during the outlawing of the potlatch from 1885 to 1951, and the massive loss 191 of material culture to museums. Recently, however, Natives i n the province have begun to seize control of the network of pro f e s s i o n a l archaeology that Borden created. The " t r u t h f u l knowledge" of archaeology i s being made to work for them i n substantiating current land claims, which i n 1995 engulf a l l of B r i t i s h Columbia, including coveted sections of Vancouver, such as Stanley Park and Point Grey which includes UBC and the archaeology lab. Such instances, i n which the power of " t r u t h f u l knowledge" has been apprehended by l o c a l groups and i s being brought to bear against the state, are c e r t a i n l y suggestive f o r a l l people who have been alienated from parts of t h e i r i d e n t i t y by s p e c i a l i s t s . Underlying the p r o f e s s i o n a l i z a t i o n of B.C. archaeology from 1945-1960 i s the e l i m i n a t i o n of many voices and the construction of a s i n g l e : that of pr o f e s s i o n a l archaeology. In B.C. since the 1960s there have been ever increasing s c i e n t i f i c i t y and more professional p r a c t i t i o n e r s , excavations, 43 funding, a p p l i c a t i o n s of technology, and elaborate theories producing ever more knowledge. So, too, has there been a more finely-woven net to draw people into the process whether they r e a l i z e i t or not. While the p r o f e s s i o n a l i z a t i o n of archaeology may be only a peripheral component of a much larger trend toward a s c i e n t i f i c and q u a n t i f i e d world, we can no longer a f f o r d the luxury of pretending, as Borden would have us do, that s c i e n t i f i c research i s value-free and serves the p u b l i c i n t e r e s t . There i s a d e f i n i t e need for a c r i t i c a l commentary on what function the powerful "truth knowledge" that p r o f e s s i o n a l archaeologists produce and disseminate w i l l serve i n the future of B r i t i s h Columbia and the r e s t of Canada. The recent seizure of p r e h i s t o r y by B.C. Natives for t h e i r own use i n land-claim negotiations suggests that p o l i t i c a l a c t i o n can control how such knowledge i s applied to human l i v e s . However, the outcome of the struggle for control of prehistory, and i t s meaning i n the future of B.C., i s not yet before the courts and remains undecided. Looking to the future, I guarantee that a knowledge of prehistory w i l l continue to have v a s t l y longer-reaching repercussions, for a l l B r i t i s h Columbians, than Charles Borden had i n mind when he r a i s e d h i s glass i n h i s favourite toast: "To the 192 future of the past." 44 NOTES *For a synopsis of the t r a d i t i o n a l d i v i s i o n between " i n t e r n a l i s t " and " e x t e r n a l i s t " h i s t o r i e s of science see: Thomas S. Kuhn, "The History of Science," i n The E s s e n t i a l Tension ed. Thomas S. Kuhn (Chicago, London: The U n i v e r s i t y of Chicago Press, 1977), 110-114 and 118-120. The same s p l i t i s i d e n t i f i e d i n the h i s t o r y of archaeology i n Bruce G. Trigger, "Writing the History of Archaeology," i n Objects and Others: Essays of Museums and Material Culture, v o l . 3 History of Anthropology ed. George W. Stocking (Madison, London: The U n i v e r s i t y of Wisconsin Press, 1985), 226. 2Gordon R. Willey and Jeremy A. Sabloff, A History of American Archaeology T h i r d E d i t i o n (New York: W.H. Freeman and Company, 1993); Glyn E. Daniel, A Hundred Years of Archaeology (London: Duckworth, 1950) . 3An example i s Willey and Sabloff's attempt to explain why North American archaeologists apparently took so long to adopt the s t r a t i g r a p h i c method compared to Europeans. See Willey and Sabloff, American Archaeology. 90-92 and notes 35 and 36 on pages 94-95. 4Knut R. Fladmark, " B r i t i s h Columbia Archaeology i n the 1970s," i n Fragments of the Past: B r i t i s h Columbia Archaeology i n the 1970s, ed. Knut R. Fladmark, A Special Issue of BC Studies no. 48 (Winter 1980-81): 11-20; Roy L. Carlson, "History of Research i n Archaeology," i n Northwest Coast, ed. Wayne Suttles, v o l . 7 Handbook of North American Indians (Washington: Smithsonian I n s t i t u t i o n , 1990), 107-115; Roy L. Carlson, "Archaeology i n B r i t i s h Columbia," BC Studies nos. 6-7 ( F a l l and Winter 1970): 7-17; Roderick Sprague, "The P a c i f i c Northwest," i n The Development of North American Archaeology ed. James E. F i t t i n g (University Park, London: The Pennsylvania State U n i v e r s i t y Press, 1973), 251-285; William C. Noble, "One Hundred and Twenty-Five Years of Archaeology i n the Canadian Provinces, " B u l l e t i n of the Canadian Archaeological A s s o c i a t i o n no. 4 (1972), 30-34; and R.G. Matson and Gary Coupland, "History of Archaeological Research," chap, i n The Prehistory of the Northwest Coast (New York, Toronto: Academic Press, 1995), 37-47. 5 E l l e n Wallace Robinson, "Charles E. Borden: His Formulation and Testing of Archaeological Hypotheses" (M.A. thesis, Portland State University, 1975); and Jud i t h Judd Banks, "Comparative Biographies of Two B r i t i s h Columbia Anthropologists: Charles H i l l - T o u t and James A. T e i t " (M.A. thes i s , The U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia, 1970). 6Bruce G. Trigger, A History of Archaeological Thought (Cambridge: Cambridge U n i v e r s i t y Press," 1989). 7Thomas C. Patterson, "Some Post War Theoretical Trends i n U.S. Archaeology," Culture v o l . 6, no. 1 (1986): 43-54; Thomas C. Patterson, "The Last S i x t y Years: Toward a S o c i a l History of Americanist Archaeology i n the United States," American Anthropologist v o l . 88, no. 1 (March 1986): 7-26; Don D. Fowler, "Uses of the Past: Archaeology i n the Service of the State," American A n t i q u i t y v o l . 52, no. 2 (1987) 229-248; Bruce G. Trigger, "Alternative Archaeologies: N a t i o n a l i s t , C o l o n i a l i s t , Imperialist," Man New Series. v o l . 19, no. 3 (September 1984): 355-370; Bruce G. Trigger, " E d i t o r i a l , " World Archaeology v o l . 13, no. 2 (October 1981): 133-137; Bruce G. Trigger, "Anglo-American Archaeology," World Archaeology v o l . 13, no. 2 (October 1981): 138-155; and J.V. Wright, "The Development of Prehistory i n Canada, 1935-1985," American A n t i q u i t y v o l . 50, no. 2 (1985): 421-433. 45 Trigger, Archaeological Thought, 13-16 and 410; and Bruce G. Trigger, "Writing the History of Archaeology," 232. 9Post-processual archaeology, also known as "contextual archaeology," i s introduced by Hodder i n the following: Ian Hodder, The Present Past (London: B.T. Batsford Ltd. , 1982); and Ian Hodder, "Post-modernism, Post-Structuralism, and Post-Processual Archaeology," i n The Meaning of Things ed. Ian Hodder (London: Unwin Hyman, 1989), 64-78. Good synopses are also present i n : W i l l e y and Sabloff, American Archaeology. 297-305; and Trigger, Archaeological Thought. 348-357. For the sociology of knowledge approach see Karin D. Knorr-Cetina, The Manufacture of Knowledge (New York, Toronto: Permagon Press, 1981); Bruno Latour and Steve Woolgar, Laboratory L i f e : The S o c i a l Construction of S c i e n t i f i c Facts (Beverly H i l l s : Sage Publications, 1979); and Peter L. Berger and Thomas Luckmann, The So c i a l Construction of R e a l i t y (Garden C i t y NY: Doubleday & Co., Ltd., 1966). The suggestion that there i s an unceasing flow of influences i n and out on archaeology i s made by CM. Hinsley, "Revising and Revisioning the History of Archaeology: Reflections on Region and Context," i n Tracing Archaeology's Past: The Historiography of Archaeology ed. Andrew L. Christenson (Carbondale, Edwardsville: Southern I l l i n o i s U n i v e r s i t y Press, 1989), 81 and 94-95. 1 0 A l i c e B. Kehoe, "The Paradigmatic V i s i o n of Archaeology: Archaeology as a Bourgeois Science," i n Rediscovering Our Past: Essays on the History of American Archaeology ed. Jonathan E. Reyman (Aldershot: Avebury Ashgate Publishing Ltd., 1992), 5; A l i c e B. Kehoe, "Contextualizing Archaeology," i n Tracing Archaeology's Past ed. Andrew L. Christenson (Carbondale, Edwardsville: Southern I l l i n o i s U n i v e r s i t y Press, 1989), 97; and Hinsley, "Revising and Revisioning, " 80-83. Although he does not e x p l i c i t l y condemn Wi l l e y and Sabloff as "Whigs," Robert Schuyler was the f i r s t to c r i t i c i z e them for de p i c t i n g North American archaeology as an i n e v i t a b l e development. See: Robert L. Schuyler, "The History of American Archaeology: An Examination of Procedure," American A n t i o u i t v v o l . 36, no. 4 (1971): 383-409. 1 1Hinsley, "Revising and Revisioning, " 83; Kehoe, "The Paradigmatic V i s i o n , " and "Contextualizing Archaeology;" Sergio J . Chavez, "A Methodology for Studying the History of Archaeology: An Example From Peru (1524-1900), " i n Rediscovering Our Past ed. Jonathan E. Reyman (Aldershot: Avebury Ashgate Publishing Ltd., 1992), 35-49; Donald E. McVicker, "The Matter of S a v i l l e : Franz Boas and the Anthropological D e f i n i t i o n of Archaeology," i n Rediscovering Our Past ed. Jonathan E. Reyman (Aldershot: Avebury Ashgate Publishing Ltd., 1992), 145-159; and V a l e r i e Pinsky, "Archaeology, P o l i t i c s , and Boundary-Formation: The Boas Censure (1919) and the Development of American Archaeology During the Inter-War Years," i n Rediscovering Our Past ed. Jonathan E. Reyman (Aldershot: Avebury Ashgate Publishing Ltd., 1992), 161-189. 1 2 I am deeply indebted to Bruno Latour, Science i n Action (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard U n i v e r s i t y Press, 1987), for c l a r i f y i n g the idea of science as a network of resources deployed for the purpose of constructing knowledge. 1 3Wright, "Prehistory i n Canada," 425. " U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia Library, Special C o l l e c t i o n s and U n i v e r s i t y Archives D i v i s i o n , Charles E. Borden Papers [hereafter UBC Archives, Borden Papers], box 28, f i l e 26, "A Paradise Lost - Archaeological Salvage i n Tweedsmuir Park 8 VI 77 Lecture to ASBC, " 8 J u l y 1977, by Charles Borden, 3-4. 1 5Wright, "Prehistory i n Canada," 425. 46 Roy L. Carlson, "Obituary: Charles E. Borden (1905-1978)," Canadian Journal of Archaeology no. 3 (1979): 234. " i b i d . , 235. " i b i d . , 234. 1 9Matson and Coupland, The Prehistory of the Northwest Coast. 42. 20 A.L. Kroeber, C u l t u r a l and Natural Areas of Native North America (Berkeley: U n i v e r s i t y of C a l i f o r n i a Press, 1939), p a r t i c u l a r l y pages 28-31, for the Northwest Coast region. 2 1The only comprehensive bibliography for pre-1970 B.C. archaeology i s the excellent compilation by Simon Fraser U n i v e r s i t y archaeologist, Knut R. Fladmark, "Bibliography of the Archaeology of B r i t i s h Columbia," BC Studies nos. 6 and 7 ( F a l l and Winter 1970): 126-151. 2 2 P h i l i p Drucker, Archeological Survey on the Northern Northwest Coast Smithsonian I n s t i t u t i o n Bureau of American Ethnology, B u l l e t i n 133, Anthropological Papers, no. 20 (Washington: United States Government P r i n t i n g O f f i c e , 1943), 17-132. 2 3 I b i d . , 128. 24UBC Archives, Borden Papers, box 47, f i l e 12, "Review of Archaeological Research C a r r i e d Out i n B r i t i s h Columbia," n.d., by Charles E. Borden, 7-8. 2 5 I b i d . , 8. 26UBC Archives, Borden Papers, box 51, f i l e 37, "Preliminary Report on the Archeology of Point Grey, B r i t i s h Columbia," A p r i l 1947, by Charles E. Borden, 1. 'On page 1, Borden also indicates that he and Dr. Akrigg v i s i t e d the Museum of Anthropology at Berkeley i n 1946, at which time they talked to anthropologists and received advice. 2 7Pertinent biographical information on Charles H i l l - T o u t i s a v a i l a b l e i n Jud i t h Judd Banks, "Comparative Biographies;" and Ralph Maud, "Bio-bibliography of Charles H i l l - T o u t , " i n The Sechelt and the South-Eastern Tribes of Vancouver Island, v o l . 4 The S a l i s h People: The Local Contributions of Charles H i l l - T o u t ed. Ralph Maud (Vancouver: Talonbooks, 1978), 17-34, and Ralph Maud, A Guide to B.C. Indian Myth and Legend (Vancouver: Talonbooks, 1982), 29-39. 2 8Vancouver Centennial Museum Library, The H i l l - T o u t C o l l e c t i o n [hereafter VCML, H i l l - T o u t C o l l e c t i o n ] , f i l e DIX, "EBURNE INDIAN MIDDEN PROBABLE DATE OF DISCOVERY, 1888," 14 September 1956, note by Vancouver C i t y A r c h i v i s t Major J.S. Mathews. 2 9Charles H i l l - T o u t , "Later P r e h i s t o r i c Man i n B r i t i s h Columbia, i n Transactions of the Roval Society of Canada Series 2 (1895): 103-122; rep r i n t e d i n The Mainland Halkomelem. v o l . 3 of The S a l i s h People: The Local Contribution of Charles H i l l - T o u t ed. Ralph Maud (Vancouver: Talonbooks, 1978), 21-38 (page references are to reprinted e d i t i o n ) . 3 0Douglas Cole, "The Origins of Canadian Anthropology, 1850-1910," Journal of Canadian Studies v o l . 8, no. 1 (February 1973): 40; and Bruce G. Trigger, "Giants and Pygmies: The P r o f e s s i o n a l i z a t i o n of Canadian Archaeology," i n 47 Towards a History of Archaeology ed. Glyn Daniel (London: Thames and Hudson Ltd., 1981), 69-76; and A l i c e B. Kehoe, "The Invention of Prehistory," Current Anthropology v o l . 32, no. 4 (August-October 1991): 467-476. 3 1Cole, "Canadian Anthropology," 42. Also see: Franz Boas, "Fieldwork for the B r i t i s h Association, 1888-1897," Report of the B r i t i s h A s s o c i a t i o n f or the Advancement of Science (1898): 667-682; reprinted i n The Shaping of American Anthropology 1883-1911: A Franz Boas Reader ed. George Stocking, J r . (New York: Basic Books, Inc., Publishers, 1974), 88-107 (page references are to the rep r i n t e d e d i t i o n ) . 3 2Cole, "Canadian Anthropology," 42. Also see H i l l - T o u t ' s c o n t r i b u t i o n to the Committee's 1902 report: Charles H i l l - T o u t , "Ethnological Studies of the Mainland Halkomelem, A D i v i s i o n of the S a l i s h of B r i t i s h Columbia," Report of the B r i t i s h A ssociation for the Advancement of Science 72nd meeting (1902): 355-490; rep r i n t e d i n The Mainland Halkomelem. v o l . 3 of The S a l i s h People: The Local Contributions of Charles H i l l - T o u t ed. Ralph Maud (Vancouver: Talon books, 1978), 39-93 p a r t i c u l a r y the section t i t l e d "Archaeological," 83-93 (page references are to the reprinted e d i t i o n ) . 3 3Cole, "Canadian Anthropology," 41-42. 3 4 I b i d . , 42. 3 5Franz Boas, "The Jesup North P a c i f i c Expedition," Publications of the Jesup North P a c i f i c Expedition 1 (1898): 1-11; reprinted i n The Shaping of American Anthropology 1883-1911: A Franz Boas Reader ed. George W. Stocking, J r . (New York: Basic Books, Inc., Publishers, 1974), 107-116 (page references are to the rep r i n t e d e d i t i o n ) . The magnitude of material culture, p r i m a r i l y ethnological rather than archaeological, which was removed from the NWC area i s staggering. The best source i s Douglas Cole, Captured Heritage: The Scramble for Northwest Coast A r t i f a c t s (Vancouver, Toronto: Douglas & Mclntyre Ltd.; Sea t t l e : The U n i v e r s i t y of Washington Press, 1985), which describes, i n a n a r r a t i v e format, c o l l e c t i n g expeditions by r i v a l English, French, German, and American museums i n the age of monopoly ca p i t a l i s m and philanthropy. An exc e l l e n t summary i s also given i n E.S. Lohse and Frances Sundt, "History of Research: Museum C o l l e c t i o n s , " i n Northwest Coast, ed. Wayne Suttles, v o l . 7 Handbook of North American Indians (Washington: Smithsonian I n s t i t u t i o n , 1990), 88-97. This a r t i c l e also has an extensive l i s t i n g of repository c o l l e c t i o n s of NWC a r t i f a c t s , photos, and paintings from around the world. 3 6Harlan I. Smith, Shell-Heaps of the Lower Fraser River. B r i t i s h Columbia, Memoir of the American Museum of Natural History, v o l . 2, pt. 4 The Jesup North P a c i f i c Expedition ed. Franz Boas. New York: 1903; r e p r i n t New York: AMS Press, Inc., 1975, 187 (page references are to the reprinted e d i t i o n ) . Smith describes t y p i c a l excavations: "Thirty-three human skeletons were secured by us from the shell-heaps at Port Hammond during two months' excavations; seventy-five were found i n the shell-heaps at Eburne during about a month's work." The t h e f t of skeletons and b u r i a l a r t i f a c t s i s documented by Cole, Captured Heritage. 119-121 and page 308: "Boas c o l l e c t e d hundreds of s k u l l s and skeletons. St e a l i n g bones from a grave was "repulsive work" but "someone had to do i t , " he wrote i n 1888 during h i s major o s t e o l o g i c a l f i e l d season." 3 1Ralph Maud, A Guide to B.C. Indian Mvth and Legend. 37. Banks, "Comparative Biographies," 85 and 191-192. 48 3 9 H i l l - T o u t , "Later P r e h i s t o r i c Man," 28-29; and H i l l - T o u t , "Ethnological Studies," 84-93. 4 0Boas 1 dismissal of H i l l - T o u t ' s s k u l l analysis followed immediately a f t e r , "Early P r e h i s t o r i c Man," i n the o r i g i n a l p r i n t i n g : "The s k u l l had been deformed i n the same manner as i s p r a c t i s e d by the present Indians . . . . What l i t t l e remains of the face indicates that i t s shape resembled the face of the present Indians of t h i s region." Franz Boas, "Remarks on a S k u l l from B r i t i s h Columbia," (1895) : 122, quoted i n Ralph Maud ed. , The Mainland Halkomelem. v o l . 3 The S a l i s h People: The Local Contributions of Charles H i l l - T o u t (Vancouver: Talonbooks, 1978), 34 footnote 14. H i l l - T o u t ' s r e a c t i o n to Boas was equally dismissive: "Although Dr. Boas i n c l i n e s to the b e l i e f that such of the face as i s l e f t presents features i n common with the heads of the present Indians, the evidence i n support of t h i s i s so scanty and inconclusive a nature that i t can sca r c e l y be taken into account." H i l l - T o u t , "Ethnological Studies of the Mainland Halkomelem," 92. 4 1 L e t t e r from Franz Boas to R.W. Brock, 14 May 1910, quoted i n Ralph Maud, A Guide to B.C. Indian Mvth and Legend. 109 footnote 9. 4 2Cole, "Canadian Anthropology," 42. 4 3 I b i d . , 43. 4 4 L e t t e r from Charles H i l l - T o u t to Edward Sapir, 26 February 1912, quoted i n Ralph Maud, A Guide to B.C. Indian Mvth and Legend. 39-41 footnote 14. 4 5 L e t t e r from Edward Sapir to Wesbrook, 29 June 1916, quoted i n Ralph Maud, A Guide to B.C. Indian Mvth and Legend. 41 footnote 14. 4 6Banks, "Comparative Biographies," 22; and Hermann Leisk, " F i e l d Notes of Hermann Leisk. Marpole Middens and Other B.C. Locations, 1927-1932," trans, and ed. Gordon Stanley (1945-1973). Vancouver Centennial Museum Libr a r y . 4 7Mention of H i l l - T o u t ' s work being reported by the London I l l u s t r a t e d News i s found i n VCML, H i l l - T o u t C o l l e c t i o n , f i l e BXV, " E d i t o r i a l , " 1930 ( s p e c i f i c date unknown), The Vancouver Province. Multiple r e p r i n t s of H i l l - T o u t , "The Great Fraser Midden," i n 1938, 1948, and 1953 i n , Museum and Art Notes, continued to advocate the two race replacement model f i r s t posited by Charles H i l l - T o u t i n 1895. See: VCML, H i l l - T o u t C o l l e c t i o n , f i l e A l , The Great Fraser Midden (Vancouver: Art, H i s t o r i c a l , and S c i e n t i f i c Association, 193 8), 5; The Great Fraser Midden. (Vancouver: Art, H i s t o r i c a l , and S c i e n t i f i c Association, 1938; r e p r i n t 1948) . C i t y of Vancouver Archives [hereafter CVA], Vancouver Art, H i s t o r i c a l , and S c i e n t i f i c Association, Add.MSS 366, Vol. 33, F i l e 425, Occasional Papers. Charles H i l l - T o u t , The Great Fraser Midden. (Vancouver: Art, H i s t o r i c a l , and S c i e n t i f i c Association, 1938; r e p r i n t 1953 with a d d i t i o n a l papers). Examples of the popular acceptance of the two race model are found i n newspaper a r t i c l e s , see: VCML, H i l l - T o u t C o l l e c t i o n , f i l e AVI #2 of 2, "SKULLS OF OLD RACE FOUND IN MARPOLE DUMP, C i t y Excavators Unearth Inter e s t i n g R e l i c s of Indians, WEAPONS LOCATED, Ancient Midden Discovered Southwest of Marine Drive," 28 May 1928, newspaper a r t i c l e from The Morning Star. Vancouver. The author states: "Fragments of e x t r a o r d i n a r i l y thick s k u l l s show that these people were at l e a s t p e c u l i a r . Measurements of s k u l l s show there i s a decided d i f f e r e n c e between the Indians of today and the representatives of t h i s ancient type, as represented by r e l i c s i n the o l d mound." F i l e BXV, "Long-Headed Race Held Sway i n Vancouver Twenty Centuries Before 1886," 16 December 1928, newspaper a r t i c l e by Charles H i l l - T o u t i n The Sunday Province: "Echoes of 49 Vanished Races i n B.C.," 22 September 1933, newspaper a r t i c l e i n The Province; f i l e AXXV, "Ancestors of Eskimo Roamed This D i s t r i c t Before Indians H i l l - T o u t Informs Local Club," 8 June 1934, newspaper a r t i c l e i n the Wenatchee D a i l y World. Washington; and f i l e BXV, "The Indians Have Vague Stories Of An Ancient Race They C a l l The Old People," 13 A p r i l 1958, newspaper a r t i c l e i n the D a i l y Colonist. V i c t o r i a . 48Maud, "Bio-bibliography of Charles H i l l - T o u t , " 28. 4 9 I n ad d i t i o n to Matson and Coupland's claim, The Prehistory of the Northwest Coast, 42, that Borden sat i n on anthropology lectures while i n u n i v e r s i t y , there i s another i n t e r e s t i n g connection to anthropology at Berkeley. I mention i n note 40 that Borden v i s i t e d the Museum of Anthropology at Berkeley i n 1946. In h i s Point Grey report Borden says: "I wish to express our thanks to Mr. R.C. Beardsley, who p a t i e n t l y answered innumerable questions while showing us through the anthropological c o l l e c t i o n s of the U n i v e r s i t y of C a l i f o r n i a . " UBC Archives, Borden Papers, box 51, f i l e 37, "Preliminary Report on the Archeology of Point Grey," 1. This i s the same Beardsley who, as an undergraduate, accompanied Drucker on his 1938 survey of the NWC region, see: Drucker, Archeological Survey. 24. C e r t a i n l y t h i s suggests that Borden's acquaintance with Boas, Kroeber, and Drucker's American t r a d i t i o n , was more personal i n the mid 1940s than simply through the l i t e r a t u r e . 5 0There i s no appreciable diff e r e n c e i n f i e l d methodology evident i n a comparison of Charles H i l l - T o u t , "Later P r e h i s t o r i c Man," 21-38; and Harlan Smith, Shell-Heaps. 133-191. Both are about excavations at the Marpole midden i n the 1890s, and there are even remarkably s i m i l a r photos i n the two pu b l i c a t i o n s (page 27 H i l l - T o u t , and plate VI between pages 190 and 191 i n Smith) depicting a p a r t i a l l y exposed skeleton l y i n g i n an open p i t , with a large pick or axe r e s t i n g next to i t , c l e a r l y h i n t i n g at the s i m i l a r i t y of how both men excavated. 51UBC Archives, Borden Papers, box 28, f i l e 26,' "A Paradise Lost," 6. "Carlson, "Obituary: Charles E. Borden," 235. "Charles E. Borden, "A Translucent Shelter for F i e l d Work i n Regions with High P r e c i p i t a t i o n , American Ant i q u i t y v o l . 15, no. 3 (1950): 252-253. 5 4Charles E Borden, "Fraser River Delta Archaeological Findings," American A n t i q u i t y v o l . 16, no. 3 (1951): 263; Charles E. Borden, review of Archaeology of the Columbia-Fraser Region, by Marion W. Smith, i n American A n t i q u i t y v o l . 16, no. 3 (1950): 278-279; and Charles E. Borden, review of C a t t l e Point: A S t r a t i f i e d S i t e i n the Southern Northwest Coast Region, by Arden R. King, i n American A n t i q u i t y v o l . 16, no. 3 (1950): 279-280. " T y p i c a l examples of Borden's p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n conferences are the following: UBC Archives, Borden Papers, box 7, f i l e 10, l e t t e r to Wilson Duff from Charles Borden, 10 January 1951, i n d i c a t i n g that Borden had j u s t returned from an American Anthropological Association meeting i n Berkeley where he met Robert Heizer, P h i l i p Drucker, and Arden King, and presented a paper on h i s work at the Whalen farm s i t e i n 1949-1950. Box 1, f i l e 4, l e t t e r to Sol Tax, Program Chairman American Anthropological Association, from Charles Borden, 27 September 1957, regarding Borden's presentation of the paper, "The S i g n i f i c a n c e of Ground Slates i n Northwest Coast History," at the 56th Annual Meeting of the A.A.A. i n Chicago i n December 1957. Box 1, f i l e 5, l e t t e r to Dr. Raymond H. Thompson, Ed i t o r of American Antiquity, from Charles Borden, 22 September 1958, 5 0 accepting the p o s i t i o n of Assistant Editor for the Northwest Coast Archaeological Region offered to him, 11 September 1958. 5 6Edward Sapir, Time Perspective i n Aboriginal American Culture. A Study i n Method Canada, Department of Mines, Geological Survey, Memoir 90, no. 13, Anthropological Series (Ottawa: Government P r i n t i n g Bureau, 1916), 1-87. 5 7 W i l l e y and Sabloff, American Archaeology. 127-128. 5 8Trigger, Archaeological Thought. 270. 5 9Kroeber, C u l t u r a l and Natural Areas. 6 0 W i l l e y and Sabloff, American Archaeology. 97-108. 6 1 I b i d . , 154-155. 6 2Clyde Kluckhohn, "The Conceptual Structure i n Middle American Studies," i n The Mava and Their Neighbors Second Editi o n , ed. Jesse D. Jennings (New York: D. Appleton-Century Company Inc., 1940; r e p r i n t , U n i v e r s i t y of Utah Press, 1962), 50. "Walter W. Taylor, A Study of Archeology no. 69 of the T i t l e s i n the Memoir Series of the American Anthropological Association (July 1948). 6 4 I b i d . , chart on page 153; and synopsis i n Willey and Sabloff, American Archaeology. 162-165. 6 5Taylor, A Study of Archeology. 154. 6 6 I b i d . , 181-189; and Trigger, Archaeological Thought. 270-275. 67UBC Archives, Borden Papers, box 27, f i l e 13, Anthropology 420 c l a s s lecture, 20 September 1949, by Charles Borden, 1. 6 8 I b i d . , 4. 69UBC Archives, Borden Papers, box 44, f i l e 20, "Objectives + Methodology of Modern Archeology," n.d., clas s lecture by Charles Borden, 2-3. 70UBC Archives, Borden Papers, box 27, f i l e 13, "Archaeological F i e l d Techniques," 23 September 1954, Anthropology 420 lecture by Charles Borden, 2. 7 1Wilson Duff, "Report on an Archeological Excavation at Marpole, B.C., May 2, 1949," Archaeology Reading Room, Museum of Anthropology, U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia. 7 2Taylor, A Study of Archeology. 202. 73UBC Archives, Borden Papers, box 44, f i l e 20, "Objectives + Methodology of Modern Archaeology," 3; Carlson, "History of Research," 111-112; and Matson and Coupland, The Prehistory of the Northwest Coast. 44-47 and 312. 7 4The phenomenal permeation by Boas and h i s students of North American anthropology and archaeology i s astounding. Some i n d i c a t i o n of t h i s influence on the NWC i s suggested by Wayne Suttles and Aldona J o n a i t i s , "History of Research i n Ethnology," i n Northwest Coast, ed. Wayne Suttles, v o l . 7 Handbook 51 of North American Indians (Washington: Smithsonian I n s t i t u t i o n , 1990), 74-80. V i r t u a l l y a l l anthropologists and archaeologists, who have worked on the NWC, are e i t h e r students of Boas, or students of h i s students, i n c l u d i n g : A.L. Kroeber, P. Drucker, R. Heizer, E. Sapir, F. de Laguna, E. Gunther, M. Smith, L. Spier, W. Duff, and Wayne Suttles. In general the major American anthropology departments on the West Coast, UC Berkeley and the U n i v e r s i t y of Washington, were staunch Boasian strongholds well into the 1950s. 7 5The r i s e of the "new" or "processual archaeology," and neo-evolution i s extensively covered by Willey and Sabloff, American Archaeology. 214-257; and Trigger, Archaeological Thought. 289-328. The seminal work that coined the term "processual archaeology," and argued that archaeology was anthropology or nothing, i s Gordon R. Willey and P h i l i p P h i l l i p s , Method and Theory i n American Archaeology (Chicago: The U n i v e r s i t y of Chicago Press, 1958), e s p e c i a l l y pages 1-7. Lewis Binford's d i s c i p l i n e shaking a r t i c l e , which draws he a v i l y on L e s l i e White and J u l i a n Steward's neo-evolutionary thought, and i s considered by many to be the foundation of the "new archaeology" i s , "Archaeology as Anthropology," American Ant i q u i t y v o l . 28, no. 2 (1962): 217-225. 7 6The f a l s e dichotomy between h i s t o r y and science, that was forced on archaeology by Kluckhohn and others, i s discussed i n Trigger, Archaeological Thought, 372-379. In the face of a n t i - h i s t o r i c a l B r i t i s h s o c i a l anthropology, Kroeber argued e a r l y on i n , "History and Science i n Anthropology," American Anthropologist New Series, v o l . 37, no. 4 (October-December, 1935): 539-569, that the d i v i s i o n between h i s t o r y and science was a r t i f i c i a l , and that anthropology had ample room for both f u n c t i o n a l i s t g e n e r a l i z a t i o n and h i s t o r i c a l p a r t i c u l a r i s m . 7 7Charles E. Borden, "Preliminary Report on Archeological Investigations i n the Fraser Delta Region," Anthropology i n B r i t i s h Columbia no. 1 (1950): 13-27; and Charles E. Borden, "Notes on the Pre-history of the Southern North-west Coast Region," The B r i t i s h Columbia H i s t o r i c a l Quarterly v o l . 14, (1950): 241-246. For a complete l i s t i n g of Borden's publications to 1970 see Fladmark, "Bibliography of the Archaeology of B r i t i s h Columbia," 127-129. 78 • Borden, "Preliminary Report," 13. 7 9 I b i d . 8 0 I b i d . 8 1Robert F. Heizer ed., A Manual of Archaeological F i e l d Methods (Millbrae, C a l i f . : The National Press, 1949). The copy I examined, from the UBC l i b r a r y , was a g i f t from Charles Borden. 8 2Borden, "Notes on the Pre-history," 242. 8 3 I b i d . 8 4 I b i d . 8 5Borden makes t h i s point himself: UBC Archives, Borden Papers, box 28, f i l e 19, "Archaeology of the Pt. Grey Area Vancouver B.C. Seattle Anthropological Association," A p r i l 1949, lecture given by Borden at The U n i v e r s i t y of Washington, 3-4. The o r i g i n a l a r t i f a c t record sheet prototype i s found i n Heizer ed., A Manual of Archaeological F i e l d methods. 32; and for the o r i g i n a l Whalen farm record sheets see the bound volumes: "Whalen Farm: Excavation 52 A r t i f a c t and Surface Finds 1949-1950," and "Whalen Farm S i t e Boundary Bay Washington 1949," Archaeology Reading Room, Museum of Anthropology, U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia. 8 6Borden, "Notes on the Pre-history," 242. The f u l l magnitude of maps, s t r a t i g r a p h i c p r o f i l e s , and hundreds of pages of meticulously recorded measurements can only be grasped by perusing the Whalen f i e l d notes see: Charles E. Borden, " F i e l d Notes + Photo Record I & II Whalen Farm (DfRs 3) Boundary Bay 1949," Archaeology Reading Room, Museum of Anthropology, U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia. 89 Borden, "Notes on the Pre-history," 242. 9 0Taylor, A Study of Archeology. 113. 9 1Borden, "Preliminary Report," 13. 9 2Drucker, Archeological Survey. 35. 9 3Carlson, "History of Research i n Archeology," 108, makes the point that Drucker's a r t i f a c t typology was based on that of W.C. McKern, "The Midwestern Taxonomic Method as an A i d to Archaeological Culture Study," American A n t i q u i t y v o l . 4, no. 4 (1939): 301-113. The connection from McKern to Linnaeus i s made i n William Duncan Strong, " H i s t o r i c a l Approach i n Anthropology," i n Anthropology Today ed. A.L. Kroeber (Chicago: The U n i v e r s i t y of Chicago Press, 1953, 1957), 391: "The archaeological use of the taxonomic approach of Linnaeus i n regard to a r t i f a c t s also goes back to 1849, i n d i c a t i n g that the midwestern taxonomic system, with whose name McKern (1939) i s most often associated, has long roots." Also see: Alex D. Krieger, "The Typological Concept," American A n t i q u i t y v o l . 9, no. 3 (1944): 271-288. 94 Borden, "Notes on the Pre-history," 243. Borden's approach to hypothesis formation i s comprehensively examined i n Robinson, "Charles E. Borden His Formation and Testing of Archaeological Hypotheses." 9 5Borden, "Notes on the Pre-history," 243. 9 6 I b i d . , 243-244. 9 7An excellent introduction and c r i t i c a l analysis of inference from analogy i s found i n Hodder, The Present Past. 11-27. 9 8The development of the d i r e c t h i s t o r i c a l approach i s covered i n W i l l e y and Sabloff, American Archaeology. 125-127 and 150 endnote 29. A.L. Kroeber employed the d i r e c t h i s t o r i c a l approach i n , "Zuni Potsherds," Anthropological Papers, American Museum of Natural History, v o l . 18, pt. 1 (1916): 7-37; and influenced W. Duncan Strong, who c a r r i e d the approach to i t s greatest refinement i n , An Introduction to Nebraska Archeology Smithsonian Miscellaneous C o l l e c t i o n s , v o l . 93, no. 10 (Washington: Smithsonian I n s t i t u t i o n , 1935). J u l i a n Steward was also influenced by Kroeber and provided the most concise synopsis of the d i r e c t h i s t o r i c a l approach i n , "The Direct H i s t o r i c a l Approach," American A n t i q u i t y v o l . 7, no. 4 (1942): 337-343. Ibid., 393. 53 1 0 0Drucker, Archeological Survey. 24. The conclusion that Borden used the d i r e c t h i s t o r i c a l approach at Musqueam i s based on the following items: UBC Archives, Borden Papers, box 50, f i l e 14, "Musgueam," 17 September 1950, f i e l d notes on an archaeological survey of the Musgueam Indian Reserve, by Charles Borden. Box 50, f i l e 15, "A Musgueam House S i t e , " n.d., f i e l d notes, by Norman Young a student of Borden; and "Results of Archaeological Excavations at Musgueam (October 1950 - A p r i l 1951)," by the student Helen Pidding, which i n d i c a t e that excavations were c a r r i e d out on a p r e - h i s t o r i c house s i t e , on the c u r r e n t l y occupied section of the Musgueam Reserve. 1 0 1Carlson makes t h i s point i n , "History of Archeological Research," 108. In Boas' 1902 a r t i c l e , "Some Problems i n North American Archaeology," American Journal of Archaeology Second Series, v o l . 6 (1902): 1-6; r e p r i n t e d i n Race. Language, and Culture ed. Franz Boas (New York: The Free Press, 1940), 525 (page references are to the reprinted e d i t i o n ) , Boas states: "It seems probable that the remains found i n most of the archaeological s i t e s of America were l e f t by a people s i m i l a r i n culture to the present Indians. For t h i s reason, the ethnological study of the Indians must be considered as a powerful means of e l u c i d a t i n g the s i g n i f i c a n c e of archaeological remains. I t i s hardly p o s s i b l e to understand the s i g n i f i c a n c e of American archaeological remains without having recourse to ethnological observations, which frequently explain the s i g n i f i c a n c e of p r e h i s t o r i c finds." The bibliographies of Borden's own p u b l i c a t i o n s often suggest the sources for h i s ethnographic knowledge, for example i n "Preliminary Report," for the Whalen s i t e , Borden l i s t s (page 20) Boas' 1895 work The Kwakiutl of Vancouver Island. Memoir of the American Museum of Natural History, v o l . 5, pt. 2 The Jesup North P a c i f i c Expedition ed. Franz Boas. New York: E.J. B r i l l , Leiden, and G.E. Stechert, 1909 301-522; r e p r i n t New York: AMS Press, Inc., 1975, c i t e d by Borden as: Boas, Franz 1905-1909 "The Kwakiutl of Vancouver Island." Mem. Amer. Mus. Nat. H i s t . , Vol. 8, pp. 307-515. Boas' work i s a massive ethnographic account of the Kwakiutl culture and l i f e -ways, focusing on: "Industries, Measurements, House and House-Furnishings, Meals, Travel and Transportation, Clothing and Ornaments, Fishing, and Hunting Sea-Mammals, and Hunting Land-Mammals and Birds," (from table of contents 301-303) . This book provided Borden with the knowledge to i n f e r l i f e patterns of p r e h i s t o r i c people at the Whalen s i t e from the a r t i f a c t u a l remains. 102UBC Archives, Borden Papers, box 50, f i l e 19, "Botanical Report, Whalen S i t e , Boundary Bay," n.d., by Wilson Duff, page 8 footnotes 4 and 5 and bibliography page 14. 1 0 3Borden, "Notes on the Pre-history," 244. Ib i d . 1 0 5Boas' introduction of d i f f u s i o n i s m to North America,- from the European cultural-geography school of F r i e d r i c h Ratzel, i s discussed i n Trigger, Archaeological Thought. 151-155. The use of migration and d i f f u s i o n as explanatory strategies i n North American c u l t u r e - h i s t o r i c a l archaeology i s discussed i n Irving Rouse, "The Strategy of Culture History," i n Anthropology Today ed. A.L. Kroeber (Chicago: The U n i v e r s i t y of Chicago Press, 1953, 1957), 71-72. Boas' i n t e r e s t i n explaining c u l t u r a l transference i s ubiquitous i n h i s writings and was a primary goal of the Jesup Expedition, see: Boas, "The Jesup North P a c i f i c Expedition," 108-109. 1 0 6Borden, "Preliminary Report," 245. 1 0 7 I b i d . , 245 footnote 5. 54 i U 8 I b i d . , 246. 109 • • • Latour, Science i n Action. 131. 1 1 0Fladmark, "Bibliography of the Archaeology of B r i t i s h Columbia," 127-128. m W i l s o n Duff, "Preface," Anthropology i n B r i t i s h Columbia no. 1 (1950): 1-2. 112 Sprague, "The P a c i f i c Northwest," 265, indicates that the only controversy, i n NWC archaeology during the 1950s, was between Borden and his colleagues i n Washington over the issue of culture flow between the i n t e r i o r and the coast, beginning with Borden's paper, "Some Aspects of P r e h i s t o r i c C o a s t a l - I n t e r i o r Relations i n the P a c i f i c Northwest," Anthropology i n B r i t i s h Columbia no. 4 (1953-1954): 26-32, and continued i n Douglas Osborne, et a l . , "The Problem of Northwest Coa s t a l - I n t e r i o r Relationships as Seen from Seattle," American A n t i o u i t v v o l . 22, no. 2 (1956): 117-129. The s i g n i f i c a n t issue i s not the p a r t i c u l a r i t i e s of the various arguments, but rather the fac t that Borden was considered both an authority to contend with, and a scholar of extreme c r e d i b i l i t y , whose work was treated as such by h i s American colleagues. 113VCML, H i l l - T o u t C o l l e c t i o n , f i l e DIV, "Hints for Excavation at Marpole," 8 October 1944, by Hermann Leisk, 3. 114VCML, H i l l - T o u t C o l l e c t i o n , f i l e DVII, l e t t e r p r i n t e d i n The Vancouver Sun. 4 February 1937, by Hermann Leisk. 115Hermann Leisk, " F i e l d Notes of Hermann Leisk," book 1, page 25, i s a de s c r i p t i o n by Leisk, of a grave excavation i n the Marpole midden, 19 May 1930, which i s t y p i c a l of h i s work. No maps were made, no measuring tools mentioned, and no d e s c r i p t i o n of the context of the exhumed skeleton i s given. CVA, Vancouver Art, H i s t o r i c a l , and S c i e n t i f i c Association, Add.MSS 366, Vol. 33, F i l e 425, Occasional Papers. "Northwest Coast Middens" by T.P.O. Menzies C i t y of Vancouver Museum Curator, i n .Charles H i l l - T o u t , The Great Fraser Midden (Vancouver: Art, H i s t o r i c a l , and S c i e n t i f i c Association, 1938; r e p r i n t 1953 with a d d i t i o n a l papers), 16, indicates that Leisk"s 1930 excavations produced over one hundred skeletons for the museum, and describes the excavations: "The method followed i n examining t h i s midden was to trench down to rock bottom, then work forward on a face. In t h i s manner scarcely an item of i n t e r e s t was missed, and the exact p o s i t i o n of the item could be c a r e f u l l y measured from the surface." As indicated, however, I have found no evidence that Leisk made c a r e f u l measurements of any kind. VCML, H i l l - T o u t C o l l e c t i o n , f i l e DIV, l e t t e r to T.H. Ainsworth, C i t y of Vancouver Museum Curator, from Hermann Leisk, 16 October 1955. In t h i s l e t t e r Leisk indicates that h i s excavations at Marpole suffered from poor record keeping, and that most material was uncatalogued and eventually thrown away because of i n s u f f i c i e n t storage space. He indicates embarrassment over the lack of rigour i n his work and claims to have been an u n s k i l l e d labourer when the museum hir e d him to excavate at Marpole. I t seems to me that Leisk only started to consider h i s work unmethodical, a f t e r Borden began excavating at Marpole, i n 1955, using the extreme rigour he was known for . 116VCML, H i l l - T o u t C o l l e c t i o n , f i l e DIX, l e t t e r to T.P.O. Menzies from Hermann Leisk, 14 February 1937. In t h i s l e t t e r Leisk claims that he could match h i s f i e l d notes up with the C i t y Museum c o l l e c t i o n s . In a personal communication from Lynn Maranda at the VCML, I learned that t h i s never happened, and that Leisk's f i e l d notes were only translated from the o r i g i n a l Dutch i n the e a r l y 1970s. 55 117 UBC Archives, Borden Papers, box 39, f i l e 8, "Brook's Mound," n.d., essay by Borden on an alleged b u r i a l mound discovered by l o c a l amateur R.A. Brooks i n 1944, 5. 118VCML, H i l l - T o u t C o l l e c t i o n , f i l e BXV, "Did Aztecs Live Here? - Find Revives Controversy," 2 January 1953, newspaper a r t i c l e i n The Vancouver Sun, and " P r e h i s t o r i c Carvings Puzzle Anthropologists," 1 March 1953, newspaper a r t i c l e i n the D a i l y Colonist, V i c t o r i a ; f i l e BXV, "Echoes of Vanished Races i n B.C.," 22 September 1933, newspaper a r t i c l e i n The Province; f i l e AVI #2 of 2, "SKULLS OF OLD RACE FOUND IN MARPOLE DUMP," 28 May 1928, newspaper a r t i c l e from The Morning Star. Vancouver; and f i l e DIV, "Dawn-Men Of North America," 13 October 1948, newspaper a r t i c l e from The Evening C i t i z e n . Ottawa. 119 UBC Archives, Borden Papers, box 51, f i l e 37, "Preliminary Report on the Archaeology of Point Grey," 5. 1 2 0 I b i d . , 52. 121UBC Archives, Borden Papers, box 28, f i l e 28, "The Middens of B r i t i s h Columbia," 8 March 1948, CBR Vancouver radio broadcast t r a n s c r i p t , by Charles Borden, 1-6. 1 2 2 I b i d . , 6. 123 Quote from: UBC Archives, Borden Papers, box 32, f i l e , 1, "Prof. Digs i n t o B.C.'s Past," 3 December 1948, newspaper a r t i c l e i n the News Herald. Vancouver. Borden's book metaphor for middens i s found i n , "An Ancient Coast Indian V i l l a g e i n Southern B r i t i s h Columbia," Indian Time v o l . 2, no. 15 (December 1955) : 11. 1 2 4For examples see the following: UBC Archives, Borden Papers, box 31, f i l e 19, "Science Aids Archaeologist In Research," 11 March 1954, newspaper a r t i c l e i n The Province; box 31, f i l e 19, " E d i t o r i a l Page of The Vancouver Sun. B r i t i s h Columbia, Canada, Tuesday, October 11, 1955," by Elmore P h i l p o t t . The author states: "According to Dr. Borden the evidence c l e a r l y shows that Indians were l i v i n g at the s i t e of t h i s Marpole midden, or Great Fraser r i v e r midden at l e a s t as e a r l y as the time of C h r i s t . Highly accurate, s c i e n t i f i c carbon te s t s on the b i t s of wood dug up from the structure show an age of more than 1,900 years. There are the r e l a t i v e l y i n t a c t remains of a house of a s u r p r i s i n g l y c i v i l i z e d type." Box 31, f i l e 18, "In Radioactive Tests B.C. Indian Campfire Ash Proved 8,150 Years Old," 10 December 1957, newspaper a r t i c l e i n The Vancouver Sun. The confidence of the author i n Borden's authority i s evident: "University of B.C. archaeologist Dr. Charles E. Borden s a i d the Yale [archaeological s i t e ] finding, and three other dates also received today from the U n i v e r s i t y of Saskatchewan laboratories, give B.C. one of the completest pic t u r e s of p r e h i s t o r i c l i f e i n North America." 1 2 5Duff took the p o s i t i o n of "Temporary Assistant i n Anthropology" i n 1949, and then permanent "Assistant i n Anthropology" i n 1950; see: B r i t i s h Columbia, Department of Education, P r o v i n c i a l Museum of Natural History and Anthropology Report for the Year 1949 ( V i c t o r i a : Queen's Printer, 1950): B5; and B r i t i s h Columbia, Department of Education, P r o v i n c i a l Museum of Natural History and Anthropology Report for the Year 1950 ( V i c t o r i a : Queen's Printer, 1951): B5. 1 2 6 I b i d . , B15. 56 127UBC Archives, Borden Papers, box 11, f i l e 1, l e t t e r to Charles Borden from Harry Hawthorn, 3 November 1950, including, "WILSON DUFF'S SUGGESTIONS REGARDING PROTECTION OF ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITES," n.d. 128 UBC Archives, Borden Papers, box 11, f i l e 1, l e t t e r to Harry Hawthorn from Charles Borden, 10 November 1950. 129UBC Archives, Borden Papers, box 7, f i l e 10, l e t t e r to Charles Borden from Wilson Duff, 9 December 1950, including, "AN ACT TO PROVIDE FOR THE PRESERVATION OF HISTORIC OBJECTS, Revised Statutes of B.C., 1948." 130.,., . , I b i d . mUBC Archives, Borden Papers, box 7, f i l e 10, l e t t e r to W.T. S t r a i t h , M i n i s t e r of Education, from Wilson Duff, 9 December 1950. 132_, . j I b i d . 133UBC Archives, Borden Papers, box 7, f i l e 10, l e t t e r to Wilson Duff from Charles Borden, 10 January 1950; and l e t t e r to Wilson Duff from Charles Borden, 29 January 1951, including, "Memorandum Re: The E f f e c t s of Proposed Power Developments on the Archeology of B r i t i s h Columbia," 29 January 1951, by Wilson Duff. 134UBC Archives, Borden Papers, box 7, f i l e 10, l e t t e r to W.T. S t r a i t h , M i n i s t e r of Education, from Charles Borden, "Re: The Present Emergency i n B r i t i s h Columbia Archeology," 5 February 1951; l e t t e r to E.T. Kenney, Minist e r of Lands and Forests, from Wilson Duff, "Re: Emergency Archeological Investigations of Areas to be Flooded by Power Development, " 28 February 1951; and l e t t e r to W.T. S t r a i t h , Minister of Education, from Wilson Duff, "Re: Emergency Archeological Investigations of Areas to be Flooded by Power Development," 28 February 1951, including, "Memorandum Re: The E f f e c t s of Proposed Power Developments on the Archeology of B r i t i s h Columbia," which outlined the estimated costs (page 7) at $2000 for a two person survey of the Nechako drainage. 135UBC Archives, Borden Papers, box 7, f i l e 10, l e t t e r to Charles Borden from Wilson Duff, 17 A p r i l 1951, i n d i c a t i n g that Duff had j u s t met with W.T. S t r a i t h to plead the case for funding of the Nechako surveys; l e t t e r to Charles Borden from Wilson Duff, 20 A p r i l 1951, concerning Harry Hawthorn, who apparently sent a l e t t e r to W.T. S t r a i t h urging for f u l l funding of the Nechako project; and box 16, f i l e 2, l e t t e r to N.A.M. MacKenzie, President of UBC, from W.T. S t r a i t h , M i n i s t e r of Education, 25 A p r i l 1951, announcing that a cheque for $2000 was being forwarded to MacKenzie for the purpose of funding Borden and Duff's Nechako project. 136UBC Archives, Borden Papers, box 16, f i l e 2, "TWEEDSMUIR PARK ARCHEOLOGICAL SURVEY, (July and August 1951), A Summary of Results and Recommendations," n.d., by Charles Borden. Also see: Charles E. Borden, "Tweedsmuir Survey Notes 1951," Archaeology Reading Room, Museum of Anthropology, U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia. 137UBC Archives, Borden Papers, box 7, f i l e 10, l e t t e r to Charles Borden from Wilson Duff, 12 September 1951. 138UBC Archives, Borden Papers", box 16, f i l e 2, l e t t e r to W.T. S t r a i t h , M i n i s t e r of Education, from Charles Borden, 12 December 1951, "Re: Emergency Archeological Investigations i n Tweedsmuir Park," c a l l i n g for funding for the 5 7 summer of 1952 and including, "TWEEDSMUIR PARK ARCHEOLOGICAL SURVEY, (July and August 1951), A Summary of Results and Recommendations," n.d., by Charles Borden. This report contained a strong plea for continued funding f o r the summer of 1952 and a f i n a n c i a l summary of how the $2000 grant for the summer of 1951 was spent. Box 16, f i l e 2, l e t t e r to Charles Borden from W.T. S t r a i t h , M i n i s t e r of Education, 27 December 1951, thanking Borden for h i s 12 December report, and concurred with Borden on the importance of continuing the surveys i n the summer of 1952. Box 16, f i l e 2, l e t t e r to W.T. S t r a i t h from Charles Borden, 12 March 1952, reminding S t r a i t h of his commitment to provide funding for the summer of 1952. Borden made a strong case for at l e a s t $8650. Box 16, f i l e 2, l e t t e r to Charles Borden from W.T. S t r a i t h , 14 March 1952, informing Borden that the P r o v i n c i a l Cabinet approved the amount requested i n the l e t t e r from 12 March 1952; l e t t e r to W.T. S t r a i t h from Charles Borden, 24 March 1952, thanking S t r a i t h for h i s e f f o r t s i n securing funding and promising " s i g n i f i c a n t contributions to our knowledge of the prehistory of t h i s region." Box 16, f i l e 2, l e t t e r from Charles Borden to W.T. S t r a i t h , 6 May 1952, i n q u i r i n g i n t o the whereabouts of the $8650 approved 14 March 1952; l e t t e r to Charles Borden from R.C. Grant, Executive Assistant to the Deputy Minister of Education, 7 May 1952, enclosed with an $8650 cheque for the Tweedsmuir Park survey of 1952; and l e t t e r to R.C. Grant from Charles Borden, 9 May 1952, acknowledging r e c e i p t of the cheque enclosed with Grant's l e t t e r 7 May 1952. Al-Can's c o n t r i b u t i o n i s mentioned by Borden i n box 28, f i l e 26, "A Paradise Lost," 9; and the UBC con t r i b u t i o n i s mentioned i n box 11, f i l e 1, l e t t e r to Dr. Jesse L. Nusbaum, Santa Fe, New Mexico, from Charles Borden, 17 May 1952. 1 3 9Charles E. Borden, "Results of Archaeological Investigations i n Central B r i t i s h Columbia," Anthropology i n B r i t i s h Columbia no. 3 (1952): 31-43. 1 4 0Wilson Duff, "Report of the Anthropologist," i n P r o v i n c i a l Museum of Natural History and Anthropology Report for the Year 1952. B r i t i s h Columbia, Department of Eduction, ( V i c t o r i a : Queen's Printer, 1953): B19. 141UBC Archives, Borden Papers, box 7, f i l e 10, "Memorandum Re: The E f f e c t of Proposed Power Developments on the Archeology of B r i t i s h Columbia," n.d., by Wilson Duff, assessing a l l of the major power projects i n c l u d i n g the Nechako-Kitimat Project p. 1, the Kootenay-Libby Project p. 3, the Quesnal River Project p. 4, and numerous other smaller power projects i n the province during the 1950s p. 5. Box 7, f i l e 10, l e t t e r to Charles Borden from Wilson Duff, 20 October 1954, regarding the Frobisher dam project i n the Yukon that threatened s i t e s i n B.C., and including, "Archeological E f f e c t s of the Frobisher Project," n.d., by Wilson Duff, i n d i c a t i n g the possible extent of r i v e r flooding that would occur i n B.C. The r e s u l t s of surveys, i n 1954, ahead of the Libby Dam project, which a f f e c t e d the Kootenay region, and surveys on the Windermere lakes are found i n : Charles E. Borden, "Results of Two Archaeological Surveys i n the East Kootenay Region of B r i t i s h Columbia," Research Studies of the State College of Washington v o l . 24, no. 1 (March 1956): 73-104. 1 4 2Charles E. Borden, "A Uniform S i t e Designation Scheme For Canada," Anthropology i n B r i t i s h Columbia no. 3, (1952): 44-48. Carlson, "Archaeology i n B r i t i s h Columbia," 13, mentions the national adoption of Borden's scheme. Also see: Charles E. Borden "Tweedsmuir Survey Notes 1951." These raw f i e l d notes from the survey indi c a t e that a version of Borden's s i t e designation scheme was already i n working order by the summer of 1951. 143UBC Archives, Borden Papers, box 11, f i l e 15, l e t t e r to P.B. Stroyan, Superintendent and Engineer Vancouver C i t y Parks Board, from Charles Borden, 25 August 1957, naming the hotel project as that of the Fraser Arms Hotel. 5 8 UBC Archives, Borden Papers, box 47, f i l e 42, summary of Borden's work at the Marpole midden i n the summer of 1955, n.d., 1-3. 1 4 5 I b i d . , 1, Borden makes the point about media coverage. The C i t y Museum's r o l e and a l i s t of volunteers are noted i n the following: UBC Archives, Borden Papers, box 11, f i l e 15, l e t t e r to Thomas Ainsworth, Secretary-Curator Vancouver C i t y Museum, from Charles Borden, 31 May 1956, inc l u d i n g the l i s t , "ARTIFACTS RECOVERED DURING EXCAVATIONS CARRIED OUT BY THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA WITH FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE FROM THE VANCOUVER CITY MUSEUM AT MARPOLE, LOT 28, JULY 9 - AUGUST 19, 1955, FIELD CATALOGUE NUMBERS Ma 4001 -Ma 5415," 2 pages, "ARCHAEOLOGICAL EXCAVATIONS IN MARPOLE, LOT 28, VOLUNTEER ASSISTANTS JULY 9 - AUGUST 17, 1955," l i s t i n g 21 volunteers, and, "VANCOUVER CITY MUSEUM GRANT IN AID OF ARCHAEOLOGICAL INVESTIGATIONS ON MARPOLE LOT NO. 28, JULY 1955," explaining i n d e t a i l how Borden spent the $350 grant, which the Vancouver C i t y Museum swapped for a l l of the a r t i f a c t s recovered during the summer 1955 excavations. 146UBC Archives, Borden Papers, box 31, f i l e 19, "In Marpole Area Indian Midden Probe i n Race Against Time," 1 June 1955, newspaper a r t i c l e i n The Province. 147UBC Archives, Borden Papers, box 31, f i l e 19, "Chamber attempts to save midden, Whole s i t e may be destroyed by b u i l d i n g development soon," 17 August 1955, newspaper a r t i c l e i n The Province. VCML, H i l l - T o u t C o l l e c t i o n , f i l e DVII, "Harry Duker heads Midden Foundation," 1 December 1955, newspaper a r t i c l e i n The Province. 148UBC Archives, Borden Papers, box 47, f i l e 42, summary of Borden's work at the Marpole midden i n the summer of 1955, describing media hype and providing the radiocarbon dates for the s i t e , 1. Box 31, f i l e 19, " E d i t o r i a l Page of The Vancouver Sun." VCML, H i l l - T o u t C o l l e c t i o n , f i l e DVII, "Great Fraser Midden i s source of hidden Indian treasures," 26 November 1955, a r t i c l e , i n The Vancouver Province B.C. Magazine. r e f e r r i n g to Borden's summer 1955 excavations. 149UBC Archives, Borden Papers, box 11, f i l e 15, l e t t e r to Jean Lesage, Minis t e r of Northern A f f a i r s and National Resources, Ottawa, from Arthur Laing, B.C. P r o v i n c i a l MLA, 23 August 1955. Laing wrote: "Last week I met three business men who had attended a service club meeting to hear a u n i v e r s i t y professor who has t h i s year conducted, with a number of volunteer workers, further excavations [at the Marpole midden]. The professor so impressed these business men that they t o l d me that i f the h i s t o r i c a l value was h a l f as great as the professor impressed upon them then t h i s property should be set aside as an h i s t o r i c a l s i t e f o r the enjoyment and i n v e s t i g a t i o n by a l l people. Would you be good enough to make some i n q u i r i e s among your o f f i c e r s to assess the value of t h i s s i t e as of permanent h i s t o r i c a l value? I might add that a number of bodies, in c l u d i n g the Marpole Chamber of Commerce, are already on record as advocating d e f i n i t e action." Laing also mentioned that Dr. Walter Sage, the B.C. h i s t o r i c a l s i t e s representative, was i n f u l l agreement with the three business men. Box 11, f i l e 15, l e t t e r to A.J.H. Richardson, Superintendent H i s t o r i c Parks and Sites, Ottawa, from Walter N. Sage B.C., h i s t o r i c a l s i t e s representative, 25 August 1955, mentioning Borden's work at the Marpole midden and urging immediate action to save the remains of the midden from destruction. Box, 11, f i l e 15, l e t t e r to A.J.H. Richardson from Walter N.Sage, 25 August 1955, discussing the imminent danger to the Marpole midden, from the hotel project, and including a copy of Laing's l e t t e r to Lesage, from 23 August 1955. Box 11, f i l e 15, l e t t e r to W.N. Sage from A.J.H. Richardson, 6 September 1955, noting: "Mr. Laing's l e t t e r has been received and h i s comments w i l l be placed 5 9 before the [ H i s t o r i c Sites] Board at i t s meeting." 150UBC Archives, Borden Papers, box 7, f i l e 10, l e t t e r to Ray W i l l i s t o n , M i n i s t e r of Education, from Wilson Duff, 12 October 1955, inc l u d i n g memorandum, "Marpole Midden," 2 pages, and "Archeological Sites L e g i s l a t i o n , " 3 pages, by Wilson Duff. 1 5 1 I b i d . 152VCML, H i l l - T o u t C o l l e c t i o n , f i l e DVII, "For Lack of $1000," 21 June 1956, newspaper a r t i c l e i n The Vancouver Sun, lamenting the lack of money for Borden to excavate and c h a s t i z i n g the p r o v i n c i a l government for not providing funding for a UBC project. However, Borden d i d excavate i n 1956 at s i t e s i n the Fraser Canyon with funding from the Koerner Foundation and the^ UBC Committee on Research: Charles E. Borden, "DjRi 3, An Early S i t e in. -the Fraser Canyon, B r i t i s h Columbia," National Museum of Canada, Contributions to Anthropology, B u l l e t i n 162 (1957, 1960): 101. 153UBC Archives, Borden Papers, box 31, f i l e 17, " i n s p i r e d by Sun e d i t o r i a l p r i v a t e g i f t finances d i g on marpole midden, " 19 August 1957, newspaper a r t i c l e i n The Vancouver Sun. Box 11, f i l e 15, l e t t e r to P.B. Stroyan, Superintendent and Engineer Vancouver C i t y Parks Board, from Charles Borden, 25 August 1957, noting that "thanks to the generous f i n a n c i a l support of a well-known B.C. i n d u s t r i a l i s t we were able to resume investigations at the s i t e i n June 1957." 1 5 4 H i l l - T o u t , "Later P r e h i s t o r i c Man i n B r i t i s h Columbia," 21. 1 5 5The f a i l e d attempt to b u i l d a park and i n t e r p r e t i v e centre on c i t y owned property i s d e t a i l e d i n the following: VCML, H i l l - T o u t C o l l e c t i o n , f i l e DII, l e t t e r to T.A. Wylie, Director of the Maritime Museum, from Thomas H. Ainsworth, Curator of the C i t y Museum, 11 August 1960; l e t t e r to T.A. Wylie from E l i s a b e t h Bouscholte, Secretary to Dr. C.E. Borden, 29 August 1960; l e t t e r to J.C. O l i v e r , Commissioner at C i t y H a l l , from T.A. Wylie, 26 October 1960; l e t t e r to T.A. Wylie from the C i t y Clerk, 4 June 1962; l e t t e r to Mr. Lefeaux, Park Superintendent of the Vancouver Parks Board, from T.A. Wylie, 20 June 1962; l e t t e r to Mrs. C. Pacey, Secretary of the Marpole Chamber of Commerce, from T.A. Wylie, 22 June 1962; l e t t e r to Mr. M c G i l l i v a r y , President of the Marpole Rotary Club, from T.A. Wylie, 22 June 1962; l e t t e r to T.A. Wylie from the Deputy C i t y Clerk, 28 August 1962; and l e t t e r to T.A. Wylie and Mrs. C. Pacey, from Stuart S. Lefeaux, Parks Superintendent, 2 October 1962. These l e t t e r s represent two years of attempts by T.A. Wylie and members of the Marpole Chamber of Commerce to have the C i t y of Vancouver convert i t s l o t s on the Marpole midden into a park. Ultimately C i t y Council members considered the park proposal redundant to the e x i s t i n g Marpole Park (not a c t u a l l y located on the midden) and no further action was taken. 156UBC Archives, Borden Papers, box 11, f i l e 15, l e t t e r to the 1955 Marpole volunteer diggers from Charles Borden, 30 March 1956, regarding a p u b l i c l e c t u r e he was going to give to the Vancouver I n s t i t u t e , 7 A p r i l 1956, e n t i t l e d , "The Marpole Midden, 56 B.C. to 1956 A.D.: Results of Recent Archaeological Excavations," and i n v i t i n g the volunteers to a reception at h i s home following the t a l k . Box.10, f i l e 11, l e t t e r to The Committee to Consider Uses of Leon and Thea Koerner Foundation Funds from Charles Borden, 9 December 1955, regarding an a p p l i c a t i o n by Borden for $3000 per annum over f i v e years to conduct archaeological surveys of B.C., to determine the extent of p r o v i n c i a l s i t e s i n danger of destruction from i n d u s t r i a l development; l e t t e r to Harlow, Secretary Projects Committee of the Leon and Thea Koerner 60 Foundation, from Charles Borden, 10 A p r i l 1959, regarding an a p p l i c a t i o n for funding of excavations at the DjRi 3 Fraser canyon s i t e . 157 B r i t i s h Columbia, L e g i s l a t i v e Assembly, Journals v o l . 15, (sess. 28 January to 18 March, 1960): 97, 121, 127, and 206. 158 B r i t i s h Columbia, "Archaeological and H i s t o r i c Sites Protection Act, " Statutes of the Province of B r i t i s h Columbia. 1960, c.2, 7-10. 1 5 9 I b i d . , 7-8. 1 6 0 I b i d . , 9. 1 6 1 I b i d . , 8-9. 1 6 2 I b i d . , 8. 1 6 3 I b i d . , 10. 164UBC Archives, Borden Papers, box 34, f i l e 17, minutes from the inaugural meeting of the Archaeological Sites Advisory Board, 15 August 1960, 1. 1 6 5 I b i d . , UBC Archives, Borden Papers, box 2, f i l e 6, l e t t e r to Charles Borden from L.J. Wallace, Deputy P r o v i n c i a l Secretary, 29 June 1960, informing Borden of the formation of the Archaeological Sites Advisory Board and l i s t i n g the appointed members. 166UBC Archives, Borden Papers, box 34, f i l e 17, minutes from the inaugural meeting of the Archaeological Sites Advisory Board, 15 August 1960, 2. 1 6 7 I b i d . , 3. 1 6 8 I b i d . , 1. 1 6 9 I b i d . 170UBC Archives, Borden Papers, box 34, f i l e 17, minutes from the second meeting of the Archaeological Sites Advisory Board, 3 November 1960, 1. 171UBC Archives, Borden Papers, box 48, f i l e 38, Preserving B r i t i s h Columbia's Prehistory: A Guide for Amateur Archeologists. 1960, by Wilson Duff. 1 7 2 I b i d . , 6-8. 1 7 3 I b i d . , 9. 1 7 4 I b i d . , 4; UBC Archives, Borden.Papers, box 3, f i l e 5, l e t t e r to Borden from Donald N. Abbott, Assistant Anthropologist at the P r o v i n c i a l Museum, 31 October 1960, regarding Abbott forming a V i c t o r i a Archaeology Club, i n a f f i l i a t i o n with the P r o v i n c i a l Museum, for responsible amateur archaeologists. Abbott indicates that he made the 14 founding members take a "pledge, " presumably regarding the ethics of archaeological work, which some were hesitant to do. 175UBC Archives, Borden Papers, box 48, f i l e 38, Preserving B r i t i s h Columbia's Prehistory.-1960. by Wilson Duff, 11. 1 7 6Bruce G. Trigger, "Archaeology and the Image of the American Indian, " American 61 A n t i q u i t y v o l . 45, no. 4 (1980): 662-676. 177 Boas, "Problems i n North American Archaeology," 527. Ibid. 1 7 9Drucker, Archeological Survey. 33. 180 UBC Archives, Borden Papers, box 31, f i l e 19, " F i r s t i n B.C. Young Indian proves keen as archaeologist," 22 June 1955, newspaper a r t i c l e i n The Province. 181VCML, H i l l - T o u t C o l l e c t i o n , f i l e BXV, "Burial mound a mystery shuswap indians unearth r e l i c s of forgotten past," 10 June 1960, newspaper a r t i c l e i n The Vancouver Sun. Ibid. 183 J u l i e Cruikshank, "Legend and Landscape: Convergence of Oral and S c i e n t i f i c T r a d i t i o n s i n the Yukon T e r r i t o r y , " A r c t i c Anthropology v o l . 18, no. 2 (1981): 67-87. 184 Jacob W. Gruber, "Archaeology, History, and Culture," i n American Archaeology Past and Future eds. David J . Meltzer, Don D. Fowler, and Jeremy A. Sabloff (Washington, London: Smithsonian I n s t i t u t i o n Press, 1986), 170. 1 8 5By compiling the attendance figures for the P r o v i n c i a l Museum i n V i c t o r i a , from: B r i t i s h Columbia, Department of Education, P r o v i n c i a l Museum of Natural History and Anthropology Report for the Years 1949-1960 ( V i c t o r i a : Queen's Pri n t e r , 1950-1961), I get the following t o t a l s : r e g i s t e r e d v i s i t o r s 586 418 and estimated v i s i t o r s 815 493. 186UBC Archives, Borden Papers, box 49, f i l e 17, "Comments on an Act for the Protection of Archaeological Sites and Objects," March 1960, CBU Vancouver P a c i f i c Network radio broadcast t r a n s c r i p t , by Charles Borden, 2. 1 8 7For example, the Archaeology Reading Room, i n the Museum of Anthropology, i s a designated repository for fieldnotes compiled during archaeological projects conducted under the auspices of UBC. 1 8 8Michel Foucault, "Two Lectures," i n Culture/Power/History eds. Nicholas B. Dirks, Geoff Eley, and Sherry B. Ortner (Princeton: Princeton U n i v e r s i t y Press, 1994), 211. 1 8 9Michel Foucault, "The Subject and Power," quoted i n Paul Rabinow, "Introduction," i n The Foucault Reader ed. Paul Rabinow (New York: Pantheon Books, 1984), 22. 1 9 0Matson and Coupland, The Prehistory of the Northwest Coast. 307. 1 9 1The outlawing of the potlatch i s comprehensively examined i n Douglas Cole and Ira Chaikin, An Iron Hand Upon the People (Vancouver, Toronto: Douglas & Mclntyre Ltd.; Seattle: The Univ e r s i t y of Washington Press, 1990). Cole indicates that despite l e t t e r s of protest, l e g a l action, and c a l l s f o r a federal i n v e s t i g a t i o n , by the Kwakiutl, to explain what occurred during the potlatch, the federal government r e l i e d on hearsay and the testimony of i t s own "experts" to formulate p o l i c y . Cole indicates, (page 21) that the giant of Canadian anthropology, George M. Dawson, himself judged the p o t l a t c h to be 62 "pernicious." Another more recent example of how Natives are studied by-anthropologists for the purpose of informing government ac t i o n was the massive "Indian Research Project" commissioned by the Department of C i t i z e n s h i p and Immigration, i n 1954, under the d i r e c t i o n of Harry Hawthorn, from UBC: H.B. Hawthorn, C.S. Belshaw, and S.M. Jamieson, The Indians of B r i t i s h Columbia (Toronto: The U n i v e r s i t y of Toronto Press, 1958, 1960). Coupland and Matson, The Prehistory of the Northwest Coast. 315. 63 BIBLIOGRAPHY Manuscript C o l l e c t i o n s C i t y of Vancouver Archives, Vancouver Art, H i s t o r i c a l , and S c i e n t i f i c A ssociation. U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia Library, Special C o l l e c t i o n s and U n i v e r s i t y Archives D i v i s i o n , Charles E. Borden Papers. Vancouver Centennial Museum Library, The H i l l - T o u t C o l l e c t i o n . Unpublished Sources Banks, Ju d i t h Judd. "Comparative Biographies of Two B r i t i s h Columbia Anthropologists: Charles H i l l - T o u t and James A. T e i t . " M.A. thesi s , The Un i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia, 1970. Borden, Charles E. "Tweedsmuir Survey Notes 1951." Archaeology Reading Room, Museum of Anthropology, Uni v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia. . " F i e l d Notes + Photo Record I & II Whalen Farm (DfRs 3) Boundary Bay 1949." Archaeology Reading Room, Museum of Anthropology, U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia. Duff, Wilson. "Report on an Archaeological Excavation at Marpole, B.C., Anthropology 401, May 2, 1949," Archaeology Reading Room, Museum of Anthropology, Un i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia. Leisk, Hermann. " F i e l d Notes of Hermann Leisk. Marpole Middens and other B.C. Locations 1927-1932." trans, and ed. Gordon Stanley (1945-1973). Vancouver Centennial Museum Library. Robinson, E l l e n Wallace. "Charles E. Borden: His Formulation and Testing of Archaeological Hypotheses." M.A. thesis, Portland State University, 1975. "Whalen Farm: Excavated A r t i f a c t and Surface Finds 1949-1950." Archaeology Reading Room, Museum of Anthropology, U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia. "Whalen Farm S i t e Boundary Bay Washington 1949." Archaeology Reading Room, Museum of Anthropology, Uni v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia. Published Sources Government Documents B r i t i s h Columbia. "Archaeological and H i s t o r i c Sites Protection Act." Statutes of the Province of B r i t i s h Columbia. 1960. c. 2. 7-10. B r i t i s h Columbia. L e g i s l a t i v e Assembly. Journals. v o l . 15, sess. 28 January to 18 March, 1960. B r i t i s h Columbia. Department of Education. P r o v i n c i a l Museum of Natural History and Anthropology Reports for the Years 1949-1960. V i c t o r i a : Queen's Printe r , 1950-1961. 64 Books Berger, Peter L. and Thomas Luckmann. The S o c i a l Construction of R e a l i t y . Garden C i t y , New York: Doubleday & Co., Ltd., 1966. Boas, Franz. The Kwakiutl of Vancouver Island. Memoir of the American Museum of Natural History, v o l . 5, pt. 2, The Jesup North P a c i f i c Expedition, ed. Franz Boas. New York: E.J. B r i l l , Leiden, and G.E. Stechert, 1909; r e p r i n t , New York: AMS Press, Inc., 1975. Boas, Franz, ed. Race. Language and Culture. New York: The Free Press, 1940, 1966. Carlson, Roy L. ( ed. Archaeology i n B r i t i s h Columbia New Discoveries. Special Issue BC Studies nos. 6 and 7 ( F a l l and Winter 1970) . Christenson, Andrew L., ed. Tracing Archaeology's Past: The Historiography of Archaeology. Carbondale and Edwardsville: Southern I l l i n o i s U n i v e r s i t y Press, 1989. Cole, Douglas. Captured Heritage: The Scramble for Northwest Coast A r t i f a c t s . Vancouver, Toronto: Douglas & Mclntyre Ltd.; Seattle: The U n i v e r s i t y of Washington Press, 1985. Cole, Douglas and Ira Chaikin. Iron Hand Upon the People. Vancouver, Toronto: Douglas & Mclntyre Ltd.; Seattle: The U n i v e r s i t y of Washington Press, 1990. Daniel, Glyn E. A Hundred Years of Archaeology. London: Duckworth, 1950. Daniel, Glyn E., ed. Towards a History of Archaeology. London: Thames and Hudson Ltd., 1981. Dirks, Nicholas B., Geoff Eley, and Sherry B. Ortner, eds. Culture/Power/History. Princeton: Princeton U n i v e r s i t y Press, 1994. Drucker, P h i l i p . Archeological Survey on the Northern Northwest Coast. Smithsonian I n s t i t u t i o n Bureau of American Ethnology, B u l l e t i n 133, Anthropological Papers, no. 20. Washington: United States Government P r i n t i n g O f f i c e , 1943. F i t t i n g , James E., ed. The Development of North American Archaeology. U n i v e r s i t y Park, London: The Pennsylvania State U n i v e r s i t y Press, 1973. Fladmark, Knut R., ed. Fragments of the Past: B r i t i s h Columbia Archaeology i n the 1970s. A Special issue of BC Studies no. 48 (Winter 1980-81). Hawthorn, H.B., C.S. Belshaw, and S.M. Jamieson. The Indians of B r i t i s h Columbia. Toronto: The Un i v e r s i t y of Toronto Press, 1958, i960. Heizer, Robert F., ed. A Manual of Archaeological F i e l d Methods. M i l l b r a e , C a l i f . : The National Press, 1949. Hodder, Ian. The Present Past. London: B.T. Batsford Ltd., 1982. 65 Hodder, Ian, ed. The Meaning of Things: Material Culture and Symbolic Expression. London: Unwin Hyman Ltd., 1989. Jennings, Jesse D., ed. The Mava and Their Neighbours. Second E d i t i o n . New York: D. Appleton-Century Company Inc., 1940; r e p r i n t , U n i v e r s i t y of Utah Press, 1962. Knorr-Cetina, Karin D. The Manufacture of Knowledge. New York, Toronto: Permagon Press, 1981. Kroeber, A.L. C u l t u r a l and Natural Areas of Native North America. Berkeley: U n i v e r s i t y of C a l i f o r n i a Press, 1939. Kroeber, A.L., ed. Anthropology Today. Chicago: The U n i v e r s i t y of Chicago Press, 1953, 1957. Kuhn, Thomas S., ed. The E s s e n t i a l Tension. Chicago: The U n i v e r s i t y of Chicago Press, 1977. Latour, Bruno. Science i n Action. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard U n i v e r s i t y Press, 1987. Latour, Bruno and Steve Woolgar. Laboratory L i f e the S o c i a l Construction of S c i e n t i f i c Facts. Beverly H i l l s : Sage Publications, 1979. Matson, R.G. and Gary Coupland. The Prehistory of the Northwest Coast. New York, Toronto: Academic Press, 1995. Maud, Ralph. A Guide to B.C. Indian Mvth and Legend. Vancouver: Talonbooks, 1982. Maud, Ralph, ed. The Mainland Halkomelem. v o l . 3 The S a l i s h People: The Local Contributions of Charles H i l l - T o u t . Vancouver: Talonbooks, 1978. . The Sechelt and the South-Eastern Tribes of Vancouver Island, v o l . 4 The S a l i s h People: The Local Contributions of Charles H i l l - T o u t . Vancouver: Talonbooks, 1978. Meltzer, David J . , Don D. Fowler, and Jeremy A. Sabloff, eds. American Archaeology Past and Future. Washington, London: Smithsonian I n s t i t u t i o n Press, 1986. Rabinow, Paul, ed. The Foucault Reader. New York: Pantheon Books, 1984. Reyman, Jonathan E. ; ed. Rediscovering Our Past: Essays on the History of American Archaeology. Aldershot: Avebury Ashgate Publishing Ltd., 1992. Sapir, Edward. Time Perspective i n Aboriginal American Culture. A Study i n Method. Canada, Department of Mines, Geological Survey, Memoir 90, no. 13, Anthropological Series. Ottawa: Government P r i n t i n g Bureau, 1916. Smith, Harlan I. Shell-Heaps of the Lower Fraser River. B r i t i s h Columbia. Memoir of the American Museum of Natural History, v o l . 2, pt. 4 The Jesup North P a c i f i c Expedition, ed. Franz Boas. New York 1903; r e p r i n t , New York: AMS Press, Inc., 1975. 66 Stocking, George W. J r . , ed. Objects and Others, v o l . 3 History of Anthropology. Madison, Wisconsin: The U n i v e r s i t y of Wisconsin Press, 1985. . The Shaping of American Anthropology 1883-1911: A Franz Boas Reader. New York: Basic Books, Inc., 1974. Strong, W. Duncan. Introduction to Nebraska Archeology. Smithsonian Miscellaneous C o l l e c t i o n s , v o l . 93, no. 10. Washington: Smithsonian I n s t i t u t i o n , 1935. Suttles, Wayne, ed. Northwest Coast. v o l . 7 Handbook of North American Indians. Washington: Smithsonian I n s t i t u t i o n , 1990. Taylor, Walter W. A Study of Archeology. Memoir Series of the American Anthropological Association, no. 69, 1948. Trigger, Bruce G. A History of Archaeological Thought. Cambridge: Cambridge Un i v e r s i t y Press, 1989. Willey, Gordon R. and Jeremy A. Sabloff. A History of American Archaeology. Th i r d E d i t i o n . London: Thames and Hudson Ltd., 1993. Willey, Gordon R. and P h i l i p P h i l l i p s . Method and Theory i n American Archaeology. Chicago: The U n i v e r s i t y of Chicago Press, 1958. A r t i c l e s Binford, Lewis R. "Archaeology as Anthropology." American A n t i q u i t y v o l . 28, no. 2 (1962): 217-225. Boas, Franz. "Fieldwork for the B r i t i s h Association, 1888-1897." Report of the B r i t i s h A ssociation for the Advancement of Science. (1898): 667-682; reprinted i n The Shaping of American Anthropology 1883-1911: A Franz Boas Reader. ed. George W. Stocking J r . New York: Basic Books, Inc., 1974, 88-107. . "The Jesup North P a c i f i c Expedition." Publications of the Jesup North P a c i f i c Expedition, v o l . 1 (1898): 1-11; re p r i n t e d i n The Shaping of American Anthropology 1888-1911: A Franz Boas Reader, ed. George W. Stocking J r . New York: Basic Books, Inc., 1974, 107-116. . "Some Problems i n North American Archaeology." American Journal of Archaeology Second Series, v o l . 6 (1902): 1-6; re p r i n t e d i n Race. Language and Culture, ed. Franz Boas. New York: The Free Press, 1940, 1960, 525-529. Borden, Charles E. "DjRi 3, An Early S i t e i n the Fraser Canyon, B r i t i s h Columbia." National Museum of Canada, Contributions to Anthropology, B u l l e t i n 162 (1957, 1960): 101-118. . "Results of Two Archaeological Surveys i n the East Kootenay Region of B r i t i s h Columbia." Research Studies of the State College of Washington v o l . 14, no. 1 (March 1956): 73-104. 67 . "An Ancient Coast Indian V i l l a g e i n Southern B r i t i s h Columbia." Indian Time v o l . 2, no. 15 (December 1955): 9-19. "Some Aspects of P r e h i s t o r i c C o a s t a l - I n t e r i o r Relations i n the P a c i f i c . " Anthropology i n B r i t i s h Columbia no. 4 (1953-1954): 26-32. "A Uniform S i t e Designation Scheme for Canada." Anthropology i n B r i t i s h Columbia no. 3 (1952): 44-48. . "Results of Archaeological Investigations i n Central B r i t i s h Columbia." Anthropology i n B r i t i s h Columbia no. 3 (1952): 31-43. . "Fraser River Delta Archaeological Findings. " American Anticruitv v o l . 16, no. 3 (1951) : 263. . Review of C a t t l e Point: A S t r a t i f i e d S i t e i n the Southern Northwest Coast Region, by Arden R. King. In American A n t i q u i t y v o l . 16, no. 3 (1950) : 279-280. . Review of Archaeology of the Columbia-Fraser Region, by Marion W. Smith. In American Anticruitv v o l . 16, no. 3 (1950): 278-279. "A Translucent Shelter for F i e l d Work i n Regions with High P r e c i p i t a t i o n . " American Ant i q u i t y v o l . 15, no. 3 (1950): 252-253. . "Notes on the Pre-History of the Southern North-West Coast." The B r i t i s h Columbia H i s t o r i c a l Quarterly v o l . 14 (1950): 241-246. . "Preliminary Report on Archaeological Investigations i n the Fraser Delta Region." Anthropology i n B r i t i s h Columbia no. 1 (1950): 13-27. Carlson, Roy L. "History of Research i n Archaeology." i n Northwest Coast, ed. Wayne Suttles, v o l . 7 Handbook of North American Indians. Washington: Smithsonian I n s t i t u t i o n , 1990, 107-115. . "Obituary: Charles E. Borden." Canadian Journal of Archaeology no. 3 (1979) : 233-239. . "Archaeology i n B r i t i s h Columbia." BC Studies nos. 6-7 ( F a l l and Winter 1970): 7-17. Chavez, Sergio J . "A Methodology for Studying the History of Archaeology: An Example From Peru (1524-1900)." i n Rediscovering Our Past, ed. Jonathan E. Reyman. Aldershot: Avebury Ashgate Publishing Ltd., 1992, 35-49. Cole, Douglas. "The Origins of Canadian Anthropology, 1850-1910." Journal of Canadian Studies v o l . 8, no. 1 (February 1973): 33-45. Cruikshank, J u l i e . "Legend and Landscape: Convergence of Oral and S c i e n t i f i c T r a d i t i o n s i n the Yukon T e r r i t o r y . " A r c t i c Anthropology v o l . 18, no. 2 (1981) : 67-93 . . Duff, Wilson. "Preface." Anthropology i n B r i t i s h Columbia no. 1 (1950): 1-2. . "Report of the Anthropologist." i n P r o v i n c i a l Museum of Natural History and Anthropology Report for the Year 1952. B r i t i s h Columbia. Department of Eduction. V i c t o r i a : Queen's Printer, 1953, B18-B21. 68 Fladmark, Knut R. " B r i t i s h Columbia Archaeology i n the 1970s," i n Fragments of the Past: B r i t i s h Columbia Archaeology i n the 1970s, ed. Knut R. Fladmark A Special Issue of BC Studies no. 48 (Winter 1980-81): 11-20. . "Bibliography of the Archaeology of B r i t i s h Columbia." BC Studies nos. 6 and 7 ( F a l l and Winter 1970): 126-151. Foucault, Michel. "Two Lectures." i n Culture/Power/Historv. eds. Nicholas B. Dirks, Geoff Eley, and Sherry B. Ortner. Princeton: Princeton U n i v e r s i t y Press, 1994, 200-235. Fowler, Don D. "Uses of the Past: Archaeology i n the Service of the State." American A n t i q u i t y v o l . 52, no. 2 (1987): 229-248. Gruber, Jacob W. "Archaeology, History, and Culture." i n Archaeology Past and Future. eds. David J.. Meltzer, Don D. Fowler, and Jeremy A. Sabloff. Washington, London: Smithsonian I n s t i t u t i o n Press, 1986, 163-186. H i l l - T o u t , Charles. "Ethnological Studies of the Mainland Halkomelem, A D i v i s i o n of the S a l i s h of B r i t i s h Columbia." Report of the B r i t i s h A s s o c i a t i o n for the Advancement of Science 72nd meeting (1902) : 355-490; repr i n t e d i n The Mainland Halkomelem. v o l . 3 The S a l i s h People: The Local Contribution of Charles H i l l - T o u t , ed. Ralph Maud. Vancouver: Talonbooks, 1978: 39-93. . "Later P r e h i s t o r i c Man i n B r i t i s h Columbia." Transactions of the Roval Society of Canada Series 2 (1895): 103-122; rep r i n t e d i n The Mainland Halkomelem. v o l . 3 The S a l i s h People: The Local Contribution of Charles H i l l - T o u t , ed. Ralph Maud. Vancouver: Talonbooks, 1978, 21-38. Hinsley, CM. "Revising and Revisioning the History of Archaeology: Ref l e c t i o n s on Region and Context. " i n Tracing Archaeology's Past: The Historiography of Archaeology, ed. Andrew L. Christenson. Carbondale, Edwardsville: Southern I l l i n o i s U n i v e r s i t y Press, 1989, 79-96. Hodder, Ian. "Post-Modernism, Post-Structuralism and Post-Processual Archaeology." i n The Meaning of Things: Material Culture and Symbolic Expression, ed. Ian Hodder. London: Unwin Hyman, 1989, 64-78. Kehoe, A l i c e B. "The Invention of Prehistory." Current Anthropology v o l . 32, no. 4 (August-October 1991): 467-476. . "The Paradigmatic V i s i o n of Archaeology: Archaeology as a Bourgeois Science." i n Rediscovering Our Past, ed. Jonathan E. Reyman. Aldershot: Avebury Ashgate Publishing Ltd., 1992, 3-14. . "Contextualizing Archaeology." i n Tracing Archaeology's Past: The Historiography of Archaeology, ed. Andrew L. Christenson. Carbondale, Edwardsville: Southern I l l i n o i s U n i v e r s i t y Press, 1989, 97-106. Kluckhohn, Clyde. "The Conceptual Structure i n Middle American Studies." i n The Mava and Their Neighbors. Second E d i t i o n , ed. Jesse D. Jennings. New York: D. Appleton-Century Co., Inc., 1940; r e p r i n t , U n i v e r s i t y of Utah Press, 1962, 41-51. Krieger, Alex D. "The Typological Concept." American A n t i q u i t y v o l . 9, no.3 (1944): 271-288. 69 Kroeber, A.L. "History and Science i n Anthropology." American Anthropologist New Series, v o l . 37, no. 4 (October-December 1935): 539-569. . "Zuni Potsherds." Anthropological Papers. American Museum of Natural History, v o l . 18, pt. 1 (1916): 7-36. Kuhn, Thomas S. "The History of Science." i n The E s s e n t i a l Tension, ed. Thomas S. Kuhn. Chicago: The Un i v e r s i t y of Chicago Press, 1977, 105-126. Lohse, E.S. and Frances Sundt. "History of Research: Museum C o l l e c t i o n s . " i n Northwest Coast, ed. Wayne Suttles, v o l . 7 Handbook of North American Indians. Washington: Smithsonian I n s t i t u t i o n , 1990, 88-97. Matson, R.G. and Gary Coupland. "History of Archaeological Research." Chap, i n The Prehistory of the Northwest Coast. Toronto: Academic Press, Inc., 1995, 37-47. Maud, Ralph. "Bio-biography of Charles H i l l - T o u t . " i n The Sechelt and the South-Eastern Tribes of Vancouver Island, v o l . 4 The S a l i s h People: The Local Contribution of Charles H i l l - T o u t , ed. Ralph Maud. Vancouver: Talonbooks, 1978, 17-34. McKern, W.C. "The Midwestern Taxonomic Method as an A i d to Archaeological Culture Study." American Ant i q u i t y v o l . 4, no. 4 (1939): 301-313. McVicker, Donald E. "The Matter of S a v i l l e : Franz Boas and the Anthropological D e f i n i t i o n of Archaeology." i n Rediscovering Our Past: Essavs on the History of American Archaeology, ed. Jonathan E. Reyman. Aldershot: Avebury Ashgate Publishing Ltd., 1992, 145-159. Noble, William C. "One Hundred and Twenty-Five Years of Archaeology i n the Canadian Provinces." B u l l e t i n of the Canadian Archaeological A s s o c i a t i o n no. 4 (1972) : 1-78. Osborne, Douglas, Warren W. Caldwell, and Robert H. Crabtree. "The Problem of Northwest Coastal-Interior Relationships as seen from Seattle." American A n t i q u i t y v o l . 22, no. 2 (1956): 117-128. Patterson, Thomas C. "Some Post War Theoretical Trends i n U.S. Archaeology." Culture v o l . 6, no. 1 (1986): 43-54. "The Last Sixty Years: Toward a S o c i a l History of Americanist Archaeology i n the United States." American Anthropologist v o l . 88, no. 1 (March 1986) : 7-26. Pinsky, V a l e r i e . "Archaeology, P o l i t i c s , and Boundary-Formation: The Boas Censure (1919) and the Development of American Archaeology during the Inter-War Years." i n Rediscovering Our Past: Essavs on the History of American Archaeology, ed. Jonathan E. Reyman. Aldershot: Avebury Ashgate Publishing Ltd., 1992, 161-189. Rabinow, Paul. "Introduction." i n The Foucault Reader, ed. Paul Rabinow. New York: Pantheon Books, 1984, 3-29. Rouse, Irv i n g . "The Strategy of Culture History." i n Anthropology Today, ed. A.L. Kroeber. Chicago: The Un i v e r s i t y of Chicago, 1953, 1957, 57-76. 70 Schuyler, Robert L. "The History of American Archaeology: An Examination of Procedure." American Anticruitv v o l . 36, no. 4 (1971): 383-409. Sprague, Roderick. "The P a c i f i c Northwest." i n The Development of North American Archaeology, ed. James E. F i t t i n g . U n i v e r s i t y Park, London: The Pennsylvania State Un i v e r s i t y Press, 1973, 251-285. Steward, J u l i a n H. "The Direct H i s t o r i c a l Approach to Archaeology." American Anticruitv v o l . 7, no. 4 (1942): 337-343. Strong, W. Duncan. " H i s t o r i c a l Approach i n Anthropology." i n Anthropology Today. ed. A.L. Kroeber. Chicago: The U n i v e r s i t y of Chicago Press, 1953, 1957, 386-397. Sut t l e s , Wayne and Aldona J o n a i t i s . "History of Research i n Ethnology." i n Northwest Coast. ed. Wayne Suttles, v o l . 7 Handbook of North American Indians. Washington: Smithsonian I n s t i t u t i o n , 1990, 73-87. Trigger, Bruce G. "Writing the History of Archaeology." i n Objects and Others: Essavs on Museums and Material Culture, v o l . 3 History of Anthropology, ed. George W. Stocking J r . Madison, Wisconsin: The U n i v e r s i t y of Wisconsin Press, 1985, 218-235. . "Alternative Archaeologies: N a t i o n a l i s t , C o l o n i a l i s t , I m p e r i a l i s t . " Man New Series, v o l . 19, no. 3 (September 1984): 355-370. . " E d i t o r i a l . " World Archaeology v o l . 13, no. 2 (October 1981): 133-137. "Anglo-American Archaeology." World Archaeology v o l . 13, no. 2 (October 1981): 138-155. "Giants and Pygmies: The P r o f e s s i o n a l i z a t i o n of Canadian Archaeology." i n Towards a History of Archaeology, ed. Glyn Daniel. London: Thames and Hudson Ltd., 1981, 69-84. "Archaeology and the Image of the American Indian." American A n t i q u i t y v o l . 45, no. 4 (1980): 662-676. Wright, J.V. "The Development of Prehistory i n Canada, 1935-1985." American Anticruitv v o l . 50, no. 2 (1985): 421-433. 71 APPENDIX 1 Maps: B.C. A r c h a e o l o g i c a l S i t e s , 1945-1960 l i l 0 10 20 km Figure 1: FRASER DELTA SITES EXCAVATED BY CHARLES BORDEN, 1945-1960 Adapted from: Matson and Coupland, The P r e h i s t o r y of the Northwest Coast, 155. 72 0 100 200 300 km I—, I l I 1 Fraser D e l t a S i t e s , 1945-1957 2 Nechako Ri v e r Survey S i t e s , 1951-1952 3 Kootenay Survey S i t e s , 1954 4 Fraser Canyon S i t e s , 1956 Figure 2: MAJOR B.C. SITES SURVEYED AND EXCAVATED BY CHARLES BORDEN, 1945-1960 Adapted from: Robinson, "Charles E. Borden: His Formulation and T e s t i n g o A r c h a e o l o g i c a l Hypotheses," 3. 73 APPENDIX 2 Photo: Whalen Farm Excavations, 1949 Figure 3: WHALEN FARM MIDDEN EXCAVATION TRENCH, POINT ROBERTS, WASHINGTON, 1949 Copied From: Borden, " F i e l d Notes + Photo Record I & I I Whalen Farm (DfRs 3) Boundary Bay 1949, " Archaeology Reading Room, Museum of Anthropology, U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia. 

Cite

Citation Scheme:

        

Citations by CSL (citeproc-js)

Usage Statistics

Share

Embed

Customize your widget with the following options, then copy and paste the code below into the HTML of your page to embed this item in your website.
                        
                            <div id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidgetDisplay">
                            <script id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidget"
                            src="{[{embed.src}]}"
                            data-item="{[{embed.item}]}"
                            data-collection="{[{embed.collection}]}"
                            data-metadata="{[{embed.showMetadata}]}"
                            data-width="{[{embed.width}]}"
                            async >
                            </script>
                            </div>
                        
                    
IIIF logo Our image viewer uses the IIIF 2.0 standard. To load this item in other compatible viewers, use this url:
http://iiif.library.ubc.ca/presentation/dsp.831.1-0086931/manifest

Comment

Related Items