AN INTERACTIVE HISTORY By

CARL BORDEN AND ARCHAEOLOGY IN BRITISH COLUMBIA: AN INTERACTIVE HISTORY c, by ' ANNE M. WILLIAMS B.A., The University of British Columbia, 1977 A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF ARTS i n ; :•>• THE FACULTY OF GRADUATE STUDIES DEPARTMENT OF ANTHROPOLOGY AND SOCIOLOGY THE UNIVERSITY OF BR ITIS H COLUMBIA We accept this thesis as conforming to the required standard THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA September 1980 @ Anne Melita Williams In presenting this thesis in partial fulfilment of the requirements for an advanced degree at the University of British Columbia, I agree that the Library shall make it freely available for reference and study. I further agree that permission for extensive copying of this thesis for scholarly purposes may be granted by the Head of my Department or by his representatives. It is understood that copying or publication of this thesis for financial gain shall not be allowed without my written permission. Department of The University of British Columbia 2075 Wesbrook Place Vancouver, Canada V6T 1W5 Date iii. ABSTRACT Carl Borden has been designated "Grandfather of B.C. archaeology" (Carlson 1979: 233). I present an aspect of his claim to this title by focusing on his important contribution to the efforts made in the 1950's, 60's and early 70's to provide a forum amenable to the pursuit of archaeo• logical research in British Columbia. My thesis is, therefore, primarily a contribution to the literature which addresses itself to understanding Borden's place in the history of archaeology in British Columbia. As such, it will not only interest those archaeologists and anthropologists who knew and worked with Borden, but also a wider audience of Canadian anthropologists and archaeologists who are concerned with understanding the significance of the persons and institutions discussed in "local histories" within the broader framework of the history of Canadian anthropology. In presenting history, I also engage in its creation. My thesis reflects my self^consciousness in producing an account where Borden's point of yiew Cas expressed in the literature and a series of interviews) and my interpretation of his point of view are negotiated. I call this process of negotiation an :interactive history. It is through this process that I discover an important aspect of the significance of Borden to archaeology in British Columbia. Therefore, it is a process which will be of relevance to those anthropologists interested in the social construction of knowledge. Presenting history and being self-conscious about how we discover history are part of a reflexive approach to furthering an understanding of ourselves and our Western Culture. My thesis advances this approach in two ways. First, by applying the anthropological method of fieldwork, i v. traditionally applied to other cultures, to make a statement about an institution - archaeology in British Columbia - which emerges from my own culture. Second, by confronting this statement and making its formulation explici t. V. CONTENTS INTRODUCTION 1 Part One: Framing the Questions 1 Part Two: Constructing an Interactive History 4 CHAPTER ONE: RECOGNIZING THE ARCHAEOLOGICAL f POTENTIAL IN BRITISH COLUMBIA 14 1. How Borden came to be concerned in the archaeological potential in British Columbia .14 2. The Social Context within which Borden's concern developed s24' CHAPTER TWO: DEFINING THE ARCHAEOLOGICAL POTENTIAL IN BRITISH COLUMBIA 34 1 . Fund i ng 35 2. Student Participation 43 3. Assistance from non-funding agencies 51 CHAPTER THREE: CALLING PUBLIC ATTENTION TO THE ARCHAEO• LOGICAL POTENTIAL IN BRITISH COLUMBIA 61 1. Raising Public Awareness 62 2. Maintaining Public Awareness 78 EPILOGUE 85 1. Borden's position at UBC 85 2. Borden's commitment to the idea of conservation archaeology 87 FOOTNOTES. 89 APPENDIX 1 90 APPENDIX 2 93 APPENDIX 3 9^ SOURCES CONSULTED 103 vi . ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The interviews I conducted with the late Carl Borden, Professor Emeritus of Archaeology at the University of British Columbia, were made possible by a British Columbia Youth Employment Program grant. I would like to take this opportunity to acknowledge my indebtedness to Dr. Carl Borden, both for the interest he expressed in my project, and for making the interviews personally rewarding occasions which I consider myself fortunate to have experienced. My thesis was written under the guidance of my advisor Dr. Elvi Whittaker who has been an inspiration to me throughout my years as a graduate student at UBC. It has also benefited from the helpful criticisms and suggestions of the other members of my advisory committee, Dr. Michael Ames, Dr, Michael Kew and Dr. David Pokotylo. The following persons have discussed my thesis with me at various stages of its development, and their interest has been a source of encour• agement to me: Lorinda Daniel Is (UBC Archives); Jeanette Auger; John Barker; Herb Barbolet; Anne-Marie Fenger; Dianna Hall; Moira Irvine and Elena Perkins (Department of Anthropology and Sociology, UBC); and Car la Patterson (Department of History, UBC). I should also like to thank Serena Potter for typing my thesis. Finally I would like to thank my sister Linda Williams for her support and thoughtfulness while I was writing my thesis. 1. INTRODUCTION FIELDWORK IN HISTORY Part One: Framing the Questions The questions with which we approach the literature reporting on archaeological research in British Columbia will direct our understanding of this research. For example, if our questions are concerned with antiquity, papers on culture history, prehistoric lifeways, and culture process inform us of the cultural development of the early inland and coastal dwellers. This is because archaeologists, interested in a knowledge of the prehistory and history of this area, have discovered and recorded data which are evidence of the actions of these people. If, however, our questions are concerned with how this knowledge has been constructed, this literature gives us insights into the process by which archaeology is accomplished, because it also contains evidence of the actions of the archaeologists. It reveals a series of historic events which constitute the emergence of systematic archaeological research in British Columbia. Bibliographies and references point to ideas which have shaped research, and prefaces, introductions, acknowledgements, and footnotes provide us with a glimpse of the concerns, beliefs, and problems which surround and give meaning to events of archaeological significance. I am interested in asking questions which will advance an under• standing of the process by which archaeology is accomplished. The literature approached in this way suggests that some thirty years ago the coastal stretch between Northern California and Southwestern Alaska was archaeologically one of the least known areas of the North American 2. continent. This was Philip Drucker's view of the situation when he reported on his survey of the Northern Northwest Coast which took place in the fall of. 1938 (Drucker 19^3). This survey has since been acknowledged as the first systematic work in the region (Sprague 1973). Archaeological research accomplished prior to this by Charles Hill-Tout in the late nineteenth and early twentieth century and later by Harlan I. Smith, who was affiliated with the Jesup North Pacific Expedition, is considered to be useful (Borden 1955; Carlson 1970; Maude 1978; Noble 1972; Sprague 1973; Winram 1975) although unspectacular (Sprague 1973). However, Roy Carlson, writing in 1975, refers to "an archaeological explosion" which he suggests took place between the years 1965 and 1975- He states, "the amount of archaeology accomplished within the last ten years is more than ten times that of all previous years combined" (Carlson 1975: 1*0. The question I ask of the literature at this point is this: How and why did this explosion come about ? Carlson, himself, provides an important clue. He states that "Charles Borden has done as much as any one man can do by undertaking extensive excavations and surveys in different parts of the province." In Carlson's opinion, "until the mid-60's he was the only archaeologist in B.C." (Carlson 1975: 14). Charles E. (Carl) Borden was born on May 15, 1905, in New York. He received his B.A. degree in 1932 at the University of California at Los Angeles and his M.A. and Ph.D. degrees in 1933 and 1937 respectively at the University of California at Berkeley. After teaching at the University of California and at Reed College in Portland, Oregon, he joined the UBC faculty in 1939 as an Assistant Professor of German. In 19^9, his involvement in archaeology in British Columbia led to a cross appointment 3. in anthropology as Lecturer in archaeology. One year before his retire• ment, in 1969, he was appointed full time as Professor of archaeology. Even after his retirement, Borden continued to engage in archaeological activities. He died on Christmas Day, 1978, at the Vancouver General Hospi tal. He was 73• Recognition of Borden's career in archaeology in British Columbia is such that it has already received considerable attention. He has been accorded the following honours: Fellow of the American Association for the Advancement of Science; The Centennial Medal for Valuable Service to Canada; Literarum Doctor (U.B.C); Queen's Silver Jubilee Medal, 1977; and the Smith Wintemburg Award of the Canadian Archaeological Association, 1978. To date, those who have furthered an understanding of the signifi• cance of his career have done so by commenting on his intellectual contribution (Bunyan 1978; Carlson 1979a, 1979b; Noble 1972; Robinson 1969; Sprague 1973) to systematic archaeology in British Columbia. They neglect, however, another important aspect of his career which is better explained from a perspective which makes its point of reference the social context of ideas. This aspect centres on his involvement in establishing legislation to protect archaeological sites.

Load more