Skip to main content
Log in

Subject or object? Shaping and reshaping the intersections between aboriginal and non-aboriginal records

Archival Science Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This paper considers the shaping and reshaping of, and intersections between, aboriginal and non-aboriginal communication, information, and documentation processes in British Columbia, from the mid 1800s to the 21st century. It suggests that when two cultures come into contact with each other, the relationship between them is inevitably transformed, along with each culture’s traditional methods of communication, information management, and memory making. While it is often assumed that one technology might dominate the other, more often the different technologies and methods blend together to create a new hybrid approach, a cross-cultural integration, though the less powerful culture often does most of the accommodating. By considering the relationship between aboriginal people and European settlers in British Columbia, on the west coast of Canada, particularly over the ownership of and rights to land, this paper suggests that the two societies have intertwined their communities, their cultures, and their documentary systems to the point that today neither society exists in isolation. Each culture is inextricably linked with the other, a fact that calls into question the idea that aboriginal oral traditions are “pure” or separate from non-aboriginal methods of documentation, as well as the notion that written forms of record keeping about aboriginal–non-aboriginal relationships are not influenced by oral evidence from aboriginal sources.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. For a discussion of cross-cultural archival issues, see for example Pylypchuk (1991). For a discussion of the analysis of discrete juridical systems, see for example Duranti (19891990). See also Innis’ (1951, p. 41) discussion of the difficulty of considering oral cultures from the point of view of a print-based society. Relevant to this particular topic, historian Robin Fisher has commented on the difficulties of assessing written and oral evidence fairly in the study of aboriginal history in British Columbia. He noted that there is inevitably a reliance on written, and therefore European, sources, which he agreed often contain “distortions resulting from ignorance and prejudice.” He believed, though, that written records “still reveal much about what the Indians were doing and, sometimes, about what they were thinking.” As I suggest here, many contemporary European records about aboriginal people were in fact created in concert with the aboriginals themselves and so cannot be seen as separate and distinct. See Fisher (1977, p. xiii).

  2. Carrithers examines cultural issues in Carrithers (1992, p. 9). See also his discussion on pp. 30, 55, and throughout.

  3. At this point one must address the contentious issue of terminology. The terms used to refer to aboriginal and non-aboriginal people in Canada have changed over the years—words are the weapons of politics, after all. Indeed, changes in the language of native-white relations have become their own political minefield; a study of the effects on archival descriptive systems, authority controls, access regimes, and reference services would provide fascinating insights into the politics of representation. As of 2005, Canada’s federal government has chosen to use the term “aboriginal people” to refer to all indigenous people of Canada, including status and non-status Indians. The 1982 Constitution, however, provides a much more detailed definition of “status” and “non-status” Indians. The distinction is critical to the provision of government services on and off native reserves. Another category is Métis: traditionally defined as persons of mixed Native American and French-Canadian ancestry. The Inuit are the aboriginal people of Canada’s far north. One is urged to avoid the term “Indian” these days; “native” and “indigenous” are considered more generic. A popular phrase now is “First Nations,” but this is a highly specific geopolitical term. While it is often mistakenly used to refer to all indigenous Canadians, the term “First Nations” in fact refers specifically to membership within a particular aboriginal governing body or, in legal and archival terminology, juridical entity.

    Terms for the non-aboriginal population in British Columbia are also not free of political influence. The first immigrants were “settlers” and “traders”—their ethnographic status less significant than the land they inhabited, the possessions they brought, or the goods they sold. Not much later, the term “European” came to represent the bulk of new residents, most of whom in fact traced their origins to distant ports in England and Scotland and probably balked at the idea of being called “European.” For decades, a popular term for non-aboriginal people was “white,” which rather accurately reflected the shade of both the people and the politics of the times. Today, of course, in a province where more than 50% of the population claims Asian origin, “white” doesn’t provide an accurate reflection, but the term still appears from time to time, especially in criticisms of government decisions about aboriginal affairs. That said, I will endeavour not to fall prey to political correctness in this paper; I have opted to refer to “aboriginal” and “non-aboriginal” people as the most generic of the terms available, but if another term was used in or appropriate to a certain historical context, I will not amend it for the sake of current sensitivities.

  4. It is only possible to open the smallest crack into the vast history of aboriginal–non-aboriginal relations in colonial British Columbia, and since this discussion focuses on record-keeping issues it is not possible to follow all the disparate historical threads that underpin the larger story. The interested reader is directed to three useful introductions to the topic of aboriginal issues and land claims in the 19th and 20th centuries: Fisher (1977), Tennant (1990), and Barman (1996).

  5. I will not spend time here apologizing for the political, economic, and social changes wrought when one society—in this case western, European, white society—moves into territory previously the domain of another society—in this case the aboriginal populations of British Columbia. I acknowledge that the effects of this interaction, for better or worse, and many believe for worse, reach far beyond issues of communications and information management. But record keeping and documentation are the topics of this analysis, and I submit that the intersection of communications technologies is more than a case of winners and losers, of oppressors and oppressed. There is a complex subtlety to the evolution of intercultural communications and relationships that demands that we look beyond personal inclinations or political preferences to the historical realities in place.

  6. Readers are directed to the judicial records of the trial, in particular In the Supreme Court of British Columbia, between: Delgamuukw, also known as Ken Muldoe, suing on his own behalf and on behalf of all the members of the House of Delgamuukw, and others, plaintiffs, and: Her Majesty the Queen in right of the Province of British Columbia and the Attorney General of Canada, defendants: reasons for judgment of the Honourable Chief Justice Allan McEachern (Vancouver, BC, 1991). (Hereafter referred to as Delgamuukw v. British Columbia, Reasons for Judgement.)

  7. Pylypchuk discusses this issue in Pylypchuk (1991, p. 53). It is an important but little-known fact that this case was not the first time in Canadian law that oral tradition was formally admitted as evidence. As legal analyst Paul Williams notes, “in 1982, the Ontario Court of Appeal decided the case of The Queen v. Taylor and Williams, also known as the ‘Bullfrogs Case.’ The court concluded that the oral tradition of an Indian nation was relevant in interpreting the treaties of that nation with the Crown. Though the judges did not say so, what they had done was create an exception to the ‘hearsay rule’—the rule that says that things one hears from someone else should not be accepted as evidence by a court” (Williams 1996, p. 29). As I suggest here, the same exceptions have been made, formally or informally, at different times in British Columbia’s history, rendering McEachern’s decision less monumental than first supposed.

  8. See Delgamuukw v. British Columbia, Reasons for Judgement, pp. 57–58. See also Pylypchuk (1991, p. 57).

  9. See, for example, Shauna McRanor’s discussion of the notion of fixity and the legitimacy of audiotapes in aboriginal culture, in McRanor (1997).

  10. For a discussion of the post-Delgamuukw environment, see Lippert (2000).

  11. See McRanor (1997, p. 69). See also Pylypchuk (1991, p. 68).

  12. McNab examines the Delgamuukw decision in McNab (2000, p. 275). The only pre-contact native societies to develop writing in North America were in Mexico, south of the Tropic of Cancer; the rest maintained oral communications technologies. See Diamond (1999, p. 22).

  13. Jackson’s statement is quoted by Pylypchuk (1991, p. 53).

  14. See the discussion in Pylypchuk (1991, p. 64). See also McRanor’s explanation of the adaawk in McRanor (1997, p. 69). These complex concepts of the adaawk and kungax have been drastically simplified here out of necessity. Further, since there are over 150 different distinct aboriginal groups in British Columbia, any statement of commonality in their beliefs and traditions is suspect. Note, for example, McRanor’s explanation (footnote 27) of the variations in the rendering of the terms adaawk and kungax, deviations which in themselves highlight the diversity among the different groups throughout the province.

  15. See Delgamuukw v. British Columbia, Reasons for Judgement, p. 46.

  16. Of the few works published about wampum records, an interesting contribution is Leavitt and Francis (1990). A Blackfoot Indian from Alberta, Pe-ta-kis-na-ma or Joe Little Chief, documented various tales, ceremonies, and historical events related to Plains Indians. In his account of the history of tobacco bundles, he described the creation of a “calendar” on skin, noting that at the start of the winter months a ceremony was held, during which the leader “put one black mark arcross this hide” to depict the November moon, then said “Now I am going to mark this line across [sic] this Nov. moon that is the old road of long ago we will all walk on that old road.” See “The history of the tobacco bundles which they use for the tobacco dance, via Margaret Studhorse, second wife of Little Joe Chief, and member of the Tobacco Society,” in Joe Little Chief fonds, Glenbow Museum, M-4394-3, transcript pp 5–6; available electronically at http://asalive.archivesalberta.org:8080/access/asa/documents/display/GLEN-692. Consulted April 26, 2006.

  17. See in particular the work of Barbeau on totem poles: Barbeau (1939, p. 491). He was considered a pioneering anthropologist in Canada; . See also McRanor’s discussion of physical objects and their evidentiary role in aboriginal society in McRanor (1997, p. 70). An early analysis of totems is found in Hill-Tout (1901, pp. 3–15).

  18. The commissioner continues at length about a range of aboriginal issues from the availability of food to relationships with local settlers; see United States, Office of the Commissioner of Indian Affairs (1869, p. 536).

  19. Ibid.

  20. A useful overview of the pre-history of British Columbia, including a discussion of archaeological evidence, can be found in Muckle (1998).

  21. See Fisher’s discussion (1977, p. 103). See also Pylypchuk (1991, p. 70).

  22. Sproat is quoted in Fisher (1977, p. 103).

  23. The Union of B.C. Indian Chiefs has compiled an extensive guide to researching land issues; see Union of B.C. Indian Chiefs (2005). Chief Stewart Philips remarks are in the foreword.

  24. For an analysis of population changes in the province over time, see Barman (1996, p. 379).

  25. Sproat (1868, p. 273), examined native life in detail.

  26. Ibid., p. 279.

  27. The author of this remark, JW Boddam-Wetham, was something of an explorer, travelling to the Caribbean and Central America and publishing accounts of his trips. His books include Boddam-Wetham (1874, 1877, 1879). Boddham-Wetham is quoted in Fisher (1977, p. 88).

  28. Douglas is quoted in Cumming and Mickenberg (1981, p. 195).

  29. Ibid.

  30. Ibid., p. 242. Ironically, the text chosen for the first 14 treaties was not drawn from the Royal Proclamation or other accords. Instead, the New Zealand Company’s agreement with the Maori people was used as the basis for Douglas’s accords. It also seems that Douglas bent the rules of the gentleman’s agreement of treaty making. Rather than write the treaties first and then have the Indian chiefs sign, it seems that Douglas instead had the chiefs sign a blank piece of paper, then has his clerk insert a suitable text on the upper portion of the sheet. It is likely that the process was chosen to allow for final negotiations on the spot, after which the clerk could prepare a fair copy of the final document back in Victoria and still have the validation of the “signatures.” Thus government officials and native chiefs would not have to travel great distances yet again to conduct another signing ceremony. See Tennant (1990, p. 19).

  31. One can question the effect of the shift in medium on the content, context, and structure of the “archival” record, as McRanor does, but I submit that the transfer of information was a fact that must be considered as we look at the blending of these two disparate communications technologies. See McRanor (1997).

  32. This and other legislative documents are in Hendrickson (1980, p. 359).

  33. See the discussion in McKee (2000, esp. chapter 1).

  34. See the discussion in Fisher (1981, pp. 155–156). For a discussion of the legality, or illegality, of Trutch’s claim that the land was not occupied, see Miller (2005).

  35. Fisher discusses Trutch’s activities (1981, p. 162).

  36. See the discussion in Tennant (1990, pp. 47–49).

  37. See the discussion in Fisher (1981, pp. 164–165).

  38. For a discussion of issues of assimilation and native culture, see Mackey (1999, including chapter 2).

  39. See Eastwood (1982, see esp. p. 40) for a discussion of the establishment of the provincial museum in his article.

  40. Many authors have examined the topic of aboriginal people and photography. See Blackman (19851986), Francis (1996), and (Schwartz 19771978). For another discussion of the misinterpretation of photographs see James (1981).

  41. Leeson is quoted in Francis (1996, p. 3). In fact, the Quatsino did not die out as expected and still exist as an administrative part of the Kwakiutl First Nation in coastal British Columbia. The photograph in question, of the Quatsino man, does not seem to have survived. However, some other Leeson photographs of the Quatsino tribe are housed in the British Columbia Archives; see for example the group portrait of the Quatsinos taken in 1895: call number D-07693, catalogue number HP 072968, accessible for online viewing at http://www.bcarchives.gov.bc.ca/cgi-bin/text2html/.visual/img_txt/dir_77/d_07693.txt. Consulted April 26, 2006. Another particularly appropriate image, in relation to the concept of misrepresentation of agoriginal people, was taken by famed photographer Frederick Dally in the 1860s; the original title, which one assumes was handwritten on the photographic plate by Dally himself, says “Indians shamming to be at prayer for sake of photography.” See call number E-04419, catalogue number HP 083074. The image is accessible for online viewing at http://www.bcarchives.gov.bc.ca/cgi-bin/text2html/.visual/img_txt/dir_128/e_04419.txt. Consulted April 26, 2006.

  42. See Fisher (1977), especially chapter 4, for a discussion of photography and the image of the Indian.

  43. See the discussion in Francis (1996, p. 8).

  44. See Eastwood (1982, p. 42).

  45. This event is discussed in Cumming and Mickenberg (1981, pp. 191, 197, 203–204). See also the analysis in Tennant (1990, pp. 104–108).

  46. Ibid.

  47. Bill Russell looks at record keeping in the Department of Indian Affairs in detail in Russell (19841985).

  48. Louis is quoted in ibid., p. 52.

  49. See the discussion in Innis (1991, p. 50). See also Russell (19841985, p. 70) and Hubner (2000, p. 30).

  50. See the discussion in Morrison (19791980).

  51. This issue is outlined in Calder et al v. The Attorney-General for British Columbia (1973): SCR 316. The implications of the Calder case are discussed in Morrison (19791980, pp. 22–23). As is noted later, the Nisga’a ended up becoming the first aboriginal group to complete a treaty in British Columbia in the 20th century, when the Nisga’a Final Agreement came into effect in May 2000. See http://www.gov.bc.ca/arr/negotiation/nisgaa/default.htm. Consulted April 26, 2006.

  52. See details about the claims process at the website for the Union of BC Indian Chiefs, at http://www.ubcic.bc.ca/Resources/publications.htm. Consulted April 26, 2006.

  53. See Morrison’s comments (19791980, p. 30). Language is also a major issue in questions of evidence, for when oral traditions are translated to become court evidence, much of their meaning can be lost. As Carrithers notes, “a story as understood is something a good deal more than a story as recorded.” See Carrithers (1992, p. 98). See also Pylypchuk (1991, p. 71). The issue of language is particularly complex. There are hundreds of aboriginal languages in Canada, many with no written form. This linguistic reality is dramatically different from the situation in countries like New Zealand, which Canada often looks to for guidance about aboriginal affairs, since in New Zealand there is a linguistic unity among the aboriginal peoples that does not exist in North America.

  54. See Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development (1982, p. 30).

  55. See information about the Union of British Columbia Indian Chiefs (UBCIC) resource centre, available online at http://www.ubcic.bc.ca/Resources/. Consulted April 26, 2006. The UBCIC was formed in 1969 partly in response to the government’s white paper suggesting assimilation as the appropriate course of action for Canada’s first nations. Its mission is to protect aboriginal title, hold the federal government to its responsibilities, and end the perceived decolonization of aboriginal people. See UBCIC, http://www.ubcic.bc.ca/about/. Consulted April 26, 2006. The UBCIC has also prepared extensive guidance on methods for conducting research, available online at http://www.ubcic.bc.ca/Resources/rilq.htm. Consulted April 26, 2006. Interestingly, there is little concern in the guidance provided about the veracity of the materials sought, whether maps or government records or oral testimonies or geneologies. Instead, the discussion focuses on how to find and use written records for land claims purposes. The implication seems to be that anything found is useful, even if someone else might question its origins or the accuracy, reliability, or “truthfulness” of its contents.

  56. This information comes from “Ayaawx & Adawx,” Kitkatla Council Meeting, Minutes, July 21–23, 2003, pp. 3, 8, 12.

  57. This idea was addressed extensively by Dan Savard, of the Royal British Columbia Museum, in an interview on 11 May 2005. See also his article on the management of aboriginal photographs in a forthcoming issue of BC Studies (2006). A particularly interesting issue here is that many people, aboriginal and non-aboriginal, claim that the photographs represent “traditional knowledge” and are accurate depictions of historical events, when in fact many of the images were artificial, staged, or outright falsified. An in-depth investigation of the veracity, or verisimilitude, of such images would be a valuable contribution to archival literature.

  58. As Brian Hubner has argued, “it is now also critical to encourage the establishment of Aboriginal archives which would collect records which reflect the activities of Native creators and not just the dominant Euro-Canadian society.” See Hubner (2000, p. 93).

  59. See SISAA information at the Association of Canadian Archivists website: http://archivists.ca/special_interest/aboriginal.aspx. Consulted April 26, 2006.

  60. Consider for example that the University College of the Fraser Valley offers a First Nations Option for its library technician program. See http://www.ucfv.ca/Home_Page.htm. Consulted April 26, 2006. As noted, the University of British Columbia’s School of Library, Archival and Information Studies offers a First Nations concentration; see for example http://www.slais.ubc.ca/PROGRAMS/first-nations.htm and http://www.slais.ubc.ca/PEOPLE/students/student-projects/R_Tagami/517/ubcic.htm. Consulted April 26, 2006. In the University of Northern British Columbia’s First Nations Studies program, courses are offered on oral history, story telling, research, and material culture. See for example https://forms.unbc.ca/pls/prd/dev_web.course_finder.calendar?subject=First%21Nations%21Studies. Consulted April 26, 2006.

  61. Kathryn Bridge of the British Columbia Archives discussed this topic at length during an interview on 12 May 2005.

  62. See the BC Ministry of Education website, particularly the section on First Nations studies, at http://www.bced.gov.bc.ca/irp/physics/apcfir.htm. Consulted April 26, 2006.

  63. See for example the discussion by the Canadian government on the role of alternative forms of justice. See http://canada.justice.gc.ca/en/ps/ajs/programs/bc.html. Consulted April 26, 2006. See also the work of the Justice Institute of British Columbia, at http://www.jibc.bc.ca/aboriginal. Consulted April 26, 2006.

  64. See Carrithers’ argument (1992, p. 199).

  65. See Brown (2003, p. 212). I am grateful to Heather MacNeil for directing me to this resource.

  66. McEachern’s words are found in Delgamuukw v. British Columbia, Reasons for Judgement of the Honourable Chief Justice Allan McEachern, March 8, 1991, p. 50. See also p. 58.

  67. Donato Tamblé considered the changes in archives over time (1994, p. 410).

  68. See for example the discussion during the meeting held by the British Columbia Treaty Commission and Morris J. Wosk Centre for Dialogue, the proceeds of which are Planning for Prosperity: First Nations, Intergovernmental Cooperation and Treaties – A Leaders’ Forum (Vancouver: Simon Fraser University, 9 September 2004), p. 26. For an example of a sophisticated website with a wide range of information, see the site developed by the Sto:lo Nation in British Columbia’s Fraser Valley, at http://www.stolonation.bc.ca/sdc/stolo_nation.htm. Consulted April 26, 2006. Other examples include the site developed by the Musqueam band, at http://www.musqueam.bc.ca/Default.htm; consulted 26 April 2006; the Haida Nation, at http://www.haidanation.ca/, consulted 26 April 2006; and the Sliammon Band, at http://www.sliammon.com/, consulted 26 April 2006.

References

  • Barbeau M (1939) The modern growth of the totem pole on the Northwest Coast. Smithsonian Report, p 491

  • Barman J (1996) The west beyond the west: a history of British Columbia. University of Toronto Press, Toronto

    Google Scholar 

  • Blackman MB (1985–1986) Studio Indians: Cartes de visite of native people in British Columbia, 1862–1872. Archivaria 21:68–86

    Google Scholar 

  • Boddam-Wetham JW (1874) Western wanderings: a record of travel in the evening land. R. Bentley and Son, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Boddam-Wetham JW (1877) Across Central America. n.p., London

  • Boddam-Wetham JW (1879) Roraima and British Guiana: with a Glance at Bermuda, the West Indies and the Spanish Main. Hurst & Blackett, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown M (2003) Who owns native culture? Harvard University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Carrithers M (1992) Why humans have cultures: explaining anthropology and social diversity. Oxford University Press, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • Cumming P, Mickenberg N (1981) Native rights in Canada: British Columbia. In: Ward WP, McDonald RAJ (eds) British Columbia historical readings. Douglas & McIntyre, Vancouver

    Google Scholar 

  • Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development (DIAND) (1982) Outstanding business: a native claims policy. Minister of Supply and Services Canada, Ottawa

  • Diamond J (1999) Guns, germs and steel: the fates of human societies. Norton, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Duranti L (1989–1990) Diplomatics: new uses for an old science (Part II). Archivaria 29:4–17

    Google Scholar 

  • Eastwood T (1982) R.E. Gosnell, E.O.S. Scholefield and the founding of the provincial archives of British Columbia, 1894–1919. BC Studies 54:38–62

    Google Scholar 

  • Fisher R (1977) Contact & conflict: Indian-European relations in British Columbia, 1774–1890. University of British Columbia Press, Vancouver

    Google Scholar 

  • Fisher R (1981) Joseph Trutch and Indian land policy. In: Ward WP, McDonald RAJ (eds) BC historical readings. Douglas & McIntyre, Vancouver

    Google Scholar 

  • Francis D (1996) Copying people: photographing British Columbia first nations, 1860–1940. Fifth House, Saskatoon and Calgary

    Google Scholar 

  • Hendrickson JE (1980) (ed) Journals of the Colonial Legislatures of the Colonies of Vancouver Island and British Columbia, 1851–1871, Vol. III, Journals of the House of Assembly, VI, 1863–1866. Provincial Archives of British Columbia, Victoria, BC

    Google Scholar 

  • Hill-Tout C (1901) The origin of the totemism of the aborigines of British Columbia, Section II. Transactions of the Royal Society of Canada

  • Hubner B (2000) An administered people: a contextual approach to the study of bureaucracy, records-keeping and records in the Canadian Department of Indian Affairs, 1755–1950. University of Manitoba, MA thesis

  • Innis HA (1951) The bias of communication. University of Toronto Press, Toronto

    Google Scholar 

  • James WC (1981) ‘Inuit in church’: Clearing photographic misattribution. Archivaria 12:59–64

    Google Scholar 

  • Leavitt RM, Francis DA (trans. and eds.) (1990) Wapapi akonutomakonol: the wampum records: Wabanaki traditional laws as recounted by Lewis Mitchell and Originally Published in 1897. Micman-Maliseet Institute, Fredericton, New Brunswick

  • Lippert O (ed) (2000) Beyond the Nass Valley: national implications of the Supreme Court’s Delgamuukw Decision. The Fraser Institute, Vancouver

    Google Scholar 

  • Mackey E (1999) The house of difference: cultural politics and national identity in Canada. Routledge, London

    Google Scholar 

  • McKee C (2000) Treaty talks in British Columbia: negotiating a mutually beneficial future. UBC Press, Vancouver, BC

    Google Scholar 

  • McNab D (2000) The spirit of Delgamuukw and aboriginal oral traditions in Ontario. In: Lippert O (ed) Beyond the Nass Valley: national implications of the Supreme Court’s Delgamuukw Decision. The Fraser Institute, Vancouver, British Columbia

    Google Scholar 

  • McRanor S (1997) Maintaining the reliability of aboriginal oral records and their material manifestations: implications for archival practice. Archivaria 43:64–88

    Google Scholar 

  • Miller BG (2005) A short commentary on land claims in BC. Presentation to the 11th annual national land claims workshop, October 2003. See http://www.ubcic.bc.ca/Resources/shortcommentary.htm Consulted April 26, 2005

  • Morrison J (1979–1980) Archives and native claims. Archivaria 9:15–32

    Google Scholar 

  • Muckle RJ (1998) The first nations of British Columbia: an anthropological survey. University of British Columbia Press, Vancouver, BC

    Google Scholar 

  • Office of the Commissioner of Indian Affairs (1869) Report of the Hon. Vincent Colyer, United States Special Indian Commissioner, on the Indian tribes and their surroundings in Alaska Territory, from personal observation and inspection in 1869. Office of the Commissioner of Indian Affairs, Washington, DC

  • Pylypchuk MA (1991) The value of aboriginal records as legal evidence in Canada: an examination of sources. Archivaria 32:51–77

    Google Scholar 

  • Russell B (1984–1985) The white man’s paper burden: aspects of records keeping in the Department of Indian Affairs, 1860–1914. Archivaria 19:50–72

    Google Scholar 

  • Schwartz J (1977–1978) The photographic record of pre-confederation British Columbia. Archivaria 5:17–44

    Google Scholar 

  • Sproat GM (1868) Scenes and studies of savage life. Smith, Elder & Co., London

    Google Scholar 

  • Tamblé D (1994) Perspectives for the history of archives before writing. In: Ferioili P, Fiandra E, Fissore GG, Frangipane M (eds) Archives before writing: proceedings of the international colloquium, Oriolo Romano, October 23–25, 1991, Ministero per I Beni Culturali E Ambientali, Italy

  • Tennant P (1990) Aboriginal people and politics: the Indian land question in British Columbia, 1849–1989. University of British Columbia Press, Vancouver

    Google Scholar 

  • Union of BC Indian Chiefs (2005) Stolen lands, broken promises: researching the Indian land question in B.C. Union of BC Indian Chiefs, Vancouver, BC

  • Williams P (1996) Oral tradition on trial. In: Standen D, MacNab D (eds) Gin Das Winan: documenting aboriginal history in Ontario. Occasional Paper No. 2 of The Champlain Society

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Laura Millar.

Additional information

This paper was originally presented at the Second International Conference on the History of Records and Archives (I-CHORA 2), “Archival Affinities: Adapting and Adopting Archival Cultures”, Amsterdam, 1–3 September 2005. I acknowledge with thanks the support and input provided by many people in the preparation of the original presentation, including Martha Black, Kathryn Bridge, Margaret and Michael Cook, Brian Hubner, Heather MacNeil, Gary Mitchell, Rita Mogyorosi, Tom Nesmith, Charlene and Hans Penner, Dan Savard, and Richard Valpy. I am of course responsible for the ideas presented here, however controversial or questionable.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Millar, L. Subject or object? Shaping and reshaping the intersections between aboriginal and non-aboriginal records. Arch Sci 6, 329–350 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10502-007-9042-x

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10502-007-9042-x

Keywords

Navigation