Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-xbtfd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-06T12:20:14.717Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Research Traditions, Public Policy, and the Underdevelopment of Theory in Plains Archaeology: Tracing the Legacy of the Missouri Basin Project

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

Mark D. Mitchell
Mark D. Mitchell*
Affiliation:
Department of Anthropology, University of Colorado, Boulder, Colorado 80309 ([email protected])
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

For more than 40 years archaeologists have been engaged in a self-conscious appraisal of the factors influencing the development of archaeological theory. The importance of external social and political forces has been widely acknowledged; however, less attention has been paid to the ways in which routine disciplinary practices authorize and reproduce particular theoretical standpoints. To illustrate how the growth of archaeological theory is intertwined with the practice of archaeological research, the goals and structure of one of the nation's first large-scale public archaeology projects, the River Basin Surveys' Missouri Basin Project (MBP), are considered and their effects on contemporary theory in Plains archaeology are evaluated. Today, theory in Plains archaeology remains implicit and for many projects culture history remains the central focus. The persistence of this research tradition can be traced in part to the success of the MBP in establishing new standards of practice for the region. Throughout the 1950s, MBP archaeologists pursued a distinctive research agenda that institutionalized inductive, culture-historical investigations. However, by the late 1960s many American archaeologists had adopted a new model of preservation, one that necessitated a new set of research practices. Because the MBP was not replaced by a new exemplar of practice, the culture historical research it championed continues to influence theory in Plains archaeology today.

Desde los años sesenta del siglo vente, los arqueologos se han dedicado a una evaluación critíca de la construcción de teoría. Mucho de este juicio se ha enfocado en descubrir las fuentes de la teoría arqueólogica. Mientras se han reconocido ampliamente la apropiación de conceptos teóricos de otros campos de estudio y de la dependencia de la teoría arqueológica en contextos sociales y políticos contemporáneos, se ha prestado menos atención a las maneras en que se reproducen o autorizan puntos de vista teóricos particulares a través de las prácticas rutinarias de la disciplina. Para demostrar cómo el desarrollo de la teoría arqueológica se entrelaza en la práctica con las investigaciones arqueológicas, se consideran los objetivos y la estructura del primer proyecto arqueológico público de gran escala, el Missouri Basin Project de los River Basin Surveys (MBP), y se evalúan sus efectos en la teoría contemporánea de la arqueología de las llanuras norteamericanas. Hoy en día, la teoría de la arqueología de las llanuras queda implícita y enfocada ante todo en la clasificación y en la taxonomía. La tenacidadde esta investigación histórico-cultural se puede atribuir en parte a los discursos fundadores alrededor de las cuales se desarrolló el MBP y a los cambios subsecuentes en la política pública, de las cuales muchos se presentaron fuera de la práctica profesional de la arqueología. Por los años cincuenta, los arqueólogos del MBP persiguieron una agenda de investigación progresiva y particular. Sin embargo, como el centro de la gravedad cambió en la arqueología profesional durante los años sesenta, los investigadores del MBP no podían adaptarse. Porque el MBP no se reemplazó por una tradición alternativa de investigación, el enfoque histórico-cultural que defendió queda en gran parte intacto hasta hoy.

Type
Reports
Information
American Antiquity , Volume 71 , Issue 2 , April 2006 , pp. 381 - 396
Copyright
Copyright © The Society for American Archaeology 2006

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

References Cited

Ahler, Stanley A. 1975 Pattern and Variety in Extended Coalescent Lithic Technology. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Anthropology, University of Missouri, Columbia.Google Scholar
Ahler, Stanley A. 1978 A Research Plan for Investigation of the Archeological Resources of the Knife River Indian Villages National Historic Site. Prepared by the University of North Dakota. Submitted to the USDI National Park Service, Midwest Archaeological Center, Lincoln, Nebraska.Google Scholar
Bamforth, Douglas B. 1999 Theory and Inference in Plains Archaeology. Plains Anthropologist 44(169):209–229.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brew, J. O. 1947 Symposium on River Valley Archaeology: Introduction. American Antiquity 12:209–210.Google Scholar
Brew, J. O. 1961 Emergency Archaeology: Salvage in Advance of Technological Progress. Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society 105(1):1–10.Google Scholar
Calabrese, Francis A. 1987 Knife River Indian Villages Archaeological Program: An Overview. In Perspectives on Archaeological Resources Management in the Great Plains, edited by Alan J. Osborn and Robert C. Hassler, pp. 135–157.1 & O Publishing Company, Omaha, Nebraska.Google Scholar
Deetz, James J. 1960 An Archaeological Approach to Kinship Change in Eighteenth Century Arikara Culture. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Anthropology, Harvard University, Cambridge, Massachusetts.Google Scholar
Deetz, James J. 1965 The Dynamics of Stylistic Change in Arikara Ceramics. Illinois Studies in Anthropology No. 4. University of Illinois Press, Urbana.Google Scholar
DeMallie, Raymond J. (Editor) 2001 Plains. Handbook of Noith American Indians, Vol. 13, William C. Sturtevant, general editor, Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C. Google Scholar
Duke, Philip 1991 Points in Time. University Press of Colorado, Niwot.Google Scholar
Duke, Philip, and Wilson, Michael C. 1995 Postprocessualism and Plains Archaeology. In Beyond Subsistence: Plains Archaeology and the Postprocessual Critique, edited by Philip Duke and Michael C. Wilson, pp. 1–16. University of Alabama Press, Tuscaloosa. Google Scholar
Falk, Carl R., and Ahler, Stanley A. 1988 Archaeological Investigations in the Mobridge Area, South Dakota, 1969–1970: Lower Grand (Davis), 39C014; Walth Bay, 39WW203; and Helb 39CA208. Prepared by the American Archaeology Division, Department of Anthropology, University of Missouri, Columbia. Submitted to the USDI National Park Service, Rocky Mountain Region, Denver, Colorado.Google Scholar
Glenn, James R. 1994 The River Basin Surveys Program. North Dakota Archaeologist 5:5–14.Google Scholar
Griffin, James B. 1976 Carl Eu gene Guthe. Atnevican Antiquity 41(2); 168–177.Google Scholar
Guthe, Carl E. 1939 The Basic Needs of American Archeology. Science 90(2345):528–530.Google Scholar
Hartle, Donald Dean 1960 Rock Village: An Ethnohistorical Approach to Hidatsa Archaeology. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Anthropology, Columbia University, New York.Google Scholar
Hegmon, Michelle 2003 Setting Theoretical Egos Aside: Issues and Theory in North American Archaeology. American Antiquity 68:213–244.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hodder, Ian, and Hutson, Scott 2003 Reading the Past: Current Approaches to Interpretation in Archaeology. 3rd ed. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
Jennings, Jesse D. 1985 River Basin Surveys: Origins, Operations, and Results, 1945–1969. American Antiquity 50:281–296.Google Scholar
Johnson, Alfred E., and Raymond Wood, W. 1980 Prehistoric Studies on the Plains. In Anthropology on the Great Plains, edited by W. Raymond Wood and Mar-got Liberty, pp. 35–51. University of Nebraska Press, Lincoln. Google Scholar
Johnson, Frederick 1947 The Work of the Committee for the Remains of Archaeological Remains: Aims, History, and Activities to Date. American Antiquity 12:212–215.Google Scholar
Johnson, Frederick 1966 Archeology in an Emergency. Science 152:1592–1597.Google Scholar
Jones, Sian 1997 The Archaeology of Ethnicity. Routledge, London.Google Scholar
Kahler, Herbert E. 1947 The Role of the National Park Service in River Basin Archaeology with Particular Reference to Inter-Bureau Agreements. American Antiquity 12:215–216.Google Scholar
Kehoe, Alice B. 1995 Processual and Postprocessual Archaeology: A Brief Critical Review. In Beyond Subsistence: Plains Archaeology and the Postprocessual Critique, edited by Philp Duke and Michael C. Wilson, pp. 19–27. University of Alabama Press, Tuscaloosa. Google Scholar
King, Thomas F. 1971 A Conflict of Values in American Archaeology. American Archaeology 36:255–262.Google Scholar
King, Thomas F. 1977 Resolving a Conflict of Values in American Archaeology. In Conservation Archaeology, edited by Michael B. Schiffer and George J. Gumerman, pp. 87–95. Academic Press, New York. Google Scholar
Kluckhohn, Clyde 1939 The Place of Theory in Anthropological Studies. Philosophy of Science 6(3):328–344.Google Scholar
Kxause, Richard A. 1967 Arikara Ceramic Change: A Study of the Factors Affecting Stylistic Change in Late Eighteenth and Early Nineteenth Century Arikara Pottery. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Anthropology, Yale University, New Haven, Connecticut.Google Scholar
Kxause, Richard A. 1972 The Leavenworth Site: Archaeology of An Historic Arikara Community. Publications in Anthropology No. 3. University of Kansas, Lawrence.Google Scholar
Kxause, Richard A. 1994 Paper Sacks, Paste-Board Boxes and Intellectual Bins: The River Basin Salvage Program and Archaeological Classification. North Dakota Archaeology 5:27–38.Google Scholar
Kuhn, Thomas S. 1970 The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. 2nd ed. University of Chicago Press, Chicago.Google Scholar
Lehmer, Donald J. 1952 The Fort Pierre Branch and Plains Prehistory. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Anthropology, Harvard University, Cambridge, Massachusetts.Google Scholar
Lehmer, Donald J. 1971 Introduction to Middle Missouri Archeology. Anthropological Papers No. 1. National Park Service, Washington, D. C. Google Scholar
Lehmer, Donald J., and Caldwell, Warren W 1966 Horizon and Tradition in the Northern Plains. American Antiquity 31:511–516.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lipe, William D. 1974 A Conservation Model for American Archaeology. Kiva 39(4):214–245.Google Scholar
Masterman, Margaret 1970 The Nature of a Paradigm. In Criticism and the Growth of Knowledge, edited by Imre Lakatos and Alan Musgrave, pp. 59–89. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. Google Scholar
Meltzer, David J. 1979 Paradigms and the Nature of Change in American Archaeology. American Antiquity 44:644–657.Google Scholar
Osborn, Alan J., and Hassler, Robert C. 1987 Perspectives on Archaeological Resources Management in the Great Plains. I & O Publishing Company, Omaha, Nebraska.Google Scholar
Rains, Albert, and Henderson, Laurance G. 1966 With Heritage So Rich. Random House, New York.Google Scholar
Rogge, Allen Eugene 1983 Little Archaeology, Big Archaeology: The Changing Context of Archaeological Research. Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Anthropology, University of Arizona, Tucson. University Microfilms International, Ann Arbor.Google Scholar
Smithsonian Institution 1968 A Review of the River Basin Surveys, Smithsonian Institution Museum of Natural History, for the Ad Hoc Advisory Committee. Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C.Google Scholar
Spaulding, Albert C. 1985 Fifty Years of Theory. American Antiquity 50:301–308.Google Scholar
Strong, William Duncan 1935 An Introduction to Nebraska Archeology. Smithsonian Miscellaneous Collections Vol. 93(10). Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D. C. Google Scholar
Strong, William Duncan 1940 From History to Prehistory in the Northern Great Plains. Smithsonian Miscellaneous Collections vol. 100:353–394. Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D. C. Google Scholar
Strong, William Duncan 1947 The Coordinated River Valley Approach—A World Problem. American Antiquity 12:210–212.Google Scholar
Strong, William Duncan, Johnson, Frederick, and Webb, William S. 1945 National Archeological Resources. Science 102(2637):44.Google Scholar
Thiessen, Thomas D. (Editor) 1993 The Phase I Archeological Research Program for the Knife River Indian Villages National Historic Site. Occasional Studies in Anthropology No. 27. National Park Service, Midwest Archaeological Center, Lincoln, Nebraska.Google Scholar
Thiessen, Thomas D. 1999 Emergency Archeology in the Missouri River Basin: The Role of the Missouri Basin Project and the Midwest Archeological Center in the Interagency Archeological Salvage Program, 1946–1975. Special Report No. 2. Midwest Archaeological Center, Lincoln, Nebraska.Google Scholar
Trigger, Bruce G. 1989 A History of Archaeological Thought. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
United States House of Representatives 1966 Establishing a Program for the Preservation of Additional Historic Properties throughout the Nation. Report No. 1916, Eighty-Ninth Congress, Second Session. U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington D. C. Google Scholar
United States Senate 1966 Preservation of Historic Properties: Hearing before the Subcommittee on Parks and Recreation of the Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs, United States Senate, Eighty-Ninth Congress, Second Session on S. 3035 and S. 3098. U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington D.C. Google Scholar
Weakly, Ward Fredrick 1968 Tree-Ring Dating and Archaeology in South Dakota. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Anthropology, University of Arizona, Tucson.Google Scholar
Wedel, Waldo R. 1938 The Direct-Historical Approach in Pawnee Archeology. Smithsonian Miscellaneous Collections Vol. 97(7). Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D. C. Google Scholar
Wedel, Waldo R. 1947 The Missouri River Basin Archaeological Survey in 1946. American Antiquity 12:220–222.Google Scholar
Wedel, Waldo R. 1953 Some Aspects of Human Ecology in the Central Plains. American Anthropologist 55:499–514.Google Scholar
Wedel, Waldo R. 1961a Contributions and Losses in Salvage Archaeology. In Symposium on Salvage Archaeology, edited by John M. Corbett, pp. 17–22. Department of the Interior, National Park Service, Washington, D. C. Google Scholar
Wedel, Waldo R. 1961b Plains Archaeology, 1935–1960. American Antiquity 27:24–32.Google Scholar
Wedel, Waldo R. 1961c Prehistoric Man on the Great Plains. University of Oklahoma Press, Norman.Google Scholar
Wedel, Waldo R. 1967 Salvage Archaeology in the Missouri River Basin. Science 156:589–597.Google Scholar
Wedel, Waldo R. 1977 The Education of aPlains Archeologist. Plains Anthropologist 22(75):1–11.Google Scholar
Wedel, Waldo R. 1982 William Duncan Strong and Plains Archeology. In Essays in the History of Plains Archeology, edited by Waldo R. Wedel, pp. 1–77. J & L Reprint Company, Lincoln, Nebraska.Google Scholar
Wendorf, Fred, and Thompson, Raymond H. 2002 The Committee for the Recovery of Archaeological Remains: Three Decades of Service to the Archaeological Profession. American Antiquity 67:317–330.Google Scholar
Willey, Gordon R. 1966 An Introduction to American Archaeology, Volume I: NorthAmerica. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey.Google Scholar
Wood, W. Raymond 1961 An Interpretation of Mandan Culture History. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Anthropology, University of Oregon, Eugene.Google Scholar
Wood, W. Raymond 1967 An Interpretation of Mandan Culture History. River Basin Surveys Papers No. 39. Smithsonian Institution Bureau of American Ethnology Bulletin 198. United States Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C.Google Scholar
Wood, W. Raymond 1995 The Missouri River Basin Surveys: Archeology Without the Middle “A.” The Kansas Anthropologist 16(2): 1–13.Google Scholar
Wood, W. Raymond (Editor) 1998 Archaeology on the Great Plains. University Press of Kansas, Lawrence.Google Scholar
Wood, W. Raymond, and Hoffman, J. J. 1994 Reminiscences of Two Missouri Basin Shovel Bums. North Dakota Archaeology 5:221–229.Google Scholar
Wylie, Alison 2002 Thinking from Things. University of California Press, Berkeley.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yoffee, Norman, and Sherratt, Andrew 1993 Introduction: The Sources of Archaeological Theory. In Archaeological Theory: Who Sets the Agenda?, edited by Norman Yoffee and Andrew Sherratt, pp. 1–9. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. Google Scholar