Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-rcrh6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-23T21:59:40.012Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Dusting Off the Data

Curating and Rehabilitating Archaeological Legacy and Orphaned Collections

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  16 January 2017

Kathryn MacFarland  and
Arthur W. Vokes
Kathryn MacFarland
Affiliation:
School of Anthropology, University of Arizona, P.O. Box 210030, Tucson, Arizona, 85721-0030 and Arizona State Museum, University of Arizona, P.O. Box 210026, Tucson, Arizona 85721-0026 ([email protected])
Arthur W. Vokes
Affiliation:
University of Arizona, P.O. Box 210026, Tucson, Arizona 85721-0026 ([email protected])
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

Archaeological projects that are described as orphaned or legacy collections are generally older materials that do not meet modern “best practice” curation standards and require considerable resources to be preserved for future research. Rehabilitation and curation of these projects allows for better inventory control of the artifacts, and accompanying documentation ensures that cultural heritage is preserved and plays an important part in the repatriation process. Procedures and methods for rehousing archaeological legacy collections are outlined. Using the 1984–1987 Arizona Archaeological and Historical Society (AAHS) volunteer excavations at Redtail Village (AZ AA:12:149 [ASM]) as a case study, we propose a process for rehabilitating legacy collections and offer solutions for preserving important archaeological resources for future research.

Proyectos arqueológicos huérfanos o también llamados proyectos de colecciones heredadas, generalmente están formados por materiales antiguos que no cumplen con los “mejores” estándares modernos de restauración. Dichas colecciones requieren considerables recursos para ser preservados para generaciones futuras. La rehabilitación y curación de estos proyectos permite obtener un mejor control de los artefactos inventariados, así como una mejor documentación que aseguraran la preservación del patrimonio cultural, a la vez, este procedimiento juega un papel importante en el proceso de repatriación. A continuación se describirán los procedimientos y métodos usados para el realojamiento de colecciones de proyectos de legado arqueológicos. Usando como caso de estudio, las excavaciones de las temporadas 1984–1987 del voluntariado de la Sociedad Histórica de Arqueólogos de Arizona (AAHS) en Redtail Village (AZ AA:12:149 [ASM]), proponemos un proceso para la rehabilitación de proyectos heredados, así como ofrecer soluciones para la conservación de importantes colecciones arqueológicas para futuras investigaciones.

Type
Research Article
Information
Advances in Archaeological Practice , Volume 4 , Issue 2 , May 2016 , pp. 161 - 175
Copyright
Copyright © Society for American Archaeology 2016

References

References Cited

Arizona Revised Statute §41–844 2007. Duty to Report Discoveries; Disposition of Discoveries; Definitions. Electronic document, http://www.azleg.state.az.us/FormatDocument.asp?inDoc=/ars/41/00844.htm&Title=41&DocType=ARS, accessed December 13, 2015.Google Scholar
Arizona Revised Statute §41–844 2007. Disturbing Human Remains or Funerary Objects; Rules; Violation; Classification; Definitions. Electronic document, http://www.azleg.state.az.us/FormatDocument.asp?inDoc=/ars/41/00865.htm&Title=41&DocType=ARS, accessed December 13, 2015.Google Scholar
Bawaya, Michael 2007. Curation in Crisis. Science 317:1025–1026.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bernard-Shaw, Mary, Dongoske, Kurt, Eppley, Lisa G., Fish, Suzanne K., Gillespie, William B., Heidke, James M., Hohmann, William D., Holmlund, James P., Lombard, James P., Miksicek, Charlie H., Vokes, Arthur W., and Wallace, Henry D. 1989. Archaeological Investigations at the Redtail Site, AA:12:149(ASM), in the Northern Tucson Basin Technical Report No. 89–9. Center for Desert Archaeology, Tucson, Arizona.Google Scholar
Bernard-Shaw, Mary, Dongoske, Kurt, Eppley, Lisa G., Fish, Suzanne K., Gillespie, William B., Heidke, James, Holmlund, James P., Lombard, James P., Miksicek, Charles H., and Vokes, Arthur W. 1990. Archaeological Investigations at the Lonetree Site, AA:12:120(ASM), in the Northern Tucson Basin Technical Report No. 90–1. Center for Desert Archaeology, Tucson, Arizona.Google Scholar
Cantwell, Anne-Marie E., Griffin, James B., and Rothschild, Nan A. 1981. The Research Potential of Anthropological Museum Collections. The New York Academy of Sciences, New York, New York.Google Scholar
Collins, Mary B., Lipe, William D., and Curewitz, Diane C. 2010. Curating Research Careers: The Cedar Mesa Project, Utah. Heritage Management 3:233–254.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Crisis and Opportunity 2015. Crisis and Opportunity: Legacy Collections and Archaeological Research in the 21st century. Symposium at The 80th Annual Meeting of the Society for American Archaeology, San Francisco, California. Electronic document, http://core.tdar.org/collection/29605/crisis-and-opportunity-legacy-collections-and-archaeological-research-in-the-21st-century, accessed September 9, 2015.Google Scholar
Electronic Code of Federal Regulations (E-CFR) 2015a. Title 36, Chapter I, Part 79.4, Definitions. Electronic document, http://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?SID=2b8c959fe4b293dc33f899943f5f1225&mc=true&node=se36.1.79_14&rgn=div8, accessed November 23, 2015.Google Scholar
Electronic Code of Federal Regulations (E-CFR) 2015b. Title 36, Chapter I, Part 79, Curation of Federally-owned and Administered Archaeological Collections. Electronic document, http://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?tpl=/ecfrbrowse/Title36/36cfr79_main_02.tpl, accessed June 24, 2015.Google Scholar
Fagan, Brian 1995. Archaeology’s Dirty Secret. Archaeology 48(4):14–17.Google Scholar
Ford, Richard I. 1977. Regional Repositories: A View from the Smithsonian. In Regional Centers in Archaeology: Prospects and Problems, edited by Marquardt, W.H., pp. 13–15. Missouri Archaeological Society, Research Series 14, Columbia.Google Scholar
Ford, Richard I. 1980. A Three-Part System for Storage of Archaeological Collections. Curator 23(1):55–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Green, Jack 2015. Building Capacity, Sharing Knowledge. Journal of Eastern Mediterranean Archaeology and Heritage Studies 3(1):63–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Griset, Suzanne, Vokes, Arthur W., and Sarther, Catherine 2004. Requirements for the Preparation of Archaeological Project Collections for Submission to the Arizona State Museum. Arizona State Museum, University of Arizona, Tucson.Google Scholar
Gonzalez, S.L., Modzelewski, D., Panich, L.M., and Schneider, T.D. 2006. Archaeology for the Seventh Generation. American Indian Quarterly 30:338–415.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hartmann, Gayle H., and Urban, Sharon F. 1991. The Arizona Archaeological and Historical Society: Its First Seventy-Five Years. Kiva 56(4):329–357.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hedquist, Saul, Thibodeau, Alyson, Adams, E. Charles, Killick, David, and Reid, J. Jefferson 2010. Sourcing Homol’ovi I and Grasshopper Pueblo Turquoise through Lead and Strontium Isotopic Analyses. Paper presented at the 2010 Arizona Archaeological Council Fall Conference: The Application of Archaeological Sciences in Arizona, Tucson.Google Scholar
Heilen, Michael, and Altschul, Jeffrey H. 2013. The Accuracy and Adequacy of In-Field Artifact Analysis: An Experimental Test at Two Archaeological Sites in the Western United States. Advances in Archaeological Practice 1:121–138.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Idaho Museum of Natural History 2015. Repository Specifications for Curation. Electronic document, http://imnh.isu.edu/home/collections-and-research/anthropology/earl-h-swanson-archaeological-repository-esar/repository-specifications-for-curation/, accessed November 23, 2015.Google Scholar
Jamieson, Andrew 2015. Developing Strategies for Sustainably Managing Archaeological Collections. Journal of Eastern Mediterranean Archaeology and Heritage Studies 3(1):71–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jones, Jeffrey T. (editor) 2015. Archaeological Data Recovery Investigations at AZ AA:12:321(ASM), the Silverbell-Coachline Site, in Marana, Pima County, Arizona. Tierra Archaeological Report No. 2014-011. Tierra Right of Way Services, Tucson.Google Scholar
Kersel, Morag M. 2015. Storage Wars: Solving the Archaeological Curation Crisis? Journal of Eastern Mediterranean Archaeology and Heritage Studies 3(1):42–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kintigh, Keith W., Altshul, Jeffrey, Beaudry, Mary C., Drennan, Robert D., Kinzig, Ann P., Kohler, Timothy A., Limp, W. Fredrick, Maschner, Herbert D.G., Michener, William K., Pauketat, Timothy R., Peregrine, Peter, Sabloff, Jeremy A., Wilkinson, Tony J., Wright, Henry T., and Zeder, Melinda A. 2014. Grand Challenges for Archaeology. American Antiquity 79:5–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kintigh, Keith W., Altschul, Jeffrey, Kinzig, Ann P., Limp, W. Frederick, Michener, William K., Sabloff, Jeremy A., Hackett, Edward J., Kohler, Timothy A., Ludäscher, Bertram, and Lynch, Clifford A. 2015. Cultural Dynamics, Deep Time, and Data. Advances in Archaeological Practice 3:1–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kletter, Raz 2015. Storage Wars 1, Curation 0. Journal of Eastern Mediterranean Archaeology and Heritage Studies 3(1):55–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kulasekaran, Sivakumar, Trelogan, Jessica, Esteva, Maria, and Johnson, Michael 2014. Metadata Integration for an Archaeology Collection Architecture. Proceedings of the International Conference on Dublin Core and Metadata Applications. DC-2014-The Austin Proceedings. pp. 53–63. Electronic document, http://dcpapers.dublincore.org/pubs/article/view/3702/1925, accessed August 31, 2015.Google Scholar
Lightfoot, Kent G. 2008. Collaborative research Programs: Implications for the Practice of North American Archaeology. In Collaborating at the Trowel’s Edge: Teaching and Learning in Indigenous Arcaheology, edited by Silliman, S.W., pp. 211–217. Amerind Studies in Archaeology. University of Arizona Press, Tucson.Google Scholar
Lindeman, Michael W., and Thiel, J. Homer 2007. The Artisan’s Burial from the Redtail Site. Archaeology Southwest 21(3):7.Google Scholar
Lindsay, Alexander J. Jr., and Williams-Dean, Glenna 1980. Artifacts, Documents, and Data: A New Frontier for American Archaeology. Curator 23(1):19–29 23(1):19-29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lindsay, Alexander J. Jr., Williams-Dean, Glenna, and Jonathan, Haas 1980. The Curation and Management of Archaeological Collections: A Pilot Study. Cultural Resource Management Series. U.S. Department of the Interior, Heritage Conservation and Recreation Service, Washington, D.C.Google Scholar
Lyons, Patrick, and Vokes, Arthur W. 2010. The Role of Fee Structures in Repository Sustainability. Heritage Management 3:213–232.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marquardt, William H. (editor) 1977. Regional Centers in Archaeology: Prospects and Problems. Missouri Archaeological Society, Research Series 14, Columbia.Google Scholar
Marquardt, William H., Montet-White, Anta, and Scholtz, Sandra C. 1982. Resolving the Crisis in Archaeological Collections Curation. American Antiquity 47:409–418.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mississippi Department of Archives and History 2015. Curation. Electronic document, http://mdah.state.ms.us/new/preserve/archaeology/curation/, accessed November 23, 2015.Google Scholar
Museum of Indian Arts and Culture Laboratory of Anthropology 2002. Procedures Manual for Submission of Archaeological Artifact and Records Collections. Electronic document, http://miaclab.org/assets/files/submission.pdf, accessed November 24, 2015.Google Scholar
National Park Service 2015. Archeology Program: Managing Archeological Collections. Electronic document, http://www.nps.gov/archeology/collections/laws_04.htm, accessed November 23, 2015.Google Scholar
Pozza, Jackie 2014. South Dakota Archaeological Rehousing Project. Electronic resource, https://www.academia.edu/11169615/The_2014_South_Dakota_Archaeological_Rehousing_Project_Implementing_Archaeological_Collections_Management, accessed September 9, 2015.Google Scholar
Silberman, Neil A. 2015. Is Every Sherd Sacred?: Moving Beyond the Cult of Object-Centered Authenticity. Journal of Eastern Mediterranean Archaeology and Heritage Studies 3(1):61–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smithsonian Institution Archives 2012. Collections Care. Electronic document, http://siarchives.si.edu/services/collections-care, accessed November 23, 2015.Google Scholar
Thibodeau, Alyson M. 2012. Isotopic Evidence for the Provenance of Turquoise, Mineral Paints, and Metals in the Southwestern United States. Ph.D. Dissertation, Department of Geosciences, University of Arizona, Tucson.Google Scholar
Thibodeau, Alyson M., Chesley, John T., Killick, David, and Ruiz, Joaquin 2010. Lead and Strontium as Isotopic Tracers of Turquoise: An Example from the Tucson Basin. Paper presented at the 2010 Arizona Archaeological Council Fall Conference: The Application of Archaeological Sciences in Arizona, Tucson.Google Scholar
Thibodeau, Alyson M., Killick, David, Hedquist, Saul, Chesley, John T., and Ruiz, Joaquin 2015. Isotopic Evidence for the Provenance of Turquoise in the Southwestern United States. Geological Society of America Bulletin. Data Repository Item.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thiel, J. Homer, and Elson, Mark D.(editors) 2011. Archeological Investigations of Selected Mortuary Contexts at AZ AA:12:321(ASM), Marana, Pima County, Arizona. Technical Report No. 2006–12. Desert Archaeology, Inc., Tucson, Arizona.Google Scholar
Voss, Barbara 2012. Curation as Research: A Case Study in Orphaned and Underreported Archaeological Collections. Archaeological Dialogues 19(2):145–169 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Voss, Barbara, and Kane, Megan S. 2012. Re-establishing Context for Orphaned Collections. Collections. A Journal for Museum and Archives Professionals 8(2):87–112.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yellow Jacket Project 2005. The Yellow Jacket Artifact Collections. Electronic document, http://yellowjacket.colorado.edu/collections.html, accessed September 9, 2015.Google Scholar