Rethinking Colonial
Pasts through
Archaeology
Edited by
NEAL FERRIS, RODNEY HARRISON,
AND MICHAEL V. WILCOXPy ‘dey Harrison
Sp Gs Caen 196 Sabb Studie Dacomtrig Hiner.
{rfid Don Lady od Gerd ac, pM
ope Rew
‘ncn Gittins vec Tx Compute Aly Cl Earner
isin theo Comite etebyG in p33 Ste
‘war Rees P Sate Nowe
sue fan Reinga Carga Eagan Comment ede
once Cpe Sarin ancy 11864
Sana P00 te Sng ofl Chane Wey Hah Ox
“Bp Aaa 25 Pon An gpl of bl Coes, Pr ie
“ence ene
en Ch hei dd aes rn
Sint eum edb) Sin fp Wnt ll A Re
rest Now hence
2
Archaeologies of Indigenous Survivance
and Residence: Navigating Colonial
and Scholarly Dualities
INTRODUCTION
Astheazchesogy ofcoonihm ad indigenous peolescontianesto mature,
the thet modes and terminologies applied oer continue to undergo
‘elneents nd seek a broderaadence within gill schaolgies These
‘efinements provide mote secre anchors for out inerpretve efor they
try to resi shorcomings i earlier modes and chs stds, while sll
dvancing along hep jectre founded bythsevery sume soes. They
‘Ss exp grapple with pltealcontngeces an legacies tha ate
practice of rchacology Equlymportan, this velame demonsttes these
{efnements pon the histle! achacology of Indigenous peoples, a:
Roberone (2000) termed i, o cntbute to broad gba rchaesoges.
‘Over the pst decade, conicbaonshave een nade nthe historical archae-
‘logit ofthe colonized to the ways hat echaologis both inside nd ut-
{Bde of estado oon, hink about study opuatonliz andre
‘ove concepts of ender an senualy (Voce 208200), abour (Sinan
30, 2010 Voss 20082) matey (Harson 200), bodies (Loren 2001,
landscapes (Byrne 2005; Harson 200), restance and revitalization
(Qbranan 2008; Lcbmann and Preuel 2007; Wikoe 2008), ethnogenesis
(ou 208), temporal eae (ese 2005 San 209), and the very tae
ofthe ineractons themes tat we vriouly ll ntact colonialism, and
ntangement across the epochs of human history (Geaden 2004 Jordan 2005,
{his vomeSliman 200, Terence and Cite 2000, Ose research contexts
{ve anigueparchate on thte profound lsues in worldwide archaelgy.
‘egurdles afte or pace.so Stephen Willman
Recent my temper in these ces have ale fundamental tenet of
‘hehinoral archaeology ofenonaim: the need measure cultural change
‘nd continuty(Sliman 205). Mytacdinghsiavaved addesing its the
{ocllednedto measur aspect. What popds ut fame oor qaeons in
‘ichotomoas helo cenatos where Native peopl, communities, o thelr
[practices and atrial ether change or ty the ume, though reraing
{he mame th onl option to have or expres tre indigenes? What he
ature ofthis Uchetomous thinking and how deep-seated it? Why do we
ive dierent tandarde when appying these sume question ttle
colonial popubons during the same time periods? My eerts have aso
‘involved the exploration of everl theoreti elements drawn fom posto
Toni decobnining, and practice theories hat empasieogency pace
hybridity, mately and soci memory over diferent temporal scales,
Herein les ea poten to advance the theoretical models eed o interpret
‘these complet Indigenous ved colonialioms, at Fes (2009) tenes
‘hen, ado irs hee Hinds of histori archaea ware wider le
‘vance in anthopoogy, hsory, andthe polical word of today. In this
‘hap, Iwao! o expend that teat cosion by further developing
‘yo concepts—suvranc nd esidence—thet may din these aerate
‘forts do nat propor them ar unnteral replacement ems bu ee
‘ove was of inking aboot complex roll and material outcomes, long
wit their pelicalimplcatons, for hstaral and archaeological eseuch, A
Stapling te ronson New Egan she
SURVIVANCE,
‘Theft concep sce, wt introduced by Ger Vena (195,198,
2a) an Ania her ond wer in Sane marie and
eraare More scarey he rena sh te ppp he ter ope
{diferent nerpete estan ad nis Foch Canadas commons
sd lder Enlist and French ongine. To im, survrac more ur
‘ramon thnendranceormererepone[Sjurvvance ran ieee
‘son of amines gry and vine (Vener 198 19). We ply
‘cet leone or rnc af i
cons obi heunbearhe weiner of rgd sad he ey oF
‘ictiny (Vier 2081) Vieor eh tint ene stor od
ewan prstence rand ap ha od tet Weg ort)
“etl convert 0 negate The esa mer ies pee
lng Nae sari snp and rather pane otcomenaplogic ho
icbfeoloii, vada acy or struggle The neg lar ccs when
Archaoegeof igo Survivace and Resince 58
‘Nave survivals enered asthe vind cemnats fm appre people,
iintlon that hardly ever rans agen. continu completeness, oF
‘stent Despite being victimized by variety ofelonaland sets orcs,
{any Indigenous peoples do not want er exience to be ined solely ot
‘pomsriy inter of ctiood and ces not ayn ference beng
{Enonzeds In contra, survivnce emphasizes crete espstcs to fica
ties ov agentve ation through struggle aterpt to Hrke Blane In
these complied interpretive rains.
However, finding the right iterprtv lance suggested srvirance i
ot eay to do, At Nal (2006) oatined in er analy of exh at the
"National Museum ofthe American Indian (NMA, fede nition that
‘opened onthe Nationa Mal is Wshigton, DCin 2008, one mast be crefa
otto underemphaiae the dificult cieummances that impinged upon com
‘ny survival anno to frgt he connection Between tos histories and
trent communities who pein ht they ae il hee T er, he c=
Ep survivane i not about avoiding ot minimizing terrors and t=
{ray of colonization. It nce agency and Native presence bt dors oat
‘eseenories fsa (Aly 2006609) Asarest Atala nde NMA
“Shbiin the People galery recent verbal planation of sr
‘irance but lacking in He ceprerntaton ofthe material contents for In
Tet words do fay neutral dpa eases of une and bil actully convey
thei historia contextual materiales in peopl ives ané deaths! Do they
{Gre sete of trogle! Given the mule meanings of thse objects inhi
{oval sitaatedldigenos lives the displays convey kine of decontextual
daed neta.
‘Many have flowed Viena’ lead and considered these sus of srt
ance ina vrety of Native American wren and poken erature This has
fered in some addiiooal contouring ofthe concept Viencr 208)
'Survinance connotes srvval with sttude, implying ac rather tan pas
Shirasng aggresive means ot nly tostaalive but forth Contemp.
try lndiane achieve survvance through resenting who the are indi
‘avothies through tling tudo! sori aod lovetng new one
(Wale 2008147), Native Americas ip the pathat Dose not jst
“conemporary-—sid the same thing 8 exept by Kripa (2008) n bis
Soa of Willam Apes? wrtings tn eighteenth and nivteeth-centary
‘Now England at Ntive American mister Yt, itor efor at uri
[tne dot alms nda wreur str ae ps ta
{oc form. They could ve remember ade tt thel mata
{titre Tetfore we need more tan theorer and imagining abou texte
lyme net analytical coneps abot practice and materia to develo the
hfuloes of surance, Admit, Vaznor didnot expound upon this
term to develop fly an anal concept outa ofthe era real, and
{vopologits and tchacolglts havent vented fa with eter (bus« Stephon WSliman
tome acknowledgement by Mancini 2008; Roscoe 1985), 40 I tke some
‘eres in ding that ere.
“Embedded ia the concept of sarvvance ie the ably pet somewhat
-smpyto change inorder to Say these Surivance ecogin tal hese
‘may wel bethesamne proces, Poplin the past ay not have intended ter
‘ocx change or remain he sume instead, they may Rave sug spy.
khoogh neve easly topes The desir tothe proceso at
Jain, as Clifrd 201) has argued capares the ways that uturescan persist
through making, wanking, and remaking rather than simpy allio