Inconstant Companions: Archaeology and North American Indian Oral Traditions

311 Pages·2006·3.05 MB·English

by  Ronald J. Mason

Inconstant Companions

Inconstant Companions
Archaeology and North American
Indian Oral Traditions
Ronald J. Mason
THE UNIVERSITY OF ALABAMA PRESS
Tuscaloosa
Copyright © 2007
The University of Alabama Press
Tuscaloosa, Alabama 35487-0380
All rights reserved
Manufactured in the United States of America
Typeface: Bembo
∞
The paper on which this book is printed meets the minimum requirements of American
National Standard for Information Sciences-Permanence of Paper for Printed Library
Materials, ANSI Z39.48–1984.
Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data
Mason, Ronald J.
Inconstant companions : archaeology and North American Indian oral traditions /
Ronald J. Mason.
p. cm.
Includes bibliographical references and index.
ISBN-13: 978-0-8173-1533-7 (cloth : alk. paper)
ISBN-10: 0-8173-1533-0 (alk. paper)
1. Indians of North America—Folklore. 2. Indians of North America—History. 3. Oral
tradition—North America. 4. Ethnohistory—North America. I. Title.
E98.F6M28 2006
305.897—dc22
2006008288
Contents
Preface vii
1. Introduction 1
2. On History 22
3. On Memory 45
4. Norsemen, Trojans, and Ancient Israelites 67
5. On the Nature of Oral Tradition 95
6. Mixing Apples and Oranges, or Looking for Kernels of Truth 132
7. Mammoth Remembrances 150
8. On the Historicity of Symbols and Symbolic Praxis 163
9. On the Central Siouans Before J. Owen Dorsey 197
10. Conclusions 233
References Cited 253
Index 287

Preface
This book addresses a fundamental historiographical problem in archae-
ology, history, and anthropology generally but most especially when those
disciplines are practiced in cross-cultural contexts. Although my focus is on
North America, this problem is global. When an archaeologist excavates
traces of a society with which some modern native people claim af¤nity
and for which they assert possession of traditional historical knowledge,
the scienti¤c results may diverge sharply from the traditional knowledge
claims. In such cases, who is to be believed? Why one and not the other?
Must it be a zero-sum game? That problem, while long-standing, has grown
to critical proportions and heightened decibel levels since the political de-
colonization of much of the non-Western world following the Second
World War. This is the issue popularly encapsulated in the question and, si-
multaneously, challenge: “Who controls (or owns) the past?”
On the face of it, that question is absurd. The past is beyond control. It is
exempt from ownership. It is extinct. The challenge, however, is another
matter. Notwithstanding some societies’ denials of the pastness of the past,
examples of which will be met in the following pages, what is really being
asked in this question/challenge is, “When disagreements arise, whose ver-
sion of the past is to be preferred?” This in turn involves the compound
question, “For whom, by whom, and for what purpose?”
This has been a dif¤cult book to write. And some will likely conclude
the same about reading it. It will also be judged controversial. Doubtless
many who simply scan its pages to see whether they might want to read it
will decide not to, ¤nding it opinionated in a direction not their own, fre-
quently requiring close attention, and sometimes discomforting. It is most
assuredly out of step with the current vogue to ¤nd equal value in “differ-
ent ways of knowing”—that is, to regard adherence to canons of evidence
and rules of logic developed in the West as intolerable “hegemonic trespass”
on non-Western epistemic traditions. An unfortunate but inevitable conse-
viii / Preface
quence of being out of step is treading on toes. When and where I have
done this has been incidental to pushing an argument onto grounds already
occupied. Not a few of the possessors of those toes are persons I esteem and
regard as friends. I trust they know me well enough to see no personal mal-
ice where none is intended.
Cognizant of the risk I take in forearming potential critics of what I
have to say in this book, I nevertheless owe it to all readers to state my
professional expertise and acknowledge my relevant shortcomings. I am a
liberally educated anthropologist of long ¤eld, museum, and college teach-
ing experience and have special research interest in the archaeology and
ethnohistory of North America’s native people, particularly those south of
the Arctic and east of the Rocky Mountains. I am not a Homeric scholar
nor a classical archaeologist. Neither am I a biblical historian, an Africanist
or Oceanian ethnographer, a Norse epic or Serbo-Croatian ballad specialist,
a psychologist of memory, an expert in documentary exegesis, nor a folk-
lorist. In these ¤elds I claim no more than amateur status and acquaintance
with some of their practitioners. I have also done extensive reading in those
¤elds—not all of it to be recommended for sheer pleasure—and have found
in their combination insights I regard as indispensable in dealing with some
of the issues intrinsic to the relations between oral traditional histories and
those revealed by scienti¤cally informed historiography. A little knowledge,
it has sometimes been said, is a dangerous thing. To which I would add, none
is even worse.
In pursuing these matters, I have greatly bene¤ted from advice, criticism,
and encouragement from a number of individuals who, while not always in
agreement with my opinions, went out of their way to respond helpfully to
my requests for information or special services. Whatever errors and other
shortcomings may be found in what follows are my responsibility alone.
Those to whom I am especially indebted are Matthew Ans¤eld, Donald
Bahr, James A. Brown, William A. Chaney, Charles E. Cleland, James A.
Clifton, Glynn Custred, Frederica de Laguna, Charles Garrad, Jeff Grath-
wohl, William Green, Robert L. Hall, June Helm, Dale R. Henning, Alice B.
Kehoe, Nathan S. Lowrey, George P. Nicholas, Peter N. Peregrine, Terry L.
Rew-Gottfried, Robert J. Salzer, George R. Saunders, Lynn S. Teague,
Alexander von Gernet, Jere Wickens, James V. Wright, and most of all my
wife and colleague, Carol I. Mason.
Although they were not directly connected with the writing of this
book, I want to express my indebtedness to my early mentors and friends,
too many of whom, alas, can no longer be thanked in person, for persuading
me by their example of the indispensability of an archaeology integrated
with the rest of anthropology and liberal education: Dorothy Cross, Loren
Preface / ix
C. Eiseley, J. L. Giddings, Jr., Ward H. Goodenough, James B. Grif¤n, Samuel
Noah Kramer, J. Alden Mason, George I. Quimby, Froelich G. Rainey,
William A. Ritchie, Linton Satterthwaite, Jr., and John Witthoft.
Finally, it is a pleasure to express my gratitude to the Department of
Anthropology and the administration and staff of Lawrence University for
unstintingly providing the facilities for postretirement research and writing
and to Judith Knight and the editorial and production staff of the Univer-
sity of Alabama Press for their splendid performance in ushering my manu-
script into print.