Bibliography
Barbeau, Marius. The Subject, Method, and Scope of this Inquiry. Readings for a History of Anthropological Theory, 1922. pp. 202-217.
Blaikie, Calum, et al. Coproducing Efficacious Medicines: Collaborative Event Ethnography with Himalayan and Tibetan Sowa Rigpa Practitioners. Current Anthropology, vol. 56, no. 2, 2015, pp. 178–204.
Fluehr-Lobban, C.. Collaborative Anthropology as Twenty-first-Century Ethical Anthropology. Collaborative Anthropologies, vol. 1 no. 1, 2008, pp. 175-182.
Herle, Bani, Mary, and Anita. Collaborative Projects on Torres Strait Collections. Journal of Museum Ethnography, no. 10, 1998, pp. 115–120.
Kennedy, E.. In Pursuit of Connection: Reflections on Collaborative Work. American Anthropologist, vol. 97, no. 1, 1995, pp. 26–33.
Lassiter, L. E.. Collaborative Ethnography and Public Anthropology. Current Anthropology 46, no. 1, 2005, pp. 83-106.
Lassiter, L. E.. Moving Past Anthropology and doing Collaborative Research. NAPA Bulletin, 2008.
Malinowski, Bronislaw. Introduction: the subject, method and scope of this inquiry. Readings for a History of Anthropological Theory. 1922.
Nurse, Andrew. Marius Barbeau and the Methodology of Salvage Ethnography in Canada. Historicizing Canadian anthropology. UBC Press, 2011.
Rodman, Margaret, et al. Women Fieldworkers’ Collaborative Research: On the History of House-Girls in Vanuatu. Working Together in Vanuatu: Research Histories, Collaborations, Projects and Reflections, edited by John Taylor and Nick Thieberger, ANU Press, 2011, pp. 99–114.
Tylor, E. B.. Primitive culture. New York: Harper, 1958.
Zarriga, Ruby, et al. Restorative Justice in Papua New Guinea: a Collaborative Effort. A Kind of Mending: Restorative Justice in the Pacific Islands, edited by Sinclair Dinnen, ANU Press, 2010, pp. 115–122.
The Colonial Past of Canadian Anthropology and Its Future- Delaney (still in progress)
Canadian anthropology has arguably been shaped by its deep ties in its past to colonialism. The discipline began with missionaries and a largely male-dominated discipline which later would enter the professionalization era that would shape how fieldwork is conducted. This era included anthropologists such as Lewis Henry Morgan, Franz Boas and Marius Barbeau. The discipline employed methodologies colonial in nature that would go on to shape how anthropology was completed in Canada as these biases influenced the work. As anthropology has changed and adapted to growing concerns, minority voices now have a place in the discipline as active participants and an equal relationship with the anthropologist. Anthropolgists have become advocates for their research and use their position as whistle-blowers. An Indigenous focus in Canadian anthropology has became a huge part of the discipline and there has been a shift away from colonial methodologies in favour of newer techniques such as interpretive, postmodernism and feminist and gendered anthropology.
Canada’s history as a colonizer has impact the way that anthropological work is conducted in Canada. Robert L.A. Hancock in his article, Towards a Historiography of Canadian Anthropology, discusses the periods that the discipline of Canadian anthropology has gone through since its emergence. Canadian anthropology began with the Missionary era that spurred the beginnings of anthropological work in this country. “Even though there were no professional Canadian anthropologists until the twentieth century (Cole 1973, 35), work now recognized as anthropological in nature has taken place in Canada for centuries.”\cite{hancock2014} (Hancock 2014: 32) Jesuit Missionaries from Europe were some of the first people to study Indigenous groups in Canada and collecting ethnography on these groups. These missionaries were heavily influenced by colonial techniques as they viewed their interactions with Indigenous groups as part of a larger ‘civilizing mission’. The missionaries were not interesting in preserving Indigenous culture and maintaining an accurate representation of their subject matter, but rather the end goal was to convert the Indigenous people to Christianity. The history of missionary work in Canada is rooted in a deeply colonial nature as Indigenous groups were targeted and assimilated. As these missionaries lived within close proximity to Indigenous groups, they created the precursor to fieldwork in anthropology. Missionary writers would go on to influence early anthropologists in Canada, but these writings were heavily biased by colonial ideologies.
One of the focal points of colonial anthropology and its history is the armchair anthropologist. The armchair anthropologist refers to European anthropologists who conducted studies on societies without actually setting foot near the subject. North American anthropologist Sergei Kan in his book, Strangers to Relatives: The Adoption and Naming of Anthropologists in Native North America critiques figures such as John Lubbock and Edward Tylor. “Their studies were syntheses of published data, in some sense, data shipped from the colonies back to England for processing.” (Kan 2001: 50). Research was conducted in a deeply colonial relationship in that there was a clear divide with 'the other'. One of the hallmarks of colonial anthropology in North America was the armchair anthropological work in its early origins during the scientific revolution. As these colonizers focused on North American research on its inhabitants, these groups were taken advantage of. “By the late nineteenth century, these groups were relatively powerless in the face of colonial agents, including, in certain cases, anthropologists.” \cite{kan2001} Kan 2001: 65). Indigenous groups in Canada were targeted with forced assimilation by the government and anthropologists were sometimes a passive participant in these techniques. As discussed later in this paper, anthropologists such as Julian Steward worked alongside these colonial agents in stripping Indigenous groups of their rights.
Historically, colonial anthropology has exploited the material culture of minority groups for personal benefit. Anthropologists such as Franz Boas and Marius Barbeau devoted much of their anthropological career to studying Indigenous groups in Canada. Marius Barbeau focused on salvage ethnography and the Indigenous groups in Canada with a goal of collecting ethnology on these Indigenous groups. Lewis Henry Morgan was an anthropologist who arguably pioneered Indigenous studies in Canada with his work. He spent extensive time studying the Iroquois Indigenous group in Canada, recording his work on them. Morgan’s work is not without its controversies as he had a very colonialist attitude towards his subjects. “Morgan advocated for Iroquois advancement because he believed them to be “ready” for and “worthy” of such a change in their legal and political status, but also because their “absorption” into the white race was inevitable and most virtuous.”\cite{simpson2007} (Simpson 2007: 71). Morgan’s anthropological work was rooted in a colonial nature as he saw the Iroquois as a primitive culture and destined for assimilation into dominant white settler society. Morgan can be credited with providing some of the first research on Indigenous groups in North America and he would devote extensive time to studying the Iroquois through his fieldwork. He was one of the first in Canada to employ participant observation techniques and sought to professionalize the discipline. His work was however, deeply influenced by his colonial attitude that saw Indigenous people as lesser than white men such as himself.
As Hancock argues in his article, Canadian anthropology then moved on to the National Museum Era and the University Era during this move to a professionalization academic era. During this time period, is when anthropologists such as Franz Boas and Marius Barbeau began their studies on Indigenous groups in Canada. Hancock himself has looked at colonial anthropologists operating during this time such as Diamond Jenness and his work on the Indigenous people of the Arctic in Canada. He writes “I tried in my recent work to show that Jenness’ Arctic research, often thought to be atheoretical, “pure” ethnography, actually contained evolutionary and racist assumptions that coloured his perspective on the Inuit.” (Hancock 2014: 34). Diamond Jenness was an anthropologist who was operating around the same time as a Franz Boas and also looked at Indigenous groups in Canada. Jenness, a native of New Zealand completed much of his anthropological work in Canada and his work reflected an influence of colonial ideologies. Much of anthropology conducted during this time period, took a rigid academic approach that furthered the distance between the anthropologist and their subject. His colonial attitude during this time heavily influenced his writings and work on the Inuit in the Arctic.
Marius Barbeau dedicated his research to techniques of salvage ethnography and spent considerable time studying Indigenous groups. ““The ethnologist,” he said, “is a fool who so far deceives himself as to believe that his field notes and specimens gathered in the raw from half-breeds or [the] decrepit survivors of a past age, still represent the unadulterated knowledge of the prehistoric races of America” (Barbeau 1917, 52-53).”\cite{darnell2014} (Harrison and Darnell 2014: 52). Barbeau maintained this ideology that ‘traditional’ Indigenous culture needed to be preserved through ethnographic analysis. Marius Barbeau’s work in salvage ethnography heavily influenced how anthropology operated as a discipline in Canada. He was known for editing his field notes extensively to fit his own narrative and kept himself separated from the Indigenous groups he was studying. Both Boas and Barbeau viewed Indigenous groups in Canada as a dying race and it was their duty to ‘preserve’ them. Their so-called preservation was through collections of material culture and ethnology. It can be acknowledged at this time period that Indigenous groups were dealing with forced assimilation by the Canadian government and their traditional culture was fading away. These anthropologists sought to ‘preserve’ Indigenous culture through a process of what the anthropologists deemed ‘worthy’ of preservation. This professionalization era of Canadian anthropology introduced the beginnings of anthropological theory in the discipline but still was influenced by colonialism. Indigenous groups became much of the subject matter of these anthropologists operated in the early 20th century but there was an unequal power balance between the two parties.