DOCSLIB.ORG

Transcript2 2000-04 Meeting 19.Pdf

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Transcript2 2000-04 Meeting 19.Pdf 1 NATIVE AMERICAN GRAVES PROTECTION AND REPATRIATION REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING APRIL 2, 3, & 4, 2000 JUNEAU, ALASKA VOLUME II MONDAY, APRIL 3, 2000 Lesa K. Hagel Word Processing Rapid City, South Dakota (605) 342-3298 2 NATIVE AMERICAN GRAVES PROTECTION AND REPATRIATION REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING 8:30 a.m. Monday, April 3, 2000 Ballroom 1 Centennial Hall Convention Center Juneau, Alaska COMMITTEE MEMBERS PRESENT: Mr. Martin Sullivan, Chair Mr. James Bradley Mr. Lawrence H. Hart Ms. Vera Metcalf Mr. Armand Minthorn Ms. Tessie Naranjo Mr. John O’Shea Lesa K. Hagel Word Processing Rapid City, South Dakota (605) 342-3298 3 TABLE OF CONTENTS CHAIR’S WELCOME – MARTIN SULLIVAN ..................... 4 INVOCATION – WALTER SOBOLEFF .......................... 4 IMPLEMENTATION OF THE STATUTE IN ALASKA ............... 5 MARK MCCALLUM ....................................... 5 SUSAN MARVIN ....................................... 17 TERRY FIFIELD ...................................... 30 YARROW VAARA ....................................... 38 STEVE HENRIKSON .................................... 52 BREAK ................................................ 71 IMPLEMENTATION OF THE STATUTE IN ALASKA .............. 71 STEVE HENRIKSON .................................... 71 ROSA MILLER AND CHERYL ELDEMAR ...................... 78 GARY SELINGER ...................................... 90 DIANE PALMER AND IRENE SHIELDS ..................... 108 ALLISON YOUNG ..................................... 115 LUNCH ............................................... 133 IMPLEMENTATION OF THE STATUTE IN ALASKA ............. 133 FREDRICK ANDERSON ................................. 133 ROSITA WORL ....................................... 138 RON WILLIAMS ...................................... 147 KENNETH GRANT ..................................... 151 PATRICK MILLS ..................................... 160 THOMAS MILLS ...................................... 173 BEATRICE BROWN .................................... 175 BOB MAGUIRE ....................................... 175 ROSITA WORL ....................................... 183 RICHARD DALTON, SR. ............................... 184 BREAK ............................................... 188 1999 REPORT TO CONGRESS ............................. 189 PUBLIC COMMENT ...................................... 195 ALFRED MCKINLEY, SR. .............................. 195 ALVIN MOYLE ....................................... 203 NORMAN HARRY ...................................... 226 PEMINA YELLOW BIRD ................................ 234 MEETING RECESS ...................................... 260 Lesa K. Hagel Word Processing Rapid City, South Dakota (605) 342-3298 4 1 CHAIR’S WELCOME – Martin Sullivan 2 MARTIN SULLIVAN: Good morning, everyone. We’re 3 going to begin our morning session, so I would like 4 to ask that you find a seat and then we’ll begin. 5 This morning we will start with an invocation 6 and we are joined by Dr. Walter Soboleff, who is the 7 chairperson of the board of trustees of the Sealaska 8 Heritage Foundation. We are honored to be here, 9 Dr. Soboleff, and we look forward to your invocation. 10 Thank you for being with us. You can use one of the 11 microphones up here. 12 INVOCATION – Walter Soboleff 13 WALTER SOBOLEFF: May we bow in prayer. (Native 14 Alaskan language.) 15 Our Father God, no matter where we are, You 16 continue to follow us and to love us and to sustain 17 us with the material things of life, yea, even the 18 spiritual. We thank You for this time that we may 19 discuss concerns of our life. We thank You for those 20 who join us in that solution. Grant mercy to our 21 errors, renew a right spirit within us today. We 22 pray in the Master’s name and for His sake. Amen. 23 MARTIN SULLIVAN: We have made a few changes to 24 the schedule. Is Mr. Paul White with us this 25 morning. He had been originally scheduled for the Lesa K. Hagel Word Processing Rapid City, South Dakota (605) 342-3298 5 1 invocation, and we will arrange that for a different 2 point in our program. 3 IMPLEMENTATION OF THE STATUTE IN ALASKA 4 MARTIN SULLIVAN: This morning’s session is 5 primarily for the purpose of hearing about 6 implementation of NAGPRA here in the state of Alaska, 7 and we have ten or eleven presentations that we 8 expect to hear this morning. The committee members 9 and I look forward to it, and if we are set, Lesa, in 10 terms of our activities then we’ll begin. 11 The first presenter is Mr. Mark McCallum from 12 the Tongass National Forest. 13 MARK MCCALLUM 14 MARK MCCALLUM: Good morning, Mr. Chairman and 15 committee members. My name is Mark McCallum. I’m an 16 archeologist with the Tongass National Forest in 17 Petersburg, a small community about 90 miles south of 18 Juneau. I thank you for this opportunity to speak 19 this morning and to share with you some of the 20 progress that the Tongass National Forest in Alaska 21 has made in implementing repatriation requirements of 22 NAGPRA. 23 Before I begin, I’d like to recognize and thank 24 the Organized Village of Kake and the Klawock 25 Cooperative Association, two Federally recognized Lesa K. Hagel Word Processing Rapid City, South Dakota (605) 342-3298 6 1 tribes, for their permission to share information 2 with you today about a repatriation we made two years 3 ago. We had hoped that some of the council members 4 from the Organized Village of Kake could appear 5 today, but due to conflicts with a big basketball 6 tournament here last week, they weren’t able to make 7 it. You’ll hear from me and some of the next few 8 speakers about some of the progress that Tongass 9 National Forest has made in implementing NAGPRA, the 10 Tongass being the largest National Forest in the US 11 at some over 17 million acres. 12 In general the Tongass reported relatively few 13 human remains and associated funerary objects to the 14 tribes as a result of NAGPRA. We deal with about 20 15 Federally recognized tribes on the Tongass and about 16 that many regional and village corporations that were 17 created under the Native Claims Settlement Act. 18 Since submitting the inventories to the appropriate 19 tribes, we’ve received few claims for repatriation. 20 It appears that most tribes acknowledge the cultural 21 affiliation of the items covered by NAGPRA, but for 22 several reasons they have not made formal claims for 23 their repatriation or return. Some tribes appear to 24 be deferring decisions until they can make plans with 25 the community. Some tribes have indicated a desire Lesa K. Hagel Word Processing Rapid City, South Dakota (605) 342-3298 7 1 to curate or store items in a local facility, some of 2 which have not been constructed yet. Other tribes 3 continue to talk with their local elders about the 4 protocol of receiving repatriated items. In general, 5 I would characterize the Tongass National Forest 6 compliance with NAGPRA as we’ve completed our 7 inventories, we’ve continued to consult with the 8 tribes and are awaiting their claims for 9 repatriation. 10 You’re going to hear several examples of the 11 implementation of NAGPRA on the Tongass today, and 12 I’d like to focus on the return of a cedar bentwood 13 burial box. Although this story truly begins 14 hundreds of years ago, for reasons of cultural 15 sensitivity and respect for the Tlingit people of 16 Kake and Klawock, I will focus my story on the last 17 half of the latter century. This report that I’ll 18 share with you today chronicles the journey of a most 19 incredible cedar box. It was in 1949 that a trapper, 20 William Vickers, was traveling along the west coast 21 of Kuiu Island, an island about a hundred miles south 22 and west of Juneau, when on his daily travels, he 23 came across a rock shelter with some bentwood burial 24 boxes in them. And for whatever reason, Mr. Vickers 25 decided to take one as a souvenir. Lesa K. Hagel Word Processing Rapid City, South Dakota (605) 342-3298 8 1 About 23 years ago, then president and chairman 2 of Xutsnoowú, a local village corporation, informed 3 the Forest Service that he had heard about a Native 4 burial box being offered for sale to art dealers in 5 the Seattle area. Mr. Johnson, the president at the 6 time, requested Forest Service help to retrieve the 7 box because he believed they came from Admiralty 8 Island, the traditional lands of the Xutsnoowú 9 people. Later that same month a Juneau resident 10 reported to the regional archeologist seeing a young 11 man at a Seattle mall trying to sell a shaman burial 12 box containing a skull with long black hair attached. 13 After making a few contacts with some art dealers in 14 the Seattle and Vancouver, British Columbia area the 15 Juneau resident was able to obtain the name of the 16 man who was attempting to sell the box. 17 This woman passed on the information to the 18 regional archaeologist and this is before the passage 19 of the Archaeological Resource Protection Act 20 parenthetically. The archaeologist requested the 21 intervention of the regional law enforcement staff 22 who conducted an investigation to determine that the 23 gentleman in Seattle was acting as a sales agent for 24 Mr. Vickers, the man – the Seattle – the fur trapper 25 that took the box in 1949. Lesa K. Hagel Word Processing Rapid City, South Dakota (605) 342-3298 9 1 Despite intervention from Mr. Vickers’s 2 Congressional Representative, Senator Hiakawa 3 (phonetic), the Forest Service obtained a search 4 warrant and retrieved the box from his California 5 home in 1977. At that time, the Forest Service spent 6 some time consulting with Sealaska Corporation, the 7 regional corporation here in Southeast Alaska, and 8 through that consultation determined that curation at 9 the Alaska State Museum was the most appropriate 10 option at the time. The box has been there ever 11 since. 12 The box returned to Alaska and, as I said, has 13 been curated at the State Museum since. We consulted 14 with Sealaska. The land where the box was taken has 15 since been conveyed to Sealaska Corporation under 16 provisions of the Alaska Native Claims Settlement 17 Act.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Borobudur 1 Pm
    BOROBUDUR SHIP RECONSTRUCTION: DESIGN OUTLINE The intention is to develop a reconstruction of the type of large outrigger vessels depicted at Borobudur in a form suitable for ocean voyaging DISTANCES AND DURATION OF VOYAGES and recreating the first millennium Indonesian voyaging to Madagascar and Africa. Distances: Sunda Strait to Southern Maldives: Approx. 1600 n.m. The vessel should be capable of transporting some Maldives to Northern Madagascar: Approx. 1300 n.m. 25-30 persons, all necessary provisions, stores and a cargo of a few cubic metres volume. Assuming that the voyaging route to Madagascar was via the Maldives, a reasonably swift vessel As far as possible the reconstruction will be built could expect to make each leg of the voyage in using construction techniques from 1st millennium approximately two weeks in the southern winter Southeast Asia: edge-doweled planking, lashings months when good southeasterly winds can be to lugs on the inboard face of planks (tambuku) to expected. However, a period of calm can be secure the frames, and multiple through-beams to experienced at any time of year and provisioning strengthen the hull structure. for three-four weeks would be prudent. The Maldives would provide limited opportunity There are five bas-relief depictions of large vessels for re-provisioning. It can be assumed that rice with outriggers in the galleries of Borobudur. They sufficient for protracted voyaging would be carried are not five depictions of the same vessel. While from Java. the five vessels are obviously similar and may be seen as illustrating a distinct type of vessel there are differences in the clearly observed details.
    [Show full text]
  • Meroz-Plank Canoe-Edited1 Without Bold Ital
    UC Berkeley Survey Reports, Survey of California and Other Indian Languages Title The Plank Canoe of Southern California: Not a Polynesian Import, but a Local Innovation Permalink https://escholarship.org/uc/item/1977t6ww Author Meroz, Yoram Publication Date 2013 eScholarship.org Powered by the California Digital Library University of California The Plank Canoe of Southern California: Not a Polynesian Import, but a Local Innovation YORAM MEROZ By nearly a millennium ago, Polynesians had settled most of the habitable islands of the eastern Pacific, as far east as Easter Island and as far north as Hawai‘i, after journeys of thousands of kilometers across open water. It is reasonable to ask whether Polynesian voyagers traveled thousands of kilometers more and reached the Americas. Despite much research and speculation over the past two centuries, evidence of contact between Polynesia and the Americas is scant. At present, it is generally accepted that Polynesians did reach South America, largely on the basis of the presence of the sweet potato, an American cultivar, in prehistoric East Polynesia. More such evidence would be significant and exciting; however, no other argument for such contact is currently free of uncertainty or controversy.1 In a separate debate, archaeologists and ethnologists have been disputing the rise of the unusually complex society of the Chumash of Southern California. Chumash social complexity was closely associated with the development of the plank-built canoe (Hudson et al. 1978), a unique technological and cultural complex, whose origins remain obscure (Gamble 2002). In a recent series of papers, Terry Jones and Kathryn Klar present what they claim is linguistic, archaeological, and ethnographical evidence for prehistoric contact from Polynesia to the Americas (Jones and Klar 2005, Klar and Jones 2005).
    [Show full text]
  • Wao Kele O Puna Comprehensive Management Plan
    Wao Kele o Puna Comprehensive Management Plan Prepared for: August, 2017 Prepared by: Nālehualawaku‘ulei Nālehualawaku‘ulei Nā-lehua-lawa-ku‘u-lei is a team of cultural resource specialists and planners that have taken on the responsibilities in preparing this comprehensive management for the Office of Hawaiian Affairs. Nā pua o kēia lei nani The flowers of this lovely lei Lehua a‘o Wao Kele The lehua blossoms of Wao Kele Lawa lua i kēia lei Bound tightly in this lei Ku‘u lei makamae My most treasured lei Lei hiwahiwa o Puna Beloved lei of Puna E mālama mākou iā ‘oe Let us serve you E hō mai ka ‘ike Grant us wisdom ‘O mākou nā pua For we represent the flowers O Nālehualawaku‘ulei Of Nālehualawaku‘ulei (Poem by na Auli‘i Mitchell, Cultural Surveys Hawai‘i) We come together like the flowers strung in a lei to complete the task put before us. To assist in the preservation of Hawaiian lands, the sacred lands of Wao Kele o Puna, therefore we are: The Flowers That Complete My Lei Preparation of the Wao Kele o Puna Comprehensive Management Plan In addition to the planning team (Nālehualawaku‘ulei), many minds and hands played important roles in the preparation of this Wao Kele o Puna Comprehensive Management Plan. Likewise, a number of support documents were used in the development of this plan (many are noted as Appendices). As part of the planning process, the Office of Hawaiian Affairs assembled the ‘Aha Kūkā (Advisory Council), bringing members of the diverse Puna community together to provide mana‘o (thoughts and opinions) to OHA regarding the development of this comprehensive management plan (CMP).
    [Show full text]
  • Linguistic Evidence for a Prehistoric Polynesia—Southern California Contact Event
    Linguistic Evidence for a Prehistoric Polynesia—Southern California Contact Event KATHRYN A. KLAR University of California, Berkeley TERRY L. JONES California Polytechnic State University Abstract. We describe linguistic evidence for at least one episode of pre- historic contact between Polynesia and Native California, proposing that a borrowed Proto—Central Eastern Polynesian lexical compound was realized as Chumashan tomol ‘plank canoe’ and its dialect variants. Similarly, we suggest that the Gabrielino borrowed two Polynesian forms to designate the ‘sewn- plank canoe’ and ‘boat’ (in general, though probably specifically a dugout). Where the Chumashan form speaks to the material from which plank canoes were made, the Gabrielino forms specifically referred to the techniques (adzing, piercing, sewing). We do not suggest that there is any genetic relationship between Polynesian languages and Chumashan or Gabrielino, only that the linguistic data strongly suggest at least one prehistoric contact event. Introduction. Arguments for prehistoric contact between Polynesia and what is now southern California have been in print since the late nineteenth century when Lang (1877) suggested that the shell fishhooks used by Native Hawaiians and the Chumash of Southern California were so stylistically similar that they had to reflect a shared cultural origin. Later California anthropologists in- cluding the archaeologist Ronald Olson (1930) and the distinguished Alfred Kroeber (1939) suggested that the sewn-plank canoes used by the Chumash and the Gabrielino off the southern California coast were so sophisticated and uni- que for Native America that they likely reflected influence from Polynesia, where plank sewing was common and widespread. However, they adduced no linguistic evidence in support of this hypothesis.
    [Show full text]
  • Dugout Canoe Gr: Prek-2 (Lesson 6)
    TRADITIONAL TRANSPORTATION: DUGOUT CANOE GR: PREK-2 (LESSON 6) Elder Quote/Belief: “Summer came and they would go around by boat. They made their first dugout canoes. They chopped down large cottonwood, and fashioned that into a canoe. They went in that into Eyak Lake. Then they tried spruce instead of cotton wood. That too was good. They carved large boats out of spruce.” -Anna Nelson Harry 1 Anna Nelson Harry, Yakutat, about 1975. (Photo courtesy of Richard Dauenhauer) Grade Level: PreK-2 Overview: The Eyak and Sugpiaq people traditionally carved dugout canoes in the Chugach Region, specifically in Prince William Sound. “The canoes were so seaworthy that they were used not just for interisland voyages to visit relatives or allies, but also to wage war and to engage in trade missions over hundreds of miles. In fact, dugout canoes plied the waters between Southeast Alaska, (Eyak) and Kodiak Island in the days before the coming of Europeans”. (Echo’s http://www.echospace.org/articles/273/sections/665.html) Standards: AK Cultural: AK Content Science: CRCC: E4: Culturally-knowledgeable students B2: A student should understand and MC1: Different kinds of wood have demonstrate an awareness and be able to apply the concepts, models, different qualities and different uses; appreciation of the relationships and theories, universal principles, and facts wood can be obtained from the forest processes of interaction of all elements in that explain the physical world. and from driftwood. the world around them. A student should determine how ideas and concepts from one knowledge system relate to those derived from another knowledge system.
    [Show full text]
  • Dugout Canoe, Prehistoric Period - 20Th Century
    Dugout Canoe, Prehistoric Period - 20th Century The dugout canoe, or log boat, is one of the simplest and earliest forms of watercraft used by humans. Dugouts were the primary boat used throughout the Americas before the arrival of Europeans and played an essential role in Native American riverine trade networks spanning across the eastern half of the present U.S. The earliest archaeological examples of this type of watercraft in the New World come from DeLeon Springs, Florida, where two specimens have Archaeologists from LAMP and the St. Johns County record a historic canoe at the Alligator Farm. This appears to be the same been dated to over 6,000 years ago. This type of vessel canoe seen in the banner image above, which was photographed in St. Augustine in the late 1800s. was hollowed out from a felled tree using a tedious process of burning with fire and scraping the charred wood away with shells. After the introduction of European iron tools, construction was rendered much easier and faster. The size of a dugout was limited by the dimensions of available trees; Columbus witnessed 100' long canoes with dozens of paddlers in the Caribbean. Dugouts were also common throughout West Africa and enslaved Africans brought canoe-building traditions with them from the coasts and river deltas of their stolen homeland. The combination of Indian, African and European boatbuilding skills resulted in an increasingly sophisticated dugout canoe. Metal tools were used to shape the outside of the log, flatten the bottom to decrease draft and weight and increase stability, and shape the bow and stern ends to increase seaworthiness.
    [Show full text]
  • Traditional Fishing Crafts of India
    Traditional fishing crafts of India Fishing boats of Gujarat There is marked difference in the geographical and physical features of northern and southern regions of Gujarat. Whereas the northern region is arid and stony, the southern region is distinguished by sandy bottom. The following types of boat with their broad features gives along side are found in Gujarat. 1) Haler machwa: Length varies from 8-10 m Broad beam and square stern Open boat except for short decking in the fore and aft. Carvel planking with unusually large and heavy frames Tall mast carries on large lateen sail of Arab pattern It is used for gillnet fishing. 2) Porbandar machwa Length varies from 6-8 m Square stern and raked stem Used for gill net fishing 3) Cambay machwa Raked stem Undecked except for short length at stern Truncated stern with a slight rake 1 4) Navalaki hodi Length 5-6 m, breadth 1-1.5 m and draft of 90-105 cm Square stern and overhang bow Decked only fore and aft Single mast carries lateen soil 5) Malia boat Flat bottom boat which measure about 6-7 m in length, breadth 1.5 m with 65cm draft. Ends are pointed and there is small rudder Carvel planking Mast carries a lateen sail Small decking fore and aft Used in tidal waters for prawn fishery 6) Dugout canoe Double – ended round bottom boat Length varies from 5-9 m, breadth 60-90 cm and depth 60-68 cm Small sail raised on a wooden mast Used for gill netting 2 7) Ludhia The boat measures 9-10 m in length and 1.5 to 2 m breadth Short decking at the fore and aft Slightly racked stem and stern Two masts with small lateen sails Carved planking and has strong keel and heavy frames 8) Madhwad type wahan Length 10-13 m and breadth 2-3 m Raked stem and square stern Decked at the fore and aft Large heavy rudder Mast with lateen soil Used for operation of gill nets and dol nets Fishing boats of Maharashtra The physical and geographical features of northern Maharashtra up to Mumbai are similar to those of southern Gujarat.
    [Show full text]
  • Celebrating the Life of Robert Loescher (1947–2015)
    Q4 Values in Action ShareholderA quarterly newsletter from Sealaska Celebrating the Life of Robert Loescher (1947–2015) FRIEND AND FORMER SEALASKA CEO On November 11, 2015, former Sealaska President and CEO Robert “Bob” Loescher walked into the forest. We celebrate both his 25-year contribution to Sealaska and lifetime of advocacy for Tlingit, Haida and Tsimshian people. Loescher was Tlingit/ Eagle moiety from the Chookeneidi Clan. His family comes from Hoonah and Sitka. His Tlingit name was Kahtushtu’. More about Loescher, including a video, at Sealaska.com. “Bob’s mentoring nature and passion for Native land ownership and management had a profound impact on Alaska’s natural resources. His dedication to our traditional livelihoods and connection to forest and land will be never forgotten.” - Anthony Mallott, Sealaska President and CEO HIGHLIGHTS • 1968: Served on the City and Borough of Juneau Assembly at • Gave his time and energy to the Tlingit and Haida Regional the age of 21 Housing Authority, Tlingit and Haida Regional Electrical Authority, and Tlingit and Haida Housing • 1979: Started working for Sealaska in Natural Resources Development Corporation • 1997–2001: Served as Sealaska President and CEO • Served on several state boards, commissions and other • 1997: Appointed by President Clinton to serve on the National entities, including: the Alaska Industrial Development and Gambling Impact Study Commission Export Authority, the Alaska Energy Authority and the Southeast Timber Task Force, the Society of American • Laid the foundation for much of Sealaska’s land and resource management and protected Native rights to use and manage Foresters, the Alaska Forest Association, and the Resource ANCSA lands Development Council Youth Advisor Update from Barbara Dude I am very excited to share my experiences of the first five months as the Sealaska Board Youth Advisor.
    [Show full text]
  • Kua Kohikohi Noa Atungia He Waka E Nga Whare Taonga Huri Noa Te Ao, Mo Etahi, Ka 200 Tau Neke
    MUSEUMS TE PAPA NEW ZEALAND NATIONAL MARITIME MUSEUM AUCKLAND MUSEUM Museums around the world have collected canoes for a long time, some for over 200 years. The Museum of New Zealand Te Papa Tongarewa, the New Zealand National Maritime Museum Te Huiteananui-A-Tangaroa, and the Auckland Museum are three of these museums. As well as holding many Maori canoes (not listed), they hold canoes from around the Pacific. You can see the lists of these Pacific canoes below. The lists are only examples of the many collections worldwide. Aside from the canoes listed, each museum also has a lot of model canoes, as well as paddles, sails, and other items. You can contact the curators of the museums for background information and photos. THE CANOE IS THE PEOPLE TE PAPA REGISTRATION DESCRIPTION ISLAND GROUP HISTORY FE005098 Tapuakaira: A double-hulled Mauke, This canoe was apparently made in 1823. FE005099 canoe with two bow covers and Southern Cook Tekura, Maru, Maunga, and Tura of Ngati FE010373 three cross-beams. The canoe Islands. Kopati gave it to the museum in 1931 through FE010374 has been taken apart. Judge H. F. Ayson, Resident Commissioner in FE005116 Rarotonga. FE005122 FE005097 FE010421 Tauhunu: A large outrigger Manihiki, This canoe was named after the main village of FE005109 canoe with a shell-lined hull and Northern Cook Islands. Manihiki atoll. It was possibly made by Te Hau outrigger float. The canoe has Nehemia, who made many models of Manihiki been taken apart. canoes when he was old. Colonel Gudgeon, Administrator of the Cook Islands, sent the canoe to the Christchurch Exhibition 1906–1907.
    [Show full text]
  • Stan Florek 2012. Indigenous Australian Canoes
    Indigenous Australian Canoes: Questions of Chronology1 Stan Florek Introduction “Perhaps it will be here, at the junction of the world’s greatest ocean and the world’s greatest archipelago, that we will eventually find man’s oldest watercraft” hypothesised Rhys Jones, an eminent Australian archaeologist (Jones 1976:261). I understand and even share his enthusiasm, as Oceania is the region where, for millennia, seafaring and boating of all kinds were an essential part of life for many communities. Man’s oldest watercraft however, is and probably will remain, elusive due to the peculiar nature of the evidence. Occasionally we uncover the most direct records from the past, but the bulk of evidence concerning boating is like a palimpsest of shadows. The oldest watercraft may not be as tangible as we would wish. In Aboriginal Australia the evidence of watercraft, beyond ethnographic records of the 18th and 19th centuries, is rather vague and the reliable chronological markers cannot yet be established. In this article I look at some evidence of Indigenous boat use on the east coast of Australia, in the broader context of Oceania, and pose a few questions about their chronology. The oldest watercraft is a good starting point because it demonstrates the inferential and elusive nature of evidence. Oceania includes part of the Old World – Southeast Asia – to which Homo erectus, an early human, arrived about 1.7 million years ago. It looks as though nothing but a relatively narrow sea channel (35-100 km wide) prevented them from moving further east, across the bio-geographical boundary that separates Southeast Asia from the landmass of Australia and New Guinea.
    [Show full text]
  • Cultural and Cognitive Implications of the Trobriand Islanders' Gradual
    Chapter 11 “ Masawa—bogeokwa si tuta! ”: Cultural and Cognitive Implications of the Trobriand Islanders’ Gradual Loss of Their Knowledge of How to Make a Masawa Canoe Gunter Senft Kwatuyavesa waga , Turn round the sail of the canoe, rakeda milaveta! its course is to the open sea! ( Oruvekoya song cycle, fi rst stanza ) A few days after I had set foot on the Trobriand Islands for the fi rst time in 1982, 1 I spied a masawa canoe sailing close-hauled toward Kiriwina, the main island of the Trobriands. Although I had seen Malinowski’s (1922/ 1978 ) photographs of these impressive canoes in his monograph Argonauts of the Western Pacifi c , I was over- whelmed by the grace and beauty of this sight. Three weeks later I had the opportu- nity to sail on such a canoe from Kaibola, the northernmost village on Kiriwina Island, back to Tauwema, the village on Kaile’una Island that has been my place of residence during my fi eld research on the Trobriands for more than 25 years now. My sailing experience with a masawa canoe is one of my dearest memories so far. In Malinowski’s times Kaile’una Island as well as Vakuta Island, Kitava Island, and the village of Sinaketa on Kiriwina Island were known as the best centers for canoe-building and as the places where most expert canoe-builders and carvers lived (Malinowski 1922/1978 , pp. 121–145). In 1982 Tauwema had eight masawa , 1 This chapter is based on more than 40 months of fi eld research on the Trobriand Islands.
    [Show full text]
  • Resisting Linguistic Genocide: Language Revitalization and Immersion Schools in Lingít Aaní, Southeast Alaska
    RESISTING LINGUISTIC GENOCIDE: LANGUAGE REVITALIZATION AND IMMERSION SCHOOLS IN LINGÍT AANÍ, SOUTHEAST ALASKA By Meribeth E. Geiger A Thesis Presented to The Faculty of Humboldt State University In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Master of Arts in Social Science: Environment and Community Committee Membership Dr. Sarah J. Ray, Committee Chair Dr. Matthew A. Derrick, Committee Chair Mr. Mike Hoyt, Committee Member Dr. J. Mark Baker, Program Graduate Coordinator May 2016 ABSTRACT RESISTING LINGUISTIC GENOCIDE: LANGUAGE REVITALIZATION AND IMMERSION SCHOOLS IN LINGÍT AANÍ, SOUTHEAST ALASKA Meribeth E. Geiger The issue of language revitalization is central to the viability of Alaska Native communities. In order to resist language loss and ensure that languages are transmitted to younger generations, immense social efforts are required. Immersion schools have the potential to create more self-determined educational paradigms that are defined by internal cultural values rather than external western ideals, while simultaneously working to create a new generation of fluent speakers. However, immersion education is hindered by state and federally-sanctioned requirements that reduce communities’ abilities to sustain immersion schools, which this thesis argues is an issue of social justice. These state and federal requirements are in conflict with international and national laws and agreements that guarantee Indigenous groups the right to self-determined educational paradigms in the language of their choosing. In 2015, legislation was introduced to support the creation of immersion charter schools in the State of Alaska. With Alaska’s assimilationist history, the very creation of such legislation signals a shift in Alaskan politics. Through interviews, textual and content analysis, participation observation, community action research, and grounded theory methodologies, I find that Tlingit ii efforts to establish immersion schools are hindered especially by: 1) dominant culture teacher certification, and 2) required monolingual standardized testing.
    [Show full text]