Who Tells the Story? Shifting Power in Archaeological Narratives
If last week’s class was about setting the stage for a different kind of archaeology—one that centers community voices and collaborative methodologies—this week was about thinking through how to make that vision a reality. We moved from broad questions about ethnography’s role in archaeology to the nuts and bolts of designing an oral history project that actively engages Indigenous partners and rethinks the ways we document the past.
This shift isn’t just theoretical: it is about putting ideas into action. How do we design a project that doesn’t simply extract knowledge but works with community members to ensure their priorities and perspectives drive the research? How do we flip the script so that oral histories don’t just record archaeologists' experiences but also serve the needs of the local community? These are the kinds of questions that challenge traditional archaeological approaches and push us to do better.
Flipping the Script: Whose Questions Matter?
One of the most thought-provoking discussions this week revolved around who gets to ask the questions in archaeology. Too often, archaeological narratives are shaped by researchers' interests rather than community concerns. But our project—The Chumash Heritage Preservation Project—takes a different approach. Instead of presuming what is important, we’re working with our community partners to develop the research design together and ensure their perspectives shape not just the questions we ask but the entire process.
This means embracing Community-Based Participatory Research (CBPR) principles:
Sharing power rather than assuming expertise.
Listening and adapting instead of imposing rigid research structures.
Building relationships over time rather than just showing up to collect data.
We also discussed a key lesson from Sonya Atalay’s work: Research questions should emerge organically from conversations with the community. This requires patience. It means allowing space for discussions, reflections, and priorities to develop naturally rather than pushing a pre-made agenda.
Oral History as a Tool for Transformation
While oral history has been used in archaeology before, it has often been a secondary method—an add-on to excavation reports or historical research. In this class, we’re treating oral history as a primary archaeological tool that allows us to capture stories, places, belongings, and experiences that don’t leave material traces in the ground but are no less critical to heritage preservation.
We explored some major themes that will guide our oral history project:
Understanding Community Priorities: What aspects of past archaeological work do local tribal members see as significant? What knowledge gaps exist that archaeologists can help address?
Archaeologists' Perspectives on Their Own Work: How do archaeologists reflect on their past methods? How have their relationships with local communities evolved (or not evolved) over time?
Environmental and Ethical Questions: How do archaeologists discuss climate change, land development, and heritage preservation? Where do these discussions align—or clash—with Indigenous perspectives?
Navigating the Tensions
One of the most challenging aspects of community-based work is recognizing that tensions will arise. As Lightfoot (2008) points out, archaeologists and Indigenous communities don’t always have the same historical narratives, and there’s no easy way to merge different perspectives into a single, harmonious version of the past. Instead, our work involves navigating these tensions honestly and creating space for multiple ways of knowing.
Some questions that emerged from this discussion:
How do we handle contradictions between community knowledge and archaeological findings?
What does true shared authority look like in practice?
How do we ensure that oral history interviews serve both the needs of the narrators and the broader research goals?
Looking Ahead
Next week, we’ll be diving into transcription processes—the next critical step in our oral history project. We’ll also start refining our interview questions, ensuring they reflect the priorities of our community partners while also providing space for archaeologists to critically engage with their own histories.
This course is more than just learning how to do ethnographic research—it’s about reshaping archaeology in California to be more ethical, collaborative, and inclusive. And my students? They’re not just observers in this process—they’re active participants in this transformation.
More reflections to come as we continue this journey…
