Papers by Michael A Klassen
ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY OF ALBERTA OCCASIONAL PAPER NO. 42, 2023
The inscription of Writing-on-Stone / Áísínai’pi on the World Heritage List in 2019 was the culmi... more The inscription of Writing-on-Stone / Áísínai’pi on the World Heritage List in 2019 was the culmination of a fif- teen-year long nomination process. The nomination recognized the international significance of this Blackfoot cultur- al landscape, but the process also exposed tensions between local, global, and Indigenous values. Consultation with Blackfoot and local settler communities during the National Historic Site of Canada commemoration that preceded the World Heritage site nomination indicated broad support for inscription of Writing-on-Stone / Áísínai’pi. How- ever, engagement with local settler communities during the World Heritage site nomination process led to multiple iterations of the submission, as the nomination team attempted to balance the original Blackfoot vision of a cultural landscape that extended beyond Writing-on-Stone / Áísínai’pi against local community concerns with the nominated property boundaries and buffer zone. Integrating recent settler history within the ancient Blackfoot sacred landscape also proved contentious. In consequence, international experts reviewing the nomination struggled to reconcile glo- balized universalism with local perspectives and Indigenous values. Throughout the nomination, Jack Brink helped the nomination team navigate the contested values of Writing-on-Stone / Áísínai’pi, ultimately leading to a successful inscription accommodating local settler history within the Blackfoot cultural landscape while representing a step for- ward on the path to reconciliation with the Blackfoot.
Plains Anthropologist, 2000
Plains Anthropologist, 2003
Over the past two decades, archaeology in British Columbia has been marked by two dramatic change... more Over the past two decades, archaeology in British Columbia has been marked by two dramatic changes: the steep rise in forest industry-related “cultural resource management” (CRM) and the concomitant increase in First Nations engagement with archaeology and heritage stewardship. These trends have led to conflict between indigenous perspectives and CRM practice, but have also led to alliances and collaborations with archaeologists and the implementation of applied archaeological approaches. This dissertation addresses the implications of indigenous heritage stewardship, from the viewpoints of the St’át’imc and Nlaka’pamux nations, in the historical and contemporary context of CRM practice and applied archaeology in the mid-Fraser region of British Columbia. To place their engagement in perspective, I consider recent theoretical debates in community-based and indigenous archaeologies, as well as the development of participatory action research in archaeology. I also review the involvement of First Nations throughout British Columbia in CRM, stewardship, heritage legislation, and ethics.
The St’át’imc and Nlaka’pamux case studies presented in this dissertation relate their outlooks on archaeology and their specific efforts in heritage stewardship, based on literature reviews, interviews, and direct participation. The St’át’imc case study describes their traditional and contemporary views on archaeology and stewardship, relates their involvement in archaeology since the 1970s, and evaluates the process and outcomes of their recent direct involvement in the business of CRM. The Nlaka’pamux case study recounts their experiences with archaeology since the late nineteenth century, as well as their more recent confrontations with CRM practice, and examines their current efforts at defining Nlaka’pamux heritage stewardship, particularly from the vantage of landscape. The different approaches taken by these two nations have their strengths and shortcomings, and both continue to aspire to greater participation and authority in archaeology and heritage stewardship. Most important, the standpoints and strategies of both nations provide insights into how applied archaeology practice can be transformed to better serve indigenous heritage stewardship, including in the realms of ethics, indigenous authority, intangible heritage, and cultural landscapes. I contend that archaeologists can best accommodate these perspectives through participatory action research and the concept of archaeological praxis.
Every detail counts: More additions to the Plains biographic rock art lexicon
The Plains Anthropologist, 2003
... Biographic Rock Art Lexicon James D. Keyser and Michael A. Klassen ABSTRACT Plains Biographic... more ... Biographic Rock Art Lexicon James D. Keyser and Michael A. Klassen ABSTRACT Plains Biographic rock art is directly related to robe and ledger drawings created by Historic period Indian artists. ... 8 Page 3. James D. Keyser and Michael A. Klassen Every Detail Counts ...
Heritage Management, Jan 1, 2009
In British Columbia, the convergence of Aboriginal political activism, legal decisions, booming i... more In British Columbia, the convergence of Aboriginal political activism, legal decisions, booming industrial development, and shifting disciplinary ethics has transformed archaeological practice.
Uploads
Papers by Michael A Klassen
The St’át’imc and Nlaka’pamux case studies presented in this dissertation relate their outlooks on archaeology and their specific efforts in heritage stewardship, based on literature reviews, interviews, and direct participation. The St’át’imc case study describes their traditional and contemporary views on archaeology and stewardship, relates their involvement in archaeology since the 1970s, and evaluates the process and outcomes of their recent direct involvement in the business of CRM. The Nlaka’pamux case study recounts their experiences with archaeology since the late nineteenth century, as well as their more recent confrontations with CRM practice, and examines their current efforts at defining Nlaka’pamux heritage stewardship, particularly from the vantage of landscape. The different approaches taken by these two nations have their strengths and shortcomings, and both continue to aspire to greater participation and authority in archaeology and heritage stewardship. Most important, the standpoints and strategies of both nations provide insights into how applied archaeology practice can be transformed to better serve indigenous heritage stewardship, including in the realms of ethics, indigenous authority, intangible heritage, and cultural landscapes. I contend that archaeologists can best accommodate these perspectives through participatory action research and the concept of archaeological praxis.