A HISTORY OF ARCHAEOLOGY IN CANADA, C. Michel Boucher, April 1977

Introduction

This history is identical to many other histories, in that it seeks 
to explain the sequence of events, their origins and results, as they 
apply to the development of archaeology in Canada. The purpose of 
this history is to show that there was a significant development of 
archaeology made in Canada.

The recognizably Canadian period lasted until 1949. The first two 
chapters will deal with this in as much detail as possible. The third 
chapter will assess the period of direct American influence, which is 
still going on.

Admittedly, there was always an influence on Canadian archaeology, as 
sciences, especially social sciences, rarely are born ex nihilo. But 
these influences were both from the United States and Great Britain. 
This created a condition that, in any other field would have resulted 
in conflict. But, as archaeology is a "sponge science", in that it 
absorbs most of its constituent elements from other sciences, it was 
more than willing to develop along any rather than particularly 
associated lines.

It is obvious that writing a history of archaeology, whether it 
concerns Canada or ideas, is not equivalent to writing a dig report 
or a theoretical paper. The techniques of research are quite 
different than those found in anthropological archaeology. or in 
anthropology itself.

These methods are much closer to historical archaeology and 
industrial archaeology, where reliance on the written word is 
essential. This researcher has had a little experience in these 
fields (Boucher, 1976), but enjoins it upon the reader to bear with 
him where written data fail.

In any research, one must select significant facts to permit one to 
reach a conclusion (Hempel, 1966: 10-8). The problem with 
significance in history is that it cannot be justified by a 
hypothesis without dangerously skewing the results, as there is no 
possibility of experimentally recreating the conditions (Dray, 1964: 
4-20). History, after all, is the study of eventsthat stem from 
principles of human behaviour, which arise from the study of social 
sciences, whereas anthropology (and archaeology) is the study of 
human behaviour as shown in the analysis of the end results of 
specific events (artifacts, systems, etc.).

In addition to the history, there will be found a sizeable 
bibliography of archaeology in Canada, in Part II. This bibliography 
contains as many items as could be found in other bibliographies, a 
total of one thousand five hundred and fifty (1550) entries. It is 
hoped that a complete bibliography would eventually be made available 
to the Universities in a cheap format.it is hoped that this will 
serve as a beginning.

Chapter 1: The Precursors (1842 - 1909)

In the 18th Century, little, if anything, was known of the Indians' 
origins, but much information had been amassed on the ethnography of 
the many tribes that shared the land with the Europeans. Travellers 
left notesof their voyages, such men as Jacques Cartier (Pendergast & 
Trigger, 1972), Samuel de Champlain, Pere Louis Hennepin and the 
celebrated Jesuit Relations.

However, the 19th century saw the birth of natural and 
anthropological sciences, particularly the rise and development of 
geology, anthropology, museology and archaeology. These four 
disciplines are closely related in Canada.

The birth of archaeology in Canada in the 1850's must first be put 
into perspective. To do this, it is necessary to review the major 
events of the 19th century.

In January 1832, Doctor Rae petitioned the Lieutenant-Governor of 
Upper Canada, Sir John Colborne, for finances to be allotted toward a 
geological survey of the province of Canada. The Lieutenant-Governor 
made the request to the Committee of Supply in the House Assembly, 
but it was refused.

A similar attempt in December of the same year, by the York Literary 
and Philosophical Society also met with defeat. But, in 1836, Mr. 
L.W. Mackenzie, grandfather of William Lyon Mackenzie King, made a 
motion for a selected committee to consider and report on a plan for 
a geological survey.

It was dropped from the agenda, but revived in 1841 after the union 
of the Provinces, and under the administration of Lord Sydenham, "a 
man who fully appreciated the importance of ascertaining the nature 
and extent of the mineral resources of Canada" (Collins, 1928: 33). 
The sum of L1,500 sterling was finally allotted for this purpose in 
the Estimates of September 12, 1841 (Appendix A). One must remember 
that for a country with a population of slightly over one million, 
where most men earned their living by clearing the land and farming, 
that sum was considered a large amount.

Sir William Edmund Logan was named first director of the Geological 
Survey of Canada in the spring of 1842. So began the National Museum 
of Canada, principally, at that time, a repository for geological and 
palaeontological specimens.

In that same year, Dr. Abraham Gesner founded Gesner's Museum in 
Saint John, New Brunswick, the first fully operating museum in 
Canada. Dr. Gesner had been a director of medicine in Parrsboro, Nova 
Scotia, and made geological collections there, when he was appointed 
New Brunswick's provincial geologist in 1838. He adopted the idea of 
making the collection public and, on April 5, 1842, opened the museum 
in a space he had rented on Prince William Street in Saint John. The 
catalogue, published ten days later, listed some 2200 exhibits. The 
following year, Gesner submitted his fifth, and last, geological 
report, and retired from the post of provincial geologist to practice 
medicine in Cornwallis, Nova Scotia. He was never paid for his five 
years with the New Brunswick government (Squires, 1945: 4-9).

The institution founded by Gesner, now located on Douglas Avenue, 
has, like Logan's Survey, endured the test of time. Each has been a 
tribute to its founder.

Archaeology, however, was not yet known. In the early 1800's, Capt. 
Back, R.N., travelled to the Great Fish River and reported seeing 
deserted Eskimo burials (Back, 1836).

In 1836 and 1837, the Call Farm and Beverly Township ossuaries were 
opened, operations which do not appear to have been much more than 
outright pillaging. In 1843, the Bytown ossuary was opened in the 
presence of E. Van Courtland. However, no report appears until 1853 
(Van Courtland, 1853), a full ten years later.

The development of archaeology in Canada during the 19th century was 
closely linked to the expansion of the railroads. The systematic 
clearing of hillocks and mounds, to make way for the tracks, opened 
burials that would otherwise have remained untouched (Wilson, 1852a: 
25).

The first railroad in Canada was built between LaPrairie, south of 
Montreal, and Saint Jean d'Iberville, 16 miles to the southeast. By  
1850, there were 66 miles of railway.

In those days, the main cities were Quebec, Montreal, Kingston and 
York (now Toronto). The first major railways were to connect those 
towns. The expansion was so great that, by the mid 1850's, railways 
were linking many out of the way towns, such as Bytown and 
Peterborough, to the main line, which ran along the Saint-Laurence 
(Boucher, 1976: 13).

These railways were cutting through archaeologically rich areas, 
along the Saint-Laurence valley, and people became quickly aware of 
the extent of Indian remains.

The link with the rest of Canada was swiftly made. In 1864, Upper 
Canada politicians succeeded in turning the Charlottetown Conference 
from the appointed subject of Maritime Union to that of Canadian 
Confederation, a widely opposed project (Wade, 1955, Ch. 5). One of 
the representatives from Lower Canada, Georges-Etienne Cartier, 
wished to expand the railroads in Canada, as a means towards economic 
unity, and therefore promoted its development as an adjunct to 
Confederation. The Maritimes agreed to join Confederation, on the 
condition that a railway would be built to link Halifax with the main 
line at Quebec. It was Cartier who proposed it as a solution, need 
one say a bribe, to the Maritimes' apparent repulsion of the proposed 
confederation.

Despite many requests for a referendum, the province of Canada was 
"united" under a single parliament in March 1867, by an act of the 
British Parliament, commonly known as the British North America Act 
(30 & 31 Victoria, c. 3, assented to 29th March, 1867). Cartier's 
plan was visible in the Act, which stated (Article 145) that:

   Inasmuch as the Provinces of Canada, Nova Scotia, and New          
   Brunswick   have joined in a Declaration that the Construction of  
   the Intercolonial Railway is essential to the Consolidation of the 
   Union of British North America...it shall be the duty of the       
   Government and Parliament of Canada to provide for the             
   Commencement, within six months after the Union, of a Railway      
   connecting the River St. Lawrence with the City of Halifax in Nova 
   Scotia...(repealed in 1893) (Driedger, 1976: 40)

In 1852, the Canadian Institute, housed in Toronto and eventual 
genitor of the Royal Ontario Museum, began publication of scientific 
reports covering a great variety of subjects in its "Canadian 
Journal". The importance of this organ cannot be overrated, and men 
such as Lyell and Faraday were aware of the eventual far-reaching 
effects of this Journal, as witness their contributions to the first 
volume.

The very first mention of archaeology, in print, possibly anywhere in 
Canada, was in the first issue and consisted of a short article by 
Rev. C. Dade on Indian remains. But, of much greater importance, was 
the editorial of the second number, attributed to Sir Daniel Wilson 
(Noble, 1973: 62-3).

This editorial concerned the scientific reporting of antiquities by 
"those who are interested by the attractive subject of Indian 
remains"  (Wilson, 1852a). It consisted primarily in the 
recirculation of an enquiry by the Canadian Institute, dated June 12, 
1852. The enquiry purported to have been drawn up as the result of 
Squier's publication of his adventures among the Mississippi mounds, 
and the obvious need for equally scientific work to bedone in Canada. 
The Institute had drawn up a thirteen point questionnairefor those 
who discovered mounds, requesting them to supply information 
concerning the size, location and context of any "intrenchments or 
mounds" (op. cit.). The article is reported in full in Appendix B.

Because of its close link to the development of the railroads, it 
might besaid that the initial thruse for Canadian archaeology was 
similar to that which later became known as "salvage" or "public" 
archaeology.

An interesting aside, in the editorial by Wilson, concerns the 
subject dealt with in the paragraph immediately following the 
Canadian Institute enquiry. This was a request for proper scientific 
reporting in geology and palaeontology, concerning primarily the 
discovery of industrial lime beds, but also fossil remains.

   ...much scientific and economic importance is involved in the      
   collection and publication of accurate description and diagrams of 
   STRATA. (underlining mine) (Wilson, 1852a)

It seems that Wilson missed scientific revolution by an inch, 
literally. But it is conceivable that he had an ulterior motive in 
linking archaeology with palaeontology, inasmuch as both are earth 
sciences. The fact that fossils are often found in limestone beds, 
and that it was known by geologists that strata reflect a measurable 
unit of time, useful in dating the remains within the matrices, could 
not have escaped a man like Wilson. One must consider the possibility 
that the juxtaposition was intentional. It is more significant when 
we see that Wilson holds the development of railroads in Britain 
responsible for the development of geology, while those in Canada, he 
maintains, were responsible for the development of archaeology.

However, the editorial was completely ignored; there was no change in 
antiquarians' methods for another sixty years.

The reasoning behind the study of antiquities was twofold. Historical 
antiquities were of interest in themselves, inasmuch as they 
supported the written record. Prehistoric antiquities were 
investigated primarily in the hope of finding a link between the 
Indians and the lost tribes of Israel. This explains the relatively 
large number of clergymen interested in the subject.

By the time, Wilson's editorial was published, Gesner's museum had 
been relinquished to the Mechanics' Institute, in 1846, and the Laval 
University Museum was founded in that year of 1852. The McGill 
University Museum was only four years in future.

The first important archaeological undertaking of the century was 
made by Sir John Dawson, professor of geology at McGill University, 
in 1859, at the site which came to bear his name, two blocks from the 
McGill campus in downtown Montreal. The site was discovered while 
workers were clearing sand for construction cement. Dawson believed 
from the first that the site was the historical Hochelaga.

He took pains to record, as completely as he could, the remaining 
evidences of layout and composition of the site, but looters and 
curious children disturbed much of it. He notes:

   On inquiry, I found that the workmen employed in removing sand,    
   have, at several times, found skeletons, and have buried them in   
   the clay below the sand bed, where perhaps at some future time     
   they may lead to the supposition that in Canada man was            
   contemporary with this historically very old though geologically   
   very recent deposit. I record the fact of the transference of      
   these skeletons to the Leda clay, to prevent, if possible, the     
   occurrence of an error so serious. (Dawson, 1860)

He also mentions that the workmen were not noting the position of the 
burials. His reports were by no means complete, but this can be 
easily understood if it is known that his primary interest was to 
identify the inhabitants (which he proceeded to do by craniometry), 
and to prove that this was Cartier's Hochelaga.

He compared the material from the site with those found by W.E. Guest 
near Prescott, at the site of an Indian village (Guest, 1856). He 
noted the similarity in detail from artifacts found on both sites. An 
interesting note may be added here, that Dawson mentions the 
dimensions of the trees on the Prescott site, as they would indicate 
a date for its abandonment, supposed by him to be much earlier than 
1534 (see Appendix B, article 4). He concluded that the settlement of 
the island of Montreal was on the decline by the time Cartier 
arrived, and, had he come a few years later, he would not have seen 
it. The inhabitants, Dawson concluded, were Algonquins.

In his research, he applied two basic principles of modern 
archaeology: chronology, in terms of the context, and comparative 
analysis.

At the same time as Guest was involved in his work at Prescott, 
Reynolds was working in Brockville and Tache at the Kinghorn pit.

In 1863, Sir Daniel Wilson published a rather large volume entitled 
"Prehistoric Men". It was an attempt to synthesize all the current 
knowledge of the prehistory of Man in both the Old and New Worlds.

Wilson stated that the primary purpose of the book was ethnological, 
but he nevertheless relied heavily on archaeology and craniometry, as 
well as early history. To prepare his volume, he received help from 
such men as the artist Paul Kane, and E.H. Davis, Squier's companion. 
In the preface, he states:

   To confine our studies to mere antiquities is like reading by      
   candle-light at noon-day; but to reject the aid of archaeology in  
   the process of science...is to extinguish the lamp of the student  
   when most dependent upon its borrowed rays.

In the first chapters, he proposed that the antiquity of the Indian 
in North America was immeasurable, and stated, as proof, that 
fossilized remains of man had been found in Florida and were dated at 
10,000 B.P. by geological methods. Moreover, he presents the case of 
two skeletons, one found at Natchez, underneath the bones of a 
megalonyx (?), and another near New Orleans, under four successive 
cypress forests, dated at 57,000 B.P.

He also warns of errors in dating remains which appear within the 
same level, citing the case of the discovery of 16th century pipes 
and Roman pottery, giving the impression that Romans were in 
possession of tobacco. it can be seen that already some attention was 
being given, albeit superficially, to archaeological context. Wilson, 
like Dawson, appears to have been interested in the development of 
archaeology in conjucnction with earth and social sciences, as 
elementary as those may have been at the time.

In 1864, W. Gossip published an article (G---, 1864) on kitchen 
middens in Nova Scotia, "kjoekkenmoedden" as they were called in 
Danish. Later, in 1873, Gilpin published an article in which he 
attempted to relate the Danish Three-Age system to Canadian Maratime 
antiquities. Indeed, it would appear that Thomsen's system was the 
greatest theoretical influence on Maratime archaeology until 1913 
(Willey and Sabloff, 1973: 13-4; Noble, 1973: 56).

At about the same time, work was being conducted by Lloyd in 
Newfoundland, and reports were made on excavations of Beothuck 
burials in Placentia Bay (Howley, 1915: 288-92, 322-41).

Lloyd did much for the development of Newfoundland archaeology, and 
the identification of Beothuck cultural remains. Two of his articles, 
reported in Howley (loc. cit.), deal with the uses of stone 
implements as deduced from their appearance.

Notwithstanding the aforementioned desire of Upper Canada to prevent 
a Maratime Union by forcing these provinces to join Confederation, 
the scientific community in this region remained apart from the rest 
of the country until the turn of the century, and developed their own 
alliances. It must be remembered that Newfoundland, although present 
in this report, did not join Confederation until 1949.

In 1868, the Provincial Museum of Nova Scotia was founded, in 
Halifax. Donald Gunn began his archaeological reconnaissance of the 
mounds in the southeast portion of Manitoba. Two years before, John 
K. Lord had described a long expedition through British Columbia and 
Washington which involved frequent reference to surface finds plus 
descriptions of Indian burial grounds (Sprague, 1973: 253).

In 1862, the Mechanics' Institute in Saint John had been instrumental 
in founding the Natural History Society of New Brunswick (NHSNB). In 
1870, the Nova Scotia Historical Society (NSHS) began publication of 
its journal, and, in the following year, the Nova Scotia Institute of 
Natural Sciences followed suit. It was not until a decade had elapsed 
that the NHSNB published its own journal.

This was the scientific cliamate of the Maratimes in which Gilpin 
formulated his application of the Thomsen model to archaeological 
remains.

It was also in this period that widespread interest began in the 
existence of Atlantis, particularly related to the work of Augustus 
Le Plongeon in Yucatan (Wauchope, 1962: 7ff). Perhaps the time was 
ripe for problem oriented research in archaeology, and also work 
based on the dubious assumption that what one found was what one was 
looking for, and that one was bound by a sense of moral certitude to 
defend one's conclusions.

In this light, it might be wise to note that, between 1875 and 1900, 
much energy was expended looking for the tomb of Tecumseh, an American 
Indian chief who fought for the English during the American War of 
Independence and was defeated at the Battle of Tippecanoe. He was 
reported to have been buried in Ontario.

As the subject of excavations at that time were burials, it is easy 
to understand how such a development came about. It is very possible 
that burials did more to develop archaeology generally, because of 
the ease with which one can identify the principal object, the 
skeleton, and the associated grave remains.

The year 1875 also saw the appearance of George Mercer Dawson, second 
son of Sir John Dawson, at the Geological Survey, where he directed 
many expeditions to the Western territories. He was also interested 
in collecting ethnological information, an interest which came to 
have far-reaching consequences.

In 1877, the Great Saint John Fire disrupted the NHSNB's collecting 
and the Society was dissolved until 1880, when it attracted William 
Francis Ganong, George F. Matthew, Samuel Kain and William McIntosh. 
These men developed the fund of knowledge on the historical Micmac 
and Malecite folk-lore and legends (Squires, 1945: 13-4).

In 1879, Robert Bell of the Geological Survey discovered the pottery 
which has since become known as Black Duck ware. This was found at the 
mouth of the Nelson River, in Manitoba.

At about this time, Dr. M.P. Schultz expressed an idea which became 
popular, until 1912, that the Manitoba mounds were the product of the 
fabled "Mound Builders" (Noble, 1973: 69). This idea was often 
expressed in books of the times, as well as reports, such as the 
Archaeological Reports of the Canadian Institute, which began 
publication in the following decade.

The early 1880's saw Howley's work with the Beothuck burials, Duns' 
analysis of lithics in Nova Scotia, Baird's excavations of 
shell-mounds in New Brunswick, as well as the Bulletin of the NHSNB, 
the incorporation of the same society by the provincial legislature, 
the founding of the Historical and Scientific Society of Manitoba, 
and, most important, the founding of the Royal Society of Canada. 
This society's publication of articles for transactions has greatly 
contributed, and indeed, continues to contribute to the major 
branches of the sciences. Many Canadian scientists and administrators 
were fellows of the Society, as well as a few anthropologists and 
archaeologists.

In 1886, Dr. David Boyle became curator of the Ontario Provincial 
Museum. He conducted the first systematic archaeological 
reconnaissance of any region of Canada. He reported regularly to the 
Minister of Education of the Province, and these reports have been 
important documents, written in great parts by Boyle himself. He 
directed the work of Andrew Hunter, who surveyed over six hundred 
sites in Simcoe Co., and of Col. George Laidlaw, who pioneered 
archaeology in his native Victoria County. Others who were directed 
by Boyle over the years were Dr. A.F. Chamberlain, Dr. J.H. Coyne, 
T.W.E. Sowter, Robert T. Anderson, Frank W. Waugh, Rev. Arthur E. 
Jones, J. Hugh Hammond, and Dr. Rowland B. Orr who succeeded Boyle in 
1911, at the great man's passing (Noble, 1973: 63-4).

In the same year, one Professor VanderSmissen proposed the novel idea 
that there should be legislation to make prehistoric monuments public 
property, and that this legislation should make it a misdemeanor to 
dig in or disturb them in any way (Toronto Globe, 1886c).

The few years preceding this rather disturbing event had seen the 
first publication of the Canadian Record of Science, a magazine, Rev. 
George Bryce's Rainy River expedition, and the proposal by Dr. 
Charles Bell for the creation of a Dominion Society for Archaeology. 
It was truly a time of ferment, but none of the ideas presented to 
the public bore any fruit for at least a quarter century. Professor 
VanderSmissen's controvertial idea still has not seen light here, 
though it has been widely adopted in the United States.

the year following the creation of the Ontario Provincial Museum saw 
that of another Museum, the Provintial Museum of British Columbia, in 
Victoria. It also saw the opening of the French River Ossuary in 
Ontario.

We now enter a period when, except for some uneventful digging and 
recording, few new ideas were introduced in Canadian archaeology. 
This period lasted for twenty years (1890-1910) and saw the 
development of ethnological research. It began, in 1888, with the 
publication of Franz Boas' "The Central Eskimo". He conceived the 
book while on a geographical reconnaissance of Baffin Island. In 
1896, George Dawson, now director of the Geological Survey, was 
appointed head of a temporary Ethnological Survey of Canada.

Meanwhile, in 1890, the Patterson Collection, an extensive collection 
of stone artifacts, was donated to the Provincial Museum of Nova 
Scotia, and, in 1896, J. Walter Fewkes conducted one of the three 
surveys of Prince Edward Island, around Rustico Bay.

The most important event of the end of the 19th century was the 
Jessup North Pacific Expedition, between 1897 and 1899. It was an 
ethnological expedition to the B.C. Interior. A young archaeologist 
by the name of Harlan Ingersoll Smith was put in charge of the 
archaeological part of the project. Boas said that he had "assigned 
an important part to archaeological work which in the careful hands 
of Harlan I. Smith gave important results on Fraser River showing the 
invasion of inland cultures" (Boas, 1936). Smith has been criticized 
for his methods, because,apparently, "even considering the time 
period, his field work left much to be desired" (Sprague, 1973: 255). 
However, his major contributions during the ten years that followed 
were his insistence on widespread distribution of publication (he 
often published the same article in as many as four different 
journals), the need for In Situ photography, and the need to wait 
until one had amassed enough artifacts of similar type before drawing 
conclusions as to their use or "common" origin. This was truly a 
Boasian idea, aimed at more extensive field work (Smith, 1911f/1913b).

In 1899, materials related to the Copper Complex in Manitoba were 
published. This proved to be the downfall of Schultz's Mound-builders 
idea.

Some years before, Joseph Tyrell, of the Geological Survey had done 
work in Manitoba (1886) and in Saskatchewan (1893), as well as work 
on historic sites in Alberta.

Work was still being carried on by Boyle's "raiders" in Ontario, and 
the publication of these reconnaissances stands out as the only 
coordinated archaeological work being done anywhere in Canada at that 
time.

A young protege of Boyle's, William John Wintemberg, was developing 
his talent towards archaeology and ethnology. He was born in New 
Dundee, Ontario, on the 18th of May 1876. His weak health did not 
permit him to practice a physically demanding line of work. He 
apprenticed as a tailor, a compositor and a brass and copper smith. 
However, his interests in archaeology of Eastern Canada and also in 
place-name lore of Ontario brought him into contact with David Boyle.

Little remains to be said of this period of the precursors, save 
perhaps that William McIntosh succeeded George Matthew as second 
curator of the Natural History Society of New Brunswick's Museum in 
1907.  He was the first full-time curator and it was under him that 
extensive and organized study of archaeological and ethnological 
material was begun, a goal in which he had shown interest some thirty 
years before (Noble, 1973: 58).

It was also in that year that landmark legislation was passed by the 
Government of Canada, giving the Geological Survey responsibility for 
the collecting and publication of ethnological as well as geological 
material. This piece of legislation is most probably a direct 
offshoot of Dawson's Ethnological Survey.

As we have seen, during the first seventy years of its existence, the 
Geological Survey had a profound influence on archaeology in Canada, 
mostly in developing interest and making people aware of the presence 
of sites in undeveloped regions of the country.

On a smaller scale, but just as intense, was the work of David Boyle 
and his associates, concentrated in Southern, Central and Eastern 
Ontario.

The individuals who contributed the most were Sir Daniel Wilson, Sir 
John Dawson, George Dawson, his son, and David Boyle.




Solarguard Canadian Archaeology