The Ethnography of On-Site Interpretation and Commemoration
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
University of Montana ScholarWorks at University of Montana Graduate Student Theses, Dissertations, & Professional Papers Graduate School 2013 The Ethnography of On-Site Interpretation and Commemoration Practices: Place-Based Cultural Heritages at the Bear Paw, Big Hole, Little Bighorn, and Rosebud Battlefields Helen Alexandra Keremedjiev The University of Montana Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.umt.edu/etd Let us know how access to this document benefits ou.y Recommended Citation Keremedjiev, Helen Alexandra, "The Ethnography of On-Site Interpretation and Commemoration Practices: Place-Based Cultural Heritages at the Bear Paw, Big Hole, Little Bighorn, and Rosebud Battlefields" (2013). Graduate Student Theses, Dissertations, & Professional Papers. 1009. https://scholarworks.umt.edu/etd/1009 This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate School at ScholarWorks at University of Montana. It has been accepted for inclusion in Graduate Student Theses, Dissertations, & Professional Papers by an authorized administrator of ScholarWorks at University of Montana. For more information, please contact [email protected]. THE ETHNOGRAPHY OF ON-SITE INTERPRETATION AND COMMEMORATION PRACTICES: PLACE-BASED CULTURAL HERITAGES AT THE BEAR PAW, BIG HOLE, LITTLE BIGHORN, AND ROSEBUD BATTLEFIELDS By HELEN ALEXANDRA KEREMEDJIEV Master of Arts, The University of Montana, Missoula, Montana, 2007 Bachelor of Arts, Smith College, Northampton, Massachusetts, 2004 Dissertation presented in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Anthropology The University of Montana Missoula, MT Official Graduation May 2013 Approved by: Sandy Ross, Associate Dean of The Graduate School Graduate School John Douglas, Chair Department of Anthropology Richmond Clow Department of Native American Studies Kelly Dixon Department of Anthropology Richard Sattler Department of Anthropology Pei-Lin Yu Rocky Mountain Cooperative Ecosystem Study Unit © COPYRIGHT by Helen Alexandra Keremedjiev 2013 All Rights Reserved ii Keremedjiev, Helen, Doctor of Philosophy, May 2013 Anthropology The Ethnography of On-Site Interpretation and Commemoration Practices: Place-Based Cultural Heritages at the Bear Paw, Big Hole, Little Bighorn, and Rosebud Battlefields Chairperson: John Douglas Using a memory archaeology paradigm, this dissertation explored from 2010 to 2012 the ways people used place-based narratives to create and maintain the sacredness of four historic battlefields in Montana: Little Bighorn Battlefield National Monument; Nez Perce National Historical Park- Bear Paw Battlefield; Nez Perce National Historical Park- Big Hole National Battlefield; and Rosebud Battlefield State Park. This research implemented a mixed-methods approach of four data sources: historical research about on-site interpretation and land management of the battlefields; participant observations conducted during height of tourism season for each battlefield; 1,056 questionnaires administered to park visitors; and 32 semi- structured interviews with park personnel. Before formulating hypotheses to test, a preliminary literature review was conducted on three battlefields (Culloden, Fallen Timbers, and Isandlwana) for any observable patterns concerning the research domain. This dissertation tested two hypotheses to explain potential patterns at the four battlefields in Montana related to on-site interpretation of primary sources, the sacred perception of battlefields, and the maintenance and expression of place-based cultural heritages and historical knowledge. The first hypothesis examined whether park visitors and personnel perceived these American Indian battlefields as nationally significant or if other heritage values associated with the place- based interpretation of the sacred landscapes were more important. Although park visitors and personnel overall perceived the battlefields as nationally important, they also strongly expressed other heritage values. The second hypothesis examined whether battlefield visitors who made pilgrimages to attend or participate in official on-site commemorations had stronger place-based connections for cultural heritage or historical knowledge reasons than other visitors. Overall, these commemoration pilgrims had stronger connections to the battlefields than other park visitors. Closer comparisons of the four battlefields demonstrated that they had both similar patterns and unique aspects of why people maintained these landscapes as sacred places. iii Table of Contents Title Page i Copyright Page ii Abstract iii Table of Contents iv List of Charts, Images, and Tables v Acknowledgements xiii Chapter One: Introduction 1 Chapter Two: Using Memory Archaeology to Observe the Interrelationship between Place- 9 based Cultural Heritage, Social Memories, and Sacredness of Battlefields Chapter Three: Contemporary Interpretative Practices at Culloden, Fallen Timbers, and 46 Isandlwana Battlefields Chapter Four: Overview of Dissertation Case Studies Bear Paw, Big Hole, Little Bighorn, 77 and Rosebud Battlefields Chapter Five: Data Sources and Hypotheses 90 First Hypothesis 91 Second Hypothesis 115 Chapter Six: Findings and Results from the Four Battlefield Case Studies 121 First Hypothesis 122 Second Hypothesis 168 Chapter Seven: Discussion 186 First Hypothesis 190 Second Hypothesis 196 Further Research Recommendations 200 References Cited 202 Appendices 218 Appendix A: An Example of an On-Site Questionnaire for Park Visitors 219 Appendix B: Locations of the Questionnaire Station at each Battlefield 221 Appendix C: Questionnaire Log Demographics 224 Appendix D: Detailed Table on the Demographics of Questionnaire Participants 226 Appendix E: Questionnaire Participants’ Current USA State or Territory of 227 Residency by Region Appendix F: Interview Consent Form 232 Appendix G: Detailed Table on the Demographics of Interviewees 233 Appendix H: Interview Questions of the First Round 234 Appendix I: Interview Questions of the Second Round 235 Appendix J: Detailed Tables on the Absolute and Relative Frequencies for the Four 236 Questions of the First Hypothesis by All Questionnaire Participants Appendix K: Detailed Tables on the Absolute and Relative Frequencies for the Four 238 Questions of the First Hypothesis by Battlefield Appendix L: Expected and Observed Counts of the Pearson’s Chi Square Test 242 Results by the Battlefield Variable for Values Less than P = 0.05. Appendix M: The Responses of Park Visitors by Ethnicity, Military Service, and 248 Current Place of Residency for the First Hypothesis Appendix N: Questionnaire Log of Participants and Non-Participants for the Second 265 Hypothesis Appendix O: Means of Composite Scores for Questionnaire Demographics of Age, 267 Education, Ethnicity, and Current Place of Residency for the Second Hypothesis Appendix P: Non-Parametric Statistical Analyses of the Second Hypothesis based 274 on Mean Scores iv List of Charts, Images, and Tables Charts Chart 5.1 Gender demographic of all questionnaire participants 98 Chart 5.2 Education demographic of all questionnaire participants 98 Chart 5.3 Ethnicity demographic of all questionnaire participants 99 Chart 5.4 Age demographic of all questionnaire participants 100 Chart 5.5 Military service demographic of all questionnaire participants 100 Chart 5.6 Chart of gender demographics of interviewees 108 Chart 5.7 Chart of education demographics of interviewees 109 Chart 5.8 Chart of ethnicity demographics of interviewees 109 Chart 5.9 Chart of age demographics of interviewees 110 Chart 5.10 Chart of military service demographics of interviewees 110 Chart 5.11 Chart of residency demographics of interviewees 111 Chart 6.1 Relative frequency of responses to the question 1H1, Why did you visit 124 [the specific battlefield]? Chart 6.2 Relative frequency of responses to the question 1H2 What is your personal 124 interest or connection to this site? Chart 6.3 Relative frequency to the question 1H3, How important are the following in 125 the cultural, national, personal and spiritual significance of [the specific battlefield] to you? Chart 6.4 Relative frequency to the question 1H3, How important are the following in 125 the other, geographical, historical, and military significance of [the specific battlefield] to you? Chart 6.5 Relative frequency of responses to the question 1H4, Did you learn anything 126 new today about [the specific battlefield]? Chart 6.6 Relative frequency of responses BEPA questionnaire participants to the 129 question 1H1, Why did you visit [the specific battlefield]? Chart 6.7 Relative frequency of responses of BIHO questionnaire participants to the 129 question 1H1, Why did you visit [the specific battlefield]? Chart 6.8 Relative frequency of responses of LIBI questionnaire participants to the 130 question 1H1, Why did you visit [the specific battlefield]? Chart 6.9 Relative frequency of responses of ROBA questionnaire participants to the 130 question 1H1, Why did you visit [the specific battlefield]? Chart 6.10 Absolute frequency of responses of BEPA questionnaire participants to the 131 question 1H2, What is your personal interest or connection to this site? Chart 6.11 Relative frequency of responses of BIHO questionnaire participants to the 131 question 1H2, What is your personal interest or connection to this site? Chart 6.12 Relative frequency of responses of LIBI questionnaire participants to the 132 question 1H2, What is your personal interest or connection to this site?