Chapter 2: The Formative Period (1910 - 1949)
At the opening of this period, Canada had completed nearly seventy
years of research in archaeology. Sixty-eight years had elapsed since
Logan's appointment as director of the Geological Survey, fifty-one
years since Dawson's work on the famous site, and thirty-seven years
since Gilpin's introduction of the Three-Age system.
The year 1910 saw the appointment of Edward Sapir, a student of Franz
Boas, as director of the Anthropology Division of the Museum of the
Geological Survey in Ottawa. His appointment came as a result of the
legislation of 1907, which allowed the formation of an Anthropology
Division. Sapir, though very unhappy in his position because of
administrative interference to his projects, remained at his post
until 1925. He published only one paper in the Museum's series
(Darnell, 1976).
The year folowing his appointment, Sapir chose Harlan Smith as
archaeologist. The connection between these two individuals is
obvious, and their common training under Boas influenced the sort of
archaeology that was done by the Anthropology Division for the next
forty years.
That year (1911), David Boyle died and was succeeded by Orr.
Wintemberg left Toronto and moved to Ottawa. He attached himself to
the newly created Victoria Memorial Museum on McLeod Street, as
part-time field worker, under Harlan Smith. Smith published his first
Canadian article, a statement of the methods of archaeology, entitled
"Archaeological Evidence as Determined by Method and Selection"
(Smith, 1911f).
It emphasized the need for serious training in the methods of
archaeology, to avoid the compiling of misleading information. Single
finds must be considered unique until they are found to be
duplicated, a principle which went against much of the antiquarians'
extrapolating. Recognition of materials found is more complete when
the individual is properly trained, which in turn allows for a
greater variety of materials. It stated that excavation was
preferable to surface collection, because of the better proportion of
stone and bone artifacts. It warned that amateur collections were
usually skewed towards the unusual, but that the object of the
archaeologist was to determine the common; unique pieces are usually
seen in relation to common pieces, and not in themselves. However, it
stated that the context (grave, house-site, etc.) may indicate some
specialized use of an object, either of function, individual or group
(shaman, fisher village, etc.). Finally, it stated that the goal of
archaeology must be the reconstruction of prehistoric ethnology.
Harry Piers was working in Nova Scotia at the time, but little
notable work was being done anywhere.
But the following years saw the initiation of four major projects,
three of which were under the direct supervision of Harlan Smith. In
1912, Wintemberg, now full-time preparator, began the Roebuck site
project. It was the largest archaeological undertaking in Canada. It
involved the systematic excavation of an eight acre site containing
85 burials, and thousands of potsherds and artifacts. The site had
been discovered in 1845 and visited by Guest in 1854, but no work had
been done in any organized fashion (Wintemberg, 1936: 1-2). It was
worked during two seasons, in 1912 and 1915. The report was not
published until 1936.
The same year, W.B. Nickerson began his three year survey and
excavation project of the Manitoba mounds. Nickerson, an amateur
archaeologist and and employee of the Chicago and Great Western
Railway, had done much work for the Peabody Museum on the Illinois
mounds between 1895 and 1901. It must be noted that Smith was
Assistant Curator of the American Museum of Natural History at that
time, and must have had some contact with Nickerson, though no
mention is made of this anywhere.
Nickerson is a unique individual in the history of archaeology, much
like Thomas Jefferson. He anticipated modern methods of controlled
excavation that included datum plane, 5-foot grid system, digging by
levels, careful smoothing of profiles and floors, and detailed
recording (Capes, 1963: 2). He remained in obscurity however, until
1926, when, shortly after his death, the University of Chicago
discovered his unpublished reports and placed them in the Field
Museum. In 1942, Bennett (1942) wrote of him that few men living in
that year had been able to better Nickerson in technique and
interpretation of data. It was not until 1963 that some of his notes
were compiled by Katherine Capes.
But the world was not widely interested in such matters. The romance
of Atlantis had captured the imagination of many, and to such a point
that it prompted Orr to write:
...in time, some Archaeological genius may devise means of
descending into the depths of the deepest ocean, and presenting to
a wondering world the history of the buried cities of the past. Or
maybe some convulsion of nature, such as has occurred in the past,
may disentomb those cities which it submerged thousands and
thousands of years ago.
But our duty at present is to travel along the beaten paths and
build up therefrom the history of the ancient races on this
continent. From Patagonia to the Yukon their footprints are to be
found; from the ruins of the stately palaces of the Incas and
Toltec, to the common village Long House of the Huron and
Iroquois, we have but to gather the handiwork of their artisans
and sculptors, the paintings of their artists, and the ornaments
and weapons of their nomadic tribes. Time and research will do the
rest. (Orr, in ARCI, 1911: 9)
It is difficult to tell whether Orr was serious, which is to be
assumed as this was a difficult year for him with the passing of
Boyle, or if he was being facetious when he gave some credit to the
existence of the Atlantean cities. Notwithstanding, he thought that
the present duties lay elsewhere, closer to hand. But his description
of the work to be done has definite overtones of antiquarianism.
In 1913, the second group of large projects was initiated, the
Mertgomish Harbour project by Smith and Wintemberg, who excavated the
Eisenhauer Shell-heap, and the first multidisciplinary study
undertaken in Canada, the Stefansson-Anderson Arctic Expedition. This
expedition lasted for five years, until 1918, and employed Diamond
Jenness as ethnologist-archaeologist. Its subject was the Copper
Eskimo region.
Jenness, a native of New Zealand, who had conducted an
anthropological expedition to New Guinea for Oxford University in
1911, was hired by Sapir, presumably, to take part in the expedition.
Many scientists were involved in this expedition and reports cover
such varied subjects as mammal biology, ornithology, entomology,
botany, marine botany, ischyology, geology, geography, ethnology and
archaeology.
In New Brunswick, McIntosh published his volume on Iroquois pottery
from Grand Lake, the first of his aforementioned projects.
It was also the year that saw the first National Museum Bulletins,
published in a separate series from those of the Geological Survey.
Smith also published a popularized version of his work on the West
Coast with the Jesup North Pacific Expedition, as part of his project
to widely disseminate information (Smith, 1913b).
In 1914, Smith and Wintemberg completed the Merigomish Harbour
project. The following year, Wintemberg surveyed six counties in New
Brunswick and completed the Roebuck site excavations. Nickerson
reported for the last time on the Manitoba mounds and returned to
Chicago. Frank Speck initiated the first major archaeological project
in Quebec since the Dawson site when he discovered the Tadoussac
site. The site was one of major importance, reinvestigated by
Wintemberg in 1927 and Lowther in the early 1960's (Noble, 1973: 61).
Little occurred until 1920, when Jenness, Wintemberg and Strong all
worked in Newfoundland-Labrador. Jenness was involved with the
Beothucks, Wintemberg was conducting one of his many surveys and
Strong was excavating in northern Labrador with some results.
In 1925, Wintemberg was named Assistant Archaeologist and conducted
the second survey of Prince Edward Island, as well as a survey of
Saskatchewan and Alberta. Jenness received a collection from Baffin
Island, more specifically from Cape Dorset, which he compared with
Matthiassen's collection from the Rasmussen 5th Thule Expedition
(1921-1924) which had recently terminated (Dekin, 1973: 19).
In 1927, the same year that the National Museum received its name and
status by an Order-in-Council (Appendix D), Wintemberg and Jenness
travelled to Newfoundland. In that same year, and in 1929, they
discovered sites of what came to be known as the Dorset culture. It
was named by Wintemberg in 1929.
In 1927, Wintemberg also reinvestigated the Archaic site of
Tadoussac, and Frederick Johnson picked up pottery at Lac Kakabonga,
on the Upper Outaouais, while on an ethnological expedition. This
material was incorporated into Wintemberg's posthumous report on
aboriginal pottery (Wintemberg, 1942). This was the last work done in
prehistoric archaeology in Quebec for twenty years.
By 1930, many men had gone through the National Museum. Sapir had
left five years before, succeeded by Jenness, Francis Knowlse, later
Sir Francis Knowles, had come and gone (1915-1921); he was appointed
as physical anthropologist by Sapir but retired due to ill health and
returned to England where he became curator of the Pitt-Rivers Museum
at Oxford. However, he left behind a complete osteological analysis
of the inhabitants of the Roebuck site, and made obvious the need for
a competent physical anthropologist. Smith and Wintemberg remained at
their posts.
in 1930, Wintemberg surveyed the east coast of New Brunswick, the
Magdalen Islands and Eastern Ontario. Junius Bird, excavating in
Labrador, identified the Hopedale culture. Charles Hill-Tout
published a description of the Great Fraser Midden in Vancouver.
In 1935, the Saskatchewan Archaeology Society was founded, the first
such Society from the West.
Harlan Smith retired from his post as archaeologist in 1936. It seems
that Jenness assimmilated his position. During his career, Smith had
published well over a hundred articles, dealing with a great variety
of subjects, from the construction of a cheap museum case, for local
museums, to expositions of archaeological approach. Though he was
rarely involved in field work after 1914, he proved to be a very
competent administrator. He was interested in the role that a museum
played in the education of the people, and was certainly instrumental
in making the Victoria Memorial Museum what it is today. He spent
much time in the development and organization of a central filing
system for archaeology at the Museum, aprecursor of the National Site
Register of the Archaeological Survey. He inaugerated weekly lectures
to adults and schoolchildren which were kept up until this author was
of age to be interested in the variety of subjects which were
offered. Smith died in Ottawa on January 20th, 1940, at the age of
68, having given the better part of his life to the development of
archaeology in Canada.
The few years preceeding the war saw little work. Jury worked along
Lake Erie, Nash at the Pound site, Greenman, for the University of
Michigan, at the Old Birch Island site and the Palaeo-Indian site of
George Lake near Killarney, and Kenneth Kidd at the Rock Lake site,
in Algonquin Park. Except for these Ontario sites, only the
reconnaissances of Wesley Bliss and Junius Bird in Alberta are worthy
of mention.
The war years were not the best time for archaeology. The
single-minded destructiveness of the nation, righteously directed at
Germany, had little time for things of the past.
The Museum published no report from 1939 until 1947. Indeed, it was
so absorbed by the war effort that its staff was disseminated among
other departments. Jenness was appointed Deputy Director of
Intelligence for the Royal Canadian Air Force in 1941 until the end
of the war.
Wintemberg retired on January 1st, 1941, and died soon after, on
April 25th. From 1937 until his retirement, he had been Associate
Archaeologist and, since 1934, a Fellow of the Royal Society of
Canada. Wintemberg, an indefatiguable researcher, left, as his
legacy, many excavated sites, a number of surveys (he was the first
man to systematically survey the country) and a considerable
collection of notes on a thousand or more subjects in archaeology and
ethnology, in all, over a hundred boxes.This author had occasion to
refer to some of Wintemberg's notes in the course of his work and
found them to be impressive, as were his field notes. Like Smith,
Wintemberg also gave his life to archaeology, and his contributionis
incalculable.
During the war years Bird and Stanton investigated parts of Manitoba,
W.H. Rand opened the Rosser and Morden Mounds (1940), amateur Chris
Vickers investigated the southeast region of Manitoba (1943), and
William Orchard, as president of the Saskatchewan Archaeological
Society, published his small volume "The Stone Age On the Prairies"
(1942), a synthesis of Prairies archaeology. Strangely enough, this
volume was published by the School Aids and Textbooks Company in
Regina and Toronto. It was perhaps the first of its kind, since
Smith's 1913 summary.
In 1946, archaeology crept back into the limelight and there was
created an impetus which has carried through to this day. In British
Columbia, Charles Borden was investigating the Fraser Delta, which
greatly increased the knowledge of the West Coast peoples. Between
1946 and 1948, McIlwraith began to train archaeology students, first
at Cahiague and then at the nearby Soper site in Ontario. This had
the effect of developing trained field personnel.
In 1947, Douglas Leechman and Frederica de Laguna surveyed the St.
Lawrence Valley, between Cornwall and Cardinal, and excavated the
Parker site. Norman Emerson excavated the Kant site on the Bonnechere
River. Rogers and Rogers began their survey of the Mistassinni and
Albanel Lakes in Quebec. But, most important, Richard MacNeish began
his survey of Iroquois collections, which led him to introduce a
technique of pottery type seriation, as well as the direct historical
approach (MacNeish, 1952b).
Jenness retired, along with Marius Barbeau, a frequent contributor to
ethnology, in 1948. He was succeeded by Douglas Leechman, who was, by
then, Chief Archaeologist. Leechman, in turn, was succeeded by
MacNeish.
That same year, Henry Collins extensively surveyed Frobisher and
Resolute Bays, as well as Southampton, Coats, Walrus and Mansel
Islands in the eastern Northwest Territories. This provided much
information on the Thule and Dorset occupations of the Canadian
Arctic (Dekin, 1973: 22).
In 1949, Boyd Wettlaufer excavated the Head-Smashed-In Buffalo jump
in Alberta, MacNeish worked at Fondue Lake in Saskatchewan, Thomas
Lee surveyed Southwestern Ontario, and William Ritchie, while
studying Middle Woodlands in Central Ontario, surveyed portions of
the Trent River system, between Picton and Rice Lake (Ritchie, 1949).
We now enter the third period of Canadian archaeology, that of
maturity. It is almost a hundred years since Wilson's editorial,
fully ninety since the Dawson site was discovered. The archaeological
work of the National Museum has been going on for forty years. The
spirit of Franz Boas was present throughout that period, as was the
emphasis on extensive field work. Much was done, if one considers the
few resources at hand. The parent institution's own emphasis on field
work was certainly instrumental in choosing the Boasian approach,
whether consciously or not.
But the hand of Government moved, and, with it, the National Museum.
It was transferred from the Department of Mines, where the Geological
Survey was housed, to the Department of Resources and Development, a
newly created department which absorbed the functions of the
Department of Mines. The Museum, somewhat independent since 1927,
became completely independent.
During the period we have just reviewed, the important individuals
were, without doubt, Edward Sapir, Harlan Smith, William Wintemberg
and Diamond Jenness. W.B. Nickerson would certainly deserve a place
here, were it notfor the fact that his contribution to the
development of archaeology was not recognized.
In 1950, the four "enfants terribles" were no longer present and
Canada was open to the introduction of new ideas from the South.
Chapter 3: Mature Archaeology (1950-1975)
This period was characterized by the introduction of ideas from
American Archaeology, at least in its early stages, and the continued
dependence of Canadian archaeology on this source of ideas.
The men of the formative period did not see their task as being
generalizing or theorizing. They were dirt archaeologists and
occasionally ethnologists. They collected, analyzed and published.
But they were independent in the formulation of their results. It
could not really be said that the Boasian approach was truly
American. Most of Boas' field work was done in Canada, as was Harlan
Smith's formative apprenticeship. Nickerson's methods were applied
most extensively in Canada, under the direction of the Canadian
government. But, even as all good things become stale, it was fated
that extensive field work could not, by itself, produce the results
required of it by Smith, the "reconstruction of prehistoric
ethnology" (Smith, 1911f).
The stimulation offered by the new ideas, introduced by men like
MacNeish, is evidenced in the number of publications that can be
found from the 1950's and early 1960's, certainly a greater number
than was published in the previous hundred years.
Although MacNeish had finished his survey of Iroquois pottery, it was
not yet published in 1950. Valerie Burger, perhaps the first woman in
Canadian archaeology, surveyed the Kempt and Manouwane Lakes region
in southwestern Quebec. Rogers and Bradley expanded the work done
three years before by Rogers and Rogers in central Quebec. Russell
Harper excavated the Portland Point site, an Archaic site in New
Brunswick, as well as two historic Micmac burials from Pictou, Nova
Scotia.
The following year, the Ontario Archaeological Society was founded by
Norman Emerson, and MacNeish began his three year survey of Southeast
Manitoba. The report from this survey, published in 1958, was of
major importance in explaining methods of selection in archaeology,
the terminology of artifact description, and making explicit the
establishment of typologies for lithic artifacts, as MacNeish's
previous work had done with pottery types. Moreover he expressed the
following ideas:
Co-operation between the archaeologist or, better yet, a series of
archaeologists employed by a number of local institutions, amateur
archaeologists, and interested laymen could make for relatively
complete archaeological reconnaissances and thorough excavations.
It is hoped that during the further excavations and analysis of
the archaeological materials, the anthropologist can work in
co-operation with ethnologists, historians, geologists,
physicists, botanists, zoologists, agronomists, and a host of
other specialists. Such interdisciplinary co-operation can greatly
enhance studies of prehistory. If such a program can be carried
out, then we shall be able, eventually, to obtain a fairly
complete story of the prehistory of Manitoba. (MacNeish, 1958: 84)
The year 1952 saw the publication of MacNeish's pottery types, and it
was also the year that a major development was introduced.
Charles Borden proposed a system for uniform site designation
throughout Canada, now known as the Borden system (which
unfortunately gave rise to the linguistic atrocities "to bordenize"
and "bordinization"). The system is adapted from the Geological
Survey map grid, divided every four degrees of longitude by two
degrees of latitude. It permits the use of Geological Survey maps,
with no modifications at 1: 250,000. The system is widely used
throughout the country to designate prehistoric sites, though
Manitoba uses its own system, as well as Ontario. This idea has not
been adopted by the National Historic Sites.
It may be pertinent, at this point, to refer the reader to the
chronoly of events, should he wish to locate a particular site. The
number increases with every year and it would be most cumbersome to
attempt to deal with them all here. Only those events of particular
significance will be reviewed, followed by a summary of the 1950 -
1975 period.
In 1955, the Glenbow Foundation in Alberta began its archaeological
ventures, under the direction of Douglas Leechman. Leechman resigned
his post with the Museum the following year.
In 1957, the Serpent Mounds excavations were begun, on Rice Lake,
south of Peterborough. The University of Saskatchewan opened its
Radiocarbon dating laboratory, a major aid in the establishment of
absolute chronologies. William Taylor came into contact with the
first skeleton of a Sadlermiut, on Southampton Island, Hudson's Bay.
In 1960, Richard Pearson began a two year survey, the third and last,
of Prince Edward Island, locating eighteen sites along the southeast
coast.
Work was resumed, in the early sixties, in Newfoundland, by MacLeod
at Twillingate, Instad and Instad at the Norse site of
l'Anse-aux-Meadows, and Elmer Harp and James Tuck in various locations.
In 1962, the Societe d'archeologie du Quebec was founded. The
following year, one of the most important sites in North America was
excavated by George MacDonald of the National Museum at Debert in
Nova Scotia. The dates obtained for this Palaeo-Indian site have
established the presence of Man in the Maratimes at 11,000 B.C.
In 1964, the first department of archaeology was formed at the
University of Calgary. Its principal orientation is towards field
work and it has produced some of the best trained archaeologists in
Canada.
Soon after, Clyde Kennedy uncovered evidence of the existence of the
Copper Complex on Morrison's Island in the Outaouais River, north of
Ottawa. As the site was composed of burials in very bad decay, it
might have represented an outpost.
In 1967, William Mayer-Oakes initiated the multidisciplinary Lake
Agassiz project in Manitoba, some ten years after MacNeish had
implanted the idea. That year also saw the Government's assent to new
legislation, making the National Museum of Canada a Crown
Corporation, to be known as the National Museums of Canada (Appendix
E). Article 5 is of especial interest. It was also the year that
William Taylor, Chief Archaeologist since MacNeish had resigned in
1963 to take up his post at the Peabody Foundation, was promoted to
Director of the newly created National Museum of Man, a position
which he holds to this day. He was succeeded by James V. Wright who
held the position until 1969, when he was in turn succeeded by George
MacDonald, who is still the Chief of the Archaeological Survey.
In 1968, the Canadian Archaeological Association was founded and
promises to grow to become an influential organization. In 1969,
Roscoe Wilmeth published his synthesis of Canadian radiocarbon dates,
a document which made available the dates from materials which had
been analyzed in the United States, and which greatly simplified
correlations. That year was also the last year for the publication of
the National Museum Bulletins. They were replaced by occasional
papers, and finally, in 1972, by the Mercury Series, a set of
publications produced at minimum cost (typewritten) and aimed at the
swift and inexpensive diffusion of reports.
We will now review the text of George MacDonald's address to the
Royal Society of Canada (1976), and which is probably the best
summary of recent prehistoric archaeology in Canada.
Great strides have been made in the development of archaeology in
Canada, both financially and institutionally. Funding for research
has greatly increased, and universities teaching archaeology have
gone from two in 1950 to more than twenty. There has been a
corresponding increase in the number of graduate students. It is no
longer essential that someone wishing to pursue graduate studies in
archaeology need go to the United States or Europe. Museums have
greatly increased in number as well.
Legislation has been enacted in most provinces, concerning
prehistoric as well as historic resources. There has been an increase
in the federal and provincial governments' involvement with
archaeology and a corresponding tenfold increase in professional
archaeologists hired directly by governments. Governmental
archaeological agencies are capable of administering prehistoric
resources and undertaking field work with research staff.
The achievements of these many agencies has succeeded in pushing back
the age of Man in North America to 30,000 years ago, when, ten years
ago, barely the third of this age was considered extreme.
We have now seen the third, and last period of archaeology in Canada.
This last period is the product of foreign "invasions", which have
luckily advanced archaeology, here as well as in the United States.
It can be said that Canadian archaeology is now in tune with the rest
of the world. But there has been no sign of an innovator like Wilson
or Smith. Perhaps the future holds a joyous surprise.
Chapter 4: The Future
As the future is uncertain, there is no point in speculating on the
possible developments that archaeology might take. We should then
look at the present needs and hope that the future, with some help,
will provide.
MacDonald (1976) sees the need for the establishment of units with
clearly defined functions of research, resource management and
repository. Proper research into extensive comparative collections
from the environment cannot, at present, be supported by any of the
institutions involved in archaeology in Canada. Resource management
cannot be dealt with properly, as it is an administrative problem,
rather than a strictly archaeological one. The repository role is not
satisfactory due to the large size of the collections and the
difficult task of retrieving specific information.
Certain European countries, France, Germany and Switzerland, have
dealt effectively with these problems. In France, archaeology is
publically recognized as a scientific research field and the Centre
National de Recherche Scientifique supports a complex of laboratories
and research centers. Hundreds of archaeologists are on full or
partial government salary. The annual budget of the CNRS is
equivalent to tens of millions of Canadian dollars.
In Germany, although the budget is comparable to that of France, the
administration is decentralized to the state level, with a staff each
of more than one hundred.
Britain has appointed an Under-Secretary of State for archaeology.
None of these developments are to be found in Canada. At the present
time, the economic situation may not permit these innovations, but,
with some planning, a similar development could occur quite soon.
Conclusion
It is hoped that the reader will now have recognized the existence of
the Canadian period in archaeology, and that this will not offend any
ideas he may have had about it.
There is little more to say, save perhaps that the reader may find he
is dissatisfied with this paper. I beg him to consider that many dates
given here are probably inaccurate, by a year or so, and that little
of the information could be cross-checked, because of the
unavailability of certain material.
Notwithstanding these objections, I believe a separate chronology can
be established for the development of archaeology in Canada, based on
legislation rather than on the introduction of ideas. It must be
remembered that, where government institutions are concerned, the
climate of acceptance must agree with the law, not vice-versa.
Solarguard Homepage
Solarguard Canadian Archaeology