December 2003 Number 11 www.mnh.si.edu/arctic

Newsletter

Smithsonian Institution National Museum of Natural History

NOTES FROM THE DIRECTOR

By Bill Fitzhugh

CHANGES AFOOT!!! My comments here last year offered the

hope that the process of introspection would soon end and renewal

might be at hand by the time this year’s newsletter appeared. Well,

after several years of false starts, mis-direction, and grass-roots

angst and rebellion, 2003 has marked a turning-point. Some of the

storm clouds swirling about the Institution are dissipating and we

look forward to a brighter future.

Why? Most importantly, the context for the ASC and

other science programs has been strengthened by conclusions

reached by the high level, institution-wide

reviews conducted by the Smithsonian Science

Commission in 2002 and parallel studies of the

National Academy of Science (NAS) and the

National Association of Professional Accountants (NAPA). Most importantly, these

reports give Smithsonian science a highly

positive bill of health and urge the SI administration and Congress to address its most

serious deficiencies: a decade of budget shortfalls resulting from unfunded mandates for

new museums and salary increases that have

cut deeply into staffing levels and SI science

support. However, the Commission and the

NAS and NAPA reports also note that the

Institution must come to grips with its illdefined and seemingly all-inclusive mission

(“the increase and diffusion of knowledge”)

and focus on a discrete set of themes and

programs. Happily, anthropology and cultural

studies is one of the four science missions

recommended by the Commission, whose

report has been enthusiastically endorsed by the Smithsonian

Regents, our governing board.

One of the most important results of these studies is that

the National Science Foundation has decided to accept

Smithsonian proposals on a regular basis, ending a policy that

for thirty-five years placed SI scientists at a disadvantage with

respect to their peers elsewhere.

A number of administrative changes recommended by

these reports have also taken place. David Evans, a highly

successful NOAA administrator, was appointed Under

Secretary for Science. Since then he has vigorously implemented many of the recommendations made by SSC, NAS, and

NAPA and has begun promoting SI science to Congress and SI

officials. He has also secured funding to begin planning a new

oceans exhibit at NMNH and has supported new science

initiatives in the SI budget. Most important, he and Secretary

Larry Small completed a search for a new director for Natural

History and in March appointed Cristián Samper, a young,

dynamic, Harvard-trained biologist with extensive science

management experience who founded and directed Columbia’s

Humboldt Institute and served as Acting Director for the

Smithsonian Tropical Research Institute in Panama. Samper has

already begun the process of renewal so badly needed by our

museum.

As Chair of Anthropology, I confess to having a role in

this process as well, and most of my time this year has been

devoted to Department matters. You don’t want to hear about

how long it takes to do performance evaluations and plans for 50 employees! Of more

interest is our effort to renovate the out-dated

anthropology halls and plans for special

exhibits on Jamestown for its 400th anniversary, on Chaco Canyon archaeology, and on

anthropological components for the oceans

hall. The untimely death of Carolyn Rose

(August 2002) required re-shaping our

museum studies programs with George

Washington University. This, and the recent

Castle decision to transfer archeometric

researchers Ron Bishop and James

Blackman to Anthropology from the

Smithsonian Center for Materials Research

and Education (SCMRE), and the joint

appointment of phytolith researcher Delores

Piperno to NMNH from STRI, offer new

opportunities for training, collections, and

research.

Fortunately, time invested in museum

and SI-wide affairs has benefitted the ASC,

and our programs are better known throughout the Institution.

In particular, I have been honored to receive the 2003 Distinguished Smithsonian Lecture Award and now chair the SI

Science Strategic Plan’s Human Diversity and Culture Change

“theme team”. But more significant is our success in publication

and exhibition programs. Three new volumes have appeared in

our ‘Contributions to Circumpolar Anthropology Series’ this

year: Honoring Our Elders: History of Eastern Arctic Archaeology (a volume dedicated to my mentor, Elmer Harp, Jr. of

Dartmouth College), Akuzilleput Igaqullghet: Our Words Put to

Paper, which received the Before Columbus Foundation’s

American Book Award for 2002, and Constructing Cultures

Then and Now: Celebrating Franz Boas and the Jesup North

Anja Herzog with Basque pot

from Hare Harbor-1
ASC Newsletter 2

Pacific Expedition. Soon to appear are a translation of Leonid

Khlobystin’s Archaeology of Taimyr Peninsula and Northern

Ethnographic Landscapes, a collaborative project with the

NPS-Anchorage.

On the exhibition front, Vikings had a double booking at

the St. Paul Museum of Science, where, Minnesotans gave it a

resounding cheer. Closing in May, all artifacts have been

returned home, and the ‘West-Viking’ portion of the installation

has been loaned to Iceland for their new Viking ship museum in

Keflavik. The exhibition, Alutiiq Looking Both Ways curated by

Aron Crowell and a team of Alutiiq colleagues,has completed a

great run in Alaska and opened at NMNH in December 2003.

This year’s special events have included Igor Krupnik’s

stewardship over a day-long symposium on climate change at

the annual ARCUS meeting in Washington in April, a meeting

that also featured Greenland Home Rule Minister of Culture,

Arkado Abelsen. But by far the most significant event was the

5th World Archaeology Congress, held at Catholic University for

more than 1000 participants and organized by Joan Gero

(American University) and Claire Smith (Flinders University

in Australia). WAC-5’s week-long calendar of social events,

embassy visits, community lectures, and tours made it arguably

the most successful and certainly the most diverse archaeological group ever assembled.

Looking forward, we have started preparations for an

arctic climate change exhibit under the new NMNH “Forces of

Change” exhibition program. Organized in collaboration with

the interagency SEARCH program (Study of Environmental

Arctic Change) that is sponsored by NOAA, NSF, NASA and

other agencies, The Arctic: A Friend Acting Strangely, will be

curated by Igor Krupnik and Katherine Rusk and will feature

new research on rapidly changing conditions in the circumpolar

regions and their impacts on Arctic Natives, northern residents,

and the wider world. We will also be presenting this topic as a

special symposium at the next AAAS annual meeting in Seattle

in 2004.

ASC archaeology projects have also forged ahead. Aron

Crowell’s Kenai Fjords project has gained momentum with

community support and funding from the NPS; Stephen

Loring’s community archaeology in Makkovik produced

exciting educational opportunities for Labrador Inuit and new

information about the European contact period in the 17-18th

centuries; and my work in Mongolia on Neolithic and Bronze

Age sites, deer stones, modern reindeer herding, and its

environmental context matured into a major scientific and

humanitarian program. Similarly, my “St. Lawrence Gateways

Project” progressed to a long-term effort with Laval University

to explore culture history, heritage studies, Basque archaeology,

and European-Inuit contact on Quebec’s Lower North Shore.

Meanwhile, Igor Krupnik’s ‘knowledge repatriation’ program

with Alaskan and Siberian communities has documented archival

photography from NMNH, NMAI, AMNH, and Russian

museum collections, and he has continued his research in

collaboration with the Eskimo Walrus Commission and other

groups.

Finally, not to be undone by her publication and

adminstrative duties, Elisabeth Ward found time this year to

research and write on Viking landscapes based on sagas and

archaeology and has continued her work on Viking popular

culture. And Matthew Gallon, in addition to supporting our

Mongolia and Quebec projects and processing Labrador

TABLE OF CONTENTS

collections for return to Newfoundland, has been collaborating

with Dan Rogers and Bruno Frohlich on Mongolian archaeology. Sadly, and left the ASC in July: Elisabeth to clear her brain

of six years of ASC fever and pursue new opportunities in

California, and Matt to begin graduate school at the University

of Michigan. Both will be sorely missed! And in case you’re

wondering if there’s a nerve center at the ASC ‘after Elisabeth,’

the new password is ‘Katherine Rusk’ or

rusk.katherine@nmnh.si.edu, who will be dividing her time

between research on the arctic climate exhibit and managing

ASC affairs in Room 307. Katherine is a specialist on

Greenland Norse settlement and environment who is soon to

receive her PhD from University of York, UK.

Changes Indeed!

ASC Anchorage

 Aleut Visit: The Alaska Collections Project........................... 3

 Archaeology and Oral Traditions .......................................... 3

Exhibitions

 Viking Show Comes to an End, but Not “The End”.............. 5

 On the Road with Looking Both Ways.......................... 6

 The Return of Turner’s Inuit Collection to Kuujjuaq..... 6

Outreach

Research and Repatriation............................................. 7

 Yup’ik Artist Studies Smithsonian Mask Collections...... 8

 Researching Masks at the Smithsonian.................................. 8

 The Conservation of Masks from the Nelson Collection...... 10

Research

 International Polar Year 2007-2008....................................... 11

 Linguistic Research on the Kensington Runestone................ 12

 The Narwhal Tooth Expedition and Research........................ 16

 Site Selection Criteria of the Norse in Greenland................... 18

F ield Work

 The Deer Stone Project Preliminary Field Report ................ 19

 Burial Mounds and Mass Graves in Mongolia.......................21

 St. Lawrence Gateways Project: 2002-2003 Field Report.....23

 Arctic Studies Center’s Labrador Initiatives, 2003.................26

 A Student’s Perspective..........................................................27

 Sub-surface survey in Northern Iceland.................................28

Conferences

 WAC-5 Comes to D.C........................................................... 30

 ASC’s Northern Connections at WAC-5........................ 31

 The Northern Veche of 2003..........................................32

 Museums Alaska 2003...................................................33

 “Jesup-2” Initiative Enters Its Second Decade................33

Bergy Bits

 Distinguished Scandinavian Visitors...............................35

 World’s Worst Skiing Trip......................................................35

 Alaska Native Elders and the Alaska Collections Project....36

 Honors and Awards......................................................36

 Ainu Website launch......................................................36

 Prime Minister Announces Diplomatic Appointment......36

 Donation to the National Anthropological Archives.......37

 ASC Establishes Dartmouth Connection........................37

Transitions........................................................................38

Publications...............................................................................39

Thanks to Our Sponsors........................................................42

Publication Order Form...........................................................43
ASC Newsletter 3

ASC ANCHORAGE

ALEUT VISIT: THE ALASKA COLLECTIONS

PROJECT

By Aron Crowell

During the week of April 7-11, 2003, four Alaska Native Unangan

(Aleut) visitors worked in the Anthropology collections and the

National Anthropological Archives in connection with the Alaska

Collections Project (ACP), led by Curator and Project Director

Aron Crowell of the Arctic Studies Center. Jennifer McCarty of

the Arctic Studies Center’s Alaska office assisted with the visit.

The visitors were Elders Mrs. Mary Bourdukofsky and

Mr. Vlaas Shabolin from the island and village of St. Paul, and

Mrs. Maria Turnpaugh of Unalaska, Unalaska Island, Alaska.

They were accompanied by Ms. Daria Dirks of the

Tanadgusix Foundation Oral History and Museum Project (St.

Paul). Mr. Shabolin is a life-long hunter, fisherman, and noted

story-teller; Mrs. Bourdukofsky and Mrs.Turnpaugh are

expert weavers of fine grass baskets for which the Aleutian

Islands are famous. All grew up in island villages and are

speakers of the indigenous language, Unangax.

ACP consultations with indigenous cultural experts from

all parts of Alaska are providing detailed documentation and

native language names for hundreds of items in the anthropology collections at both NMNH and NMAI. The research will

yield a major exhibition in Anchorage, traveling exhibits for

Alaskan communities, a Smithsonian web site, publications, and

detailed information to be incorporated into the Department of

Anthropology’s collections records. With Crowell, the Aleutian

group examined and discussed more than 50 items in the

NMNH ethnology collections, including baskets, bentwood

hunting hats and visors, skin clothing, tools, and masks from

burial caves. The interviews were professionally videotaped

and audiotaped to

create a permanent

record. The Arctic

Studies Center will

provide copies and

transcripts for

archives at both

NMNH and NMAI.

A highlight of

the trip was a visit

to the National

Anthropological

Archives, where the

visitors viewed

paintings done in the

Aleutian Islands

during the 1870s to

1890s by Henry

Wood Elliott. They

discussed several of

the paintings in

detail, including:

“Fishing from

kaiaks, Captain’s

Harbor, Unalaska”, 1872; and “Men with clubs on edge of fur

seal rookery, St. Paul Island”, 1891. All of the visitors from St.

ARCHAEOLOGY AND ORAL TRADITIONS ON THE

OUTER KENAI COAST, ALASKA

By Aron Crowell

The National Park Service in Alaska, through its Ocean Alaska

Science and Learning Center (OASLC) program, has provided more

than $87,000 in research grants to the Arctic Studies Center in

Anchorage for investigation of the archaeology and oral history of a

little-known region of southern Alaska – the spectacular, glaciated

Pacific coastline of the Kenai Peninsula. The study area is within

Kenai Fjords National Park. Important partners in the Kenai

Fjords Oral History and Archaeology Project are the lower Cook

Inlet Native villages of Nanwalek, Port Graham, and Seldovia. The

Pratt Museum in Homer is also working with village residents and

ASC on the project, which includes a strong focus on education,

student training, and community outreach. Aron Crowell is the

Principal Investigator and Project Director. Archaeologists from the

Fairbanks and Anchorage faculties of the University of Alaska will

join the project this

summer, including

David Yesner,

WilliamWorkman,

and Maribeth

Murray.

Native residents of

Nanwalek, Port

Graham, and Seldovia

– whose cultural

affiliation is Alutiiq

(or Sugpiaq) – are

knowledgeable about

the outer Kenai coast

and its history

because many of their

grandparents and great

grandparents lived

there in villages such

as Aialik, Yalik,

Dogfish Bay, Rocky

Bay, and Port

Chatham. These

settlements were

gradually abandoned as the Alutiiq population declined during the

19th and early 20th centuries. The survivors settled in Cook Inlet,

Aleutian consultants Daria Dirks, Marie Turnpaugh, Vlaas Shabolin, and Mary

Bourdukofsky looking at a painted wooden shield from Kagamil Island.

Paul had worked at one time in the island’s commercial fur seal

harvest, which was started by Russian fur traders in the 18th

century and continued under U.S. federal management until

1980. Their comments about the fur seal industry, which

brought Elliott to the islands as an advocate for regulation of

the harvest, will add immensely to the historical documentation

of the Elliott paintings. Crowell plans to gather more information from the group about the whole collection through followup interviews in Alaska.

This was the fifth ACP trip in a series of seven. Future

visits will include Tlingit visitors from southeastern Alaska and

Athabascans from interior villages.
ASC Newsletter 4

where there was better access to jobs, schools, and the Russian

Orthodox church. Some men still traveled to the outer coast by

kayak for trapping and hunting until the 1930s, but few people in

the Cook Inlet villages today have ever visited their former Alutiiq

homeland. Nonetheless, vivid stories of traditional life and travels

on the outer coast have been passed down to current generations,

and there is strong interest in revisiting the area and working with

scientists to study it. Oral traditions, combined with traditional

knowledge about subsistence resources and the outer coast

environment, are invaluable for interpreting archaeological sites that

range from 100 -1000 years old.

One of the key questions is how Alutiiq people adapted

to dramatic environmental changes that took place over the last

ten centuries. Among these were a volcanic eruption that

covered the area in ash about A.D. 1500 and a very large

earthquake around A.D. 1170 that caused the shoreline to drop

at least two meters. It appears that many coastal villages were

inundated by this crustal movement and that a human exodus

from the area lasted at least a century. Climate change was

another variable. Markedly cooler temperatures during the

Little Ice Age (“LIA”,ca. A.D. 1300–1870) caused glaciers to

advance down the coastal fjords, and at least one ancient village

(at Harris Bay) was almost buried beneath the ice. Based on

known links between water temperature

and the relative abundance of key food

species such as salmon and seals, it is

almost certain that resources available to

outer coast residents were very different

during the LIA than they are today.

Collections of discarded food bones from

archaeological sites are being studied to

develop an understanding of these changes,

which are of broad interest to climate

science. The Institute of Marine Sciences

at the University of Alaska Fairbanks

(UAF) will analyze stable oxygen, carbon,

and nitrogen isotopes contained in archaeological samples to help develop a picture of

changing water temperatures and corresponding shifts in the marine food web.

The Kenai Fjords Oral History and

Archaeology Project began in 2000 with a

planning grant from the Alaska Humanities

Forum. Planning activities included public

meetings in the villages and an initial visit

to sites in Aialik Bay and Harris Bay with

students and elders in June 2001. Archaeological fieldwork during the summer of 2002

focused on one of the older known

settlements, the Bear Cove village site in Aialik Bay. The field

crew of 10 included high school, undergraduate, and graduate

students from Alaska and California. Robert McMullen (Port

Graham) and Sperry Ash (Nanwalek) joined the project in the

field. More than twenty Alutiiq elders in the villages provided

videotaped interviews from their homes that focused on

memories and stories about the outer coast, and several visited

the Bear Cove site at the end of the field season. Nick Tanape,

Sr. (Nanwalek), a noted hunter and teacher of traditional

knowledge, offered important observations about the archaeological findings and the environment and subsistence resources

of Aialik Bay.

Based on calibrated radiocarbon dates, the oldest house

and midden remains at Bear Cove are from the period A. D. 950

- 1400. Excavations uncovered house floors; knives, lance

points and other stone tools; hearths; and other features. Nick

Tanape, Sr., John Moonin, Sr., and other visitors from

Nanwalek and Port Graham suggested that a stone-lined basin

that was discovered on one of the house floors was an early

example of a well-known type of traditional cooking pit. The

procedure was to build a large fire in the bottom of the pit, let

it burn down to coals, then place flat stones over the embers

followed by alternating layers of seal or bear meat and seaweed.

The meat would steam for many hours while the hunters were

away for the day and be ready to eat upon their return. Elders

also suggested that the predominance of whole, finished tools

inside the Bear Cove houses was due to the pragmatic and

hospitable Alutiiq tradition of leaving houses well stocked with

food, firewood, and tools for use by travelers who might seek

shelter there in a time of need. The abundance of burnt bone

fragments was attributed to the custom – called pinahsuhtut

‘they are hunting for good weather’ - of tossing bones into the

cooking fire to chase away storms.

Village project coordinators Nick Tanape, Sr., Herman

Moonin, Jr., and Lillian Elvsaas worked with the Pratt

Museum to edit a video entitled Bringing

Back the Stories that will be used in the

Pratt’s future exhibition Kachemak Bay: An

Exploration of People and Place, funded by

the National Endowment for the Humanities. With Talking Circle Productions, the

Arctic Studies Center produced a 20-minute

educational film that incorporates interviews with elders as well as extensive video

documentation of the field research.

Entitled Archaeology and Memory:

Ancestral Alutiiq Villages on the Outer

Kenai Coast, Alaska, it will be used in

classrooms, shown at the Kenai Fjords

National Park visitor center in Seward, and

presented at public meetings and academic

conferences.

Gale Parsons, Education Director of

the Pratt Museum, managed participation

of three high school interns from Homer in

the field project, and this program will be

expanded in 2003 to include 5 – 6 interns

from Nanwalek, Port Graham, Ninilchik,

and Homer.

Fieldwork during July and August

2003 focused on several 19th century sites

in Aialik Bay that relate directly to stories told by elders. The

grandmother of Eleanor McMullen, First Chief of Port

Graham, lived at Aialik Bay as a child in the 1880s, and the

stories her grandmother passed on include many details that

have been verified by preliminary archaeological testing,

including the types of fish and sea mammals upon which people

depended. Codfish bones from the midden indicate that this

important food fish grew much larger in the cold waters of the

Little Ice Age, which reached its southern Alaskan peak in the

late 19th century. The desolate cold and ice of that time

feature in the oral traditions of both Alutiiq people and their

Tlingit neighbors to the east.

Alutiiq advisor Nick Tanape, Sr.

talking about the Bear Cove site with

Aron Crowell.
ASC Newsletter 5

 EXHIBITIONS

VIKING SHOW COMES TO AN END,

 BUT NOT “THE END”

By Elisabeth Ward

The Smithsonian special exhibition Vikings: The North Atlantic Saga

allowed for over 300 objects from 29 lending institutions to be

brought together for a celebration of the 1000 year anniversary of the

Viking arrival in the New World. On May 18th, 2003, that party

came to an end. All of the Viking Age and Norse artifacts, as well as

some modern pop-culture pieces and a handful of replicas, had to “go

home” to their lending institutions. If the objects had the chance to

tell us what their experience was like, we hope they would feel it has

been a good one. They certainly got star-quality treatment:

conservators cautiously kept an eye on their condition at each venue

opening and closing, and representatives from the lending institutions

came to ensure each venue met security and environmental control

standards. Some objects were only allowed to be handled by the

owning institution, which meant that the installation schedule had to

accommodate a variety of needs from international flight schedules to

the host venue’s PR demands. James

Rubinstein of Natural History’s Special

Exhibits Department did a fabulous job keeping

all of that rolling, with the assistance at each

venue of the respective special exhibits project

coordinator, the cooperation of the

representatives of the loaning institutions, and

the steady hands of our contracted move crew,

Ely, who stuck with the show from start to

finish.

We could have asked for no finer place

to bid adieu to the Viking show than its final

venue: The Science Museum of Minnesota.

Because of the large Scandinavian-American

population in the mid-west, the Smithsonian

had always wanted the show to go to that

part of the country. But with Chicago

falling through, we were left with a conspicuous gap in the center of North

America. The Science Museum of Minnesota was eager to fill that void, but they

only had an opening in their schedule in the

fall of 2002. Originally, the exhibition was

set to close in October of 2002, after its run at the Canadian

Museum of Civilization. But everyone from the lenders to

Smithsonian staff decided that it was worth making the extra

effort to allow the show to stay on tour for one more venue if

that would mean this show could reach its core-constituency.

The Science Museum of Minnesota opened the show November

14th with a fine opening ceremony, attended by the Mayor of St.

Paul, and several State Delegates, though the most honored guest

(and keynote speaker) was surely the President of Iceland,

Olafur Ragnar Grimsson, who represented not only Iceland but

also the Nordic Council of Ministers, the main sponsor for the

exhibition. That auspicious start was followed up by a string of

special events planned throughout the run of the exhibition, all

expertly orchestrated by the friendly, professional staff at the

SMM, and led by Project Coordinator Anne Hornickle. There

were evening lectures planned each month that the show was

at the SMM: Bill Fitzhugh started off the series with his

lecture opening weekend summarizing the exhibition themes

and highlighting evidence of Native-Norse contact. Contributors to the exhibition catalogue kept the monthly lectures

interesting by Peter Sawyer (with his wife Birgitta Sawyer)

who spoke on the Viking Age in Europe; Kirsten Seaver who

spoke on the Greenland Colonies, and Elisabeth Ward who

spoke on Viking Women, specifically Gudrid the Widetraveled. Other evening lectures were given by Vestein

Olason, director of the the Arni Magnusson Institution in

Reykjavik, who spoke on the Sagas, and James Graham

Cambell, who gave an overview of Viking Art. Although

other venues have likewise had a series of evening lectures,

this one was notable partially because the exhibition run was

twice as long (6 months as opposed to 3 months) so it

required extra care to make sure each lecture had sufficient

publicity, a task easily handled by the PR staff led by

Carleen Pieper and Janine Hanson.

Other events including a Viking Weekend festival,

entertainment by the Saga Singers of the Saga Center in

Southern Iceland (led by Arthur

Bjorgvin Bollason), and a visit by the

National Opera of Norway for the

closing weekend (which coincides with

Norway’s National Day Celebrations)

certainly kept buzz around the

exhibition going. Within the exhibit

itself, the SMM had also put in extra

effort: they constructed a hands-on

exploration area modeled after the

Viking Village created by the Denver

Museum of Natural History; and they

made an audio-guide to give visitors an

additional way to explore the content

and themes of the exhibition. All of

this extra effort certainly paid off: they

had the second-highest number of

visitors for any venue on the tour (after

the opening here in Washington, where

admission is free!). Their total pushed

the combined number of visitors for all

venues (Washington, New York,

Denver, Houston, Los Angeles, Ottawa

and Minnesota) over the 3.5 million mark, an astonishing and

truly gratifying figure.

Of course, this success leaves Bill and Elisabeth, as well

as Robert Sullivan, Joe Madiera, and Jim Rubinstein of

Exhibits at the National Museum of Natural History, sad to

see the show ending. It has been an extraordinary experience,

and hopefully one that will inspire the Museum to undertake

such an effort in the future. But one obstacle to a repeat

would likely be financial: despite the obvious success of the

show, NMNH came out slightly in the red. Partially this is

because of the unfavorable exchange rate between Kroner and

Dollars, but also because we tried to keep our fees as low as

possible to encourage as many venues as possible to take the

show. To help ameliorate this deficit, we began looking for

ways to recoup our expenses by finding an appropriate

The Islendingur Ship
ASC Newsletter 6

institution to take some of the exhibition furniture (cases,

panels, models, etc.) at the closing of the exhibition.

We were extremely pleased that a very suitable option

presented itself a few months ago. As luck would have it,

another Viking Millennium inspired event, the sailing of the

Islendingur replica Viking ship from Iceland to North America,

had produced a valuable asset (in this case, a beautiful full

scale Viking ship!) in need of a home. The City of

Reykjanesbaer (made up of the communities near Keflavik

International Airport in Iceland) had agreed to purchase

Islendingur from the ship captain, Gunnar Marel

Eggertsson. The Mayor of Reykjanesbaer, Arni Sigfusson,

had hired a notable Icelandic architect, Gudmundur Jonsson,

to construct an edifice to house the ship. However, he and the

others on the planning committee, Einar Benedictsson and

Margret Halgrimssdottir, felt that there should be an exhibit

to accompany the Islendingur ship. When Elisabeth heard

about that, she quickly offered the cases, panels, and models

in the Vikings exhibition, and just before the show closed in

Minneapolis, an agreement was reached for Reykjanesbaer to

borrow the exhibit furniture for an extended period of time.

Though certainly work remains to modify the existing exhibit

components to work with the story of the Islendingur, there

is reason to be optimistic. The Islendingur ship, because of a

fortuitous stop in Iceland by Bill several years ago, was the

object that graced the cover of the exhibition catalogue, an

image of it advertised the exhibition throughout its North

American tour, and the ship met the exhibition in New York

City in October of 2000. So the two have been linked from

the beginning of the year 2000 celebrations, and it seems the

will of Leif the Lucky Eriksson that the two should end it

together in Iceland.

ON THE ROAD WITH LOOKING BOTH WAYS

By Aron Crowell

Looking Both Ways: Heritage and Identity of the Alutiiq People, the

award-winning exhibition produced by the Arctic Studies Center,

the Department of Anthropology, the Office of Exhibits Central,

and the Alutiiq Museum, was presented at the Alaska State

Museum in Juneau during April – October 2003. Juneau, home to

3000 Alaskans and destination for 700,000 cruise ship passengers,

was a fitting stop on the exhibition’s journey from the Alutiiq

homeland (Kodiak and Homer) to the wider world. The trip has

included Alaska’s largest city (Anchorage), the state capital

(Juneau), and now the nation’s capital. Looking Both Ways opened

on December 15 at the National Museum of Natural History

(NMNH) and will be on display through 2004.

The trip from Alaska to Washington, D.C. had its

moments of drama, starring Alaska’s Senator Ted Stevens.

When commercial air transport arrangements fell through, the

Senator asked the U.S. Air Force to step in. An extensive

coordination effort was immediately launched, involving the

Senator’s office, the Smithsonian’s Office of Government

Relations, the Air Force, and the NMNH Department of

Anthropology. In the end, an Air Force cargo plane left

Elmendorf Air Force Base in Anchorage on a cold Saturday

morning with the exhibition’s 40 salmon-pink shipping crates on

board, along with strapped-in courier Scott Carrlee of the Alaska

State Museum. The shipment safely reached NMNH via Travis

A.F.B. in California and Dover A.F.B. in Delaware.

Key Smithsonian players in the hastily written script

were Carey Wilkins and Nell Payne at Government Relations

and Deborah Hull-Walski, the Anthropology collections manager

and orchestrator of the LBW tour. A large and able Air Force team

made it all happen, including coordinator Colonel Sam Cox and

Staff Sergeant James Langston (Elemendorf), Master Sergeant

Doyle (Travis), and Lieutenant Bowman (Dover). The

coordination of the transportation effort could not have been done

with out Jerome (Jay) Johnson, John Becker, and Jeffry

Crooks, who were the main link with the ATOCs at Elmendorf,

Travis, Dover.

Looking Both Ways arrives at NMNH

KUUJJUATUQAQ 1882-1884 / KUUJJUAQ C.1968

A CENTURY LATER, PART OF THE TURNER’S

INUIT COLLECTION WAS BACK UP NORTH, TO

KUUJJUAQ

By Louis Gagnon

The exhibition Kuujjuatuqaq 1882-1884 / Kuujjuaq c.1968 was

very successful at its showing during the 9th Inuit Circumpolar

Conference (ICC), from August 12-19th, 2002. With between

500 to 600 participant, this conference was the largest international event ever held in Nunavik, and the Cultural Center was

newly opened in Kuujjuaq for the occasion.

This outstanding exhibition was produced by Avataq

Cultural Institute, an Inuit organization, and proved to be a

turning point in Nunavik museology because of its original way

of dealing with recent and ancient pasts, its size (over 100

historical photos and drawings, some 25 rare artifacts borrowed

from five important collections, and all displayed on more than

400 sq. feet), and the exceptional participation of the

Smithsonian Institution’s National Museum of Natural History.

It successfully conveyed a genuine piece of history of Kuujjuaq.

The loan of 17 objects, and the permission to enlarge

27 photographs and drawings from the Lucien M. Turner

Collection, were made possible with the very supportive

collaboration of the Smithsonian Institution’s National Museum

of Natural History. Lucien McShan Turner’s (1848-1909)

extensive observations, his photographs and the traditional Inuit

artifacts that he collected between 1882-1884 from Fort Chimo

area (now called Kuujjuaq) form today a tangible link to the

nineteenth century... and, of course, to the Inuit inhabitants of

that region.
ASC Newsletter 7

While the impressive and well-preserved 120 year old

Turner pieces were displayed on the mezzanine of the brand

new Kuujjuaq Cultural Center, the main floor of its hall was

animated by an exciting mural 9 feet high and by over 25 feet

long, of the Bernard Saladin d’Anglure/Corcoran Collection of

photographs. Known for his fieldwork in Nunavik since the

mid-1950s, Laval University anthropology professor Bernard

Saladin d’Anglure sojourned briefly in Kuujjuaq in summer

1968, accompanied by the photographer Corcoran. Together

they realized an unsurpassed series of 65 B&W family portraits

that have never been shown before.

For the visitors who recognize themselves or some of

their relatives or friends, the “flash-back” provoked by these 35

year old photos generated an immediate and very emotive

experience of “personal past” quite distinctive in comparison

with the feelings and thoughts inspired by the century-old

Turner collection which provided a point of contact with

Nunavik history. Together the continuity between the present

and the past made “history” come true.

“Turner’s contribution is vital in that he collected

artifacts at a time when we did not do so. More than a century

later, his work validates our very real sense of being Inuit in

modern times.” (R. Watt, in his foreword to the Ethnology of

the Ungava District, 2002 re-edition)

Again in the hall of the Kuujjuaq Cultural Center,

Avataq put on display a few old significant pieces coming from

three major Nunavik collections (Daniel Weetaluktuk Memorial

Museum and Cultural Transmission Center, Inukjuak; Saputik

Collection from the Puvirnituq Cultural Facility, Puvirnituq; StEdmund’s Anglican Church Collection, Kuujjuaraapik) to

underline the individual and collective efforts in Nunavik to

preserve the rich legacy of past Inuit generations.

For the benefit of the people attending to the ICC

conference and the Kuujjuammiut (local people from Kuujjuaq)

Avataq also showcased its main projects and programs developed in respect of its leitmotif: “Keeping Afloat Nunavik Inuit

Tradition & Knowledge”.

Joshua Sivuarapik, Avataq co-curator, holds amulets collected

by Lucien Turner in 1882

At the conclusion of the 2003 summer’s archaeology work at

Makkovik, Labrador Stephen Loring, in his guise as a member of

the Advisory Board of the Tshikapisk Foundation – an Innu

organization committed to preserving traditional Innu core-values,

language, and country-based knowledge – traveled to the Innu

village of Sheshatshiu from whence, accompanied by his Tshikapisk

colleague, Anthony Jenkinson, Tim Borlase (Labrador Institute)

and Malinda Blustain and Emily Trespas (Phillips Academy in

Andover, Massachusetts), he flew into the Kamestastin region of

the central Labrador barrenlands where Tshikapisk hopes to develop

an experiential education facility. While aimed primarily at Innu

youth the Kamestastin program hopes to partner with Canadian and

U.S. universities and institutions who share an interest in the

preservation of all aspects of Innu culture, language and history.

Loring’s previous fieldwork at Kamestastin has revealed that the

region retains traces of over 7000 years of occupation by small

groups of specialized caribou-hunters.

 Discussions with Tshikapisk educators, Innu leaders and

representatives from Memorial University and Phillips Academy in

Andover, Massachusetts focused on developing a systematic

archaeological program and oral history project to document the

extraordinary relationship between the Innu, their ancestors, their

land and the caribou. Caribou predation plays a pivotal role in

human history (e.g. in Paleolithic Europe and in the Late Pleistocene

Northeast U.S.). It is believed that a community anthropology

project with the Innu centered at Kamestastin could be expected to

greatly enhance our knowledge of the dynamics and consequences of

a specialized caribou hunting economy and contribute significantly

to an understanding and appreciation of the spiritual and practical

dimensions of the lives of northern hunter-foragers.

Jordanna Benuen and Emily Trespas

contemplate dinner at Kamestastin.

OUTREACH

RESEARCH AND REPATRIATION

By Christina Leece

The issue of “repatriation”, so hotly discussed in the news and at

WAC 5 this year, has been one of great concern for the Arctic

Studies Center. The excavated materials we have been housing and

studying from Labrador, Canada, are now desired for local

museums and universities. These materials are in the process of

being returned to people who see them as a valuable piece of their

cultural history.

Since the fall of 2001, the ASC has been better outfitted

to deal with this repatriation procedure. We have a wide array of

collections from sites that range from having only a few utilized
ASC Newsletter 8

flakes, to larger collections compiled over several seasons of

fieldwork. With the intention of expediting the return process, the

ASC acquired a lab in the swing space area of the museum in October

of 2001. Since this time the lab has been filled with artifacts from

Labrador. A string of interns have been recruited from universities in

the area, and across the country to help maintain records on these

archaeological finds. They have offered their services assisting in the

analysis, description, and cataloguing of artifacts. The interns

document the provenience, materials, measurements, descriptive

notes, and specimen types of the artifacts in a database created by

Matthew Gallon. We can then pull out information to cross reference

artifacts and study specific features or tool manufacture techniques

with increased ease. This enables us to do more comparative studies

and to see trends that would be otherwise difficult to quantify

scientifically. Students from all over the country have welcomed this

rare opportunity for hands on experience, and we have welcomed their

help.

Once the initial documentation procedure has been

completed, a research assistant – Matthew Gallon followed by

Christina Leece – compiles more extensive analysis of the artifacts.

They are described individually, and digitally photographed for future

publications. After the sites have been adequately described, they are

sent to the Newfoundland Museum in St. John’s Newfoundland,

where they are housed and used for research and exhibits.

Many shipments to the museum include over 500 artifacts

and bags of non-cataloged flakes from tool manufacture. The chart

below only lists the sites returned in 2003 with more than fifty

artifacts, which is a small portion of the total number of returns. We

continue making headway in the repatriation of collections with a

healthy flow of interns in our much-improved workspace.

Major Sites (Borden #) Returns Un-Cat.

Black Island 1A (Raven Site)(HeCi-16) 79 33

Dog Bight LO9 (HdCh-09) 82 41

Dog Island Southwest 1(HdCh-37) 55 19

Dog Island West Spur L1(HdCh-13) 65 7

Dog Island West Spur L5 (HdCh-17) 81 28

Imilikuluk 07 (HdCg-35) 62 5

Karl Oom Island 5 (HdCg-41) 108 69

Nachvak Village (IgCx-01) 298 72

Questlet Isles 4 (HeCi-43) 99 15

September Harbor 3 (HdCg-13) 187 21

Tinutyarvik Cove 1 IgCv-02 163 31

Tinutyarvik Cove 2 IgCv-03 67 8

Total Returns in 2003 2031 727

 Polished Nephrite endblades from Nachvak Village, a Thule culture

site. IgCx-03:335 and IgCx-03:336.

practices his art as a means to anchor himself to his Yup’ik

heritage: of Yup’ik and Canadian descent, his father is from

Valleyfield, Canada and his mother Tasianna “Nurauq” is

Yup’ik from Kwigillingok, Alaska. He is the grandson of John

“Cunar” and Jane “Nausgauq” Hinz of the Kipnuk area.

Aarnarquq holds degrees from the University of Alaska

Fairbanks and Harvard University in Education, Native Studies,

and Administration but it is as an artist that he is currently

exploring the world. He writes,

In the ongoing process of doing art, I constantly

research traditional and contemporary Yup’ik ways of being

and knowing giving me a better contextual framework and

foundation to base my work upon. My research helps to

reinforce and expand upon the philosophy of my work which

is quite humanistic and, at the same time, brings me back to

my culture.

Aarnarquq’s description of his recent visit to the

Smithsonian is taken for the most part from his website:

http://www.yupikmask.com/aarnarquq.htm

RESEARCHING MASKS AT THE SMITHSONIAN

By Phillip Charette (Aarnarquq)

As strange as this may sound, I was fortunate enough to spend

the week of my birthday and wedding anniversary in March

researching Bristol Bay, Norton Sound, Nunivak, Yukon, and

Kuskokwim masks, drums, and other Yup’ik artifacts at the

Smithsonian Institution, Department of Anthropology, Arctic

Studies Center. With the assistance of Dr. Stephen Loring, I

studied hundreds of Yup’ik artifacts collected by E.W. Nelson

and others stored at the Museum Support Center (MSC). The

Smithsonian’s Department of Anthropology has an impressive

collection of Yup’ik artifacts which are excellent examples of

Yup’ik ingenuity, craftsmanship, and artistry. The collection

gives one a sense of the Yup’ik worldview and the significance of

Yup’ik cosmology in all aspects of traditional Yup’ik life. This

is indeed a powerful and moving collection providing us with a

vital link to the rich and colorful Yup’ik past and to our

worldview. The pieces are stored in an excellent state of the art

facility and are handled with the care they deserve. The

collection was so powerful, spiritual, and precious to me that I

found myself shaking every time I picked up and examined a

mask, drum, or other artifact. As my apa Cunar would do and

with him in mind, I took great care in spiritually protecting

YUP’IK ARTIST PHILLIP CHARETTE

(AARNARQUQ) ENCOUNTERS THE TUUNRISSUUT

AND THE NEPCETAQ AT THE SMITHSONIAN

 By Stephen Loring

For a week in March, the Arctic Studies Center was pleased to

host a visiting Yup’ik artist, Phillip John Charette

(Aarnarquq), from Portland, Oregon. Mr. Charette is an

Alaskan Native artist specializing in Yup’ik masks, festival

regalia including drums and finger masks, as well as Native

American flutes. Artist, teacher, and activist, Mr. Charette
ASC Newsletter 9

myself when handling the collection.

The focus of my brief research project was to do an initial

assessment of the number and condition Yup’ik masks and

drums in the collection. Due to time constraints, I only had

enough time to see about 1/3 of the northern mask collections

which was enough to pique my curiosity and consider future

research projects. I also focused my study on traditional Yup’ik

carving and design techniques utilized in the making of traditional masks and drums which will be incorporated into my

own artwork. And finally, I wanted to study the thematic

design characteristics consistent in

traditional designs

against what I

already know and

understand about

traditional Yup’ik

masks and drums.

To a limited

degree, I achieved

most of my

objectives but also

realize that I

simply scratched

the surface in

terms of working

with such a large

collection. I was

honored to have

the opportunity to

glimpse into my

Yup’ik past and

was thrilled to

have worked with

experts and well

trained staff. As I

worked with the

collections, the

excitement and anticipation was rewarded each time another

cabinet or drawer was opened revealing a breath taking treasure

of artifacts. Photographs, images, and drawings do no justice to

the actual pieces in the collection; you must see them with your

own eyes and let your senses take in the rest. When you smell

the smoke and feel the soot from the gasqiq on the masks, smell

the seal oil in the in the lamps, and see the blood on the

shaman’s mask, you begin to realize that we are not so far

removed from our Yup’ik “History”. Realizing that the pieces I

handled were from my grandparent’s and great grandparent’s

lives was sobering and touched a part of my soul which brought

me to tears.

With all the radical changes our people have endured over

the last 3-4 generations, experiencing these pieces from a

contemporary Yup’ik point of view gave me a unique perspective of our culture! The pieces in the collections provide

evidence that Yup’ik peoples are highly skilled and talented

artisans who are very clever, creative, imaginative, and extremely intelligent. The nature of the work also shows that

Yup’ik people were extremely resourceful, skilled survivors,

strong in stature, and were so spiritual that it is reflected in

every aspect of Yup’ik life and art.

Phillip Charette (Aarnaquq) at M.S.C. with a nineteenth-century

Nepcetaq mask from the Yukon-Kuskokwim region of Alaska

I definitely feel the need, and have a personal commitment, to do additional follow-up work with the Yup’ik

collection. I would welcome future projects to reassemble,

repair, and/or provide more detailed educational documentation

on these pieces through educational video, photography, or

audio recordings with the assistance of elders and youth. After

seeing the collection, I recognize the significance of this

collection and the need for further comprehensive documentation utilizing existing cultural resources before they are no

longer available. Even if we do not have stories associated with

each piece, we

still can document specific

design elements,

carving techniques, tools

utilized, and

symbolic

meaning within

the works.

I highly

recommend that

all Yup’ik

carvers, artist,

and Yup’ik

cultural educators take the time

to see this

invaluable

collection

because of the

range of technical

abilities expressed in the

works. It is an

awesome

collection in its

scope and scale.

[ Editor’s note: Aarnarquq concludes his essay on his

home page with some insightful suggestions for collaboration

between Alaskan Native Artists and the Smithsonian’s collections management staff concerning on-going research and care of

the important Yup’ik collections. He concludes his thoughts on

his Smithsonian experience.] Special thanks to the Smithsonian

and Department of Anthropology and Arctic Studies Center

staff for their support, time, effort, and eagerness to work on

the collections with me, to Dr. Stephen Loring of the Arctic

Studies Center for his assistance and working with me for days

on end in pod #1 researching the collections, and to Theresa

Malnum, Deborah A. Hull-Walski, Carrie Beauchamp, and

Felicia Pickering for assistance in gathering research data. You

have all helped to fulfill a lifelong dream of working with

Yup’ik masks, drums, and other Yup’ik artifacts which I will

not soon forget. I look forward to working with you on future

research projects and being with the collection again.

 [Ed: Thank-you Aarnarquq for your kind words. We

look forward to seeing you again in Washington and we remain

committed to assuring access to you and all Native Alaskans to

the collections and artifacts which are your patrimony, heritage

and pride. Quyanarpiit-lli! or Quyana, ...Ellam Yua!]
ASC Newsletter 10

GAMEKEEPERS OF THE ARCTIC: THE

CONSERVATION OF TWO TUNGHAK MASKS

FROM THE NELSON COLLECTION

By Katharina Geier

Smithsonian Center for Materials Research and Education

Smithsonian Institution 4th year intern, University of Applied Sciences

Erfurt (Germany), Conservation and Restoration Program

Two ceremonial Yup’ik masks from the

Smithsonian Institution’s National Museum of

Natural History (NMNH) are the focus of a

current conservation project. Both are part of

the Nelson Collection, a cache of almost 10,000

objects collected by Edward William Nelson

on his expedition to Alaska from 1877 through

1881.

The two masks, the largest ceremonial

Yup’ik masks owned by the Smithsonian

Institution (their faces measuring 55 x 32 cm and

52 x 29 cm) resemble each other closely in

appearance, and share the same materials and

techniques of construction. They are carved from

wood, painted, and decorated with feathers. Both

masks have the same prominent facial features,

attached arms that extend directly from their

mouths, side bars, two labrets, and attached carved

animals. They are also painted in the same

manner with the same colors.

Though we do not know the precise

year in which the masks were manufactured, or

whether they were originally used ceremonially,

they are nonetheless well documented. Mask

33118 is one of the few masks of the large Nelson

Collection to be described and illustrated in

Nelson’s monograph:

This image represents the tunghâk or

being that controls the supply of

game. It is usually represented as

living in the moon. The shamans

commonly make a pretense of going

to him with offerings in order to

bring game into their district when

the hunters have been unsuccessful

for some time. Masks of this

character are too heavy to be worn

upon the face without additional

support, so they are ordinarily

suspended from the roof of the

kashim by strong cords. The wearer

stands behind with the mask bound

about his head, and wags it from side

to side during the dance so as to

produce the ordinary motion. I was

told that in all the great mask festivals several of these huge objects

were usually thus suspended from the roof.

During the expedition, each object of the Nelson Collection

was numbered and catalogued in the “E.W. Nelson List of Ethnological

Specimens Obtained in Alaska,” today in possession of NMNH.

According to Nelson’s list, two masks numbered 1441 and 1442 are

from the “Magemuts from the South of Lower Yukon.” When the

masks were accessioned by the Smithsonian Institution on November

6, 1878, they were assigned the catalogue numbers 33118 and 33119,

respectively.

We do not know the condition in which the masks arrived

in Washington D.C. Ledger drawings of the masks from 1878 show

both masks assembled, and an illustration published in 1899, in

Nelson’s monograph The Eskimo About Bering Strait, shows mask

33118 assembled.

However, when they were shippied

from Alaska to Washington, both masks were

disassembled. During the course of the

Anthropology Inventory Project that took place

at the Smithsonian between 1978 and 1980, the

masks were placed in two storage boxes along

with their various detached parts. Since the

field numbers were written on almost every

one of the attached pieces during Nelson’s

expedition, the pieces detached through

disassembly could be correctly regrouped with

the masks to which they properly belonged.

In May 2003, the Tunghak masks

were transferred from the storage units of the

NMNH to the laboratories of the Smithsonian

Center for Materials Research and Education

(SCMRE), where they received conservation

and restoration treatment. The treatment report

will be available as dissertation project.

To prepare for the treatment of both

masks, the materials and techniques of

manufacture were analyzed to gather technical

information that served as the background for

optimal conservation and restoration. The

pigments and binders used, as well as the paint

application, are still under investigation. This

new set of analytical data, derived from

objects of a generally known age and

origin, will support and add to the

information available, and it will also

serve as a reference for future studies

of objects from the Arctic region.

Because the masks are

important representations of the

Yup’ik culture, one main goal of this

project was to reassemble the masks

correctly and restore them as closely

as possible to their original condition.

The ledger drawings of the

masks from 1878 and the illustration

of mask 33118 in Nelson’s monograph

from 1899 helped guide our

understanding of the relationship

between the detached parts and the

original masks. However, a

comparison between the masks and the drawings suggests that the

masks were already partly disassembled when the drawings were

made. The masks are shown differently than they actually exist, and

they are shown with parts attached in ways that cannot be logically

duplicated, due to a lack of appropriate joinery (dowels, holes, etc.).

By matching the broken dowels in both the detached pieces and the

Plate of Mask 33118 from

Nelson’s 1899 monograph

Mask 33118 with relocated

parts before assembly

Detached parts are relocated by matching dowels and holes
ASC Newsletter 11

Before considering the reconstruction of missing parts,

substantial time was spent looking through the Arctic storage units.

These units contain boxes with a collection of various single or broken

parts of unknown origin. An additional fifteen pieces, bearing the

original Nelson expedition catalogue numbers or matching broken

dowels on the masks, have been relocated within the storage units.

Five pieces were relocated for mask 33118: the center

caribou on the forehead (which was already missing in the drawing of

1899), two teeth and two wooden sticks for attaching the side bars.

The mask is now almost complete. A few teeth, seal flippers, caribou

legs, and antlers remain missing, as well as unknown parts indicated

by three broken dowels in the chin region.

Ten pieces were relocated for mask 33119: three seals, two

labrets and five pieces of bent wood. We are still missing a few of the

mask’s teeth, some seal flippers, and another element belonging to

the forehead region,

which is presumably

another carved seal.

Lost mask

parts were

reconstructed by

comparison of the

masks to existing

drawings and

photographs. Due

to the symmetry of

the objects,

additional

information about missing parts was obtained through the

examination of the opposite sides of the masks. The replacements

were carved from wood and inpainted using dry pigments and

water colors. Each inpainted replacement carving was marked on

its back in pencil with the date of its creation (2003). Like the

original parts, they were carved with an end shaped into a dowel

or re-doweled and inserted mechanically into already existing

drilled holes.

For mask 33118 three

teeth, one eyebrow peg, two seal

flippers and eight caribou antlers

were carved. All disassembled,

relocated and reconstructed parts

were assembled with the mask. In

addition, missing feathers were

replaced with new swan feathers.

The conservation and restoration

treatment of this mask is now

complete.

For mask 33119 the

conservation and restoration

treatment is almost complete. So

far, one eyebrow peg, seven teeth

and six seal flippers have been carved. There are still a few flippers

and the seal of the forehead to be made. In addition, the appropriate

locations for four pieces of bent wood belonging to the mask are still

unknown.

The conservation and restoration treatment has greatly

changed the overall appearance of the two masks. Through the

relocation and reconstruction of their missing parts, and their

reassembly, the two Tunghak masks are now closer again to their

original impressive and powerful appearance.

INTERNATIONAL POLAR YEAR 2007-2008: THE

NEXT MAJOR SCIENCE EFFORT IN THE POLAR

REGIONS?

By Igor Krupnik

Planning is underway for a new large-scale international

program in polar research called the “International Polar Year

2007-2008.” or IPY. It will include 18 months of intense

research activities, followed by data analysis, publication,

policy and public discussions. It is the fourth similar effort

undertaken by the international polar science community, 125

years after the first International Polar Year of 1882-83, 75

years after the second such program in 1932-33, and 50 years

after the third and most concerted effort in 1957-58, called the

“International Geophysical Year” (IGY). All previous IPY

ventures provided major opportunities to enhance polar

research (and its funding) which promoted international

cooperation among polar scientists and national research

institutions, and helped collect benchmark data on many facets

of the cold regions of the world. They also served as major

vehicles to capture public imagination and to convey the crucial

role that the polar areas play in the functioning of the Earth as

the planetary ecosystem.

Hopes are very high that IPY 2007-08 will play an even

larger role in spurring research cooperation and will open a new

era in polar scholarship. The new IPY is envisioned to be an

intense and coordinated international campaign of research and

observations, with extensive planning and follow-up analysis. It

should be bipolar in focus, multidisciplinary in scope, and truly

international in participation. The emerging vision for the new

IPY initiative is for researchers from many nations to work

together to gain holistic insights into planetary processes, to

explore and increase our understanding of both the Arctic and

the Antarctica, and of their roles in the global system in order to

expand our ability to detect ongoing changes in the polar regions

and to extend this knowledge to the public and decision makers.

The concept of the IPY 2007-08 has been endorsed and

advanced by a broad range of polar research groups. In February

2003, the International Council for Science (ICSU) formed an

International Polar Year Planning Group (IPY-PG). Several

national IPY groups and planning committees are under various

stages of organization. In August 2003, the National Research

Council of the U.S. National Academies created the U.S.

Planning Committee on the International Polar Year which held

its first meeting in Washington, DC on September 30-October 1,

2003. The first document to outline the emerging U.S. vision of

the IPY 2007-08 (‘U.S. National IPY Report’) is due in early

2004. The U.S. committee already has its own web site http://

dels.nas.edu/prb/ipy/ for information and updates on IPY

activities.

Igor Krupnik from the Smithsonian Arctic Studies Center

and Richard Glenn from the Arctic Slope Regional Corporation

in Barrow, Alaska are serving on the U.S. national IPY committee to represent the interests of social scientists and of northern

indigenous residents, respectively. Both constituencies have

great stakes in this major international effort. Unlike the

RESEARCH masks, most of the pieces could be relocated in their original

 positions.

Ledger drawings of masks 33118 and

33119 from 1879

Mask 33119 with relocated

parts before assembly
ASC Newsletter 12

previous IPY ventures of 1882-83, 1932-33, and 1957-58,

which were primarily (if not exclusively) focused on geophysical and natural sciences, the IPY 2007-08 is planned as a truly

interdisciplinary program. The new vision is to integrate polar

residents and social scientists into all its activities, from the

very beginning. Some national IPY agendas, particularly that of

the Canadian IPY group, put high priority on “human dimensions” in its research planning. The U.S. agenda for IPY

activities will include many cultural, social, health, and

environmental issues critical to polar communities and social/

human scientists.

There is a powerful (though mostly forgotten) legacy that

relates both constituencies to earlier IPY efforts, particularly to

the First International Polar Year of 1882-83. Several IPY-1

expeditions and related later surveys produced extensive

ethnographic and natural history collections and other documentary records, such as historical photographs, personal

diaries, and early publications. The collections, photographs,

and writings of the U.S. IPY Expedition to Point Barrow (1881-

83) now at the Smithsonian Institution (Ray 1885; Murdoch

1892/1988) offer the best-known example. Several other

surveys affiliated with the first IPY, like those of Lucien

Turner in Ungava Bay, of Franz Boas on Baffin Island, and a

three-year stay of Adolphus W. Greely’s party on Ellesmere

Island (1881-84) made tremendous contributions to the

development of knowledge of the Arctic. These expeditions as

well as other IPY-based collections are of great value to today’s

northern residents. They can be shared with northern communities and made available through various exhibit, educational, and

“knowledge repatriation” programs.

There is another special aspect to the planning of the new

IPY activities. Arctic residents, indigenous communities,

political and other non-governmental organizations are now key

players in polar research. They have stakes in every facet of

arctic science, particularly in the issues related to climate

change, pollutants, cultural heritage, subsistence, health, and

economic development in northern areas. Burgeoning northern

towns, like Barrow, Alaska; Iqaluit, Nunavut; Kautokeino,

Norway; Rovaniemi, Finland; and Tiksi in Sakha Republic,

Russia; have emerged at sites once selected as ‘pristine

observation stations’ by the First IPY expeditions. These Arctic

towns now have their own museums, research institutions,

colleges and even universities. They also have great numbers of

experienced elders as well as hundreds of formally educated

local residents and many young students interested in polar

science. For these and many other reasons, northern residents

will play important role in every aspect of the new IPY-focused

research, from pre-planning to scholarly design, funding, data

collection, and the final analysis and dissemination of results.

Major research activities in the forthcoming IPY agenda

are still three or even four years away; but time is ticking away,

as today’s research planning, grant application, and funding

takes years to accomplish. The human component of the IPY

2007-08 will require concerted efforts by social scientists and

indigenous communities as well as many discussions to develop

a joint agenda. Communication and sharing of existing knowledge on previous IPY efforts and resources needs to begin soon.

To this end, the U.S. National IPY Committee, the Smithsonian,

the International Arctic Social Science Association (IASSA), and

Barrow Arctic Science Consortium (BASC) are exploring several

venues to reach out to those social scientists and northern

communities interested in forging new partnerships. The ASC is

sure to play an important role in these efforts and we plan to

cover it extensively in future newsletters.

Last year after completing my studies

at Cologne University I started a

research internship concerning the

Kensington Runestone(KRS) at the

Arctic Studies Center. I began by

conducting background research into

the history of the stone; the different

rumors, opinions, tales and reports of

its discovery; and also the different

scientific fields that are connected

with it, namely geology, archaeology

and history. Because my area of

expertise is in linguistics and

Scandinavian Studies, I want to

concentrate here on the linguistic

aspects of my findings.

 The inscription is selfdated to 1362 and tells the story of 8 Swedes and 22 Norwegians that came to Kensington on a voyage from Vinland and

found 14 of their men dead after returning from a fishing trip. I

looked at the stone’s inscription on three levels: runic forms,

syntax and grammar. On all three fronts, I was astonished to

discover that almost all of the forms in this inscription need a

special explanation or construction under which they would be

possible for a 14th century origin. Occam’s razor clearly does

not apply to the Kensington Runestone. An entire document

simply cannot be composed of exceptions to the conventional

linguistic system because that would contravene the principle

of communication; we communicate to be understood and

therefore do so in a standardized way. If we believe the story

told on the stone it is more than unlikely, even impossible, for

so many aberrant forms to show up in a relatively short text. It

is therefore easy to understand why linguists, including myself,

have decided the stone only makes sense as a 19th century

product. In the following article I want to show some of the

points that convinced me of this conclusion.

 Proponents of the KRS argue that many of the unique

and unusual forms on the stone can be explained by the

LINGUISTIC RESEARCH ON THE KENSINGTON

RUNESTONE

By Iris Hahn

 Iris Hahn

Research headquarters of the Point Barrow expedition 1881-83
ASC Newsletter 13

influence of oral language on written language, for example the

complete lack of plural verb forms throughout the whole

inscription. On the stone is written: vi hade (‘we had’), vi var

(‘we were’), vi fisk (‘we fished’), vi kom (‘we came’), vi fann

(‘we found’) and vi har (‘we have’), even though the proper

forms would have been vi hafðum, vi varum, vi fiskum, vi

komum, vi funnum and vi havum. The singular forms for verbs

in plural usage became accepted in written Norwegian in the

1860’s and even later in Swedish. It is therefore unlikely that it

was already a common trend to use the singular verb forms in

14th century spoken Swedish and/or Norwegian; to this might be

added that a runic inscription – a late representative of a

conservative tradition – was probably the least likely of all

documents to reflect oral influence. In addition to this, our

knowledge of Nordic spoken languages in the 14th century is so

limited that there is no support for attributing anything on the

stone to the spoken language of this period. Therefore, this

argument can be neither verified nor invalidated; it simply

cannot be used to prove or disprove anything on the

Kensington Runestone.

A further grammatical mistake is the lack of a dative form

after certain prepositions like við (‘by, at’) and fra (‘from’).

The inscription reads ve havet (‘at the sea’), which is acceptable in modern central Scandinavian languages, but the equivalent for 14th century would be við hafinu. The stone likewise

should read við tvem skæriom (‘at two skerries’), fra þessum

steni (‘from this stone’) and fra þessi oe (‘from this island’)

instead of ved 2 skjar, fro þeno sten and from þenno oeh. In all

of these cases, the nouns and pronouns are not following the

persistent grammatical rules or inflection

common for the

Germanic languages.

As mentioned

above grammar is not

the only problem,

some of the runes are

wrong, too. The first

example of a problematic rune is the ö rune.

The symbol /ö/

signifies a phonetic

modification of the

sound [o] and is called

an umlaut. The first

issue is that the

Scandinavian

languages already

used umlauts in

spoken language, but

had not yet incorporated a symbol for it

in their writing system. The KRS uses a rune (fig. 1), which is

not related to the symbol for o (O)*

. All Germanic languages

that have both sound values on their phonetic system use

related graphemes to represent these sounds (e.g. German,

Icelandic, Swedish: o/ö; Danish, Norwegian: o/ø) Since there is

no organic relationship between these two symbols, the rune is

either pure invention or is borrowed. If it is an invention then it

is an overcompensated form, and cannot just be explained by

being Latin based; either an umlauted o or an o with the

 Figure 1: Invented or borrowed O

superimposed x would have been sufficient as a Latin based

grapheme. Late Dalecarlian runic alphabets show the rune Ö for

phonetic [ø] and one of them shows O with an x in it for [o],

this is where the overcompensating might have come from that

ended in the particular rune on the KRS. Dalarna is an area

where they used runic alphabets until far into the 20th century;

this is especially interesting because either Öhman himself or

his mother — here the sources differ — might have come from

this particular area in Sweden. Unfortunately, there is not

enough research so far about this aspect of Öhman’s life.

Hjalmar Holand, who was the first defender of the

runestone’s authenticity, quotes out of Kaalund’s Atlas, which

shows manuscripts from the period 1164-1545, to justify the

early use of the umlauted o-rune on the KRS. Many examples

of the sound [ø] are found therein, but none for the actual letter

/ö/ or the fact that the original runic script used a specific

symbol for ö. Holand seems not to have understood that the

original manuscripts were given in standardized transliterations,

where /ö/ is used in abundance. Other Old Swedish texts, for

example, had standardized the spelling of the runic symbol as

either /oe/ or /ø/. Holand is merely speaking of the sound

(phonetic [ø]), earlier spelled in different ways but nowadays

represented in standard Swedish orthography by the letter /ö/.

Holand therefore confused the sound with the letter.

At this point, Richard Nielsen’s work on medieval

Swedish manuscripts should be mentioned. Like Holand,

Nielsen is attempting to mix two different systems and then

compare them. Even though the Scandinavians around this time

used both writing codes, i.e. runic inscriptions and Latin

alphabet manuscripts, it

is not linguistically

supportable to assume

that a mixture would

have taken place. These

two systems are codes,

and it is a well established linguistic rule

that when “codeswitching” is done,

(Greek and Russian

speakers do this on an

almost daily basis),

users of the codes do

not mingle the two

systems. For the

Scandinavians it would

have been even less

likely because not only

did they use two

different alphabets for

writing but they also

used different material to write on. On top of that, runes were

always sacred and were treated with a conservative bias. As

Holand compared a grapheme with a phoneme, Nielsen

compares a manuscript in Latin script with a chiseled medium

in runic script. His discussion is therefore concerned with

manuscripts and books in the Latin alphabet, modified for

writing and printing in Swedish, and has nothing to do with

runes. It does not matter if in Latin texts umlauted symbols

were already in use, because it is very unlikely that the carver

would have tried to “make up” a runic pendant for it. He would

 Figure 2: X rune
ASC Newsletter 14

have done what all other rune carvers before him had done —

use a known runic symbol, because the sound [ø] already

existed long before the 14th century in Scandinavian languages.

Further runes that are problematic on the Kensington

runestone are the runes for a, g, k and the j in skjar (‘skerries’-

rocky little islands). For /a/, the carver used an X with a little

hook on the right upper arm [fig. 2]. In itself the X is totally

unrelated to any runic symbols used for representing “a” (e.g. a

or A) and is not known

before the 18th and 19th

century. As for the hook, it

does not serve any purpose

and has no known antecedents; there were no hooks

used in runic alphabets to

express phonetic features.

Richard Nielsen’s argument

for a possible 14th century

origin of the X rune is the

similarity between the

Gothic letter for cursive A,

which is x-shaped, and the X

rune on the stone. Mr.

Nielsen displays cursive a’s

found in Latin manuscripts

and claims that they

influenced the carver and

motivated him to produce an

X for a. Unfortunately, these

are merely cursive Latin

letters and not runes, and the

same argument given earlier

about mixing writing systems

is again valid.

I think the most strained argument to try to explain a

problematic rune in Nielsen’s arguments is the one trying to

explain the j rune [fig. 3]. There used to be a runic symbol for j

(j) in the elder Futhark but it went out of use in the 12th

century, any subsequent runic alphabet did not have a symbol

for j. Therefore, the fact that the carver used a symbol (an

invented one) for j is a strong indicator that he was not from the

14th century. Richard Nielsen has therefore put forward the idea

that the rune actually should not be read as j at all, but as a ~, a

symbol that stands for a palatized L. Thus the runic word

normally transliterated as skjar (‘skerries’) becomes skylar

(‘shelters’). This, however, is simply an ad-hoc solution.

Nielsen’s formula for it reads as follows: sk-f-ar > sk-~ ar >

skjlar > skylar. /i/ and /j/ ahead of or after a consonant were

indeed used to palatize that particular consonant. That does not

give Nielsen any reason or grounds to introduce the vowel y

here, just to get the desired skylar. jl and yl are not the same,

neither phonetically nor orthographically.

The vocabulary used in the inscription is as peculiar as

the runes, for example the word opdagelsefard. It is used in the

sense of “voyage of discovery” (land) on the Kensington

Runestone. The lexem itself is of Dano-Norwegian origin. This

alone wouldn’t rule it out for the inscription, since we know

that the party was from a mixed origin, namely 8 Swedes and 22

Norwegians, but it is a modern word. The word uppdaga is not

recorded in the sense ‘to find’ in Swedish before the beginning

of the 19th century. This word and its meaning entered the

Scandinavian language area from Low German at a late date. The

word opdagelse (it should be upptäckt in Old Swedish) is not

recorded in Swedish for any period, and furthermore is not even

found in Older Danish, Middle Dutch or Middle Low German,

languages around the presumed KRS date and even significantly

later in the case of MLG [1400-1600]. It is therefore a modernism and very likely taken from a heated newspaper discussion

in the 1890’s. Gustav Storm wrote at that time about Norse

voyages of exploration in a

Norwegian newspaper that

was widely spread in

Minnesota using the word

opdagelse 12 times in a

single article. Not only the

word alone, but also the

concept is a modern one

refering to the seizure of

land by law, clearly not

what the hypothetical

KRS explorers would have

been doing. We do have

two verb phrases in Old

Icelandic that describe the

activity of exploring land.

These are leita landið, ‘to

search out the land’, and

kanna landið, ‘to explore

the land’; therefore any

word that would have been

used to describe a journey

of discovery would have

been most likely

landaleitan. Because of the

obvious moderness of this word, some proponents have argued

that it should be spelled opðagelse instead of opdagelse.

Although the latter would demonstrate an older possible date of

origin, which would disprove the standard argument about the

lexem being from a 19th century origin, it does not change the

fact that the semantics are a modern concept and the word

remains impossible for a 1362 usage.

The other anachronism is dags rise (‘one day travel’). Old

Swedish and Old Norwegian would be daghs færdh or daghs

ledh; the word resa in Old Swedish was a transitive verb,

meaning ‘to raise’. The intransitive verb resa, ‘to travel’ and the

noun resa, ‘journey’ are of a later origin, apparently Middle

Low German. The combination of both, dagsresa, is first

recorded in 1599. It could have been in oral use earlier, but we

have to assume that the Kensington explorer used it because it

was standard; after all, they wanted to be understood. This is

rendered impossible, however, by the fact that the word resa

meant ‘to raise’ (see above). In Old Icelandic, too, the verb

reisa is transitive, meaning it has to be reisa ferð, ‘to start a

journey’. Common terms for maritime travel were dags-roðr

“day’s row(-ing)’ and dags-sigling ‘day’s sail’.

The orthography used on the stone also is inconsistent

and faulty. The two r’s in norrmen (modern Swedish norrmän)

are pointing towards a modernism here, because the correct

older spelling would be norðmæn or normæn. Other abnormalities are the fact that og (‘and’) and ok are both used on the

stone, with ok being the correct older Scandinavian spelling and

og being the modern form. Likewise, the forms 22 norrmen and

The Kensington Runestone went on dispay in Sweden

in 2003 (photo courtesy of Scott Wolter)
ASC Newsletter 15

10 mans both show up, with men being the correct plural form

of maðr. Mans gave way to a few speculations. It might be the

influence of the English plural system, in which the plural is

usually formed by adding an –s ending to the noun in question.

This, however, is doubtful, because the plural for man in

English is irregular as well, and somebody with even a rudimentary knowledge of English usually knows the correct form men.

Others have speculated that it could have been a hidden hint to

Öhman’s name and his authorship of the inscription.

I have mentioned only the biggest mistakes, because the

list of grammatical, orthographical and syntactical mistakes is

too long to include here in full. Had the stone just been carved

for fun those idiosyncrasies wouldn’t be any problem, but if we

believe that it is a genuine and tragic message Norsemen left in

terror, hoping to leave a message about the disaster that had

befallen them, then its purpose above all would have been to

communicate to all who could read. A 14th century Northman

would have been unable to understand the inscription unless he

was aware of a bizarre array of language traditions.

It seems to be a fact that the language used on the stone is

a mixture and/or pidgin of some kind. Within the inscription,

the party is described as 8 Swedes and 22 Norwegians, and they

would have had to spend quite some time together before they

reached Minnesota. But the Minnesota area was also an area

with a mixed Norwegian-Swedish population; Öhman’s own

language shows quite a few traces of Norwegian influence. This

was probably the case for all people there with a Scandinavian

first language. This argument therefore works for both sides and

can’t be used to prove the KRS genuine, especially since the

words that are from a mixed linguistic background seem to be

from a modern origin.

In general, the inscription is too detailed; genuine old

inscriptions are extremely laconic in their formulation. The

proper name of the carver or whomever ordered the carving are

generally given, but the expression of a date in terms of calendar

years is out of place in runic inscriptions. Where dating occurs,

it is related to important events, such as the reigns of kings. In

the rare cases numerals appear at all, they are written out or in

later times expressed in Roman-style (as opposed to the

pentadic number system used on the KRS). Nothing here stands

in tradition with other runestones.

We know now that the experts of the first hour made

some mistakes and that ongoing research has revealed some

information that gives new details: the n-rune was found in later

inscriptions (very sparsely, though); the possibility for fra to

be a preposition; and the word ‘resa’ that apparently didn’t

exist in either the 14th century or in the 19th century, but was

solely used in the 1500’s. On the other hand, they all were able

to read and to translate the inscription in agreement. Even

though the first person to translate it was not an expert in Old

Swedish, he made a translation that, despite minor modifications, is still correct; just as if he were reading modern Swedish.

If presented in isolation, none of the historic-thematic,

graphical-runological, linguistic-stylistic arguments would

suffice to support the conclusion. However, their combined

weight should not leave any doubt that the Kensington inscription is from the 2nd half of the 19th century and not from 1362

(Iver Kjær, Runes and Immigrants in America, p.16)

 If this holds true for the hoax argument, then the

opposite side, that is, in favor for an authentic inscription, has

to fulfill the same requirements: a single disproven argument

that was made by the old runologists against the Kensington

runestone will not invalidate their whole work. But the fact is

that the n-rune and ‘resa’ are also problematic for the 14th

century, and the X, G, K, J and Ö runes are still unattested in

the 13th, 14th, or 15th century.

When I began my internship at the Arctic Studies Center,

I didn’t have a set opinion about the Kensington inscription,

but I very soon understood why the early runologists, linguists

and Scandinavian Studies experts dismissed the stone so

quickly. The 14th century was a century of significant changes

in the Scandinavian linguistic environment, but even in times of

drastic language changes people out of the same language group

still can communicate. We pick up one neologism or another, we

use grammar forms that were frowned upon a decade ago, but

are acceptable now, but a single speaker of a language will not

use all of the changes at once. The Kensington Runestone

simply combines too many aberrant forms, and, moreover,

simply reads too easily like a 19th century Swedish inscription.

I do not necessarily believe in the Öhman-as-forger theory, but

I do believe that the inscription is not from 1362 or anywhere

near that date.

During the time I spent with the KRS research I often

heard that the scholarly world is afraid of changes or too

narrow minded to accept new finds; the fact is that if I would

have found anything remotely new, I would have had a doctoral

thesis on my hands and could have transformed the year I spent

with this into something really fortunate for me. But even

though I was not able to make a significant new find, I enjoyed

my time at the ASC a lot and I want to thank William

Fitzhugh and Elisabeth Ward for the possibility to work here,

for their cooperation, and for their criticism and the input they

offered me. They also gave me the possibility to learn about

museum work and to go to the opening of the Viking Show, and

the Kensington Runestone Workshop in Minnesota. For this

I’m really grateful because it gave me the opportunity to work

with both sides — proponents and the opponents. Even

though we sometimes had different opinions, I appreciate their

support and ideas. Special thanks also goes to the Kensington

Runestone Museum in Alexandria, MN for the permission to use

their collections. The pictures of the runes in this article are all

taken out of their “rune library”.

Discussion and debate continue over dinner at the KRS workshop

with ASC’s Elisabeth Ward (right)
ASC Newsletter 16

THE NARWHAL TOOTH EXPEDITION AND

RESEARCH INVESTIGATION

By Martin Nweeia, D.D.S.

The narwhal, Monodon monoceros, has long fascinated sea

explorers, scientists and aristocracy. This arctic whale is

characterized by a single spiraled tusk extending six to nine feet

that emerges from the upper jaw and through the lip of adult

males. In some cases, females have an elongated tooth and in

rare instances whales with two protruding teeth have been

found. Often associated with the mythical horn of the unicorn,

the narwhal tooth has found its way into the books of scientific

rarities and mythical tales. Researchers have proposed myriad

theories to explain the tooth’s purpose and function, yet

considerable debate surrounds these studies.

 It is with the spirit of wonder and scientific curiosity

that we have planned a research

expedition and investigation to

solve one of nature’s most intriguing mysteries. During the months

of May and June, 2003, The

Narwhal Tooth Expedition and

Research Investigation will carry

the Explorers Club Flag #176 to the

southeastern edge of an ice floe

outside Pond Inlet in northern

Baffin Island, Nunuvut in search of

some answers. With Institutional

support from the Smithsonian

Institution, The Harvard Museum

of Comparative Zoology, the

Harvard School of Dental Medicine, and a corporate grant from the

J.O. Butler Company, field

observations will be documented

and previously harvested tissue

samples will be collected and

brought to the United States for further examination.

Throughout history, the narwhal tooth has inspired

legend and lore. Centered on the mythical creature with the

single horn protruding from its head, the unicorn story traces a

myth as unique as the animal that inspired it. The Greek

physician Ctesias, in the 8th century B.C., told of a creature

from India whose description inspired the image of a rhinoceros

with a horn that had both magical and medicinal powers. This

belief created a trade on rhinoceros horn for its qualities of

healing and protecting the user from poisons. The Roman

naturalist Aelian (ca. AD 170-ca. AD 235) later described the

horn of the unicorn as a spiral. This changed the perception of

the fabled creature’s protrusion from the rhinoceros horn to the

narwhal tooth. With help from its newfound association with

the unicorn, the narwhal tooth became both prized and celebrated.

So prized was the fabled horn of the unicorn that in the

16th century, Queen Elizabeth paid 10,000 pounds for one

(equivalent to the cost of an entire castle). The tooth is revered

by many cultures around the world. In Japan, two crossed

narwhal teeth adorn the entrance to the Korninkaku Palace. In

Denmark, multiple teeth comprise the frame of the Danish

throne. The royal scepter in England is made from the rare

tusk.

Artists know the narwhal for its unique association with

the famous Unicorn Tapestries. These tapestries, six of the

Lady and the Unicorn hanging at the Cluny Museum in Paris

and seven of the Hunt of the Unicorn at the Cloisters Museum

in New York are among the most well known tapestries in the

world. The unicorn, with its narwhal tooth protruding from the

head, continues as an endless source of fascination in modern

culture. Scientists, equally intrigued, support author and

explorer, Ivan T. Sanderson’s comment on the narwhal as

being “the most extraordinary of all living mammals”. It has

retained its legendary character because of its remote, harsh,

and inaccessible living area, and because it has what many

scientists describe as the most unusual tooth in nature.

Narwhal teeth are unique for several reasons. Among

them is the spiral nature of the tooth, observed as a left-handed

helix, only rarely seen in the teeth of other animals. Narwhal

teeth are also characterized as an

extreme example of directional

asymmetry. Normally the teeth

appearing on either side of the

cranial midline in most mammals

are symmetric in both size and

morphology. Narwhal teeth are an

exception to this rule. The

elongated male left tooth is quite

dissimilar to the right side, or its

antimere. The tooth on the right

side remains embedded in the skull

and extends only about one foot in

length. In addition to the size

difference, the morphology also

breaks the expected pattern. Each

tooth exhibits a left-handed helix.

A true symmetric antimere would

have an opposite or mirrored

appearance, expressed here as a

right-handed helix. Lastly, as the

elongated tooth is almost always observed in males, the narwhal

displays the most unique example of sexual dimorphism in the

teeth of all mammals.

Whales in general exhibit an unusual array of teeth and

mouth organs, which have puzzled researchers. Many toothed

cetaceans have no upper teeth and the lower teeth are of

questionable use. Sperm whales, for example, have only soft

tissue sockets that receive the 18-25 lower teeth on each side of

Unicorn Tapestry, Cloisters Museum
ASC Newsletter 17

the jaw. The strap-toothed whale has two oversized lower

teeth that can completely wrap around the upper jaw restricting

its ability to open. Contrary to the more common finding of

lower teeth, the narwhal teeth are upper teeth, the left front

tooth of the male commonly being expressed as the elongated

tusk and the right usually remaining imbedded in the jaw. These

varied expressions of teeth in whales are difficult to study and

understand.

 Why does the narwhal exhibit such an unusual array of

dental traits, and how can we explain them? Investigators in

the fields of dental research, marine biology, genetics and

mathematics have been

assembled to examine these

questions. Preserved, narwhal

tissue will be analyzed at The

Biostructure Core Facility at

The Forsyth Institute, Harvard

School of Dental Medicine, and

the National Institute of

Standards and Technology, in

addition to being examined by

CAT scans at the Woods Hole

Oceanographic Institute.

Findings from the scans will

help determine 1) basic

anatomical soft tissue structure

and morphology of the head

region currently not well

documented, 2) nerve pathways

in the head region, 3) interrelationships between different organs and tissue in the head

e.g., the tooth and brain, the tooth and nerve pathways to the

ears, 4) histology, and cell formation patterns of the tooth, and

5) understanding structures and cells at the base of the root.

Infrared micro-spectroscopy will be utilized to examine the

crystalline structure and formation of narwhal teeth to gain

insight into the composition and growth pattern. Radiographs

and T-scans, a three-dimensional high resolution laser surface

scanner recently developed by Steinbichler Optotechnik, will be

utilized for recording data of skeletal samples and teeth from

museum samples housed in Canada and the United States.

Recording and analysis of the tooth spiral will be examined as it

relates to function and to other spirals in nature

Research will begin on a molecular level finding the gene

responsible for the tooth and uncovering the genetic mechanism

for the trait exhibiting as a male characteristic. Micro-structural

analysis of the soft and hard dental tissue will be examined and

reported as well as the formation patterns of these developing

tissues. Crystalline analysis of the apatite crystals of narwhal

dentin will also be examined. In addition to the laboratory

examination, field-testing will also be conducted to study the

possibility of an electric field or potential created around the

tooth’s surface.

The upper plate of bone supporting the elongated left

tooth of the male is barely thicker than the diameter of the root.

In addition, the weight of the male tusk is several times that of

the supporting bony plate. How then does a thin, proportionately small jaw plate of bone generate such a large, heavy, and

seemingly unsupported tooth? The dentin component of

narwhal teeth has previously been reported as a weaker

crystalline structure when compared to the teeth of other

marine mammals. The emergence angle of the tooth from the

jaw is often seen as off center when viewing aerial photographs

and harvested specimens. This then creates a considerable drag

on the whale while swimming. Why would evolutionary factors

favor what appears to be a detrimental and burdensome trait?

Prior work on the paddlefish and platypus suggests electrical

sensors used to detect food sources may be present in other

fish and marine mammals. Thus, the possibility of an electric

field surrounding the narwhal tooth will be examined. Its use as

a probe for myriad purposes including hunting and navigation

may provide an unusual mechanism and purpose for the

narwhal and may lead to findings

about teeth in other marine

mammals. Such a theory is also

supported by the potential for

distorted apatite crystals in the

spiral formation of the tooth

creating an electric potential.

The significance of this possible

finding is far reaching.

Descriptions and speculation about the male tooth as a

weapon of aggression or defense,

hunting implement, sexual

display organ, and ice breaking

tool are noted in the literature.

Breaks in the tip of narwhal

tusks have also been observed

and used as evidence to support

such findings. However, stress

from such activities as ice breaking could significantly impair

the tooth and the thin bony skull plate that supports the large,

heavy, and awkwardly protruding tooth. Jaw plate fractures

have not been observed or cited in the literature as might be

expected from such behavior. The possibility of the tooth as a

probe will be explored in this study. Information and observation on the electrophysiology of the tooth will be gathered and

include tests to evaluate the potential relationships to electric

fields, acoustic signals and echolocation, and temperature

control for the whale. Any proposed theory must address the

prevalence of the elongated tusk primarily in males. Observations and knowledge from Inuit hunters will also be analyzed

and studied in relationship to the scientific information gathered

since the Inuit spend a great amount of time around this

otherwise elusive marine mammal.

Much of the current documented information about the

narwhal tooth needs to be updated or corrected. The very

classification of narwhal teeth as incisors or canines is debated,

as are the comments and speculation about the purpose and

function of the tooth. Skull and jaw anatomy, and gross

anatomy of the head region will be described and added to the

limited published work, as will the results of micro-structural

analysis of narwhal tissue associated with the teeth. What

possible answers and insight may come from such an investigation? As there is no other precedent set for such an unusual

expression of teeth in nature, the insights gained will help us

understand both the narwhal and links to the teeth of other

animals including humans.

We hope that our investigation to examine and explain

what we consider to be the most extraordinary tooth in nature,

may bring new attention to this deserving marine mammal.
ASC Newsletter 18

SITE SELECTION CRITERIA OF THE NORSE IN THE

EASTERN SETTLEMENT OF GREENLAND.

By Katherine J. Rusk

When I first tried to decide which project to develop for my

doctorate thesis, I was given a sound piece of advice: choose

something that has not been done before in an area that has been

understudied and look at a culture that you enjoy being with. For

me, that advice translated into investigating the Norse in Greenland;

specifically, the reasons why they chose certain spots for their

farmsteads instead of others when they first arrived. The majority

of the archaeological investigations of Norse Greenland have

centered around reasons why their settlements were abandoned

between 1350 and 1500 CE. Other workers, notably Tom

McGovern of Hunter College New York, have examined the

settlement known as the Western Settlement near Nuuk.

McGovern’s work focused on the needs of the Norse as pastoralists,

raising sheep, goats, and cattle, which strongly require grass or hay

for their food. In his study, a technique was developed to assess the

availability of grass in the areas immediately around the farmsteads

of a sample of the Western Settlement.

I was interested in the Eastern Settlement, which is an area

of the southwest coast near Narsaq. This is the area first

settled by the Norse, led by Erik the Red, in 985 CE and

remained a major power center throughout the apparent life of

the colony, as it held the Bishop’s seat across the fjord and the

Lawspeaker’s farm. Why did they come here? What were they

looking for when they sailed up the fjords?

McGovern’s pasturage assessment was tried on a selection

of 69 Norse sites around Erik the Red’s farm Brattahlið,

including a major portion of the farmsteads in the hinterlands. A

small secondary sample was chosen from the Laxá valley of

northeastern Iceland as a comparison because some of the

settlers of Greenland came from Iceland and it was useful to test

pasturage assessment as a technique in new environments.

Around Brattahlið and Qorlortup Ittinnera there were a

large number of main farms which appeared to have been used

year-round. There were also an equally large number of farm

sites at much higher elevation that were much smaller. In other

parts of the North Atlantic such as the Faeroes, Iceland and

Norway such farms are used in the summer by herdsmen who

take their flocks and herds away from the main fields of the

farm so that hay or other crops can be grown undisturbed by

grazing needs. These farms, sæters to give them their proper

name, also produce butter, milk and cheese as well as an

alternate source of hay. In McGovern’s model, these sites could

not exist as the vegetation line in his sample was too low at

only 200m a.s.l., whereas, in Qorlortup Ittinnera the vegetation

line was at 700m a.s.l. The Norse were pastoralists: good

pasturage, although not necessarily determinant, nor a complete

explanation, remains of great importance in selecting a site. The

Norse did not practice arable agriculture because they did not

have the plant varieties that would withstand the growing

season. The current Inuit favorites of rhubarb and potatoes are

late introductions (to Western Europe); the rhubarb came from

Siberia in the 17th century and potatoes arrived in the 16th

from South America, even now in Greenland they require hot

housing.

So what could explain this complex distribution of sites?

It is well to remember that, to medieval European eyes, there

are very few sources of fuel in Greenland for cooking or heating

purposes and the winters are notoriously cold. So what could

they have done to stay warm? They did not appear to use seal

oil except for lighting small lamps. The evidence from a midden

site in my sample area indicates that mammal bones were used

as fuel. This would have been very smoky and not particularly

warm. Other usual European sources of fuel such as peat or

charcoal are very limited in this area of Greenland. One

possible method Norse Greenlanders used to attain a warm

domicile is based on the site of the house relative to how much

sunlight the area received in winter. They had well-insulated

houses, with a meter thick skin of sod on the external walls and

roof, so if the interior ever did heat up it wouldn’t escape

outside.

Which criteria are the most important for selecting a site

for the Norse? The site selection criteria that seem most likely

are: 1) A low-lying, slightly sloping site with good drainage

(except for sæters), 2) Access to fresh water, 3) Good pasturage for sheep and cattle, 4) Good sunlight (and therefore

warmth) in winter with the possibility of low snow levels, 5)

Access to neighbors in all seasons.

How to test this idea? One of my tutors, Peter Halls,

had developed a computer model based on GIS and the physics

of solar exposure through the year for a sample area in

Tanzania. He suggested that, as I already had the sample area

mapped out in GIS, I should try his model as a comparison for

his equatorial sample. This worked so well that I was able to

find a new sæter the following summer by looking in areas that

should have had sites but none had yet been found. Obviously,

the Norse did choose large areas of the Eastern Settlement

based on the lushness of pasture available, but they selected

their house sites for how much sunlight was available to them

in winter. A house that stands in the sun is easier to keep

warm than one in the shade. The settlement density of a site

about one kilometer distant from its neighbors indicates that

the study area was highly prized by the Norse. It also

indicates that the area was the first settled by Erik the Red and

the last to be abandoned because such densities are not

commonly found in Norse Greenland, nor are there any other

regions with sites of such high status. The site selection

criteria listed above are found at the majority of sites within

the study area. What remains to be done is to test the model in

other parts of the North Atlantic to see if this pattern holds

true for other Norse communities.

 Site 534, an abandoned Norse farmstead, July 1995. Looking

due west , height of building is 1.63 metres.
ASC Newsletter 19

THE DEER STONE PROJECT 2003 FIELD REPORT

William W. Fitzhugh

The Smithsonian Arctic Studies Center conducted a three-week

investigation in the Muron - Darkhat region of northern Mongolia

in May and June, 2003, pursuing studies of archaeology, climate

history, and ethnology of the Tsaatan (Dukha) reindeer-herding

people whose existence is threatened by rapid social and

environmental change. The project has

explored issues of culture history and

environmental change, seeking to

understand the origins of northern

Mongolian cultures and their

relationships with other peoples of

China, Mongolia, and Siberia, as well as

their influence on more distant cultures,

including Scythians and Eskimos.

Staff schedules required that

the 2003 effort be split into two

components: an anthropological project

led by William Fitzhugh in May and

an ethno-botanical and environmental

project led by Paula DePriest in August.

Funding for the anthropological work

was supported by grants from the Trust

for Mutual Understanding, the SI/NMNH Robert Batemen Fund,

the National Museum of Natural History, and Arctic Studies

Center. Work was conducted in partnership with the University of

Pittsburgh, the National Museum of Mongolian History

(NMMH), and the Mongolian Academy of Sciences. The research

team included William W. Fitzhugh and Matthew Gallon of the

ASC; Bruno Frohlich of the NMNH Department of

Anthropology; Julie Singer,

who collected beetles for NMNH

Entomology; and University of

Pittsburgh honors geology

student Kevin Robinson and

biology student Scott Stark.

Mongolian researchers included

archaeologists Ochirkhuyag

Tseveendorj and Jamsranjav

Bayarsaikhan of NMMH;

ethnologist Ts. Ayush of

NMMH; geographer O.

Suhkbaatar of Chingis College

and the International Reindeer

Fund; and archaeologist T.

Sanjmiatov of the Mongolian

Academy of Sciences. Local

planning support was provided by the Santis Foundation’s

Dooloojin Orgilmaa with Namkhai Adiyabold serving as

primary field coordinator and translator.

Erkhel Deer Stones and Horse Head Burials

Field work began after the crew arrived in Muren on

May 29, where we received a warm welcome from the aimag

Deputy Governor O. Gunaashav. We had visited the deer stone

site west of Erkhel Lake for the past two seasons, and last year

conducted test excavations at the base of Deer Stone 5 in an

attempt to locate dating samples, recovering charcoal that dated to

2100 BP, about 500 years later than expected. This year we spent

nearly a week excavating the southwest quadrant of Deer Stone 4,

obtaining important results. From surface indications it is difficult

to interpret the distribution of the many rocks that surround the

deer stones, but when we began excavating most of these rocks

were found to be part of separate burial features containing

individual horse heads accompanied by neck vertebrae (usually

seven), with the horse head facing east.

Based on our observations at DS-4 it

appears that most deer stones are

surrounded by a series of these horse

head burials. Furthermore, in and around

these features we found pecking stones

whose edges were the same diameter as

the grooves in the deer stone engravings.

The association of pecking stones with

horse head burials suggests the deer

stone carvings were produced at this

location at the same time that the horses

were sacrificed and buried, and that dates

from the horse remains should also date

the deer stones. If this is confirmed by

future work, it will be a major breakthrough. Until now, the deer stone

carvings have been difficult to date by direct radiocarbon methods

and their age has been determined indirectly by art historical means

– by the styles of tools (daggers, axes, bows, etc) seen in the

carvings. This method has produced estimates of ca. 2500-2800

B.C., placing the carvings at the early end of the Scythian art

period. These dating and stylistic similarities have led Russian

experts and Esther Jacobson, an art historian who has worked

closely with these specialists, to

suggest that the Mongolian deer

stone art may be a prototype of

Scythian animal-style art, core

charcoal samples associated with

DS-4 produced a 2800 BP date.

Now we will be able to compare

this and other dates with the date

obtained from DS-5. Further work

at this site is needed to help pin

down the actual dates of the deer

stones and their associated

features.

The other important result

is that the deer stone horse head

features are similar or identical to

features found at burial mounds in

the vicinity of deer stone sites. Bruno and Matt’s survey data

illustrate clearly that these small horse-head features are found

along the southeast margins of the stone ‘fence’ that surrounds the

burial mound. Many of these mounds also have smaller oval

hearths or ‘altars’ located outside the ring of horse head mounds

that contain cremated bone of sheep, horse, and other animals.

Similar oval cremation features occur at the Erkhel deer stones

sites, outside the circle of horse head burials. If this pattern holds,

it suggests that the deer stone complexes closely parallel the

F I E L D W O R K

William Fitzhugh, Matt Gallon and

Ochirkhuyag Tseveendorj at the WAC-5

reception at NMNH (see p.30)

Deer Stones at Erkhel with anthropomorphic engravings of elk
ASC Newsletter 20

construction form of burial mounds. While the latter contain

human remains in a central mound crypt, the deer stones have no

human remains, but otherwise have similar patterns of horse head

burials and cremation hearths. This suggests that deer stones and

burial mounds are complimentary aspects of a mortuary system

which has two major expressions, one with a body and the other

without; it also seems likely now that burial mounds and deer

stone sites are contemporary or near-contemporary rituals rather

than palimpsests that develop over time as people utilize ‘sacred

ground’ for their own rituals. If we are able to confirm

concurrence, it will be possible to study burial mounds, deer

stones, and their associated features as related

aspects of a single late Bronze Age mortuary and

symbolic tradition.

Our work at Erkhel was graced by

superb weather and occasional fierce

thunderstorms, one of which blew away our

maps and nearly blew away our entire camp. We

were saved only by using the jeeps as

windbreaks and anchors for our large work tent.

During this time Kevin and Scott searched the

steppe environs for lakes suitable for coring, but

found none; all were too shallow or too hardbottomed to sample with their gear. While this

work progressed, Ayush and Sukhbaatar,

canvassing the countryside for information on

the ethnic history of the region, discovered that

this area had formerly been a boundary between

Mongol groups to the south and others more

closely related to the Tsaatan/Dukha to the

north. Expanding Mongol influence had gradually

transformed the local population into its current Mongol identity.

Soyö Excavations

Shifting north to Soyö in the West Darkhat, we set camp

on the terrace between the sharp-pointed Soyö (canine) Hill and

the Khugin-gol (Melody) river where we had found remains of a

microblade-bearing Neolithic site last year. We excavated test pits

across the terrace, isolating several productive areas for future

work, and dug two eroding hearths at the edge of the terrace. Last

year the eroding faces at these locations produced microblades,

blade cores, ceramics, bones, hearth rocks, and charcoal that dated

to ca. 1000 BP. These results were problematic, 4000 years too

late for Neolithic. This year we worked back into the dunecovered terrace, exposing these hearths horizontally and

discovered they contained two components: a Neolithic level

(with very crude cord-wrapped stick ceramics and large deposits

of tiny calcined bone fragments) a few centimeters below the 1000

BP horizon, and above that fire-cracked cobble hearths with wellpreserved bone and charcoal and well-made red-stained ceramics,

no lithic tools, and curious edge-ground discoid stones. Charcoal

and burned bone samples from the Neolithic level should clarify

the dates of these components, which we discovered were also

present in a blown-out portion of the terrace several hundred

meters east of our sites. A charcoal sample from a feature 3

Neolithic hearth produced a date of 5800 BP.

Tsaatan Spring Camp

The final phase of work was in the mountainous taiga to

the north, where we settled for a week with our West Darkhat

Tsaatan friends at their spring camp west of Tsaagan-nuur (White

lake). Previously we had visited them at their summer camp

northwest of Soyö. But we were a few weeks earlier this year, and

they had not moved to their summer camp, giving us a chance to

see what their life was like in a different season and location.

Unfortunately this meant that we could not work the

archaeological site we had tested last year, and our efforts to locate

new sites in the heavily bushed taiga and marshes were

unsuccessful. But we were able to learn more about the spring

camp cycle and observed reindeer subsistence and herding methods

in a different season. Most striking was the discovery that the

reindeer spring diet consists nearly exclusively of newly-leafed

shrub birch, which the reindeer strip from the

branches as though they were eating ice-cream

cones. Almost no lichen or other ground cover

was being consumed. Another interesting

observation is that the females are not milked at

all during this time and are allowed to give all of

their milk to the young. This leaves the human

diet without cheese and milk products, which we

found dominated the summer camp diet. Another

interesting observation was that the community

is much more dispersed in spring than in summer,

with one or two tipis in family-linked clusters

separated from others by a mile or more. This

apparently is necessary to provide the deer with

larger foraging range. Finally, we discovered that

wolves are a major menace to herders at this time

of year, when their young are learning to stalk. It

was a rare night that did not erupt in the howling

of watchdogs, followed by rifle-fire as herders

attempted to drive the predators off. Despite

these intrusions, the spring calving was very successful this year

and the herd has continued to grow, as it has for the past several

years.

While we were in the taiga we gathered information on

Tsaatan children who suffered from treatable medical conditions.

An effort organized by Santis Foundation had discovered that the

Save the Children Fund could offer these and other Mongolian

children with bone or tissue deformities treatment in hospitals in

the United States. Batsaya’s daughter, who has a hip malformation

that without care will eventually cripple her, was selected for

treatment this year

Kevin and Scott struck pay-dirt, in the small chain of

taiga lakes west of the Tsaatan camps. Guided by Sanjin, the

Tsaatan’s naturalist-par-excellence, their ungainly pack-trains

bristling with oars, core tubes, and an inflatable boat, bushwhacked their way into these lakes, and discovered excellent

sediments. Over the course of four days they assembled eleven

one-meter cores from four lakes and identified some as prospects

for future coring with long Livingston cores that might span the

Holocene era. Several of the cores had visible stratigraphy, and

upon inspection back home in the lab at Pittsburgh, more

stratigraphy and interesting features were noted. Kevin is expecting

these cores to produce interesting data on the last few thousand

years of climatic history, which we hope will have a bearing on

culture history and reindeer herding.

Note at publication:

Bilgun’s hip opperation took place in California this fall

and was a complete success. She took her first independent steps in

early December!

Batsaya, Wife, and Daughter Bilgun
ASC Newsletter 21

Bronze Age Burial Mounds

Mongolia is covered with burial mounds. Some are huge

and extensive and impossible to miss, and others, and most

likely most of them are barely identifiable and only recognized

by the trained archaeologist’ keen eye. It is unknown how many

mounds scatter the Mongolian landscape. It is also unknown

which time periods are represented with mound structures.

Mounds also known as khereksurs have been reported

extensively by Russian, Mongolian and more recently European

and American researchers. Some excavations have been

completed although little scientific data has been published.

Our time in the field was short, thus we had to limit our

objectives and focus on smaller and well-defined areas and use

fast and efficient data collection including GPS, Total Stations,

and digital photography. We decided on a limited data collection

thus focusing on geographical location and elevation, horizontal

distribution, density, size and shape variation and possibly

description of burial contents as observed in cases where the

tombs had been either excavated by professionals or robbed.

We limited our search to cover smaller selected areas in three

regions: (1) Soyo, (2) Ushkin Uver, and (3) Erkhel Lake. One

of our objectives was to apply modern and high precision

surveying equipment which in this case included Global

Positioning Systems. All data was processed in the field by

using a combination of lap-top

computers, generators and battery

power. We obtained ranges of precision

from 5 meters (for hand-held units) to

better than two centimeters (less than

one inch) using a Base/Rover combination of Ashtech/Magellan Locus GPS

units.

We recorded more than 300

mounds using GPS equipment and

probably around 100 to 150 additional

mounds found in areas where we did

not have the time to stop and do

accurate recordings. We found that

most of the mounds are located on hills

facing the South, Southwest and Southeast. The larger mounds

are found on the flat land facing the southern hills and medium

size and smaller mounds are located on the hill sides possibly

getting smaller as you climb higher toward the top of the hills.

There is some variation of course. In a few cases we did find

larger mounds in ‘saddles’ between hills and smaller mounds at

lower levels. In four we found some geographical association

between deer stones and burial mounds. This was clearly the

case at Erkhel Lake were Bill Fitzhugh did some excavations

and at Ushkin Uver where Japanese teams have been excavating

recently. However, two small deer stone sites were found in the

Soyo area although both of a much smaller number when

compared to the first two. Also, in both cases we found signs of

clandestine excavations which may have resulted in the removal

of some of the better looking stones. Although the connection

between the deer stone monuments and the burial mounds have

not yet been established, some finds may suggest that such a

connection may be proven to exist (see Bill’s article).

The burial mounds ranges in size from a few meters in

diameter to more than hundred meters. A majority of the

mounds include a centrally-located mound of rocks surrounded

by a circular ring-wall or a squared wall. At this time we have

SURVEYING AND EXCAVATING BRONZE AGE

BURIAL MOUNDS AND 20TH CENTURY MASS

BURIALS IN MONGOLIA.

By Bruno Frohlich(1), Matt Gallon(2), and David Hunt(1)

(1)Department of Anthropology, Smithsonian Institution

(2)Department of Anthropology, University of Michigan

Introduction

This year resulted in two visits to Mongolia. Both of them in

association with the ASC and nicely covered under Bill

Fitzhugh’s administrative umbrella. The first visit in May -

June focused on Bruno Frohlich’s and Matt Gallon’s

surveying of Bronze Age burial mounds around the town of

Muron, Lake Erkhel and in the Soyo area. The second visit in

September – October by Bruno and David Hunt was on an

invitation from the Mongolian Academy of Sciences helping the

Institute of Archaeology survey, evaluate and excavate newly

identified mass burials at Hambiin Ovoo outside Ulaanbaator.

Both our visits were administratively and economically

supported by ‘The Deer Stone Project’ directed by Bill

Fitzhugh, with funds from the Natural History Museum’s CT

Laboratory, and private funds. We

enjoyed the company of many new

friends both in the field and in

Ulaanbaatar including Naraa

Bazarsad (physical anthropologist

and our main supporter and collaborator in Mongolia), T. Galbaatar

(President of the Mongolian Academy

of Sciences), D. Tseveendorj (Director of the Institute of Archaeology), B.

Enkhtuvshin (Vice-President of the

Mongolian Academy of Sciences), S.

Idshinnorov (Director of the National

Museum of Mongolian History), J.

Batsuuri (Director of the Mongol

Tolbo Association), and Lama G. Purevbat (Director of the

Mongolian Traditional Cultural Art Center at the Gandan

Tekchenlin Monastery). Our work made us appreciate the hard

work, interest and support of researchers, academics, and

students, including J. Bayarsaikhan and T. Ayush, both of the

National Museum of Mongolian History, and Erdene

Batshatar, Tsend Amgalantugs (Togso), Enhtor Enkhtur

(Turo), and Batsukh Dunburee all of the Institute of Archaeology. Kevin Robinson and Scott Stark added a fresh and

friendly component in our research by sharing their experience

with sediment core drilling for the study of late Holocene

climatical variations. Also, Julie Singer who collected insects,

mostly beetles, for our museum’s entomology department

assisted us during the mound surveys with data recording and

photography. During our second visit we had the great pleasure

to collaborate with the American Embassy in Ulaanbaatar

visiting and discussing our projects with Ambassador Pamela

Slutz and Armanda Morrow (visiting from the State Department). Nancy Tokola from the embassy joined our team during

the second visit as a pathologist adding clinical pathological

descriptions of finds from the mass burial at Hambiin Ovoo.

Matt Gallon and Bruno Frohlich at work
ASC Newsletter 22

later time and that the Mongolian Academy of Sciences would

coordinate this with the Gandan Monastery and let us know

when they were ready to proceed. This occurred a few months

later and resulted in the visit of Bruno (assisted by David

Hunt) working for almost three weeks on the mass burial at

Hambiin Ovoo outside Ulaanbaatar during September and the

beginning of October month this year.

The mass burial had been found at Hambiin Ovoo

earlier this year by construction workers and because of the

obvious finds of Buddhist monk clothing and other similar

objects the Lamas at the nearby Gandan monastery were

notified. It became Lama Purevbat’s job to retrieve as many

bodies as possible and apply Buddhist ceremonies and burial

practices. Lama Purevbat did a good job on this. He retrieved

about 600 bodies as counted by the number of crania and

femora. His method included the removal of bodies by the use

of construction equipment, and cremating the remains at the site

of the findings. Lama Purevbat kept around 80 skulls and some

post cranial material in a small building within the Gandan

monastery as proof of the killings. We managed to get an

introductory view of the bodies. About 70 out of the 80 crania

included two suspicious holes most likely depicting projectile

entry and exit holes caused by the use of firearms in the

execution of the victims. The projectile caliber appeared to be

around 7.6 mm and in a few cases 9 mm. In the majority of the

cases, the individual was executed by firing a gun directed at the

lower right part of the head (occipital). The power of the

gunshot resulted in an exit of the projectile at the front of the

head (upper frontal bone) and massive fractures of cranial bones

especially around the exit hole. Some of the finds associated

with the bodies strongly suggested that the executed individuals

all were Buddhist monks and some of the artifacts/objects could

be dated to between 1930 and 1940. Most likely, the bodies

derive from mass executions carried out by the Mongolian

Stalinist regime between 1937 and 1939. It is possible that this

was more than one mass burial, leaving thousands of human

bones scattered all over the place. Therefore the removal of one

bone most often resulted in the appearance of two new ones. In

terms of volume, the remains collected from the surface added

up to between three and five cubic meters (yards) of bones.

We decided to make a few test pits, all measuring one by

one meter. All yielded human remains. It was impossible, however,

to evaluate the degree of articulation because of the destruction of

the original surfaces and because we were probably dealing with

secondary deposits resulting from the removal of remains from

earlier mass burials while preparing for newer mass burials. After

obtaining a tentative idea about what was going on at the site we

started excavating a four meter by five and a half meter square. In

forensic parlance we talk about a ‘modified archaeological

technique’ which has the purpose of satisfying the archaeological

methodology as much as possible and also produce the speed and

accuracy most often necessary in forensic work and at the same

time securing good and reliable evidence.

Our finds yielded several layers of human bodies of

which all skulls, except for one, depicted an execution style similar

to those recently reported by other forensic teams in Eastern

Europe. In general we concluded on the following reconstruction

on how the executions and interments took place: the person was

brought to the site of burial (pit already been excavated or

excavated by the victim before execution), forced to kneel down at

the border of the burial pit and shot in the back of the head

not completed all the analysis. Tentative results should give

some ideas about the variation: We divided the mounds into

three classes based on location and elevation: on low and flat

land (25%), on lower parts of hills (21%), and on medium to

high on hills (54%). More than 75% of the larger mounds are

found on flat land and a majority of the smaller mounds are

found at higher elevations. Fifty eight percent of mounds

include a circular ring-wall and 42% include a squared complex

of walls surrounding the mound. Some of the medium and larger

size mounds include external features such as smaller mounds

and rings of stones most often located in straight lines to the

South of the ring-walls or, when the number of such external

features are high they will surround the basic mound architecture. We found that 30% of the mounds include external mounds

ranging from one single unit to as many as 94. We also found

that only eight percent of the mounds include smaller additional

rings of stones external to the ring-walls and externally to the

external mound structures. Only in one case do we find circular

rings of stones but no external mounds, thus it may be concluded that presence of external rings of stones is highly

correlated with the presence of external mounds. We found that

the circular ring-wall surrounding the centrally located burial

mound is always depicted as a perfect circle. We also found

that the additional structures such as smaller mounds and rings

not always depict perfect circles but are very irregular. Smaller

burial mounds do not have these external structures and it is

obvious that the frequency of external structures increases with

increasing size of the general mound structure.

We did not have the time to carry out any excavations.

However, increased amount of robbery has resulted in many

mounds being destroyed by looting. The excavators are not very

experienced, thus the destructions are enormous. They have not

yet learned to use stratigraphy and changes in soils to evaluate

and narrow down the excavations. During the short time we

spend at Soyo we saw a new generation of tomb robbers in

action, and it is obvious that the clandestine excavations are

becoming more and more advanced and especially better

organized. By observing the results from the thieves and from

some ‘professional’ archaeologists we did verify that all

centrally mounds included some remains which could be

identified as human. In a few cases we found that external

structures were either empty or included horse skeletons, most

often crania, mandibles, and a few cervical vertebrae. It is

impossible to establish any deductions from such data,

however. It is known, however, that the burial of horse remains

is an important factor and can be found in most excavated

mounds. Such remains have also been proved to be associated

with the deer stone. This does not necessarily ‘connect’ the

two structures.

Mass Burials

 A fascinating introduction to Buddhist mortuary

practices and Buddhist treatment of human remains was given

to me (BF) by Lama Purevbat. We viewed about 80 bodies

which had not been cremated and found that all of them had

entry and exit openings in the crania strongly suggesting that

they had been executed. It was decided that a new exploration

and excavation of the mass burials should be completed at a
ASC Newsletter 23

ST. LAWRENCE GATEWAYS PROJECT: 2002-2003

FIELD REPORT

 By William W. Fitzhugh

Since our last newsletter we have conducted two more field

seasons on the Gateways Project on Quebec’s Lower North Shore

(LNS). Our initial 2001 survey covered the region from the

Mingan Islands to the Strait of Belle Isle (Fitzhugh 2001), while

2002/3 research concentrated on the region between Harrington

Harbor and La Tabatiere (Fitzhugh and Gallon 2002). Project

goals include (1) exploring a little-known region; (2) identifying

local Maritime Archaic and later Indian sites; (3) defining the

western limits of Dorset Paleoeskimo and historic Inuit (Eskimo)

cultures; (4) identifying trade and culture contacts; (5) searching

for early European (Viking, Basque, and later) European sites; and

(6) studying European-indigenous contact. Research to date has

contributed results in each of these areas. To date more than fifty

sites have been located and studied. Full reports on 2001, 2002,

and 2003, field activities have been submitted to the Ministry of

Culture and Communication, Government of Quebec, together

with artifact catalogs prepared by Anja Herzog of Laval University. The collections obtained are housed at the Quebec Archaeological Repository.

Approaches and Departures

In 2002 we spent several days working at Maritime

Archaic sites on Petit Mécatina Island from our anchorage at the

eastern end of Havre de la Croix, a former cod-fishing harbor.

Mapping and excavation of the PM-1 (EdBt-1) site with its

28m long boulder structure took several days, during which we also

located a second longhouse site, Petit Mécatina 4 (EdBt-4), which we

mapped but did not fully excavate. After finishing work at PM-1 we

shifted east to the Hare Harbor Basque site (EdBt-3). Mapping and

testing of this site occupied the better part of a week. During this

period we were joined by General and Mrs. Raymond E. Mason

Jr., who helped sponsor the project

and who visited Harrington and our

sites from Amy Evans’ Bed and

Breakfast, a sumptuous retreat of

hospitality.

As people became familiar

with our work they began bringing old

heirlooms for us to inspect, including a

fine 18th c. iron axe now owned by

Larry Ransom of Harrington, found

by his grandfather near Chevery. We

also were shown two Late Maritime

Archaic ground slate spear points, one

of which (owned by Lloyd Jones) had

been recovered from a drag net off

south of Petit Mécatina, suggesting

that these implements were used for

hunting marine mammals (probably

seals), and another found by Wilson

Evans in his deceased father’s toolbox,

without identification as to origin.

Our work in 2003 was similar, concentrating on testing

General and Mrs. Mason at

Hare Harbor

resulting in an entry opening in the lower left occipital bone and

an exit opening in the frontal bone.

Our time was limited, thus we could not complete the

excavation and retrieval of all the bodies known to be located in

this specific area. This was expected, since our visit was

primary for the purpose of identifying if any bodies were left in

this specific area, to estimate the horizontal distribution of the

mass burial site or sites, and to introduce forensic techniques to

our Mongolian colleagues. The remains which had not been

removed were all covered up, and later it will be decided by the

Mongolian Government if they want us to continue this

investigation.

Our tentative conclusion is based on the initial

analysis and description of the human remains and also on the

finds of associated objects such as clothes (mostly similar to

items used by Buddhist monks), Russian artifacts such as metal

cups, and other objects. Several gun casings were identified as

being of German origin although a few definitely were of

Russian origin. We have, so far, only found adult males although

some could be older teen-agers. This may be consistent with a

mass burial of Buddhist monks. However, our sample size is

not adequate to derive to a full conclusion on this issue. The

data obtained from analyzing the casings will be studied by

weapon experts at the Henry C. Lee Institute of Forensic

Sciences at the end of October 2003. Also, one cranium and

mandible were brought to the Smithsonian Institution for

detailed analysis including x-rays and CT scanning.

The identified mass burial or mass burials are not an

isolated case. Our survey found that an area covering at least

600 meters in length and about 100 meters in width may have

been used for executions and burials of anything ranging from a

single individual to several hundreds, or maybe thousands of

people. Additionally, the Hambiin Ovoo area is only one

reported place in Mongolia with mass burials. We are told that

similar burials are to be found in Dornod (north-eastern

Mongolia) mostly including murdered Buriats, In Ulaangour

(northwestern Mongolia), Khovssol (northern Mongolia),

Bayankhongor (central-southern Mongolia), Tsetserleg (central

Mongolia) and at Shar Khad (close to Hambiin Ovoo). It is

believed that investigations of all these places and others,

unknown to us will show that the 30,000 number of individuals

known to have been murdered is a very conservative number.

All the human remains and associated objects collected

during our two week investigation were transported to the

Institute of Archaeology. Before we left Mongolia we spent

some time helping the Institute organizing the newly arrived

skeletal collections. We obtained excellent computer boxes from

the U.S. Embassy and with David’s great expertise we had a small

computerized collection management system up running within a

few days. This was combined with an in-depth training in

recording forensic data such as sex, age at death, metric and nonmetric data, and in some cases paleopathology. We used

recording forms developed by Doug Owsley’s laboratory at our

department in Washington and relied on David’ expertise in doing

the best possible job. We had the pleasure of working with some

very intelligent, very enthusiastic people. Bakzuk, Turo,

Tukzo, and Erdene from the Institute of Archaeology, and

Bayaraa from the National Museum of Mongolian History were

all great assistants and supporters.
ASC Newsletter 24

the Hare Harbor site, and during several weeks of the finest

weather I have seen on the LNS we opened a Basque workshop

floor, tested more Maritime Archaic sites, and excavated a small

Groswater seal-hunting camp at Seal Net Point near Cape

Whittle. With the assistance of Harrington volunteers Christine and Wilson Evans, Helen Morency, and Georgie

Maurice we completed the workshop excavation and were

rewarded twice over when Wilson located a 19th C. schooner

anchor in the cove adjacent to the Basque land site. While

investigating the anchor, Wilson found the bottom strewn with

Basque roof tiles, cut timbers, whale bones, and pottery vessels

that were identical to those we had been finding at the land site.

Apparently we not only had a fascinating late Basque land site

but a potentially rich underwater deposit that calls for a full

underwater survey that might include boats and other materials!

While en route to Newfoundland in late August, 2003,

we stopped for a day in the St.

Augustine region, where we met

Nicholas Shattler, who had reported

several sites and finds to us by email last

spring. Nick joined us for a brief survey

among the outer islands. The rest of our

return voyage was spectacular for its

calm, beautiful weather. Arriving at Long

Island a few days early gave us a chance

to inspect some of the quarries, caves,

and living sites where Beothuk remains

had been discovered here in early days.

Selected Site Reports

Petit Mécatina 1 (EdBt-1):

Our 2002 work at this longhouse sites

was exciting, as it is the only Maritime Archaic dwelling site

known south of the central Labrador coast. Over the course of

several days we mapped the site and excavated two of the three

dwelling structures (House 1 and House 2). The structures are in

the middle of the highest boulder beach at the site. The largest of

the structures (H1), measuring 28.5m long and 6-8m wide (outside

dimensions), follows the boulder beach crest and consists of five

oval or sub-rectangular rooms or floors each measuring ca. 2.5-

3.0m by 4m. The floors were created by

removing beach rocks down to a depth of ca.

50cm. The wall foundations are slightly

mounded and about 1.0-1.5m wide, and were

made from cobbles cleared from the floors. At

the center of each room a low mound of rocks

50-75cm in diameter and about 10-15cm higher

than the surrounding floor probably functioned

as a hearth, although no fire-cracked rocks were

found.

Unlike the prolific stone tool

assemblages from Labrador MA houses, PM-1

produced little cultural material other than a

distal fragment of a faceted ground slate celt, a

few flakes of flaked rhyolite, a quartzite

grindstone, utilized flakes of quartz, and a

possible quartzite biface preform base. The faceted celt is

typologically similar to Rattlers Bight and Port au Choix celts and

probably dates ca. 3500-4000 B.P.

We also excavated portions of House 2 and House 3,

Hare Harbor-1, Basque excavation

Beads found in Hare Harbor-1

excavation (Courtesy of J-F

Moreau)

which appeared to be smaller versions of longhouse dwellings.

House 2 is 18m long and had three rectangular rooms, each of

different sizes: R1, 7x4m; R2, 2.5x4m; and R3, 3x3m. No artifact

finds were recovered. Three conical pits, each about 1.75m in

diameter and 75cm deep, within a meter of the walls of H3 and H1,

appear to have been food caches.

Petit Mécatina 4 (EdBt-4): About 1.5 km east of the

PM-1 we found another site closely resembling PM-1. The deepest

of the habitation structures, H1, is an oval or sub-rectangular

structure with internal dimensions of 7x4m and external wall

dimensions of 10x7.5m, with a cache outside its southwest wall.

Like PM-1 H-3, the bowl-like interior of this structure had no

discernible internal features, and produced similar finds: a few slate

flakes and the exhausted re-flaked core of a slate celt. House 2 lay

several meters south of H1 and had a cache outside its northwestern

corner. The floors of the four rooms or

segments of this structure had not been

excavated below grade, making its wall

boundaries indistinct, and there was no

indication of hearth mounds or

transverse platforms. Nevertheless, PM4 H1 rooms are contiguous, aligned with

the beach front, and similar in size and

shape, and in these respects follow the

pattern known from other Maritime

Archaic structures at PM-1 and in

Labrador.

Hare Harbor 1 (EdBt-3): This

site’s historical important is wellmatched by its dramatic physical setting

at the base of a huge cliff whose inslanting lower wall creates a 100-meter long shelter ranging from 5-

10 m deep. Some of this shelter is cluttered with rock-fall, but

much is accessible, and fragments of tile, iron spikes, charcoal, and

bone from two test pits excavated at the drip-line suggest the

Basque may have erected structures inside the dry zone.

Access from the harbor is by a steep grass-covered bank.

Test pits excavated at the top of the bank revealed a thin culture

layer with tile fragments, small spikes, small amounts of ceramic,

and charcoal. One pit contained faience or majolica earthenware

fragments with glazed decoration, a fluted

earthenware strap handle, large quantities of

charcoal, and several clay pipe stem fragments.

On the north side of the cove the land rises

steeply to the cliff in a jumble of huge blocks

that separated from the cliff face in a massive

rock-fall. Roof tiles pinned below the fallen

blocks raise the possibility that this portion of

the site received a catastrophic blow that may

have contributed to its abandonment.

In 2002 we produced a detailed map,

searched unsuccessfully for ovens, excavated

new test pits, and opened a 40-square meter

trench in Area 1. Here we found a a structure

with a rough slab rock floor. The black, humusrich soil above this floor contained large amounts of roof tile (some

lightly glazed), large numbers of iron spikes ranging in size from

small nails to heavy spikes 25cm in length, shards of thick dark

bottle glass, extremely thin flat and curved glass fragments, highly-
ASC Newsletter 25

fired grey stoneware in a variety of vessel shapes, soft

earthenware, large amounts of charcoal, and a chunk of beeswax.

No wood or bone remains were found, although charcoal was

present in large quantity. Among the peculiar finds was a lump

of wax and a corner fragment of a blubber-encrusted Inuit

soapstone lamp.

Our work this past summer confirmed much of the

interpretation from the previous season and provided a clearer

picture of activities in the Area 1 structure. Opening the area to

the limits of its 8-by-8 square meter floor, we recovered an

excellent sample of grey stoneware vessels of several types,

earthenware with fluted strap handles and stamped panel

decoration; a variety of glass bottles and fine glassware; large

and small iron spikes, pipe-like fragments, a large-headed iron

pin resembling a rudder pintle, and a tanged iron spear point.

Charcoal was abundant everywhere in large quantities, but there

was no evidence of smelting or smithing; however lead sheet and

melted lead sprue are present. A slab-lined sunken chamber 30

cm below the structure floor covered with small beach cobbles

suggested the possibility that the structure may have served as a

bath-house with a hot-rock steam generator.

We also found scattered fragments of

baleen. However, the most interesting finds

were a small number of glass beads of 5 or 6

different types, a large variety of clay pipe

stems and bowls, and the broken end of an

Inuit soapstone cooking pot with singlegrooved rim decoration. Pipes, beads, Inuit

soapstone, baleen, and the continued

absence blubber rendering facilities raise

interesting new questions vis-a-vis other

Basque sites from the Straits and Gulf.

The highlight of the 2003 work

was the discovery of an underwater Basque

component in the site’s landing area.

Although only briefly inspected, we

recovered fragments of roof tile, nearlywhole earthenware vessels with broad strap-handles and

stamped panel decoration like that found in the land site, pieces

of whale bone, cut timber, and ballast stone. We surmise that

these materials accumulated as detritus from the land operation,

fragments of vessels, and remains of roof tile and ceramics that

had been dumped after breakage during the sea-crossing.

The Petit Mécatina site seems to have been a 17th C.

Basque operation of modest size with work shops, middens,

and activity areas distributed over 500-1000 square meters of

land and an untold area of the adjacent sea floor. While furnaces

and blubber-stained remains have not been located, baleen and

whale bones are present in small quantities. Organic remains

other than charcoal are rare, but the artifact inventory includes a

variety of plain, stoneware, and decorated, glazed ceramics; iron

spikes, spears, and tool fragments; other types of metal goods

like lead; and glass beads and smoking pipes. Fragments of an

Inuit oil lamp and a rectangular cooking pot indicate contact

with or presence of Labrador Inuit whose presence in the years

around 1600 extended at least as far south as Blanc Sablon. Such

artifacts are normally associated with Inuit women.

Interestingly, residents of the nearby village of Tete-a-la-Baleine

recall that Hare Harbor was once known as L’Anse aux

Esquimaux. One wonders if there might have been an Inuit

woman who served as custodian of our Basque ‘bath-house’.

Work to date has generated the following tentative conclusions:

Site Distribution:

Surveys to date have produced evidence of nearly fifty new

sites, dating from ca. 7000 B.P. to the present. Surprisingly, research

in the Mingan Islands produced little new evidence of prehistoric

occupation, suggesting that these islands were occupied sporadically

and less intensely than the adjacent mainland, where some sites

contain large quantities of Ramah chert, dramatically exemplified by

the Stubbert Cache from Kegashka.

Evidence of prehistoric and historic settlement increases

markedly between Baie Mouton and Blanc Sablon. In part, this

results from the more open, less forested terrain in the eastern LNS

region; but it may also be attributed to the greater concentration of

maritime resources available as one approaches the Strait of Belle

Isle. We located five prehistoric sites in Baie Mouton (four of Early

Maritime Archaic affiliation, at elevations of 30-51 m), while raised

beaches in the 10-14m range at Pointe des Belles Amours contained

post-Maritime Archaic boulder pit dwellings probably dating to ca.

3500-1500 B.P. Paleoeskimo finds indicate that both Groswater and

Dorset peoples occupied the LNS between Cape

Whittle and Blanc Sablon. So far we have found no

evidence of Thule or historic Inuit sites or stone

monuments (grave cairns, fox traps, tent rings),

apart from the Inuit soapstone finds at Petit

Mécatina.

Early/Middle Maritime Archaic: Mouton Bay

3 site provided only modest information about the

early phase of this culture period, in part because

this and other sites in the area have been surfacecollected for many years by local residents.

Nevertheless careful inspection of the eroded

remains and excavation of in situ materials

indicates a low frequency of diagnostic finds

(scarpers, bifaces, ground slate) and an absence of

hearth deposits and interpretable settlement data.

Mécatina Complex: Work at Petit Mécatina 1 and 4, at

Pointe des Belles Amours 1, and at Gros Mécatina 2 are beginning to

provide a consistent picture of a LNS Late Maritime Archaic culture

that differs from Newfoundland and Labrador MA sites and can be

provisionally designated the Mécatina complex. All four sites share

similar types of multi-segment rooms, low rubble walls, shallow

interior room floors, and a tendency for lineal segment agglomeration

within a single ‘longhouse’ type structure. PM1 and 4 both have 4-5

segment dwelling units located adjacent to smaller oval structures

with a single large room excavated a meter or more below grade, with

cache pits near their outer walls. While this type of large single-room

pithouse is not present at PBA-1, the PBA-1 rooms have similar

construction, shape, size and suggestions of a central hearth/room

divider. Slate and quartz flakes are present in small quantities at both

PM-1 and PBA-1, but finished tools are scarce. These sites and PM4 are located on beaches that were available during the Maritime

Archaic period, and similar sites and structures are not found on

lower beaches such as Belles Amour Peninsula (EiBi-7), which we

suspect are later in time. Chronological correspondence between

Mécatina complex components also exists, albeit tenuously, since the

LMA style celt at PM-1 should date to the period indicated by the

3930+/-90 PB radiocarbon date from PMA-1. Further, each of these

sites exist in outer coast environments and have caches that suggests

Ceramics from underwater

survey of Hare Harbor
ASC Newsletter 26

these locations were occupied when sea mammals – most probably

harp seals – were available in quantity. Hence, spring or fall

seasonality is more likely than summer or winter.

The closest comparison with Mécatina complex is found

at Aillik West and Aillik 2 in central Labrador. Like Mécatina,

Aillik West has longhouse structures with two or three rectangular

4x6m segments excavated slightly below grade on barren shingle

beaches, with low rubble walls and room dividers and central

hearths. While the dating of the Aillik West structures is not

precise, ranging from 5200-3500 B.P., Mécatina and West Aillik

sites share similar crude and apparently impoverished technology,

poor quality lithic materials, geographical settings that suggest

spring or fall seasonality, and similar site settlement patterns with

pit caches. Similarities also exist with the intermediate 3-5 segment

houses of the Aillik 2 series. Uncertainties exist for both sets of

sites as to their relationship to the more common type of Middle

and Late MA longhouse sites, most of which are found on sandy

rather than on rocky beaches, are often larger and are presumed to

be multi-family summer camps, and contain large amounts of

finely-crafted lithic tools, exotic lithics, and sometimes burial or

ceremonial components. Such features, while not evident at

Mécatina complex sites, are known for the LNS area at La

Tabatière and other locations, and appear to date to the Late MA

period. This raises interesting questions about seasonality,

resource scarcity, and settlement pattern variability within the

Middle/Late MA period of the LNS and whether MA groups

occupying the western fringe of their culture area were

significantly different from those occupying Newfoundland and

Labrador, where great resource abundance may have encouraged

greater technological, social, and demographic development.

Basque and later European Settlement: Our second

major accomplishment has been identification of a significant late

17th C. Basque presence on the central portion of the LNS.

Although we have not fully resolved the issue, the absence of

blubber-rendering facilities suggests that Hare Harbor may have

been a baleen-hunting, fishing, and trading site. Recovery of a Inuit

soapstone lamp and pot fragments raises questions about an Inuit

presence, and the presence of glass beads and clay pipe fragments

may be important chronological and functional markers suggesting

a new economic focus on trade and native contact. Records suggest

that Hare Harbor may be the site known on Basque maps as

‘Babaçula’ or ‘Petit Canada’. With few Basques sites known for

this period on the LNS, Hare Harbor may offer information on

changing Basque economy, environmental conditions, and contacts

with the Native groups for fishing, trapping, and trade, which are

likely to have become important concerns for Basque

entrepreneurs by 1600 AD. The newly-discovered underwater site

at Hare Harbor may hold special surprises to clarify these and

other issues.

Finally, the discovery of several later European sites

dating from the 17th to early 20th C. at Petit Mécatina, Boulet

Harbor, and Chécatica provide insight into later European

settlement of this region. These components need further testing to

determine their precise dating and function, but each offers

interesting and different research potential. Future work will

elucidate cultural and historical sequences and the changing conduct

of the seasonal sealing economy; study of these sites will also

reveal changing political and demographic pressures as Europeans

began to appropriate LNS resources from Native groups and to

define their roles as the dominant traders and marine zone

exploiters. Such studies will help document the long and relatively

unstudied history of European-Native relations in the St.

Lawrence ‘gateway’ region.

Acknowledgments

The 2002 and 2003 field projects were supported by permits from

the Ministry of Culture and Communication. We thank Gilles

Samson, Anne-Marie Balac, and Claudine Giroux for their

assistance. These projects could not have been accomplished

without the generosity of Major General and Mrs. Raymond

Mason of Columbus, Ohio, and of Mrs. Anina Glaize of

Winchester, Virginia. Both years, Perry Colbourne of Lushes

Bight, Newfoundland, piloted the Pitsiulak, assisted by Cristie

Boone, who also performed duty as an archaeological field crew

member. Other crew in 2002 included Matthew Gallon, Alyssa

Fisher, and Anja Herzog. Will Richard recorded the project

photographically and prepared a website on our joint work

(www.wrichphoto.com) and at the ASC site (www.mnh.si.edu/

arctic/gateways). The Gateways 2003 field crew included Cristie

Boone, Christie Leece, Helena Sharp, Warren and Andrew

Hofstra, with enthusiastic volunteer help from Christina and

Wilson Evans, Georgie Maurice, and Helen Morency, and with

Will Richard again providing photographic coverage. In

Harrington we were assisted by Mayor Paul Rowsell, Keith

Rowsell, Amy Evans, the Fish Coop, and many other residents.

We also thank the Colbourne family of Lushes Bight for their

warm hospitality, as well as Boyce Roberts of Quirpon, and Gina

Nordhof of L’Anse aux Meadows. Matthew Gallon shot in the

PM-1 and HH-1 site maps in 2002 and prepared most of the

illustrations for the 2002 field report. Anja Herzog identified and

catalogued the collections.

ARCTIC STUDIES CENTER’S LABRADOR

INITIATIVES, 2003

By Stephen Loring

The summer of 2003 marked the fifth field season for the

Central Coast of Labrador Community Archaeology Project, a

long-term research collaboration between the community of

Makkovik (including the local historical society and it’s White

Elephant Museum and the J. C. Erhardt School), the Arctic

Studies Center and Brown University. The Central Coast of

Labrador Community Archaeology Project integrates highschool curriculum development and local heritage concerns with

archaeological fieldwork at the mid-18th century Labrador Inuit

village site at Adlavik Harbour (GgBq-1). Project co-directors

Stephen Loring and Leah Rosenmeier (Brown University

PhD candidate and the Confederacy of Mainland Mi’kmaq)

spent the latter part of July and much of August conducting

fieldwork with a team of four Inuit students from Makkovik.

When it was occupied, ca. 1750, the site at Adlavik Harbour

was situated about half way along the Labrador coast between

the French and English fishing stations in southern Labrador

and Newfoundland and the Thule Inuit whaling villages

scattered about the north coast.

 During the 2003 fieldseason archaeological veterans Erin

Andersen and Jillian Mitchell welcomed newcomers Julia

Ford and Jason Voisey to the vagaries of life on Adlavik
ASC Newsletter 27

ment to promoting cultural heritage initiatives in Labrador. In

addition to the museum exhibition we have been busy developing school curriculum materials on archaeology which includes a

small book about the site. As yet untitled and modeled in part

on Bob McGhee’s The Burial at L’Anse Armour the book

attempts to put a human face on the past with a story of what

life might have been like for the inhabitants of the sod-houses at

Adlavik around two hundred and fifty years ago. Aimed at a

Grade-8 audience the story, presented in the voice of an Inuit

hunter reflecting on the memories of his childhood, seeks to

incorporate as many aspects of the archaeological site (specific

artifacts, aspects of the physical layout of the houses, the local

environment) as possible and weave them into the story of a

late winter adventure on the ice. Following the narrative is a

short descriptive essay on the actual site with archaeological

drawings and plans presenting the data on which the story was

based. The first part of the book features a series of fabulous

drawings by Cindy Robbins of Forteau, Labrador. A significant

portion of this publication and curriculum development

materials has been funded by a grant we received from the

International Grenfell Association and from Newfoundland’s

REDAS (Regional Economic Development and Schools)

program. Joan Andersen in Makkovik and Tim Borlase, the

Director of Memorial University’s Labrador Institute in Goose

Bay are an integral part of the team working on this project.

A STUDENT’S PERSPECTIVE

By Erin Andersen

The first time I heard of the dig out

at Adlavik was about five years

ago. Steve Loring and Leah

Rosenmeier came into my school

in Makkovik, Labrador and did a

presentation for us about archaeology. It was not until two years

later, in late June of 2001, that I

first spoke to Leah about working

for them. The way it all went down

was pretty simple. She asked if I

wanted a job, I said I did and I was

hired. At the time I could have

never guessed what accepting that

job would mean for me.

When I reminisce about my three summers in the field, I

get a nice, content feeling. Like I just ate something with a lot

of substance like mashed potatoes and gravy. Going out the

first time, I was really nervous. Having never even camped out

before, I had no idea what to expect once we got there. I know

that people have gone farther then this, for longer periods of

time and in the worst of conditions. But for me, going off like

this was a huge thing. It wasn’t like walking down the road and

looking at the hills way off in the distance. You were no longer

admiring nature from the outside but became a part of it. It was

just the ocean, a few islands, and the crew. We were completely

alone, but never lonely. For a time, we were a world unto

ourselves. A world I always came back from revitalized,

refreshed and ready to take on the challenges in this one. When

you are standing on the edge of a cliff, and everything as far as

you can see is absolutely perfect and beautiful, it is impossible

Julia Ford excavating an 18th century walrus skull

in House-4 at Adlavik Harbour

Island. The team completed excavation of the large communal

house structure (House-1), further sampled the midden in front

of House-2 and partially excavated a newly recognized feature;

House-4. Previous field-seasons had focused on excavations in

House-1 as well as in the House-1 and House-3 middens so that

with the House-4 excavations of this year a fairly substantial

and representative portion of the site has been excavated. The

preservation in House-4 was excellent and over 100 kgs of

faunal remains – principally seal, but also polar bear, black

bear, caribou and walrus – and a nearly equal amount of mussel

shell, were recovered. The faunal material is being analyzed by

Leah Rosenmeier and Sarah Lansing (Michigan State

University).

Prior to our fieldwork it was hypothesized that Adlavik

Harbour’s strategic location most likely meant that the families

who lived there could have served as middlemen or entrepreneurs in the emerging global capitalist system by serving as a

conduit by which Inuit resources –baleen, ivory, seal and whale

oil, furs, feathers and fish– could be exchanged for European

products and raw materials. However, the artifact assemblage

lacks many of the expected material correlates of an emerging

social hierarchy based on formal trade and control of European

materials. Evidence of firearms remains exceedingly rare, as are

pipes, beads, European clothing and tea-paraphernalia which

would be expected if the Adlavik residents had been in formal

trading relations with the Europeans. Instead, the Adlavik

assemblage is dominated by hand-wrought iron nails and spikes

as well as pieces of sheet lead,

copper and brass, all of which was

quite likely looted from seasonallyabandoned Basque and English

fishing stations along the Strait of

Belle Isle. By the middle of the18th

century stone tools, except for the

ubiquitous soapstone pots and

lamps, had disappeared from the

Inuit tool assemblage, replaced by

cold-hammered iron knives, spears

and end-blades. Analysis of the

Adlavik Harbour collection forms an

exceptionally vivid picture of 18th

century Labrador Inuit lifeways and

provides insight to a critical link in

the transformation of Inuit economy

from one of regional self-sufficiency

to one increasingly linked to western capitalist, colonial and

evangelical influences.

In addition to our fieldwork we completed an exhibit on

the research at Adlavik for the White Elephant Museum –the

oldest building in Makkovik which, newly refurbished, now

houses the collection of the local historical society– and

participated in its formal grand opening. The archaeology of

Adlavik is presented in a series of photographs, maps, text

panels and quotes from students who have participated in the

program. Plans are underway to build a special display case to

house the Adlavik artifacts once they have been cataloged and

conserved. Both the Labrador Institute in Goose Bay and the

Newfoundland Museum have expressed support for this project

and are committed to seeing Labrador archaeological collections

displayed in their local context and we thank both organizations

for their sustained interest in the project and for their commit-
ASC Newsletter 28

to obsess over every little thing. Whether or not I chose the

right college, moving into my own place, having to leave home.

It didn’t matter on the island. I always felt very present and

aware. I think that feeling is what brought me back for three

years.

That and the sense of community. People you may have

never talked to or gotten to know become intimate friends. And

by intimate I mean the person you work in a one metre by one

metre square with all day is the same

one that sleeps a foot away from you

at night . You depend on each other,

you come to accept and appreciate

what everybody has to offer. And

when that person who shares your

square and your tent has to go into

town for a night or two, it doesn’t feel

right until they come back “home”.

I will never forget the smell of

the canvas tent and the Coleman

lamps, even the soil. I will never

forget that one really great day when

we came back in from a few late nights

in town. It rained and rained so we

stayed inside cleaning bones all day. I

will never forget the hours spent

laughing until my sides hurt, though I

have already begun to forget most of

the things we laughed about. Only after being home for awhile

have I been able to think about what I have taken away from

this experience. How strange it is now to think that, all this

time there was something there like this out there. When we

were going to the cabin when I was a kid, which is very near

Long Tickle, I had no clue something this amazing was there.

Just waiting for someone to find it. To think it was destined to

play such a large role in this time of my life, and turn it into

such a great one. I never even had an inkling.

Erin Andersen working

in House-1 on a cold

morning.

 LOOKING DEEPER: SUB-SURFACE SURVEY IN

NORTHERN ICELAND AND THE LONG-HOUSE AT

GLAUMBÆR

John Steinberg

“I don’t believe it” V. Gordon Childe is supposed to have said

as he overlooked the grassy lowland sheep and cattle farms

during a tour of Iceland in 1956. Childe was referring to the

idea that this volcanic island, warmed by the North Atlantic

Drift of the Gulf Stream, was not settled until the Viking Age.

Childe’s seminal books had synthesized long-term trends of

European prehistoric social evolution. As a materialist, he did

not think that the magnificent resource he was looking at could

go for so long without being exploited.

“Dig deeper!” Childe commanded, thinking that the

archaeologists must be wrong. But even today, there is no

reliable evidence that the island had inhabitants any earlier than

the Viking Age settlement, which began in 874 AD. With only a

little more than 1100 years of occupation, Iceland is one of the

last inhabitable places on earth to be settled, making it an ideal

location to study certain anthropological questions.

This includes questions of social evolution, my primary

interest and the reason I started working in Iceland in 1998. In

addition to the archaeological record, there are stories, called

sagas, written about the people and events in Iceland during the

first 400 years of settlement. Many of the stories describe the

actions of three-dozen chiefs and how they managed to organize

disparate elements of the society. For the most part, the sagas

were not written at the same time as the events they describe,

but rather several hundred years later. Nonetheless, these

stories relate to the dramatic changes that the Icelandic

chiefdoms went through as they became more complex,

eventually resulting in a medieval manorial society around 1250

A.D.

Surface remains hint at some of the social transitions

described in the sagas. Farmsteads at the higher elevations

(above 200 meters) and towards the interior of the island are

abandoned, sometimes quite early. This is probably due to

climatic deterioration and substantial soil erosion. However,

farmsteads at the lower elevations, close to the coast, seem to

be continuously occupied. Not only are they believed to have

been continuously occupied, but stable in terms of land usage,

such that the structures existed on the same spot through time.

Icelandic Viking Age and later structures were made of turf,

which is cut from the upper portion of a peat bog and then

dried, making an ideal insulator. As newer turf structures were

built on top of older ones the remains of previous turf buildings

began to form large farm mounds. Continuous occupation of

the same spot forming large farm mounds certainly suggests

remarkable stability in lowland settlement patterns.

It struck me as odd that the lowland settlement pattern

would be so stable through the social changes described in the

sagas and through the abandonment of the farms at the higher

elevations attested to by the archaeological record. Settlement

patterns are very sensitive to socio-political changes. In

situations without textual records, settlement patterns identified in the archaeological record are usually employed to assess

socio-political changes. If the Icelandic chiefdoms became more

complex, but the settlement pattern remained almost identical,

then settlement patterns in general may not be as sensitive to

prehistoric social changes as anthropological archaeologists

have imagined. Unwilling to simply accept this disconcerting

possibility, I reasoned that it could be that a substantial portion

of early sites are not in farm mounds. This would mean that the

distribution of farm mounds is not a proxy for Viking Age

settlement patterns.

Where then were the earliest sites, and how could they be

found? The erosion of the highlands, which had contributed to

the abandonment of those sites, is known to have caused

substantial soil deposition in the lowlands: anywhere from 50

centimeters to 2 meters of windblown soil has been deposited

over the last 1100 years. Therefore, the earliest turf structures

could easily be buried and not apparent on the surface.

Certainly there have been structures found in low-lying areas,

away from farm mounds. When these sites are identified, their

preservation can be very good. What percentage of early farms

these buried sites represent is unknown.

In 1999, funded by NSF, Doug Bolender of Northwestern University and I began to develop a series of methods to

identify buried turf structures. We found that even when
ASC Newsletter 29

deeply buried, intact turf walls did not conduct electricity as

well as the surrounding soil, resulting in a recognizable lowconductivity profile. We believed that a program of sub-surface

survey, based on coring and remote sensing, could reveal a more

complete settlement pattern by identifying buried turf structures. In 2000, Tim Earle of Northwestern University and

Antonio Gilman of Cal State Northridge joined Doug and me

as we searched for a region to conduct a settlement pattern

survey. We identified Skagafjörður as

an ideal region. It seemed to have gone

through dramatic social changes,

including the growth of powerful

chieftains and the founding of a

Bishopric in 1106 at Hólar, a site that

would become the second most

powerful farm in Medieval Iceland. A

major Icelandic project was in the

works to explore Hólar (http://

www.holar.is/~fornleifar/) and the

highlands above Skagafjörður had

already been surveyed. The lowlands

had received 1.5 to 0.5 meters of soil,

most of it during the first 300 years of

settlement, which made for ideal

preservation of the earliest farmsteads.

Furthermore, Skagafjörður has received

a series of distinct volcanic ash, or

tephra, layers in the years 871, 1000,

1104, and 1300 AD, which corresponds quite well to major political

shifts. Frost disturbance is minimal

below the topsoil and because there are

no rodents and little soil mixing, the

soil profiles read like books.

In 2001, funded by NSF and

Wenner-Gren, we started the Skagafjörður Archaeological

Settlement Survey (http://sass.ioa.ucla.edu). The team then

began to develop a protocol for identifying and exploring buried

turf structures. After much

experimentation, we arrived at

the following sequence. A

traditional document survey

was carried out which

included a walk around, where

structures mentioned in

various sources were associated with features in the

landscape. Following that,

targeted soil cores were taken

to ascertain soil depth ranges

and to make sure that the field

had not been substantially

altered. We then cored every

50 meters and recorded tephra

layers and soil depths and took samples for environmental

reconstructions and phosphate levels. Areas that had received

at least 30 centimeters of soil over the last 1100 years and were

without modern electrical contamination (for example, buried

iron structures, pipes, power lines, telephone cables, etc.) were

then selected for conductivity survey with the EM-31. The

readings of the EM-31 were then examined by geophysicist

Brian Damiata of UCLA for the low conductivity anomalies

characteristic of buried turf walls. Promising locations were

then investigated with a power auger, which bores an eight-inch

hole, just large enough to reliably identify turf walls. Once a

turf wall was identified, we used another piece of equipment,

the Syscal Kid resistivity meter, to provide a pseudo-profile of

the sub-surface to a depth of about 6 meters. Each of the 30 to

50 meter long pseudo-profiles from the same field could then be

combined to get a good idea of the wall

or building orientation. Finally, several

test trenches are excavated into what is,

hopefully, the outside of the wall. Not

only do the test-trenches provide

critical ground truthing to the remote

sensing readings, they provide necessary

dating material.

After applying the protocol on a

series of farms, it became apparent that

a substantial percentage of the earlier

turf structures are not at the bottom of

large farm mounds, but rather spread

around the landscape. Many of the

sites that we have identified and

explored have little or no surface sign

and are not specifically mentioned in

historical documents. We are now

working on understanding the changes in

the settlement pattern, which apparently shifts dramatically during the first

few hundred years of occupation.

Of the several early sites identified, one in particular needs special

mention, Glaumbær. Towards the end of

the 2001 season, Tara Carter and

Nilka Dabare of Cal State Northridge,

using the power auger to confirm a low conductivity anomaly,

discovered a series of turf walls and a thin, but extensive, peat

ash midden at a field on the farm of Glaumbær, 150 meters to

the east of the old turf manner

house that has been preserved

as the Glaumbær Folk

Museum (http://krokur.is/

glaumb/home.html). The walls

and midden were under an inplace 1104 tephra layer. Local

tradition had it that the

present location of the turf

house museum was also the

location of a well-known

Viking Age farmstead. A test

trench into the ash midden

outside the back door of the

museum indicates that the area

around the turf museum was

inhabited after the newly discovered structure was abandoned.

We found that the ash midden is on top of the 1104 tephra

layer, which is on top of natural soil. No other structures from

before 1100 were identified on the other hay fields of

Glaumbær.

This farm is significant because it figures in the sagas

relating the Viking exploration of North America. According to

Conductivity profile, from the EM-31, across short axes

of the Glaumbær long-house.

Excavation trench across the short axes of the

long house. The façade of the turf house museum

is in the background.
ASC Newsletter 30

these sagas, an Icelandic trader named Þorfinnur Karlsefni

Þórðarson had journeyed to Greenland, where he met Guðríður

Þorbjarnardóttir. Guðríður and her father had followed Eirík

rauða Þorvaldsson (Erik the Red) to Greenland, and after she

married Karlsefni, they decided to travel to Vínland, which had

been recently discovered by Leifur Eiríksson (Leif the Lucky).

While in Vínland, she gave birth to a son, Snorri Þorfinnsson,

who—if he existed—would be the first European born in the

New World. Their time in Vínland was difficult, so the family

returned to Iceland, via Greenland and Norway. In Iceland, the

Saga of the Greenlanders relates that the family bought

Glaumbær, and then, when Karlsefni died, Guðríður went south

(to Rome) on a pilgrimage. When she returned to Glaumbær,

Snorri had built a church for her on the family farm.

Guðríður was a prominent part of the National Museum

of Natural History’s exhibit, Vikings: The North Atlantic Saga.

The discovery of the walls and midden at Glaumbær intrigued

Elisabeth Ward, who helped curate the Smithsonian Viking

exhibit, and Guðmundur Ólafsson, of the National Museum of

Iceland, who had re-excavated Eiríksstaðir. Both Elisabeth and

Guðmundur joined the project for the 2002 season to further

test the archaeological deposits at Glaumbær. E. Paul

Durrenberger of Pennsylvania State also joined the project to

help with the settlement pattern interpretation.

The more extensive excavations of 2002, which included

cross trenching the structure, revealed a narrow, rectangular

longhouse, with 2 meter thick turf walls and 1.8 meter benches

lining each side of a tramped earth floor. The structure is

almost 30 meters long. Less than 10% of the structure has been

excavated. Bog iron working seems to have been a major

activity at the site. An AMS Radiocarbon date from part of the

floor indicates an occupation at 1017 AD ±56.

However, there is a problem interpreting this site as the

home of Karlsefni, Guðriður, and Snorri. The other version of

the Vínland story, the Saga of Erik the Red, states that

Karlsefni returned to his father’s farm, Reynistaður, just to the

north of Glaumbær, and does not mention the family purchasing

Glaumbær. Furthermore, many scholars, including Helge

Ingstad, who discovered the Viking site of L’Anse aux Meadows

in Newfoundland, believe that the last section of the Saga of the

Greenlanders, which concerns Glaumbær, is unhistorical and

anachronistic, since it so heavily emphasizes the family of

Karlsefni, rather than that of Eirik and Leif. Sigríður

Sigurardóttir, the Director of the Glaumbær Folk Museum,

and a great supporter of the excavation, had dismissed this

apparent discrepancy by assuming that both Reynistaður and

Glaumbær were in the possession of the same family (not

unusual, considering how well-established his family was—

several of Karlsefni’s decedents became bishops at Hólar) and

that Karlsefni, Guðríður, and Snorri had merely established a

separate farm. Interestingly, there is one turf wall at the site

that seems to have been built before 1000 AD, which would

predate the family’s occupation. Further excavations will be

required to determine how all of this relates to the details in the

Vinland sagas, although the main long-house occupation

certainly appears to be consistent with the timing indicated for

the return of Guðríður and her family to Iceland.

Is this newly discovered structure Guðríður’s farmstead?

We now have many more questions than answers. I suppose

we may have to follow Childe’s advice after all and look deeper.

C O N F ER E N C E S

Igor Krupnik traveled to Stockholm, Sweden where he was

invited to attend the international scientific conference,

“Mountain Areas: A Global Resource,” held September 7-9. The

conference, organized by the Swedish Polar Board as “The

Royal Colloquium 2003,” was attended by 20 scientists and

public activists from Sweden, US, Britain, Switzerland, and

India. His Majesty, King Carl XVI Gustaf of Sweden, chaired

two days of sessions that dealt with environmental and human

impact on mountainous areas. Topics included preserving

biological complexity, new environmental threats to mountains,

and mountains as the main source of fresh water in the 21st

century.

Igor was a guest speaker for the panel on cultural diversity in mountain areas and presented a talk on “Mountains as

Cultural and Heritage Landscapes: Diversity and Integration.”

Saami filmmaker, John Erling Utsi, from Jokkmokk in

northern Sweden, was Igor’s discussant and talked about the

role of mountains in supporting Saami identity and oral

tradition and the Saami’s deep affiliation with the land of their

ancestors.

Meeting attendees also visited the Abisko Scientific

Research Station near the northern city of Kiruna and the

Tarfala Research Station located in the glacier valley at the

foothill of Sweden’s highest mountain peak, Kebnekaise at 68°

N.

The symposium concluded with a dinner at the Royal

Palace in Stockholm. The conference’s proceedings will be

published next year as a special issue of Ambio, the Swedish

environmentalist journal. For this issue, Igor and John Utsi

have been asked to contribute a joint paper on the role of

mountains as heritage resource for northern indigenous people.

WAC-5 COMES TO D.C., THANKS TO SMITHSONIAN

PARTNERSHIP

By Joan Gero

The Fifth World Archaeological Congress, held June 21 – 26,

2003 in Washington D.C., was a great success, thanks in large

part to the roles played by the Smithsonian Institution National

Museum of Natural History, the Department of Anthropology,

and especially the Arctic Studies Program. After meeting in

Britain, Venezuela, India and South Africa, this is the first time

WAC has convened in North America, and it is especially

noteworthy that NMNH was an official partner to the event

(together with the National Museum of the American Indian and

the Getty Conservation Institute).

Plans for the congress were not without worry, especially

with a US military engagement in Iraq, a move that proved

unpopular in much of the rest of the world. Since the goal of

the World Archaeological Congress is to bring together scholars,

researchers and others with a genuine interest in the past

(including native peoples from different parts of the world,

whose pasts the archaeologists are recreating), it was not clear

if international participants would be able to attend the

congress... or would be willing to come. Funding was suddenly

harder to come by, and there were many distractions.

Nevertheless, more than 1100 people attended the

congress, representing 77 different countries and tribal nations.
ASC Newsletter 31

The four-day program was convened in 23 concurrently-running

sessions that totaled some 1400 presentations (some people

offered more than one presentation). Topics under discussion

varied widely, from regional sessions dedicated to presentations

of new research within a specific geographic region, to reflective

theoretical discussions about such

ideas as how decision making in

fieldwork affects what we know

about the past. Underwater

archaeology, the management of

public archaeological sites, use of

remote sensing techniques, ancient

system of astronomy, and women’s

roles in hide preparation were all

large and popular topics. At the

same time, many native, indigenous

and tribal people attended in order

to bring their minority voices to the

discussion (see Loring, below).

The Smithsonian Institution’s

help was evident at every turn.

Sessions were organized by

Smithsonian researchers from both

the Natural History and the American Indian Museums,

including Dennis Stanford (“The American Paleolithic”), York

Rowan (“UNESCO and Cultural Heritage Preservation”),

Dorothy Lippert (“Room for Both Research AND Repatriation”), Bill Billeck (“Logistics of Repatriation”) and Terry

Snowball (“Returning the Sacred”). George Horse Capture

(NMAI) organized a plenary panel titled “Archaeology from

Native Americans’ Perspective” and Ramiro Matos (NMAI)

offered a plenary address on “La Práctica de la Arqueología en

los Paises Pobres y Ricos.

Even more visible was the hugely popular reception

offered jointly by the two SI museums in the central rotunda of

the Natural History Museum on Sunday evening, June 2nd.

Amid flowing libations and great mounds of delicious food, Bill

Fitzhugh (as Chair of the Department of Anthropology) and

Rick West (Director of the Museum of the American Indian)

both addressed the many hundreds of WAC-5 participants

gathered there to enjoy themselves. This opportunity for

informal exchange among people from so many nations and

archaeological traditions was as important for the dissemination

of information and for the future of archaeological cooperation

as were the more formal paper presentations. Special thanks to

Laurie Burgess who so ably coordinated this event!

A very special and much appreciated Smithsonian

contribution to WAC-5’s success was the behind-the-scene

tours of the nation’s archaeological and ethnographic collections, housed in Natural History’s Museum Support Center and

in the Cultural Resources Center of the American Indian

Museum. Coordinated by Stephen Loring, these tours were

offered on the days before and after the congress, and on the

free day scheduled midway through the congress. In groups of

10-12 people, a total of 400 archaeologists and native people

ultimately got to see either a general tour of collections and

facilities, or a specialized and customized tour of their special

areas of interest. For many people attending WAC-5, this was

a highlight of their visit!

And there was still more. Head librarian of the

Smithsonian’s NMNH Anthropology library, Margaret

Dittemore, was critical to developing a plan to allow visiting

WAC-5 scholars to use local libraries for research assistance, in

conjunction with attending the congress. The SI Anthropology

library opened its own doors to many scholars, giving them

access to the invaluable bibliographic materials housed here.

Finally, an unexpected and

completely successful addition to

the WAC-5 program was offered by

Smithsonian NMNH Information

Technology specialist Dan Cole

who voluntarily coordinated and

taught a free GIS (geographic

information systems) workshop to

WAC-5 participants on the day

following the congress. This

opportunity was offered on a firstcome-first-serve basis and was

eagerly oversubscribed by people

who, in some cases, changed their

travel plans to be able to take

advantage of Dan’s generous offer

to learn GIS.

In all, the Smithsonian played

a critical role in the enormous success of the Fifth World

Archaeological Congress and thus contributes to extending the

organization’s vitality for future meetings. WAC is a unique

venue for the global exchange of information about recent

advances in archaeology, about methodological and theoretical

innovations, and for planning future cooperative international

research projects, and it is fitting that the Smithsonian was at

the center of this enterprise. We are very grateful for their

participation.

ASC’S NORTHERN CONNECTIONS AT WAC-5

By Stephen Loring

A generous grant from the National Science Foundation’s Polar

Program created a fantastic opportunity to invite a select group

of northern indigenous community members to attend WAC.

The ASC and Dr. Randall McGuire of the State University of

New York/ Binghamton with whom we submitted the grant

request wish to acknowledge our profound appreciation and

gratitude to Dr. Anna Kerttula at NSF for her support. The

inclusion of northern native representation at WAC represented

an important opportunity to encourage and enhance the

perspectives of Native Alaskans, Canadian First Nations, and

Inuit, as they pertain to archaeology, oral history and “mythology”. In communities across the circumpolar North there still

resides a band of elders who grew up on the land prior to the

advent of modern village life. The wisdom and perspective of

these community elders is a rapidly diminishing voice and an

irreplaceable link to humanity’s common hunting heritage. In

northern communities the emergence of a league of young

professional as well as avocational folklorists, oral historians,

educators and archaeologists by dint of their language skills,

interests and web of social relations, are uniquely situated to be

a bridge between the knowledge and observations of the

“elders” and various community and academic interests that

share a common desire to preserve and interpret native histories

of the north.

The Fifth World Archaeology Congress offered an

Rick West, Director of NMAI and Joe Watkins at the

WAC-5 reception in NMNH
ASC Newsletter 32

academic setting that is uniquely situated to address the needs

and interests of northern native groups. The emergence of

“community archaeology” is arguably one of the most significant developments in North American archaeology of the past

decade. Throughout the north, native communities have become

empowered to participate in the full spectrum of research and

investigations from planning to excavation and analysis and the

construction of knowledge concerning their history. At WAC-5,

the northern delegates had an opportunity to interact not

only with a broad range of professionals but also with

members of native groups from around the world to exchange

strategies on how to collect, interpret, preserve and present

their versions of the past, how to negotiate with professionals

who would dominate their accounts, and how to preserve what

they see as sacred while also contributing to scientific accounts

of their regions’ past.

The NSF grant supported the travel and participation of

two prominent native Alaskan scholars, Herbert Anungazuk,

an archaeologist, educator, and resource manager with the

National Park Service in Anchorage and Wales, and Deanna

Kingston an anthropology professor at Oregon State University Corvallis with family and research connections in Nome

and King Island, Alaska. Traveling with Aron Crowell from

Anchorage were four Sugpiaq/Alutiiq colleagues of his who had

worked closely with him on many aspects of the Looking Both

Ways Exhibit: Lillian Elvsaas (Seldovia), Nick Tanape, Sr.

(Nanwalek), and Nancy Yeaton (Nanwalek). NSF also sponsored three Inuit students and colleagues from Makkovik

Labrador: Lena Onalik (Memorial University), Tracy-Ann

Evans (Carleton University) and Amalia Tuglavina (Labrador

Inuit Association, Nain) and two colleagues working on

community archaeology initiatives with the Innu from

Utshimassit and Sheshatshiu, Anthony Jenkinson (Tshiapisk

Foundation) and Richard Nuna (Innu Nation Environment).

Stephen Loring, along with Anthony Jenkinson and

Richard Nuna made a presentation in a session on

ethnoarchaeology entitled “From Archaeology to History: An

Emerging Innu Perspective on the Past” on their current

research in Nitassinan (the Innu homeland in the interior of the

Quebec-Labrador peninsula) under the supervision of the

Tshikapisk Foundation. Tshikapisk is an organization of Innu

educators and community members deeply committed to trying

to resolve the social and economic ills plaguing their community

by looking to core Innu values and traditions. Most

Tshikapisk programs are centered in nutshimit (the “country” as

opposed to the village) where small inter-generational groups

can camp together in a setting that teaches and reaffirms Innu

skills and knowledge. A Tshikapisk initiated program in

archaeology seeks to reconnect and empower Innu youth with

the production of knowledge about their history.

Richard Nuna made a presentation (“Innu history:

exploring the paths of stories, mythology and archaeology —

an Innu perspective”) in which he explored the relationship of

Innu story-telling traditions and archaeology. Stories and storytelling link Innu and Innu ancestors down through the ages and

provide a critical perspective to explore the meaning of history.

Richard argued that to be legitimate “Innu archaeology” must

find a way to incorporate Innu oral tradition as an integral part

of the story of Innu history and tenure in Nitassinan.

And finally, Stephen, joined by Leah Rosenmeier (The

Confederacy of Mainland Mi’kmaq) and Lena Onalik

(Memorial University) reported on their community archaeology project in Labrador (“Challenges for the future of the past:

new directions in Inuit archaeology in Labrador”) in which they

sought to integrate the practice and product of archaeology with

the wishes and interests of the host community in an effort to

define a new set of criteria by which archaeology can meet the

social and intellectual interests of the Inuit.

THE “NORTHERN VECHE” OF 2003

By Elisabeth Ward

In 2000, the inaugural meeting of the Northern Research Forum

took place in Reykjavík, Iceland (see ASC NL #9). The second

Forum continued in the spirit of that first meeting by including

an array of “stakeholders” in the North, ranging from politicians and business investors to scholars and native peoples.

This time the venue seemed to be almost a participant as well;

the conference took place in Veliky Novgorod (Great

Novgorod), Russia. This locale, the former capitol of the

independent state of Novgorod, has a tradition of democratic

participation expressed in the practice of veche, an open public

assembly. The organizers set the tone and spirit of the

conference by calling it “Northern Veche”, and a proposal was

adopted at the closing session so that this term will continue to

be used for upcoming meetings. Certainly the in-depth and

lively interchanges throughout the conference demonstrated this

spirit. The town of Veliky Novgorod came to embody one of

the sub-themes of the meeting: Applying the Lessons of

History. The timing of the Northern Veche coincided with the

1140th anniversary of the founding of the Russian state, which

was celebrated by a parade of historical figures (by townspeople in appropriate costume), clearly demonstrating that the

past has real agency in how people define themselves in the

present. Witnessing this ceremony gave all the participants a

renewed energy for the conference topics. Finally, and perhaps

most importantly, this grand town struggling to redefine itself

in the post-Soviet era provided the perfect backdrop to

demonstrate the urgency of this meeting. Since a large percentage of the participants were Russian, themes of indigenous

rights, sustainable development, tourism, and trade all came

back to the reality of post-Soviet Russia. Russian government

officials publicly declared their appreciation of the foreign

delegates for sharing their perspectives, many of which differed

At WAC-5 (L-R): Lena Onalik, Richard Nuna, Tracy-Ann Evans,

Ken Isaacson, Pierre Desrosiers, and Amalia Tuglavina
ASC Newsletter 33

MUSEUMS ALASKA 2003: EPHEMERA FOREVER!

By David Shayt, NMAH

Alaska, that least ephemeral of all the fifty states, was the

focus of a session on the museum acquisition and interpretation of

“ephemera,” all that one-time or short-term use flotsam of

commerce and popular culture: ticket stubs, food packaging,

postcards, bookmarks, bottle caps, cigar bands, napkins, key tags,

all the routine detritus of city life and retail activity. Once

sufficient years have passed to render ephemera non-current,

museums collect it and call it archival or “reference.” Libraries

collect it and struggle to create logical numbering systems for it, or

despair and dump it into vertical files sorted by topic.

Alaskan ephemera proves particularly rich. The conference

session, “The Ephemeral North: Collecting and Using Northern

Ephemera,” featured a display of the Candy Waugaman Collection.

Railroad schedules, movie posters, fruit crate labels, wall calendars, AlCan road maps, Skagway song sheets, oil spill bumper

stickers, saloon beer mats, matchbooks, sailing ship announcements, empty salmon cans . . . all the basis for a lively discussion

among the participants: David Shayt of the Smithsonian’s

Division of Cultural History at the National Museum of American

History, Steve Hendrickson, Curator of Collections at the Alaska

State Museum Juneau, and Richard Engeman of the Oregon

Historical Society. Shayt offered a slide presentation of

Smithsonian ephemera collections housed at his American

History Museum, highlighting the Eskimo Pie advertising

collection, the Ivory soap ad campaign, and 19th-century

African elephant ivory trade literature for piano keys and hair

from traditional Russian methods. For instance, the local,

grass-roots approach to cultural heritage management demonstrated by Canadian and Alaskan indigenous groups is not

commonly practiced in Russia. Ways to incorporate ideas

presented at the conference were actively discussed by the

Russian attendees, lending an air of real communication to the

proceedings.

The differences in approaches between Western Europe,

the US, and Russia was seen in the session at which Elisabeth

Ward presented her paper “Modern Interest in the Vikings:

history in the service of political realities”; along with the

presentations of Lassi Heininen and Joonas Ahola of Finland,

a post-modernist analytical flair was evident in these nonRussian presentations. In contrast, Vlasimir Konetsky,

Vasily Adreev, and Gennadi Kovalenko presented a chronologically organized and detailed history of Novgorod. Despite

these divergent approaches to the topic, all agreed that the

Viking history of Novgorod was an important component

worthy of further research and support. Similar examples of

divergent methodologies were explored in the various sessions

throughout the three-day conference.

While the first meeting of 2000 was called “North meets

North”, it might be tempting to dub the 2002 meeting “West

meets East”. In fact, the cooperative and open-minded

atmosphere gave a new level of appropriateness to the name

Northern Veche.

Elisabeth would like to express her appreciation to the

Secretariat of the Northern Research Forum for awarding her a

Young Researchers travel grant, which allowed her to attend the

conference.

combs.

What meanings can be teased out of such an accumulation?

Is this a new archaeology, with flimsy everyday relics gathered

up before they reach the privy? Or must this interest in

ephemera be necessarily ephemeral, saving serious history and

scholarship for artifacts with more heft, more gravitas.

General agreement prevailed that Northern ephemera

matters. In areas of technology, ephemeral documents such as

dated price guides, operating manuals, and parts lists serve a

vital surrogate role when original machines such as the Iron

Chink salmon-processing machine are too vast or too scarce to

collect outright. In other cases, postcards and pamphlets

validate and reinforce otherwise anonymous artifacts such as

store-bought fishing tackle or trinkets from the Alaska-YukonPacific Exposition of 1909. As art, Alaskan ephemera takes on

high-end value in the lush 1920s posters luring tourists by

steamship, rail, and float plane to the Last Frontier. Ephemeral

tchotchkes for tourists occupy a large class of miniature totem

poles, dolls, basketry, carvings, and fur garments whose deeper

cultural meanings await anthropological scrutiny within the

context of Alaskan tribal traditions.

As with much in Arctic studies, ephemera’s value is

determined by the questions asked of it and the particular

passions brought to its analysis. As witnessed at Museums

Alaska 2003 (and at www.ephemerasociety.org), scholars

increasingly embrace the serious acquisition, organization, and

study of ephemera. What to make of it all, beyond collector’s

connoisseurship, may not be the question. More likely, what

particular significance do individual pieces have to larger

studies. How well did Levi’s jeans sell in the Klondike? Look

to the ephemera.

Postcard of Siberian Yup’ik Traders ca. 1910, Nome.

“JESUP-2” INITIATIVE ENTERS ITS SECOND DECADE

By Igor Krupnik

Time is indeed running faster these days. It was hardly a twinkling

of time ago, in October 1992, when our “Jesup-2” program

focused on the legacy of the Jesup North Pacific Expedition (JNPE

– see ASC Newsletters, nos. 1,2,3,5, and 6) was officially

inaugurated at its opening session held during the first

International Congress of Arctic Social Sciences in Quebéc City,

Canada. Now, almost eleven years and several efforts later, we are

much more realistic about the goals to be set and the input needed

to match the expectations. We can always say that ‘it takes time to

get started,’ particularly in the funding environment, especially in
ASC Newsletter 34

the Governorship of Hokkaido, Hokkaido Commission for

Education, Sapporo Branch of the Japanese main air carrier, JAL;

offices of two newspapers, Hokkaido Shimbun and Hokkaido

Branch of Asahi Simbun; Ainu Research Center; Hokkaido

University; Hamanasu Fund, and others offered their support for

the meeting. There is a preliminary agreement that the proceedings

of the symposium will be published in both English and Japanese,

as two parallel volumes. Hence, it would be our responsibility to

prepare a new collection of the Jesup-2 paper for one of the

forthcoming issues under the ASC Contributions to Circumpolar

Anthropology series. This forthcoming volume, the third in the

string of the ASC Jesup-2 publications, will feature new results of

our studies in the history of the JNPE collections and collectors,

and its role to many today’s efforts in cultural revitalization in the

North Pacific region. It is also going to include some new topics,

such as major review papers covering the state of critical fields in

the North Pacific research (archaeology, linguistics, study of

myths, etc.) as well as the status of many individual Jesup-2

initiatives of the past decade, 1992-2002.

The Raven’s Arch symposium was accompanied by

several public events, including public lectures given by Barbara

Mathé (on the Jesup Expedition historical photography at the

American Museum in New York), Bill Fitzhugh (on the history

of the Smithsonian Ainu exhibit), Shigeru Kayano (on the status

of Ainu culture in today’s Japan), and Chuner Taksami (on Ainu

collections in Russian museums). A photo exhibit

made of several dozen historical Jesup pictures

from the American Museum and of modern

photographs from the Jesup ‘old sites’ in East

Siberia taken by the late Japanese photographer

Michio Hoshino was organized at the Hokkaido

University museum. The final event of the

symposium was a trip to the Ainu Museum at

Shiraoi, where the Jesup-2 team met our long-term

partners from an earlier Ainu exhibit project, such

as Masahiro Nomoto, Shigeki Akino, Miyuki

Muraki, and others. So, the Raven’s Arch brought

together not only the two sides of the North

Pacific, once studied by the JNPE teams but also

the two main ASC collaborative projects of the

1990s: the Jesup-2 and the Ainu exhibit.

There were several other important developments in the

Jesup-2 field during this past year. A new Jesup web site is under

development, thanks to the unyielding dedication of Barbara

Mathé, Museum Archivist and Head of Library Special

Collections at the American Museum of Natural History in New

York. The site will be a guide to the AMNH Library collections

pertaining to the Jesup North Pacific Expedition. It includes a brief

overview of the expedition, biographical notes of the expedition

members, a timeline, a bibliography of the JNPE-related

publications (prepared by Igor Krupnik), and a list of cultures

represented in the collections. The photographic collection will be

available through a searchable database. In addition a link will be

provided to the database of the Jesup Expedition’s ethnographic

collections held in the AMNH Anthropology Department. It is

hoped that links to Jesup resources held in other institutions will

also be made available through this site. Several volumes of the

Jesup Expedition publications (AMNH Memoirs) are presently

being imaged and will be soon available online as part of the

AMNH Digital Library project, funded by the Andrew W. Mellon

Foundation.

the absence of Boas and Jesup. But as the program finally gained

its own momentum, it gradually began generating more products.

Many personal bonds established during this past decade among

the Jesup-2 participants are also paying off.

In fact, the past year 2002-03 was quite successful to

many Jesup-2 efforts. We had one more volume of papers out in

print and one more international conference, of twenty more new

papers to build a core for our next volume. “Jesup” website is now

running; several new papers have been published, and new projects

were initiated. There are still no signs of any “Jesup-fatigue” and a

lot of enthusiasm is radiating from the trenches. If “Jesup-1” is to

be any guide, their peak of activities spanned over some 13-14

years, before the program’s energy started to wind down. So, it

looks like we are up for at least a few more years of active work,

until we may consider our mission accomplished.

In addition to Publishing Constructing Cultures, another

big event of the past year was an international symposium that

was held at another end of the JNPE original field of operation, the

Island of Hokkaido, Japan. The symposium was dedicated to the

centennial of the completion of the JNPE field surveys; as such,

the choice of the Asian side of the Pacific, where the last

expedition party headed by Waldemar Jochelson continued to

work until the summer of 1902, was quite natural. The symposium

was co-chaired by Kazuyuki Tanimoto, Director of the Ainu

Research Center in Sapporo and Bill Fitzhugh. All the practical

preparations for the session were undertaken by

our tireless symposium secretary, Dr. Koichi

Inoue from the Slavic Research Center at the

Hokkaido University in Sapporo, who was

assisted by Igor Krupnik. The emergence of this

‘gang of four’ as an organizing body for the new

Jesup-2 symposium was a direct result of personal

bonds built during earlier collaborative efforts,

Jesup ‘centennial’ conference of 1997 and Ainu:

Spirit of a Northern People Smithsonian exhibit.

The symposium was titled The Raven’s

Arch: Jesup North Pacific Expedition Revisited and

it was held on October 24-28, 2002 in Sapporo,

Japan, at a truly lovely meeting place, Sapporo

International Guest House. About 15 invited

speakers, mainly from the U.S. and Russia, mixed with about the

same number of Japanese scholars who arrived from all across

Japan. Again, we were very happy to meet with many old friends

and partners from our earlier ventures, such as the previous Jesup2 panels and publications (Nikolay Vakhtin, Barbara Mathé,

Thomas Miller, David Koester, Molly Lee), Ainu exhibit

(Kazuyuki Tanimoto, Koji Deriha, Shinko Ogihara, Shiro

Sasaki, and others), and Mini-Crossroads (Olga Shubina). New

‘intellectual blood’ was also pumped into the Jesup-2 veins, as

represented by Yuri Berezkin (myth distribution in Siberia and

North America), David Yesner (early adaptations of the North

Pacific coastal people), Machiya Mashiko (comparative study of

the Raven myth cycles), Hiroki Takakura (reindeer herding in

Siberia), Tatyana Roon (Amur-Sakhalin collections in North

American museums), Elena Mikhailova (Jesup collections in

Russia), Sergei Slobodin (ethnoarchaeology along the JNPE

surveys in Siberia), and others.

We are grateful to our Japanese colleagues, particularly

to Koichi Inoue and Kazuyuki Tanimoto, who carried the main

load of logistical, financial, and other responsibilities for panel

organization. Several Japanese agencies and institutions, including
ASC Newsletter 35

Bergy Bits

DISTINGUISHED SCANDINAVIAN VISITORS

By Elisabeth Ward

During the Spring of 2003, the Arctic Studies Center hosted

two separate delegations of distinguished Scandinavians,

showing that the roots planted with the Vikings exhibition are

continuing to bear fruit. The first group was members of the

Parliamentarians of the Arctic Region, which is a body comprised of elected members of parliament from each country with

a vested interest in the Arctic. Kjell Myre-Jensen and HillMarta Solberg of the Norwegian Parliament, Guy Lindström

of the Finnish Parliament, and Thórunn Sveinbjarnadóttir

and Lilja Grétarsdóttir of the Icelandic Parliament, were in

Washington D.C. to discuss Arctic issues with their US

counterparts. Igor Krupnik and Elisabeth Ward were invited

to meet with the delegates, and we had a wide-ranging discussion including the usefulness of exhibitions in rural communities, ASC efforts at knowledge repatriation, and possible

collaborative efforts with the University of the Arctic. Brian

LeMay of the Smithsonian’s International Office briefly joined

the group to express welcome from the Secretary and to give an

overview of Smithsonian activities in the international arena. It

was certainly our pleasure to have been included in the Arctic

Parliaments official visit to Washington, D.C.

Several months later, we again found ourselves participating in an official government visit, this time organized by the

Meridian International Center for the Department of State’s

International Visitors Program. This prestigious program matches

international leaders in various fields with their counterparts in

the United States for an exchange of ideas and to build contacts.

Normally lasting up to six weeks, Margrét Hallgrímssdóttir,

THE WORLD’S WORST SKIING TRIP

By Elisabeth Ward

From February 16th, 2000 until June 5th, 2000, a life or death

drama was playing itself out on the Arctic ice-shelf as two

Norwegians, Rune Gjeldnes and Torry Larsen attempted to

cross-country ski across this unstable mass without any hope

of being re-supplied. Dragging behind them a sled with all the

provisions they had, the two military-trained comrades

embarked on this journey, which has not since been repeated.

Their physical struggles to climb the fluctuating ice, paddle

across leads in the ice, and endure the unrelenting cold were

equal only to the mental challenges to maintain a positive

attitude and ignore the pangs of hunger that set in as they began

to ration food. From the moment they departed Cape

Arctichesky in Siberia to the time they arrived in Cape

Discovery in Northern Canada, they had only each other to

depend on. Along the way, they took detailed meteological

observations of the weather and ice—the last observations

before global warming disrupted the formation of a solid icemass—as well as providing readings to the US Naval Research

Institute on the physical strains such a trek places on the

human body, measuring endurance in extreme situations.

Through the internet, many Norwegians were well aware

of this feat, since they linked up by satellite each night to report

on their progress, and the Norwegian media had closely followed

their preparations before they departed. But those of us in the

US, and especially those of us busy with the Vikings exhibition in

the summer of 2000, were not aware of this accomplishment. It

was therefore a great pleasure when Fæsta Tora Thorsrud and

Bjarte Wetteland of the Norwegian Embassy informed us that

these two men were coming to Washington D.C. and asked us if

we would like to them to give a talk at our museum. Deborah

Rothberg arranged for a Friday noon lecture on May 16th

featuring this adventurous tale. Through video, slides, and the

remarkably honest delivery style of these two men, the

paradoxical commonness and surrealness of their journey came

to be appreciated by all who attended. And it became apparent

that the Viking spirit is indeed live and well among their

State Antiquarian of Iceland, accompanied by Guðríður

Sigurðardóttir of the Culture House in Reykjavík, were only

able to make a three week tour of the United States, due to

pending projects in Iceland, including the reopening of the

National Museum. But they expressed a strong interest in

spending a day of their busy tour at the Smithsonian. The

Department of State contacted Elisabeth Ward at the Arctic

Studies Center, and she arranged for Margrét and Guðríður to

get a behind the scenes look at the Natural History Museum

and the Office of Exhibits Central. Deborah Hull-Walski

began their enlightening visit with a look at the Museum

Support Center collection storage fascility, which Margrét

found especially helpful since the Icelandic national collection

storage is currently undergoing renovation. Lora Collins then

gave a thorough overview of the creative process of exhibition

development at the Office of Exhibit Central, including a peak

at some of the components for the new Mammal Hall. Back at

Natural History, the ladies met with Robert Sullivan concerning outreach efforts and then with Museum Director Cristián

Samper, before taking time to visit the museum’s standing

exhibitions. Thanks to all who made the visit so enjoyable and

informative.

This trove of JNPE treasures will soon be accessible to

researchers and general public. The dream is to use the new Jesup

site at the AMNH as a platform for further research and for

educational web exhibit projects. Igor Krupnik is already

exploring such an opportunity for a new cooperative project with

the AMNH, Archives of the Russian Academy of Sciences, and

Museum of Anthropology and Ethnology (MAE) in St.

Petersburg. The project will focus on a block of some JNPE 300

photos made by Waldemar Bogoras during his trip along the

southern shore of the Chukchi Peninsula in 1901.

Last but not least, the first “Jesup-2” Ph.D. thesis is up

for its defense at Columbia University in New York in January

2004. Thomas Miller has completed his dissertation in

anthropology, “Songs from the House of the Dead: Sound,

Shamans, and Collecting in the North Pacific (1900/2000).” It is

focused primarily on the context and interpretation of shamanistic

wax-cylinder recordings from the Jesup Expedition produced by

Jochelson, Bogoras, Teit, and Boas himself. Thomas’ thesis is the

first true ‘brain-child’ of the Jesup-2 project: from museum and

archival research including his work as Guest Curator of the Jesup

centenary exhibition “Drawing Shadows to Stone” (1997, with

Barbara Mathé) to the initial dissertation proposal, to his

fieldwork in Siberia, Alaska, and British Columbia, to comparative

analysis of the old and new data collected, to its supervision and

reviewing by several members of the Jesup-2 team. We wish

Thomas well and hope that his thesis will be published soon, and

that he will be followed by many successful “Jesup-2” Ph.Ds.”
ASC Newsletter 36

HONORS AND AWARDS

By Katherine Rusk

The ASC notes with great pride that Dr William Fitzhugh

presented the fourth annual Secretary’s Distinguished Researcher

Lecture. These lectures are given by a staff member of the

Smithsonian with sustained achievements in research, a long-term

commitment to the Institution, outstanding contribution to their

field of research by either broadening the scope of study or

substantially enhancing understanding within that field, and have

the ability to communicate this research to a wider audience. The

series was inaugurated by the Secretary of the Smithsonian, Larry

Small, to showcase the breadth of contributions to science made

by workers at the Institution and is sponsored by the offices of

ALASKA NATIVE ELDERS FURTHER THE ALASKA

COLLECTIONS PROJECT

By Dawn Biddison

In the spring and fall of this year, Alaska Native Elders have

joined the Artic Studies Center in

Anchorage to work as translators on

the Alaska Collections Project .

Frances Charles, a retired teacher

from Unalakleet, spent two weeks at

the Center in April. She transcribed

and translated Qawiaraq (also

Kawerak) Iñupiaq from 16 hours of

museum consultation discussions and

for 138 object names. Frances made

recordings of object names and brief

discussions of key objects that she

transcribed and translated. She also

worked on a glossary of terms in

Qawiaraq Iñupiaq, a dialect for which

no dictionary exists. Frances was

one of the Elders on the first Alaska Collections Project

museum consultation trip to Smithsonian. This month Vera

Kaneshiro has joined the Center to transcribe and translate St.

Lawrence Island (SLI) Yupik discussions and object names from

the second Alaska Collections Project museum consultation.

Vera, a fluent SLI Yupik speaker whose second language is

English, was born and

raised in Gambell and

currently resides in

Anchorage. She has

worked with the

Alaska Native Language Center at the

University of Alaska

Fairbanks for thirty

years on educational

materials and SLI

Yupik dictionaries and

is also teacher in

Alaska Native Studies

at the University of

Alaska Anchorage. Future Elder collaborators will include

speakers of Bering Strait Iñupiaq, North Slope Iñupiaq, Central

Yup’ik and Unangan (Aleut).

the Under Secretary for Science, the Under Secretary for American

Museums and National Programs, and the Director of the

International Art Museums Division. Bill Fitzhugh’s lecture

“Down to Earth: An Archaeologist’s Search for Circumpolar

Connections” was presented to a crowded Baird Auditorium at

NMNH on October 20 2003 and featured highlights of his career at

the Smithsonian, particularly his fieldwork in Canada, Siberia, and

Mongolia. Introduced by Secretary Small and Director Cristián

Samper, we learned the mystery of Bill’s minuscule tie collection:

they are presents hand-woven by Saami craftspeople as tokens of

their appreciation and esteem. Bill’s lecture was attended by an

invited audience of numerous colleagues, friends, family and wellwishers and was followed by a delicious reception which featured,

as a treat for Bill, Mongolian lamb dumplings!

AINU WEBSITE LAUNCH

By Andrea Neighbors

Following the successful Ainu: Spirit of a Northern People

exhibit in 1999 at the Smithsonian’s Museum of Natural

History, the Arctic Studies Center and the creative minds at

S2N Media, Inc., brought the sights and sounds of Ainu life to

the Internet. With commentary given by curator Bill Fitzhugh

and co-curator Chisato Dubreuil, viewers can journey into the

exhibition rooms which display the various artifacts that were

shown to the public. Launched in September of 2002, John

and Kathy Prusinski at S2N Media, Inc., provided ingenious

assistance in immortalizing the Ainu exhibit, and in 2003 their

hard work paid off most handsomely in receiving the South by

Southwest award in arts and culture for best display in

interactive multimedia. South by Southwest (SXSW Inc.) is an

annual festival devoted to works done in film, music, and web

production in all fields and genres.

When viewing the website, visitors can see photographs, bone carvings, knives, baskets, models of ships, even a

grinding bowl for poisonous plants that can be studied by

anyone curious about Ainu life. Seven rooms show Ainu

culture, housing styles, spirituality, and the unique genetic

make-up of the people. With a

simple click, all the knowledge and

information you would need about

the Ainu is available, along with

very exclusive pictures to match

the wondering mind.

The CD-ROM of the

exhibit is available through our

order form in the newsletter and

through our website, free of

charge. If interested, the book is

also available in both hardback and

paperback. To view the Ainu

website, the address is http://www.mnh.si.edu/arctic/features/

ainue/index.html, and if interested in the South by Southwest

Festival, please visit http://www.sxsw.com.

PRIME MINISTER ANNOUNCES DIPLOMATIC

APPOINTMENT

By Katherine Rusk

Prime Minister Jean Chretien of Canada announced on

December 2, 2003 the appointment of Jack Anawak as

Canada’s Ambassador for Circumpolar Affairs. The Ambassador

Vera Kaneshiro.

Frances Charles

descendants, as they, like the Vikings, continue to push beyond

the horizon of the known world in seek of adventure.
ASC Newsletter 37

DONATION TO THE NATIONAL ANTHROPOLOGICAL

ARCHIVES

By Stephen Loring

The ASC wishes to acknowledge the thoughtful donation of a

small collection of twenty 35mm kodachrome slides taken in the

vicinity of Iqualuit (formerly Frobisher Bay) on Baffin Island,

Canada in September 1956 by Morton Margulies of Potomac,

Maryland. Mr. Margulies, an officer in the U.S. Army Judge

Advocate Generals Corps stationed in Labrador, had a brief

assignment that took him to the joint US-Canadian Air Base in

Frobisher Bay. During his very brief visit Mr. Margulies had

the opportunity to photograph Inuit families in their summer

encampment and visiting the Hudson’s Bay Company store.

The Margulies photographs will be accessioned into the Papers

of the Arctic Studies Center housed at the National

Anthropological Archives where they will be available to

future scholars and researchers.

The Smithsonian’s National Anthropological Archives

and Smithsonian Institution Archives have become recognized

as an important repository of archival photography pertaining

to the peoples of the circumpolar North. Much of this material

ASC ESTABLISHES DARTMOUTH CONNECTION

WITH STEFANSSON FOCUS

By William Fitzhugh

During the past year the ASC has begun discussing the possibility of developing a formal relationship with Dartmouth College

to facilitate joint research, education, and public programs.

These discussions have emerged from a decade of periodic

collaboration with Dartmouth’s Institute of Arctic Studies

(Oran Young, Gail Osherenko, Nick Flanders), its Anthropology Department (Deb Nichols and Sergei Kan), the Hood

Museum, and the Native Studies Program. Dartmouth students

have been ASC interns and field assistants over many years,

and ASC staff have worked closely with staff of the U.S. Army

Cold Regions Research and Engineering Laboratory (Mary

Albert, David Cate, Debra Meese) on education, publication,

and science policy. These contacts accelerated after 2001 when

Lynne and I began to spend more time in the Hanover area

following our purchase of a residence near Hanover, in Fairlee.

However, the immediate catalyst was the recent departure

of Oran and Gail for new positions at UC San Diego in January,

2003, which resulted in the immediate need to replace Oran’s

role in a special interdisciplinary course on arctic and antarctic

issues scheduled for spring, 2003. This seemed like an ideal

way to become more directly involved with the campus, and so

Igor Krupnik and I readily accepted the invitation extended by

IAS acting director Ross Virginia to spend a week lecturing on

Arctic history, circumpolar cultures (using the Hood Museum

ethnographic collections), and contemporary issues of Arctic

Native peoples. Igor also presented a talk on ‘knowledge

repatriation’ to the Anthropology Department, and we both met

with the Native Studies Program and with the staff at the

Dartmouth Library that houses Stefansson’s archives and book

collection. Stephen Loring gave a lecture sponsored by the

IAS on early Labrador links with New England in October,

2003, while Aron Crowell hosted a Dartmouth intern in our

Anchorage office.

As currently envisioned, the ASC-Dartmouth connection

will involve three types of activities: (1) ASC assistance in

Dartmouth’s formal instructional program (sporadically, or

perhaps through ASC staff being in residence for periods of

time); (2) training in northern research and museum studies at

the Smithsonian (primarily the National Museum of Natural

History) through internships, fellowships, and field opportunities; and (3) collaboration in joint research, education, and

public programs. Ideally, all of these activities may share a

for Circumpolar Affairs represents Canada at international

meetings on circumpolar issues; consults with interested

Canadians, particularly northern governments and Aboriginal

groups; and coordinates Canada’s participation in the Arctic

Council, which was created in 1996 to advance circumpolar

cooperation.

Ambassador Anawak was born near Repulse Bay, Nunavut

and was raised in traditional outpost camps in the Kivalliq region,

where he learned the traditional Inuit survival skills.

Mr. Anawak has served as hamlet councillor and mayor of

Rankin Inlet. He has also served on the executive board of the

Tunngavik Federation of Nunavut and as Speaker of the

Keewatin Regional Council. Mr. Anawak is also a former

president of the Keewatin Chamber of Commerce. In 1986, Mr.

Anawak was appointed Executive Director, and was later elected

President, of the Keewatin Inuit Association, where he served

until his election to Parliament in December 1988. Mr. Anawak

served two terms as the Member of Parliament for Nunatsiaq.

During that time, Mr. Anawak served as Official Opposition critic

for Northern Affairs and Environment, Vice-Chair of the

Standing Committee on Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development, and Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Indian

Affairs and Northern Development.In April 1997, the federal

Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development appointed

Mr. Anawak Interim Commissioner of Nunavut. As Interim

Commissioner, he was responsible for establishing the administrative framework for the new Nunavut government, Canada’s third

territorial government.

Mr. Anawak resigned from his position as Interim

Commissioner in January 1999 to run in the first election for

the Government of Nunavut, and in February 1999 the constituents of Rankin Inlet North elected him to the Nunavut

Legislative Assembly, where he served as Minister of Justice;

Community Government; and Culture, Language, Elders and

Youth.

Mr. Anawak and his wife, Caroline, have 17 children,

including seven adopted children and seven foster children.

originates from the fieldwork of Smithsonian naturalists and

archaeologists working between 1877 and 1940. It can be said

that these early photographs form the intellectual bedrock of

pictorial materials from the Arctic. However, the profound

cultural transformation that has taken place across the Arctic

since WWII is poorly represented in our collections. The ASC

has adopted a policy of trying to acquire collections of

photographs and moving pictures from the post-war period so

that future researchers will have a corpus of materials as rich

and varied as are the materials left by earlier Smithsonian

scientists. Towards that end the Margulies photographs form

a modest but valuable addition to our holdings with their insight

to camp life among the Inuit of Frobisher Bay prior to their

adopting a more settled life in the village that became Iqualuit.
ASC Newsletter 38

Roxy C. Laybourne, a

Smithsonian ornithologist

who pioneered the

identification of birds from

the barest remains of the

downy barbules at the base

of their feathers, died on

Aug. 7 at her farm in

Manassas, Virginia, at the

age of 92. For many years

Roxy helped the ASC

identify bird feathers used

in the manufacture of arctic

native clothing and

artifacts, pointing out that

TRANSITIONS

common theme where Smithsonian/ASC interests can be

found to match the educational needs of the College and its

students, staff, collections, and financial resources.

We were delighted that our discussions with Ross

Virginia quickly established common ground in the archive

collections of Vilhjalmur Stefansson held by Dartmouth

College Library and the Hood Museum’s collections of Arctic

ethnography and archaeology. At present neither of these

collections fall into the current range of Dartmouth faculty

research or knowledge. The Stefansson Archives include large

numbers of photographs taken during Stefansson’s many

arctic explorations to northern Alaska and the Canadian Arctic

in the early 1900s. Many of these photographs have never

been identified, researched, or published and have never been

made available to communities in the North. The same may be

said of the Hood’s artifact collections. Both are important

collections which would be of great interest to scholars and

northern natives and residents. Both collections have potential for multiple student projects supervised by ASC in

collaboration with relevant academic departments. Once

research data has been assembled, the projects could be

prepared by student-faculty teams for web or multi-media

publication with assistance from the College’s media training,

for Hood Museum displays, and for Smithsonian programming.

This relationship can make important contributions to

two forthcoming ASC projects. The first is the approaching

anniversary of Stefansson’s first arctic expedition in 1907,

which has special relevance to Dartmouth, as well as to the

northern science community which is planning a national

effort celebrating the Fourth International Polar Year, 2007-

08. We propose to organize projects in which Dartmouth

students utilize the College’s unique collections to learn

research skills and take part in the development of scholarly

products and public programs in Hanover, Washington, and

Anchorage. A second focus of collaboration may involve

collaboration with Dartmouth faculty specializing in Basque

literature and contemporary arts on planning and programs

related to our proposed Basque exhibition.

Roxy C. Laybourne

many of the feathers used in the fletching of arrows and darts

came from birds like cormorants and hawks that were the natural

predators of the fish and land game for which the weapons were

intended.

Roxy was a colorful character who liked to drive a red

sports car and was a great scientist who found a practical use for

her identification skills. In 1960 when a plane crashed taking off

from Logan Airport in Boston, killing all 62 people aboard, Roxy

helped investigators determine the cause of the crash was a flock

of starlings that got sucked into one of the planes engines. Since

then she has identified remains of hundreds of birds involved in

air crashes, becoming famous around the world for her skill at

teasing identifications from the most mangled and charred

remains. The breakthrough came when she realized that feathers

could in many cases be identified to species or family based on

the shape of the tiny fluffy barbule structures found on the quill

at the base of the feather. Her skills were especially important

after engine manufacturers were required to rate their engines for

strikes of certain types and sizes or weights of birds. The

identification of the bird could determine who was to pay the

insurance bill: the manufacturer or the carrier. Imagine an engine

being rated to gobble a goose!

However, Roxy told me that other than seeing them in living

birds she much preferred seeing feathers put to use in beautiful

garments and artifacts than inside airplane engines! Once when I

brought her a mass of grimy feather remains from one of our

permafrost archaeological sites in the Torngat Mountains in

northern Labrador, she ordered: “Git them feathers into a light

bath of Ivory Snow! Then I’ll look at ‘em. But don’t you scrub

‘em too hard now, y’hear!” Roxy had a great career at brightened

the lives all everyone around her with her enthusiasm, her

southern twang, and her bight wit. She’s gone, but her skill lives

on in Carla Dove, and Carla also likes pretty northern

featherwork!

Carolyn L. Rose, 53, Smithsonian

administrator and internationally

recognized leader and educator in

conservation, died August 29, 2002, after

a thirteen-year battle with cancer.

A Smithsonian employee since

1971, Carolyn most recently was

chairman of the Department of

Anthropology, National Museum of

Natural History. She also was adjunct

associate professor in anthropology and

art at George Washington University,

where she continued to teach courses in

conservation and museology until her death. In 1974, Carolyn helped

create and later directed a pioneering graduate training program in

ethnographic and archaeological conservation. This joint George

Washington University/Smithsonian Institution program was

developed in conjunction with the Smithsonian’s Anthropology

Conservation Lab, where she served as laboratory supervisor for

many years. In 1982, Carolyn married her department colleague,

chemist David von Endt, now with the Smithsonian Center for

Materials Research and Education, with whom she collaborated on

numerous projects. In 1988, Carolyn became a senior research

conservator, serving in that position until 1993 when she was

appointed deputy chair and acting program manager of the

Handbook of North American Indians, Department of Anthropology.

Carolyn L. Rose
ASC Newsletter 39

PUBLICATIONS

Book Release: Inuit Artists Print Workbook

Published by Arts and Culture of the North

Edited by Sandra Barz.

The Inuit Artists Print Workbook is a culmination of 30 years

of research about the specifics of Canadian Inuit prints produced

in the arctic since the first experiments at Cape Dorset in 1957. It

includes detailed information on all community and cooperative

collections as well as special collections and commissions,

experimental collections and prints and anomalies, footnoted with

additions, corrections and anecdotal material. It will be an historic

document because many of the advisors, artists and printmakers

who have been interviewed during my approx 30 trips to the

Canadian Arctic are not longer with us. This is also the only

source of its kind which contains all the details of the 5,000+

prints in one place. This Volume III, contained in two separately

bound books, is an extension of Volumes I and II, with much new

and revised information. Orders must be postmarked by January

30, 2004 as supplies are limited.

Sandra Barz

 Arts & Culture of the North

19 East 88th Street

New York, NY 10128. USA

E-mail: sbarz@worldnet.att.net

 Over the course of her career, Carolyn directed six

archaeological conservation field laboratories; conducted

conservation assessments for 16 U.S. and international museums;

and organized many workshops, symposia, annual meetings, and

conferences. During the last two decades, she had traveled to 22

countries throughout the world to lecture, teach, and advise on

museum preservation and collections management. Carolyn is

survived by her husband Dr. David von Endt, her daughter

Elizabeth from her first marriage, and two grandchildren, as well as

her mother, two sisters, a brother, and many other family

members. Tireless in her pursuit of expanding the field of

conservation and preservation,

Carolyn Rose leaves behind a legacy of research and

educational opportunities and a vast body of students and

colleagues who remember her with respect and warm affection.

To honor her memory, the Department of Anthropology has named

the Carolyn L. Rose Seminar Room and is raising funds to

establish a permanent legacy in her honor. Contributions to the

Carolyn L. Rose Fund can be sent to Dr. William Fitzhugh, Chair,

Department of Anthropology, National Museum of Natural History,

10th and Constitution Avenue, N.W., P.O. Box 37012, NMNHMRC112, Washington, D.C. 20013-7012.

Graham Rowley, an

Arctic traveler,

archaeologist and

student of Inuit

culture, was born in

Manchester, England

on October 31, 1912.

He died peacefully at

home in his 92nd

year, surrounded by

his family, on

December 31st. He

is survived by his

loving and devoted

wife, Diana Rowley

(nee Crowfoot), his daughters Anne, Susan and Jane and their

husbands and grandchildren Katharine, Sarah, Edward, Jason,

Francis and Emma. Graham first visited the Arctic in 1936 as a

member of the British Canadian Arctic Expedition and was

captivated by it. He spent the rest of his life on northern issues,

working at first for the Department of Defense and later for the

Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development. After

his retirement, he joined the faculty of Carleton University where

he taught in the Canadian Studies Programme.

If desired, donations may be made to the University of Ottawa

Heart Institute Foundation, 40 Ruskin St., Ottawa, ON., K1Y 9Z9.

[Note from Bill Fitzhugh] As we go to press I have just

learned that Graham Rowley died a few days ago at his home in

Ottawa. Graham was one of the most delightful persons I have

ever known — a scholar, gentleman, explorer, and an

‘anthropologist-without-portfolio’ who pioneered in the

archaeology of the Canadian arctic and gave us our first detailed

look at the wonders of Dorset bone technology and art, from his

work at Abverdjar. For many years the Rowley home was the

Graham Rowley (left) displaying a Harp

lager bar towel which he presented to

Elmer Harp (right) at the 1993 “Elders

Conference” in Hanover, N.H.

coziest spot in all of Ottawa, for me and many others. A true

pioneer who had the grace to share his knowledge with everyone,

and an infectious cheerfulness and interest in all things ‘northern’,

he did much to build the foundation of Inuit-friendly arctic

research in Canada. We are fortunate that his scholarship and love

for the North lives on in the work of his daughter, Susan, who

continues his research interest in Igloolik. In 1993 Graham was

honored at the time of his 80th birthday in the Dartmouth “Elder’s

Conference,” and a chapter of what later became his

autobiographical memoir, Cold Comfort, appeared in the ASC

volume, Honoring Our Elders: a History of Eastern Arctic

Archaeology (CCA-2, 2002). Graham was also a true sartorial

connoisseur who owned the largest cache of hand-woven Sami ties

in North America!

Book Release: Native Voices In Research

Edited by: Jill Oakes, Rick Riewe, Kimberley Wilde, Alison

Edmunds and Alison Dubois Aboriginal Issues Press

University of Manitoba,Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada

Native Voices in Research explores innovative ways of learning

based on traditional Aboriginal Peoples’ ways of knowing. Authors

include Aboriginal practitioners, academics, and community leaders

in the fields of anthropology, community health, dentistry,

education, history, nursing, linguistics, literature, political sciences,

economic development, and women’s studies.

The book has five sections: I; Health and Education, II;

Colonization, III; Ethics and Methodology, IV; Consultation

and Public Policy, and V; Traditional Knowledge in Planning.

The first section presents Aboriginal Peoples’ perspectives on
ASC Newsletter 40

Book Release: Honoring Our Elders: the History of Eastern

Arctic Archaeology

Contributions to Circumpolar Anthropology 2, 2002, 319 pp

Edited by William W. Fitzhugh, Stephen Loring, and Daniel Odess

Dedicated to Elmer Harp, Jr., the volume is introduced by a

personal reflection by Fitzhugh on Elmer Harp’s career and the

huge impact that he had on the education of a generation of

arctic researchers, on his field studies of Dorset culture throughout its geographic range, and on the use of photography and

environmental analysis techniques. This is followed by an

essay by Fitzhugh and Loring presenting a history of key

themes that have dominated arctic archaeology during the past

Book Release:To the Aleutians and Beyond, The Anthropology

of William S. Laughlin

Volume 20 Ethnographical Series The Danish National Museum

Edited by Bruno Frohlich , Albert Harper , and Rolf Gilberg

A volume has recently been published in honor of William S.

Laughlin, one of the pioneers in Aleutian archaeology and

anthropology. Includes twenty two articles covering topics on

shamanism; archaeology of the Aleutians, southwestern Alaska,

and Kodiak Island; mortuary practices and Aleutian site

surveys (Bruno Frohlich and Sara Laughlin), mummy

studies; DNA typing; paleopathology, epidemiology, and

migrations ; and other articles on museum collections, bird

feather identification, and William Laughlin. The volume is

well-illustrated of which a majority have been produced by Bill

Laughlin’s students, friends and colleagues reflecting more than

60 years of archaeological and anthropological research in the

Aleutian Islands, Greenland, Canada, and mainland Alaska.

Copies can be ordered from Bruno Frohlich, Department of

Anthropology, Smithsonian Institution, Washington, DC

(frohlich.bruno@nmnh.si.edu) or from Rolf Gilberg, The

National Museum of Denmark, Copenhagen

(rolf.gilberg@natmus.dk).

In September 2003 the press released the printed volume of

proceedings of the “centennial” Jesup conference held in New York

in November 1997. This collection of 20 papers edited by Laurel

Kendall and Igor Krupnik was produced as Volume 4 under the

Arctic Studies Center’s Contribution to Circumpolar Anthropology

Series. The book follows the template of the first opening Jesup

volume in the series, “Gateways”; it features a great body of new

archival and documentary data, and over 100 historical photos and

other illustrations. Papers in the volume cover a broad range of the

issues pertaining to the history of the Expedition and careers of its

individual participants (collectors); the intellectual impact of the

multi-decade venture; and the role of Jesup-generated cultural

resources to modern efforts in heritage preservation, museum

anthropology, and local communities once studied by the members

of the first expedition. Over 100 copies of the 800-strong print-run

have been already disseminated. We would appreciate assistance

from our Newsletter readers in spreading the message about the

new volume to libraries, museum and research centers, and

individual scholars worldwide. Avaiable from the Arctic Studies

Center.

Book Release: Constructing Cultures Then and Now:

Celebrating Franz Boaz and the Jesup North Pacific

Expedition

Contributions to Circumpolar Anthropology 4, 2003. Edited by

Laurel Kendall and Igor Krupnik

the meaning of “place or home”, collaborative field work,

distance education nursing programs, the meaning of cancer, and

university life. The second section presents colonization

through changes in Mi’kmaq-Acadian alliances, Anglican

missionaries, use of Guarani by indigenous peoples in Paraguay,

and the role of Coyote! The third section introduces ethics and

methods based on Aboriginal traditions highlighting experiential

learning, storytelling, relationship building, and inclusive

learning, The fourth section questions policies in Canada and

India, provides advice on effective consultation, and discusses

the essential need for respect in presenting traditional ecological

knowledge. The final section shares examples of how community-based research was used to learn invaluable perspectives

on topics ranging from Arctic climate change, lake sturgeon and

moose, northern economic development, Greenland fisheries,

and indigenous potato farmers in Bolivia.

riewerr@ms.umanitoba.ca

Associate Editor Aboriginal Issues Press

University of Manitoba Winnipeg, Manitoba R3T 2N2

half-century, as well as a discussion of the ‘sea change’ that

occurred when the research mode shifted from strict adherence

to scientific objectives to a more public-minded, native-oriented

approach. This shift is documented also by statements made by

Inuit who participated in the ‘Harp Fest’ conference held at

Dartmouth College in 1993, in several of the papers in the

volume, and as represented in the life of native archaeologist

Daniel Weetaluktuk. These papers and an historical essay on

arctic ethnology by Ernest Burch, Jr. set the tone for the four

sections that follow: Historical Perspectives (Burch, James V.

Wright, Bryan Gordon, David Morrison); High Arctic: Travel,

Philosophy, and Theory (Ted Carpenter, Jørgen Meldgaard,

Hans-Christian Gulløv, Moreau Maxwell, Daniel Odess,

Graham Rowley, Guy Mary-Rousseliere); The Far Northeast:

Archaeology of Quebec, the Maritimes, and Labrador (William

Fitzhugh, Stephen Loring, Patrick Plumet, Charles Martijn,

Jean-Yves Pintal, Moira McCaffrey); and The Future of the

Past (Bryan Hood, James Helmer, Genevieve LeMoine,

Susan Rowley, and Norman Hallendy). Available from the

Arctic Studies Center.

STAFF PUBLICATIONS

2002 Honoring Our Elders: the History of Eastern Arctic

Archaeology, edited by William Fitzhugh, Stephen Loring, and

Daniel Odess. 319 pp. Contributions to Circumpolar Anthropology, 2. Washington, DC: Arctic Studies Center, National

Museum of Natural History, Smithsonian Institution.

2003 Constructing Cultures Then and Now. Celebrating
ASC Newsletter 41

and Policy, edited by G. Carleton Ray and Jerry McCormickRay. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing, pp. 181-182.

2003 The Walrus in Native Marine Economies. In

Coastal-Marine Conservation: Science and Policy, edited by G.

Carleton Ray and Jerry McCormick-Ray. Oxford: Blackwell

Publishing, pp. 196-97.

2002 “Shifting Patterns, Lasting Partnerships. Inuit

Knowledge and Academic Science in Arctic Cultural Research.”

Inussuk. Arctic Research Journal (2):55-74.

2002 The Surveyor of the ‘Bridge’: Interview with

William S. Laughlin. In: To the Aleutians and Beyond. The

Anthropology of William S. Laughlin, edited by Bruno Frolich,

Albert Harper, and Rolf Gilberg. Publications of the National

Museum. Ethnographical Series, 20. Copenhagen: The National

Museum of Denmark, pp. 207-226.

Stephen Loring:

2002 Introduction. In, Honoring Our Elders: A History of

Eastern Arctic Archaeology, pp. 1-29

2002 “And the took away the stones from Ramah”: lithic

raw material sourcing and Eastern Arctic archaeology”. In,

Honoring Our Elders: A History of Eastern Arctic Archaeology., ,

pp.163-185

2002: INVITED SPEAKER: The Inuit of the Makkovik

and Hopedale Areas: the archaeological record. From Nisbet

Harbour to Nain: the Early Moravian Exploration of Labrador

Symposium, Department of Tourism, Culture and Recreation,

Government of Newfoundland and Labrador, Makkovik, Labrador.

2003 “The Archaeology and Ethnohistory of a Drowned

Land: Innu Nation Research Along the Former Michikamats Lake

Shore in Nitassinan (Interior Labrador).” (co-authored with Moira

T. McCaffrey, Peter Armitage and Daniel Ashini). Archaeology of

Eastern North America 31:45-72.

2003 Aleut Archaeology and Cultural Heritage: The

Legacy of the Jesup North Pacific Expedition (co-authored with

Douglas W. Veltre) In, Constructing Cultures Then and Now:

Celebrating Franz Boas and the Jesup North Pacific Expedition,

pp. 306-318.

Aron Crowell:

2003 “Implications of ‘Punctuated Prductivity’ for

Coastal Settlement Patterns: A GIS Study of the Katmai Coast,

Gulf of Alaska”.( Alaska). Journal of Anthropology 2(1): 62-96.

2003 Film, Archaeology and Memory: Ancestral Alutiiq

Villages of the Outer Kenai Coast. 21 minutes. Produced by the

Arctic Studies Center and Talking Circle Productions, Anchorage.

2002 Russian Colonialism. In Encyclopedia of Historical

Archaeology, edited by C. Orser, pp 486-489. Routledge, London.

Franz Boas and the Jesup North Pacific Expedition, edited by

Laurel Kendall and Igor Krupnik. Contributions to Circumpolar

Anthropology, 4. Washington, DC: Arctic Studies Center,

National Museum of Natural History, Smithsonian Institution.

William Fitzhugh:

 2002 Introduction. In: Honoring Our Elders: the

History of Eastern Arctic Archaeology: pp. 1-35.

 2002 Nukasusutok 2 and the Paleoeskimo Transition in

Northern Labrador. In: Honoring Our Elders: the History of

Eastern Arctic Archaeology: pp. 153-184. Washington: Arctic

Studies Center, Smithsonian Institution.

 2002 Saving Cultures, Reconstructing Museums:

Smithsonian Anthropology and Native Relations. In: Museums

2000: Confirmation or Challenge? Edited by Peer-Uno Agren

and Sophie Nyman, pp. 177-183. Swedish Traveling Exhibitions.

ICOM Sweden and the Swedish Museums Association.

 2002 The Gateways Project 2001: Archaeological

Survey of the Quebec Lower North Shore, Gulf of St. Lawrence,

from Mingan to Blanc Sablon. 90 pp. report. Washington

D.C.:Arctic Studies Center, Smithsonian Institution.

 2003 The Gateways Project 2002: Surveys and Excavations from Petit Mecatina to Belles Amours. 174 pp. report.

Washington DC: Arctic Studies Center, Smithsonian Institution.

 2003 Mongolia’s Arctic Connections: The Hovsgol Deer

Stone Project, 2001-2002 Field Report. 114 pp. Washington,

DC: Arctic Studies Center, National Museum of Natural

History, Smithsonian Institution. (Author/editor, with contributions by Paula DePriest, Susan Lutz, Stephen Young, Ts.

Tsendeekhuu).

 2003 Heritage Anthropology in the “Jesup-2” Era:

Exploring North Pacific Cultures Through Cooperative Research.

In: Constructing Cultures Then and Now: Celebrating Franz

Boas and the Jesup North Pacific Expedition: pp. 287-306.

Washington, DC: Arctic Studies Center, National Museum of

Natural History, Smithsonian Institution.

Igor Krupnik:

2003 The Aim of the Expedition ...Has in the Main Been

Accomplished: Words, Deeds, and Legacies of the Jesup North

Pacific Expedition. With Nikolai Vakhtin. In: Constructing

Cultures Then and Now. Celebrating Franz Boas and the

Jesup North Pacific Expedition: pp. 15-31.

2003 Introduction: A Centenary and a Celebration. With

Laurel Kendall. In Constructing Cultures Then and Now.

Celebrating Franz Boas and the Jesup North Pacific Expedition:

pp. 1-11.

2003 The Subsistence Era: Early Prehistory to EuroAmerican Contacts. In Coastal-Marine Conservation: Science
ASC Newsletter 42

Ainu: Spirit of a Northern People. Edited by William W. Fitzhugh

and Chisato O. Dubreuil. 1999.

The Earth is Faster Now: Indigenous Observations of Arctic

Environmental Change. Edited by Igor Krupnik and Dyanna Jolly.

ARCUS, 2002.

Vikings: The North Atlantic Saga. Edited by William W. Fitzhugh

and Elizabeth Ward. 2000. Available from SI Press (www.

sipress.si.edu)

Gateways: Exploring the Legacy of the Jesup North Pacific

Expedition, 1897-1902. Edited by Igor Krupnik and William W.

Fitzhugh. Contributions to Circumpolar Anthropology 1, 2001.

Honoring Our Elders: The History of Eastern Arctic Archaeology.

Edited by William W. Fitzhugh, Stephen Loring, and Daniel Odess.

Contributions to Circumpolar Anthropology 2, 2001.

Akuzilleput Igaqullghet: Our Words Put to Paper. Edited by Igor

Krupnik, Willis Walunga, and Vera Metcalf. Contributions to

Circumpolar Anthropology 3, 2002.

Constructing Cultures Then and Now: Celebrating Franz Boas

and the Jesup North Pacific Expedition. Edited by Laurel Kendall

and Igor Krupnik. Contributions to Circumpolar Anthropology 4,

2003.

The Gateways Project 2001: Archaeological Survey of the

Quebec Lower North Shore, Gulf of St. Lawrence, from

Mingan to Blanc Sablon. 90 pp. field report. Washington

D.C.:Arctic Studies Center, Smithsonian Institution.

The Gateways Project 2003: Archaeological Survey of the

Quebec Lower North Shore, Gulf of St. Lawrence, from Hare

Harbor to Jacque Cartier Bay . 130 pp. field report. Washington

D.C.:Arctic Studies Center, Smithsonian Institution.

The Gateways Project 2002: Surveys and Excavations from

Petit Mecatina to Belles Amours. 174 pp. field report.

Washington DC: Arctic Studies Center, Smithsonian Institution.

Mongolia’s Arctic Connections: The Hovsgol Deer Stone

Project, 2001-2002 Field Report. 114 pp. field report.

Washington, DC: Arctic Studies Center, National Museum of

Natural History, Smithsonian Institution. (Author/editor, with

contributions by Paula DePriest, Susan Lutz, Stephen Young, Ts.

Tsendeekhuu).

THANKS TO OUR SPONSORS ASC Publications

Afognak Native Corporation

Alaska Humanities Forum

Alaska State Museum Grant-in-Aid

Program

Alutiiq Heritage Foundation Anchorage

Museum of History and Art

Anina Gaize

Arco Foundation

Bateman Fund

Bristol Bay Native Corporation

Inlingua/Santis Corp.

International Grenfell Association

James VanStone Estate

Kodiak Area Native Association

Koniag Inc.

Marshall Cloyd

Middlecott Foundation National Bank

of Alaska

National Aeronautics and Space

 Administration

National Endowment for the Humanities

National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration

National Park Service

National Science Foundation

Newfoundland Rural Economic

Developmentand Schools

Oceans Alaska Science and Learning

Center

Phillips Alaska Inc.

Rasmuson Foundation

Raymond and Margaret Mason

R.S. Peabody Museum

Trust For Mutual Understanding
ASC Newsletter 43

For information on ASC publications and to purchase please contact:

Arctic Studies Center Smithsonian Institution

PO Box 37012

10th and Constitution N.W.

National Museum Natural History,

Rm 307 MRC 0112

Washington, DC 20560-0112

Fax: 202-357-2684

Phone: 202-357-2682

Email: arctics@nmnh.si.edu

Thank you for supporting the Arctic Studies Center and its research!