ABSTRACT. As part of the First International Polar Year, the Smithsonian Institution established a meteorological and astronomical observatory at Ft. Chimo (Kuujjuaq) in Ungava Bay in 1881? 1883. Sent to man the post was the Smithsonian?s most prominent northern naturalist, Lucien Turner. Turner developed a close rapport with Inuit and Innu families from whom he acquired an extraordinary array of scientifi c specimens and ethno- logical materials. While intrepid and inspired, the work of the Smithsonian?s pioneering Arctic scientists refl ects the biases of western scientifi c tradition. Northern Native peoples were viewed as part of the arctic ecosystem to be observed, cataloged, and described. For the most part, the intellectual landscape of Innu and Inuit groups was overlooked and ignored. The Smithsonian collections are a powerful talisman for evoking knowledge, appreciation, and pride in Innu and Inuit heritage and serve as one point of departure for research during the Fourth IPY in 2007? 2008. Recognition that northern Natives have a mandate to participate in and inform northern research is an important change in the production of northern scientifi c research. INTRODUCTION This essay considers the changes in the practices of museum anthropology and archaeology at the Smithsonian Institution between the First IPY in 1882? 1883 and the current IPY of 2007? 2008. To know a place is to name it. The place we call the Arctic means different things to different people. A cultural construct defi ned by different eyes and different ways of knowing, it is both real and intangible. Archaeologist Robert McGhee (2007) calls it ?the last imaginary place.? It is only in the twentieth century that the technologies and the insatiable appetites of the developed world have been able to overcome environmental and logistical constraints to establish a permanent presence throughout the north. There are libraries and research institutes devoted to the complexity and variety of human experiences at high latitudes. For visitors, the Arctic is as much a cul- tural construct as it is a physical one, with perceptions repeatedly shaped and reshaped by time and circumstance. One has only to consider the transformation of Arctic landscapes from the fantastic fairy-tale visions? gothic cathedrals of ice? of the early-nineteenth- century explorers, subsequently morphed by suffering and danger into the grim Stephen Loring, Arctic Studies Center, Depart- ment of Anthropology, National Museum of Nat- ural History, Smithsonian Institution, P.O. Box 37012, MRC 112, Washington, DC 20013-7012, USA (lorings@si.edu). Accepted 9 May 2008. From Tent to Trading Post and Back Again: Smithsonian Anthropology in Nunavut, Nunavik, Nitassinan, and Nunatsiavut? The Changing IPY Agenda, 1882? 2007 Stephen Loring 10_Loring_pg115-128_Poles.indd 11510_Loring_pg115-128_Poles.indd 115 11/18/08 9:17:27 AM11/18/08 9:17:27 AM 116 SMITHSONIAN AT THE POLES / LORING and foreboding visions of the ubiquitous and relentless ice of the post-Franklin era (Figure 1), to the modern era with its coffee-table books of stunning photography of polar bears and vast unpopulated expanses (Loomis, 1977; 1986; Grant, 1998). But the Arctic is also a homeland, and has been for thousands of years. Arctic inhabitants have evolved a remarkable and practical adaptation to the cli- matic and ecological extremes of the northern polar world. Indigenous knowledge? based on observation and infer- ence and passed from generation to generation? forms an astute and perhaps surprisingly complex interpretation of the world inhabited by indigenous northern peoples. Yet with few exceptions (e.g., Rasmussen, 1929; Rink, 1875), visiting researchers and scientists have not learned the lan- guage of their hosts and thus have been denied much of the complexity of northern perceptions that has developed over generations by indigenous peoples. Historically, science in the north began as a hand- maiden of colonial enterprise. Having developed the tech- nology to transport them into (if not always out of) the polar regions, nineteenth-century explorers, with their passion for expanding scientifi c and geographic knowl- edge, began to collect information about the places they found themselves in. As was typical on many early and mid nineteenth-century Arctic voyages, with their winter quarters established, observatories were placed on the ice and rounds of tidal measurements, weather, and geophysi- cal observations began. Expedition accounts are fi lled with observations on the phenomenology of ice and cold, as navy explorers and scientists confronted the mysteries of Arctic life and returned with their collections of natural history specimens. Also in these accounts, are anecdotal and ethnohistorical passages that provide some of the fi rst descriptions of Native residents of the Arctic. In compari- son to more complex societies elsewhere, northern band- level societies, with their more modest material remains (the very antithesis of Euro-American values of domi- nance, competition and wealth) were perceived as being backward and marginal, literally frozen in time. Lacking a critical self-awareness the eyes of the European explor- ers had yet to take the true measure of the Natives of the eastern arctic who were frequently portrayed as quaint and childlike, devoid of the quarrelsome and bellicose at- titudes of some of their western and southern counterparts (Figure 2). Gradually the accumulation of geographical knowl- edge, dearly bought, began to make sense of the physi- cal mysteries of the arctic. Still little in the way of seri- ous attention to native cultures was afforded prior to the travels of Charles Francis Hall beginning in 1860 (Hall, 1864; Loomis, 1972). More visionary than scientist, Hall had been drawn to the arctic by the continuing fascina- tion with the fate of the lost Sir John Franklin Expedi- tion (1845) and the possibility that survivors might yet be living amongst the Inuit. Severely curtailed by fi nancial constraints Hall broke from the prevailing tradition of us- ing expedition ships frozen in the ice as base stations from which to launch sledge and small-boat voyages in favor of adopting Inuit modes of travel. Hall moved in with his Nunavut hosts, learned their language, and experienced their culture as an active participant. He was fortunate FIGURE 1. The terrible tragedy surrounding the loss of life during the U.S. North Polar Expedition (1879? 1881) following on the de- bacle of the British Northwest Passage Expedition under Sir John Franklin (1845? 1848) had soured public opinion in the United States on the benefi ts of polar exploration and transformed perceptions of the Arctic as a deadly and foreboding landscape. Editorial cartoon, Frank Leslie?s Illustrated Newspaper, 20 May 1882, William Dall papers, RU7073, SI Archives. (S. Loring photograph.) 10_Loring_pg115-128_Poles.indd 11610_Loring_pg115-128_Poles.indd 116 11/18/08 9:17:27 AM11/18/08 9:17:27 AM FROM TENT TO TRADING POST AND BACK AGAIN 117 in befriending an extraordinary Inuit couple, Ebierbing (?Joe?) and Tookoolito (?Hannah?) who provided Hall with an entr?e into Inuit society and served as his guides and guardians on all of Hall?s three arctic expeditions (Loomis, 1997). Hall?s receptivity to Inuit testimony and acceptance of the validity of Inuit knowledge about their history and their homeland both assured his own survival and the success of his expeditions and presaged (by more than half a century) the recognition of the validity and acuity of Inuit oral knowledge by subsequent Arctic scien- tists and travelers (Woodman, 1991) (Figure 3). In the eastern Arctic, it is not until nearly 20 years after Hall that the fl edgling discipline of Arctic anthro- pology emerged as a direct consequence of the fi rst Inter- national Polar Year with the arrival of Lucien Turner in Ungava in 1882? 1884 and Franz Boas in Baffi n Island in 1883? 1884 (Loring, 2001a; Cole and Muller-Wille, 1984). Neither Boas nor Turner was formally trained in anthropology. Turner?s fi rst interest and abiding passion was ornithology while Boas came to the eastern arctic as a geographer. Boas? trip to Baffi n Island was planned and partially sponsored by the German Polar Commission, which was then processing the data gathered from the Ger- man IPY station in Cumberland Sound (Barr, 1985). The resulting ethnographic monographs of both Boas (1885) and Turner (1894) were subsequently published by the Smithsonian Institution. These monographs have proved to be the emerging discipline of anthropology?s intellectual bedrock for research pertaining to the indigenous peoples of Baffi n Island and northern Quebec-Labrador, and these FIGURE 2. Illustrations accompanying William Edward Parry?s popular accounts of his search for the Northwest Passage (1819? 1834) depict the central Canadian Arctic Inuit as whimsical and childlike catered to a European perception of the polar region as a fantastic otherworldly place (Parry 1821, 1824). Detail from a Staffordshire ceramic plate, ?Arctic Scenery? ca. 1835. (Photograph by S. Loring of plate in author?s collection.) 10_Loring_pg115-128_Poles.indd 11710_Loring_pg115-128_Poles.indd 117 11/18/08 9:17:37 AM11/18/08 9:17:37 AM 118 SMITHSONIAN AT THE POLES / LORING works remain as some of the lasting triumphs of the fi rst IPY accomplishments. The scientifi c agendas of the International Polar Years, in 1882? 1883, 1932? 1933, and 1957? 1958 have all been concerned with addressing problems of meteorol- ogy, atmospheric science, and high-latitude geophysics. Yet, ironically, arguably the most lasting accomplishments of the American contribution to the First IPY? from the Point Barrow and Ungava stations? were the collections of natural history specimens (e.g., Dunbar, 1983) and eth- nographic materials that Smithsonian naturalists acquired around the fringes of their offi cial duties as weather ob- servers for the U.S. Army Signal Service (Murdoch, 1892; Turner, 1894; Nelson, 1899). Surprisingly, the volumes of atmospheric, oceanic, magnetic, and solar observations gathered at the dozen IPY 1882? 1883 stations did not yield the anticipated insights into global climatic and geophysi- cal regimes (Wood and Overland, 2006). Perhaps more signifi cant than the research results in the physical sciences was the establishment of a model for international scien- tifi c practice based on coordination and cooperation, and the recognition that the study of high latitudes (at both poles), as with the high seas, was an arena of international consequence and signifi cance. In company with the earth sciences and natural history, anthropology and archaeology were part of the expand- ing western economic, social, and intellectual hegemony of the nineteenth century. The construction of scientifi c knowledge about the world has, for the most part, pro- ceeded following well-defi ned western notions of logic and scientifi c explanation as the principle explanatory process for understanding the natural world and the place of human beings therein. Now, in the twenty-fi rst century, with much of the world?s cultural and biological diversity documented in at least a preliminary fashion, anthropol- ogy faces the challenge of recognizing, articulating, inter- preting, and preserving as broad a spectrum of humanity?s shared cultural diversity as possible. At the time of the fi rst IPY, many of the indigenous peoples of North America had been swept from their tra- ditional homelands. Secure in their northern redoubts of ice and stone, the Natives of the eastern Arctic had been spared much of the continental dislocation and genocide waged against indigenous communities in warmer climes. The inroads of European explorers, and later missionar- ies, whalers, and traders, had not signifi cantly impeded traditional Inuit subsistence practices nor had they in- truded far into their spiritual matters and beliefs. Under the leadership of Spencer Baird, the fi rst curator of the U.S. National Museum and the Institution?s second secre- tary (1878? 1887), and later, John Wesley Powell (Director of the B.A.E. 1879? 1902), Smithsonian anthropology? in the guise of the Bureau of American Ethnology? operated under a paradigm of salvage anthropology in the belief that Native American peoples were fated to gradually decline and disappear. Situated in the National Museum of Natural History (NMNH), Smithsonian anthropology had a decidedly materialist, collections-based orientation that was strongly infl uenced by biological sciences and Darwin?s evolutionary doctrines. Northern native cultures were seen as being somewhat uniquely divorced from his- tory due to their remote geography, and many theorists of the day considered them to be a cultural relic of Ice Age Paleolithic peoples, at the extremity of the scale in terms of human cultural variation. FIGURE 3. Thule ground-slate whaling harpoon endblade found by Charles Francis Hall?s Inuit companion Ebierbing, also known as ?Esquimaux Joe.? Historically, the role of Inuit guides and companions in the production of Arctic science was rarely acknowl- edged.SI-10153, Charles Francis Hall collection, NMNH. (S. Loring photograph) 10_Loring_pg115-128_Poles.indd 11810_Loring_pg115-128_Poles.indd 118 11/18/08 9:17:51 AM11/18/08 9:17:51 AM FROM TENT TO TRADING POST AND BACK AGAIN 119 The Smithsonian Institution?s previous interests in the eastern arctic? beginning with biological studies in Hudson?s Bay in the early 1860s, and support for the U.S. Eclipse Expedition to northern Labrador in 1860, as well as its close relationship with the Hudson?s Bay Company (Lindsay 1993)? provided a basis for a concerted study in the Ungava region. As part of the First International Polar Year 1882? 1883, the Smithsonian Institution partnered with the U.S. Signal Corps to establish meteorological and astronomical observatories at Point Barrow, Alaska, at Ft. Conger on Ellesmere Island, and at the Hudson?s Bay Company Post at Fort Chimo (Kuujjuaq) in Ungava Bay (Barr, 1985). Sent to man the post at Kuujjuaq was one of the Smithsonian?s most experienced northern naturalists, Lucien Turner, who had previously conducted important studies for the Smithsonian in the Aleutian Islands and Western Alaska (Turner, n.d.; 1886; Loring, 2001a). Lucien Turner (1848? 1909) was at the center of a small and talented band of young naturalists that were recruited by the Smithsonian?s second secretary, Spencer Baird. An accomplished ornithologist, linguist, and taxi- dermist Turner reveled in the opportunities for research and collecting in the North American arctic. Baird ar- ranged for Turner to be posted at the Hudson?s Bay Com- pany post at the mouth of the Koksoak River in Ungava Bay as a member of an IPY-sponsored meteorological ob- servatory for the U.S. Signal Corps. Turner?s arrival at Fort Chimo in 1882 was something of a surprise for the chief factor there, as news from the outside world only arrived once a year with the annual supply ship. Not easily rebuffed, Turner quickly estab- lished his observatory and took up the responsibilities of his post (Figure 4), both those pertaining to his IPY agenda and those dictated by his Smithsonian mandate. Although constrained by the demanding regime of his observation and recording obligations, Turner was able to develop a close rapport with Inuit and Innu families visiting the post, from whom he acquired an extraordinary array of scientifi c FIGURE 4. Lucien Turner at his observatory at the Hudson?s Bay Company Post at Fort Chimo (near present day Kuujjuak), 1881. (SI-6968) 10_Loring_pg115-128_Poles.indd 11910_Loring_pg115-128_Poles.indd 119 11/18/08 9:17:53 AM11/18/08 9:17:53 AM 120 SMITHSONIAN AT THE POLES / LORING specimens and ethnological materials (Turner, 1888, 1894; Loring 2001a) (see Figure 5). Unfortunately, no traces of a personal diary or let- ters survive from Turner?s time at Fort Chimo. Diligent archival research, at the Smithsonian and Hudson?s Bay Company archives, provide a few tantalizing clues to his rapport with the northern Natives he came into contact with (Loring, 2001a). However, for the most part these contacts are only dimly referred to as the source for knowledge about the local environment, animals (includ- ing mammals, birds, fi sh, and invertebrates), social rela- tions, and mythology. The contemporary ?intellectual landscape? of Innu and Inuit groups? the complex web of oral histories and observational knowledge pertaining to animals, weather, and the land? was largely overlooked and ignored by the IPY-era anthropologists, as their focus, stemming from the natural history approach of their mis- sions, was to categorize and describe the material culture of the people they encountered. Despite being confi ned by the intellectual framework of the day, Turner?s Ungava collections (as well as the collections made by Murdoch and Ray at Point Barrow in 1881? 1883) have become a powerful instrument for evoking knowledge, appreciation, and pride in Innu and Inuit heritage. They serve as a point FIGURE 5. Innu women and children visiting Lucien Turner at Fort Chimo, 1881. Photography was deemed an essential component of the work of the Smithsonian naturalists. As some of the earliest extent photographic images of northern Natives, they remain a prominent legacy of the fi rst IPY. (SI-6977) 10_Loring_pg115-128_Poles.indd 12010_Loring_pg115-128_Poles.indd 120 11/18/08 9:18:05 AM11/18/08 9:18:05 AM FROM TENT TO TRADING POST AND BACK AGAIN 121 of departure for research during this IPY in 2007? 2008, as explained below. Within the confi nes of their training and natural history proclivities, the Smithsonian?s Arctic natu- ralists had a demonstrated sensitivity to some aspects of native knowledge pertaining to the cultural and biological collections they acquired, though for the most part these are brief and anecdotal notations. Today, these notes, but more signifi cantly the objects themselves, are being reex- amined and reinterpreted by descendants from the com- munities from which the objects had come more than a century before. THE SHIFT IN INTELLECTUAL PARADIGM The recognition that arctic people have an intellec- tual, moral, and sociopolitical mandate to participate in and inform northern research marked a fundamental and dramatic shift in the practice of scientifi c research in the north. It did not arrive until the 1970s and more fi rmly, until the 1990s (Berger, 1977; Berkes, 1999; Nadasdy, 1999; Stevenson, 1996; Nicholas and Andrews, 1997) (see Figure 6). With the passage of the Native American Graves Pro- tection and Repatriation Act in 1990 (NAGPRA) and the National Museum of the American Indian Act (in 1996), the intellectual landscape as it pertains to the use and study of the Native American collections has been transformed into a museum anthropology that is more inclusive, more diverse, and contingent on Native participation and exper- tise (Crowell et al., 2001; Fienup-Riordan, 1996, 2005a, 2005b, 2007; Loring 1996, 2001b; Swidler et al., 1997; Thomas, 2000; Watkins, 2003; 2005; Zimmerman et al., 2003). It is in this context of cooperation and respect that the agendas of Smithsonian anthropology and IPY con- verge as specifi c information about objects in the museum collection are not only interpreted by knowledgeable el- ders and descendant community representatives but also serve as a touchstone or gateway to discussions about tra- ditional ecological and environmental knowledge. It thus seems appropriate, given the degree that human agency is implicated in climatic change, that anthropology for the fi rst time has been formally recognized as a goal of IPY polar science, under its new mandate: to investigate the cultural, historical, and social processes that shape the resilience and sustainability of circumpolar human societies, and to identify their unique contributions to global cul- tural diversity and citizenship. (ICSU/WHO 2007:13) SEEING AND BELIEVING: CHANGING PERSPECTIVES IN MUSEUM ANTHROPOLOGY At the Smithsonian Institution, the climate and phi- losophy of repatriation (Loring, 2001b; 2008), coupled with the moral and inspirational presence of the new Na- tional Museum of the American Indian (NMAI), has en- couraged the emergence of new practices and scholarship. FIGURE 6. ?We were real red-men in those days!? says Uneam Kat- shinak, a much revered Innu hunter, as he reminisces about being covered in blood while spearing caribou from a canoe as a boy. The continuity of traditional subsistence practices has anchored northern Native perceptions of their identity and their homeland belying the ?vanishing Indian? paradigm of nineteenth-century anthropology. (S. Loring photograph at the Tshikapisk-sponsored rendezvous at Kamestastin, Nitassinan, September 2000) 10_Loring_pg115-128_Poles.indd 12110_Loring_pg115-128_Poles.indd 121 11/18/08 9:18:22 AM11/18/08 9:18:22 AM 122 SMITHSONIAN AT THE POLES / LORING The new paradigm is evidenced by the signifi cant num- bers and variety of northern Native American and Inuit scholars, academics, artisans, and visitors who come to acknowledge, study, and appreciate the collections that were derived from their ancestors a century or more ago (Figure 7). The Smithsonian?s anthropology collections acquired during the First International Polar Year in Alaska and Nunavik had languished for almost a cen- tury, awaiting an appreciation of their signifi cance? fi rst as objects of art with The Far North exhibition at the National Gallery of Art (Collins et al., 1973) and then as symbols of cultural glory and scholarly wonder in a pair of precedent-setting exhibitions, Inua: Spirit World of the Bering Sea Eskimo in 1982 and Crossroads of Conti- nents in 1988 (Fitzhugh and Kaplan, 1982; Fitzhugh and Crowell, 1988). In opening the Smithsonian?s ?attic? and in returning to northern Natives an awareness of their material culture patrimony, the role of the museum has been radically transformed. Today, the Smithsonian col- lections at the NMNH and the NMAI form the largest holding of material culture pertaining to the heritage and history of North America?s indigenous peoples. With the passage of time and the miracle of conservation, these objects have undergone an extraordinary transformation from natural history specimens and anthropological curi- osities to become the foundation stones for contemporary community identity and heritage (Figure 8). The challenge of the next century is to accommodate this transforma- tion and incorporate new perspectives and knowledge. The future of anthropology in the museum will en- courage? and necessitate? new ways of thinking about the past that would require museum anthropologists and archaeologists surrender? or negotiate? their prerogative to interpret the past. Even more important, it is incumbent upon museum professionals to learn new ways of listening, new ways of recognizing the legitimacy of other voices, and other ways of knowing and accepting oral tradition as a valid interpretive tool (Tonkin, 1992). This sea change in museum anthropology and archaeology is inherent in the programs and initiatives that Smithsonian anthropology is conducting during the time of IPY 2007? 2008. A joint NMNH? NMAI exhibition project is bringing more than 500 Native Alaskan artifacts collected around the time of the First IPY to Anchorage, Alaska. The exhibit relies heavily on curatorial input from teams of Native Alaskan consultants affi rming the legitimacy of their perspective, knowledge, and link to their legacy and heritage. AN ENDANGERED PERSPECTIVE ON THE PAST With the passing of the Inumariit, the knowledgeable Inuit who lived in the country in the manner of their an- cestors, and the Tsheniu Mantushiu Kantuat, the old Innu hunters with special powers, so passes one of the last ves- tiges of the link to the intellectual landscape of hunting- foraging peoples. To anthropologists and even many indig- FIGURE 7. Community-orientated collection consultation and outreach has been a core concept of the Smithsonian?s Arctic Studies Center since its inception in 1991. Here George Williams, from the village of Mekoryuk on Nunivak Island, Alaska, points out construction details of a model kayak that had been collected by Henry B. Collins in 1927. Williams was part of a delegation of Nunivak elders and educators who visited the Smithsonian in March 1996. (S. Loring photograph) 10_Loring_pg115-128_Poles.indd 12210_Loring_pg115-128_Poles.indd 122 11/18/08 9:18:25 AM11/18/08 9:18:25 AM FROM TENT TO TRADING POST AND BACK AGAIN 123 enous people themselves, it becomes increasingly diffi cult to grasp the richness and complexity of the hunters? worlds as discerned through artifacts and museum exhibits. The insights and wisdom derived from centuries of intimate knowledge and experience on the land now exists as a much impoverished and fragmentary corpus. In Labrador, the 1918 infl uenza pandemic devastated Inuit communities and savaged Innu camps, killing off a generation of story- tellers and tribal elders and often leaving camps where only children and dogs survived. Soon, much of what remains of this specialized knowledge will only reside in libraries, museum collections, and in the clues that archaeologists might deduce. However, there is yet a great potential for the practice of archaeology in the north to be informed by the knowledge and perceptions of elders, the last people to be born in snow houses and tents and to have spent much of their lives as subsistence hunters and seamstresses. The sense of urgency is palpable, as the stock of elders? knowl- edge and perceptions is not renewable and will not be with us much longer. Subsistence strategies are being replaced by the market economy; communal social relations predicated on reciprocity and kinship are subordinated by government mandates and initiatives. The problem can be framed in a global perspective of diminishing ecological, biological, and cultural diversity. All of which begs the question: How important are ?old ways? and ?traditional subsistence practices? in the modern world? In Labrador, as elsewhere in the north, today?s Innu and Inuit youth are village-dwellers. Born in hospitals and brought up in isolated rural towns, northern young people have few opportunities to acquire country experiences and knowledge. There is a huge discrepancy between the past as experienced by their grandparents and the present. However well-meaning Canadian government policies may have been in advancing schooling, health care, and old-age pensions, the results have often been disastrous (Samson, 2003; Shkilnyk, 1985). Suicide rates in Labrador Innu communities are the highest recorded in the world and substance abuse is rampant (Samson et al., 1999). Fueled by chronic unemployment and inappropriate educational development, the impoverishment of village life? devoid of country values and skills with its concomitant pack- age of social, health and economic woes? is striking in comparison to ethnohistorical accounts which invariably describe the Innu as arrogant, self-suffi cient, ?tiresomely? independent, and proud (Cabot, 1920; Cooke, 1979). KNOWLEDGE REPATRIATION AND ARCHAEOLOGY In this situation, Smithsonian cultural research in the north becomes a component in the communities? re- sponse to the current heritage crisis and social dissolution. For the past decade, in close collaboration with Native elected offi cials, community leaders, and teachers, the Arc- tic Studies Center has pioneered community archaeology programs in Labrador with Inuit and Innu communities FIGURE 8. A drawing of the so-called magic doll collected by Luc- ien Turner in 1881 from Labrador Inuit visiting the Hudson?s Bay Company Post at Ft. Chimo (Kuujjuak) in Nunavik. Such unique specimens eloquently attest to the continuity of shamanistic practices in country-settings beyond the purview of missionaries and trad- ers. Transformed into museum specimens such objects still retain a tremendous potency to inspire and inform descendant community members of the people from whom they had been acquired. (Fig. 22 in Turner 1894, Smithsonian catalog number ET982, NMNH) 10_Loring_pg115-128_Poles.indd 12310_Loring_pg115-128_Poles.indd 123 11/18/08 9:18:27 AM11/18/08 9:18:27 AM 124 SMITHSONIAN AT THE POLES / LORING ( Loring, 1998; Loring and Rosenmeier, 2005). These pro- grams have sought to develop archaeological fi eld-schools that would provide Native youth with opportunities to ex- perience life in the country, acquire new job skills, and fos- ter self-esteem and pride in oneself and one?s heritage. This type of enterprise, generally called ?community archaeol- ogy,? especially as it is practiced in the north, is rooted in applied socially conscious advocacy anthropology. In addition to addressing the special scholarly questions that archaeologists commonly pose, community archaeology seeks additional goals that strive to empower and engage communities in the recognition and construction of their own heritage. In the north in general, and in Labrador specifi cally, community archaeology initiatives celebrate traditional values and share a research focus and practice that is responsible for creating and returning knowledge to communities (Lyons, 2007; Nicholas, 2006; Nicholas and Andrews, 1997), in a sense coming full circle since the years of the fi rst IPY. Perhaps the most important facet of community ar- chaeology as practiced in Labrador is that it is situated outside the settlements, in the country where the knowl- edge, wisdom, and experience of elders is relevant and ap- parent (Figures 9 and 10). Fieldwork based on mutual re- spect and sharing among families, generations, and visiting researchers honors and encourages indigenous knowledge and different ways of knowing. The practice of commu- nity archaeology with the Innu in Nitassinan is culturally FIGURE 9. No longer the exclusive domain of professional researchers, archaeology in the north has become a cooperative initiative between local community interests and visiting researchers. Here, community activist and former Innu Nation president Daniel Ashini, left, accompanied by Dominique Pokue, survey the ruined shorelines of former Lake Michikamats during an Innu Nation? sponsored archaeological survey of the region in 1995. (S. Loring photograph) 10_Loring_pg115-128_Poles.indd 12410_Loring_pg115-128_Poles.indd 124 11/18/08 9:18:29 AM11/18/08 9:18:29 AM FROM TENT TO TRADING POST AND BACK AGAIN 125 situated experiential education and has an important sub- sistence component. An awareness of animals? especially caribou? trumps the mechanics of fi eldwork: Survey is as much scouting for game as it is searching for the sites where ancestors lived and hunted. The acquisition of game is an integral part of the fi eldwork as young people pre- pare their own trap lines, catch fi sh, and learn from elders how to prepare food and pay proper respect to animals (Loring, 2001b; 2008). And in contrast to the practice of archaeology in the strictly scientifi c paradigm, the les- sons of community archaeology? sharing resources and interpretations and communal decision making? could be neatly summed as ?don?t be bossy, don?t be greedy.? Beyond expanding an awareness and appreciation of in- digenous knowledge and values, Smithsonian archaeology today is about being socially responsible, recognizing that the present is connected to the past, and celebrating indig- enous heritage and land tenure. CONCLUSIONS Around the campfi re or next to the tent stove, the con- versation about archaeology with Native participants is tumbled together with thoughts of the weather, caribou, and seals; of the places where one went hunting, berry picking, or fi shing; and of the old places where ancestors and supernatural creatures once lived. New directions FIGURE 10. Coming full-circle in the production of knowledge about northern people and their history community archaeology returns knowl- edge to a local setting. Working with local youth, and informed by knowledgeable elders, such initiatives serve to celebrate and respect the continuity and experiences of Native northern hosts. Here, visiting elders from Makkovik interpret architectural features at the mid-eighteenth- century Labrador Inuit village site at Adlavik (GgBq-1) in 2002. With them is Lena Onalik (right) from Makkovik, the fi rst professional Inuk archaeologist from Nunatsiavut. (Central Coast of Labrador Archaeological Project photo) 10_Loring_pg115-128_Poles.indd 12510_Loring_pg115-128_Poles.indd 125 11/18/08 9:18:40 AM11/18/08 9:18:40 AM 126 SMITHSONIAN AT THE POLES / LORING in the practice of archaeology in the north recognize the legitimacy of life ?in the country.? Because of different ways of thinking about the past, explaining the past is a basic operating assumption predicated on respect of the cultures and traditions of the people on who live (or used to live) on the land (Lorde, 1981). This collaborative ap- proach of northern anthropological research, predicated on repatriation, recognition, and respect, suggests that the future of the past is likely to re-imagine the cultural and physical landscape of the Arctic in wholly new ways. With the passing of the last vestiges of humanity?s hunt- ing heritage, future generations will need to derive new sources for inspiration. Northern Native involvement with Arctic science might be thought to have begun with the collaboration and insights provided to early explorers and collectors, including those affi liated with the First IPY in 1882? 1883. The increased awareness of the value and acuity of native knowledge and perception has radically transformed the social construction of northern science as the interests and concerns of researchers and indigenous residents alike come to share an interest in the ecological and behavioral consequences of life at high latitudes and a concern for understanding both the past and the future. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS William Fitzhugh (Smithsonian Institution), Igor Krupnik (Smithsonian Institution), and James Fleming (Colby College) provided helpful comments on an earlier draft. LITERATURE CITED Barr, William. 1985. The Expeditions of the First International Polar Year, 1882? 1883. The Arctic Institute of North America, Technical Paper 29. Calgary, Alberta, Canada: University of Calgary. Berger, Thomas R. 1977. Northern Frontier, Northern Homeland: The Report of the Mackenzie Valley Pipeline Inquiry, 2 vols. Toronto: James Lorimer in Association with Publishing Centre, Supply and Services, Canada. Berkes, F., 1999. Sacred Ecology: Traditional Ecological Knowledge and Resource Management. Philadelphia: Taylor and Francis. Boas, Franz. 1885. The Eskimo of Baffi n Land. Transactions of the An- thropological Society of Washington 3:95? 102. Cabot, William Brooks. 1920. Labrador. Boston: Small, Maynard & Co. Cole, Douglas, and Ludger Muller-Wille. 1984. Franz Boas? Expedition to Baffi n Island. ?tudes Inuit Studies, 8:37? 63. Collins, Henry B., Frederica de Laguna, Edmund Carpenter, and Peter Stone. 1973. The Far North: 2000 Years of American Eskimo and Indian Art. Washington, D.C.: National Gallery of Art. Cooke, Alan. 1979. L?Independence des Naskapis et le caribou. In Dossier Caribou, Ecologie et Exploitation de Caribou au Qu?bec- Labrador, ed. Francois Trudel and Jean Hunt, pp. 99? 104. Recher- ches Am?rindiennes au Qu?bec 9. Crowell, Aron, Amy Steffi an, and Gordon Pullar, eds. 2001. Looking Both Ways: Heritage and Identity of the Alutiiq People. Fairbanks: University of Alaska Press. Dunbar, M. J. 1983. A Unique International Polar Year Contribution: Lucien Turner, Capelin, and Climatic Change. Arctic, 36(2):204? 205. Fienup-Riordan, Ann. 1996. Agayuliyararput: Kegginaqut, Kangiit-Ilu ?Our Way of Making Prayer?: Yup?ik Masks and the Stories They Tell. Seattle: University of Washington Press. ???. 2005a. Yup?ik Elders at the Ethnologisches Museum Berlin: Fieldwork Turned on Its Head. Seattle: University of Washington Press. ???. 2005b Ciuliamta Akluit? Things of Our Ancestors. Seattle: Uni- versity of Washington Press. ???. 2007 Yuungnaqpiallerput: The Way We Genuinely Live. Seattle: University of Washington Press. Fitzhugh, William, and Aron Crowell, eds. 1988. Crossroads of Conti- nents: Cultures of Siberia and Alaska. Washington, D.C.: Smithson- ian Institution Press. Fitzhugh, William, and Susan Kaplan, eds. 1982. Inua: Spirit World of the Bering Sea Eskimo. Washington, D.C.: Smithsonian Institution Press. Grant, Shelia. 1998. Arctic Wilderness? and Other Mythologies. Journal of Canadian Studies 33(2): 27? 42. Hall, Charles Francis, 1864. Life with the Esquimaux, 2 vols. London: Sampson, Low, Son, and Marston. ICSU (International Council for Science)/WHO Joint Committee for IPY 2007? 2008. 2007. The Scope of Science for the International Polar Year, 2007? 2008. Geneva: World Meteorological Association. http:// 216.70.123.96/ images/ uploads/ lr*polarbrouchurescientifi c_ in.pdf (accessed 13 August 2007). Lindsay, Debra. 1993. Science in the Subarctic: Trappers, Traders and the Smithsonian Institution. Washington, D.C.: Smithsonian Insti- tution Press. Loomis, Chauncey. 1972. Weird and Tragic Shores: The Story of Charles Francis Hall, Explorer. London: Macmillan. ???. 1977. ?The Arctic Sublime.? In Nature and the Victorian Imagi- nation, ed. U. C. Knoepfl macher and G. B. Tennyson, pp. 95? 112. Berkeley: University of California Press. ???. 1986. Arctic and Orphic. London Review of Books, 8(1): 12? 13. ???. 1997. ?Ebierbing.? In Lobsticks and Stone Cairns: Human Landmarks in the Arctic, ed. Richard C. Davis, pp. 52? 54. Calgary, Alberta, Canada: University of Calgary Press. Lorde, A. 1981. ?The Master?s Tools Will Never Dismantle the Master?s House.? In This Bridge Called My Back: Radical Writings by Women of Color, ed. C. B. Cherr?e Moraga and G. Anzald?a, pp. 98? 101. New York: Kitchen Table, Women of Color Press. Loring, Stephen. 1996. Community Anthropology at the Smithsonian. American Anthropological Association. Anthropology Newsletter, October: 23? 24. ???. 1998. ?Stubborn Independence: An Essay on the Innu and Ar- chaeology.? In Bringing Back the Past, Historical Perspectives on Canadian Archaeology, ed. Pamela Jane Smith and Donald Mitch- ell, pp. 259? 276. Mercury Series Archaeological Survey of Canada Paper 158. Hull, Quebec: Canadian Museum of Civilization. ???. 2001a. ?Introduction to Lucien M. Turner and the Beginnings of Smithsonian Anthropology in the North.? In Ethnology of the Ungava District, Hudson Bay Territory by Lucien Turner, pp. vii? xxxii. Washington, D.C.: Smithsonian Institution Press. ???. 2001b. ?Repatriation and Community Anthropology: The Smithsonian Institution?s Arctic Studies Center.? In The Future of 10_Loring_pg115-128_Poles.indd 12610_Loring_pg115-128_Poles.indd 126 11/18/08 9:18:45 AM11/18/08 9:18:45 AM FROM TENT TO TRADING POST AND BACK AGAIN 127 the Past: Archaeologists, Native Americans, and Repatriation, ed. Tamara Bray, pp. 185? 200. New York: Garland. ???. 2008. ?The Wind Blows Everything Off the Ground: New Provisions and New Directions in Archaeological Research in the North.? In Opening Archaeology: the Impact of Repatriation on the Discipline, ed. Thomas Killion, pp. 181? 194. Santa Fe, N.Mex.: School of American Research. Loring, Stephen, and Leah Rosenmeier, eds. 2005. Angutiup ?nguanga/ Anguti?s Amulet. Truro, Nova Scotia: Eastern Woodland Publish- ing, Milbrook First Nation. Lyons, Natasha. 2007. ?Quliaq tohongniaq tuunga? (Making Histories): Towards a Critical Inuvialuit Archaeology in the Canadian West- ern Arctic. Ph.D. diss., Department of Anthropology, University of Calgary. McGhee, Robert. 2007. The Last Imaginary Place: A Human History of the Arctic World. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Murdoch, John. 1892. Ethnological Results of the Point Barrow Expedi- tion. Ninth Annual Report of the Bureau of American Ethnology for the Years 1887? 1888, pp. 19? 441. Washington, D.C.: Govern- ment Printing Offi ce. Nadasdy, Paul. 1999. Politics of TEK: Power and the ?Integration? of Knowledge. Arctic Anthropology, 36(1? 2): 1? 18. Nicholas, George. 2006. Decolonizing the Archaeological Landscape: The Practice and Politics of Archaeology in British Columbia. American Indian Quarterly, 30(3? 4): 350? 380. Nicholas, G., and T. D. Andrews, eds. 1997. At a Crossroads: Archaeol- ogy and First People in Canada. Burnaby, British Columbia, Can- ada: Simon Fraser University Archaeology Press. Nelson, Edward William. 1899. The Eskimo about Bering Strait. Eigh- teenth Annual Report of the Bureau of American Ethnology for the Years 1896? 1897, pp. 3? 518. Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Offi ce. Parry, William Edward. 1821. Journal of a voyage for the discovery of a North-West Passage from the Atlantic to the Pacifi c; performed in the years 1819? 20, in His Majesty?s Ships Hecla and Griper with an appendix, containing the scientifi c and other observations. London: John Murray. ???. 1824. Journal of a second voyage for the discovery of a North- West Passage from the Atlantic to the Pacifi c; performed in the years 1821? 22? 23, in His Majesty?s Ships Fury and Hecla, under the or- ders of Captain William Edward Parry. London: John Murray. Rasmussen, Knud. 1929. Intellectual Culture of the Iglulik Eskimos. Re- port of the Fifth Thule Expedition, 1921? 24, Volume 7(1). Copen- hagen: Nordisk. Rink, Hinrich. 1875. Tales and Traditions of the Eskimo: With a Sketch of Their Habits, Religion, Language and Other Peculiarities, ed. Robert Brown. Edinburgh: W. Blackwood and Sons. Samson, Colin. 2003. A Way of Life That Does Not Exist. London: Verso. Samson, Colin, James Wilson, and Jonathan Mazower. 1999. Canada?s Tibet: The Killing of the Innu. London: Survival International. Shkilnyk, Anastasia M. 1985. A Poison Stronger Than Love: The Destruc- tion of an Ojibwa Community. New Haven, Conn.: Yale University Press. Stevenson, M. G. 1996. Indigenous Knowledge in Environmental Assess- ment. Arctic, 49(3): 278? 291. Swidler, Nina, Kurt Dongoske, Roger Anyon, and Alan Downer, eds. 1997. Native Americans and Archaeologists: Stepping Stones to Common Ground. Walnut Creek, Calif.: AltaMira Press. Thomas, David H. 2000. Skull Wars: Kennewick Man, Archaeology, and the Battle for Native American Identity. New York: Basic Books. Tonkin, E. 1992. Narrating Our Pasts: The Social Construction of Oral History. Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge University Press. Turner, Lucien M. n.d. Descriptive Catalogue of Ethnological Specimens Collected by Lucien M. Turner in Alaska. Lucien M. Turner papers, Bureau of American Ethnology collection, National Anthropologi- cal Archives, National Museum of Natural History, Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C. ???. 1886. Contributions to the Natural History of Alaska. Washing- ton, D.C.: Government Printing Offi ce. ???. 1888. On the Indians and Eskimos of the Ungava District, Lab- rador. Proceedings and Transactions of the Royal Society of Canada for the Year 1887, sect. II, vol. 5: 99? 119. ???. 1894. Ethnology of the Ungava District, Hudson Bay Territory. Eleventh Annual Report of the Bureau of American Ethnology for the Years 1889? 1890, pp. 159? 350. Washington, D.C.: Govern- ment Printing Offi ce. Watkins, Joe 2003. Archaeological Ethics and American Indians. In Ethi- cal Issues in Archaeology, ed. Larry Zimmerman, Karen D. Vitelli, and Julie Hollowell-Zimmer, pp. 129? 142. Walnut Creek, Calif.: AltaMira Press. ???. 2005. Through Wary Eyes: Indigenous Perspectives on Archaeol- ogy. Annual Review of Anthropology, 34:429? 449. Wood, Kevin R., and James E. Overland. 2006. Climate Lessons from the First International Polar Year. Bulletin of the American Meteo- rological Society, 86(12):1685? 1697. Woodman, David. 1991. Unraveling the Franklin Mystery: Inuit Testi- mony. Montreal: McGill-Queen?s. Zimmerman, Larry J., Karen D. Vitelli, and Julie Hollowell-Zimmer, eds. 2003. Ethical Issues in Archaeology. Walnut Creek, Calif.: AltaMira Press. 10_Loring_pg115-128_Poles.indd 12710_Loring_pg115-128_Poles.indd 127 11/18/08 9:18:46 AM11/18/08 9:18:46 AM 10_Loring_pg115-128_Poles.indd 12810_Loring_pg115-128_Poles.indd 128 11/18/08 9:18:46 AM11/18/08 9:18:46 AM