Historical ecology has revolutionized our understanding of fisheries and cultural landscapes, demonstrating the value of historical data for evaluating the past, present, and future of Earth’s ecosystems. Despite several important studies, Indigenous fisheries generally receive less attention from scholars and managers than the 17th–20th century capitalist commercial fisheries that decimated many keystone species, including oysters. We investigate Indigenous oyster harvest through time in North America and Australia, placing these data in the context of sea level histories and historical catch records. Indigenous oyster fisheries were pervasive across space and through time, persisting for 5000–10,000 years or more. Oysters were likely managed and sometimes “farmed,” and are woven into broader cultural, ritual, and social traditions. Effective stewardship of oyster reefs and other marine fisheries around the world must center Indigenous histories and include Indigenous community members to co-develop more inclusive, just, and successful strategies for restoration, harvest, and management.

Understanding the causes and consequences of previous climate changes is essential for testing present-day climate models and projections. Archaeological sites are paleoenvironmental archives containing unique ecological baselines with data on paleoclimate transformations at a human timescale. Anthropogenic and nonanthropogenic forces have destroyed many sites, and others are under immediate threat. In the face of this loss, previously excavated collections from these sites—referred to as legacy collections—offer a source of climate and other paleoenvironmental information that may no longer exist elsewhere. Here, we 1) review obstacles to systematically using data from legacy archaeological collections, such as inconsistent or unreported field methods, inadequate records, unsatisfactory curation, and insufficient public knowledge of relevant collections; 2) suggest best practices for integrating archaeological data into climate and environmental research; and 3) summarize several studies to demonstrate the benefits and challenges of using legacy collections as archives of local and regional environmental proxies. Data from archaeological legacy collections contribute regional ecological baselines as well as serve to correct shifting baselines. They also enable regional climate reconstructions at various timescales and corroborate or refine radiocarbon dates. Such uses of legacy collections raise ethical concerns regarding ownership of and responsibility for cultural resources and highlight the importance of Indigenous involvement in planning and executing fieldwork and stewardship of cultural heritage. Finally, we discuss methodologies, practices, and policies pertaining to archaeological legacy collections and support calls for discipline-wide shifts in collections management to ensure their long-term utility in multidisciplinary research and public engagement.

In North America, Indigenous pasts are publicly understood through narratives constructed by archaeologists who bring Western ideologies to bear on their inquiries. The resulting Eurocentric presentations of Indigenous pasts shape public perceptions of Indigenous peoples and influence Indigenous perceptions of self and of archaeology. In this paper we confront Eurocentric narratives of Indigenous pasts, specifically Wabanaki pasts, by centering an archaeological story on relationality between contemporary and past Indigenous peoples. We focus on legacy archaeological collections and eroding heritage sites in Acadia National Park, Maine. We present the “Red Paint People” myth as an example of how Indigenous pasts become distorted through archaeological narratives influenced by Western ideologies and offer a framework for indigenizing archaeological narratives constructed previously through Western lenses, using Indigenous language and community engagement to carry out the study.

Indigenous communities globally are challenged by threats to heritage resources due to residual effects of colonization, outsider encroachment on traditional spaces, and economic and political inequities. The effects of climate change add another dimension to these challenges, not only by altering familiar ecosystems and landscapes but also through the destruction of Indigenous heritage spaces. The University of Maine's Northeast archaeology program supports Indigenous resilience to climate change through community-engaged approaches to archaeological research. Recent shell heap research at the Holmes Point West site in Machiasport, Maine, exemplifies these efforts by blending archaeological science with service through Passamaquoddy language preservation and community engagement. This article discusses the University of Maine's partnership with the Passamaquoddy Nation and reflects on the nexus of Indigenous archaeology, heritage protection, and climate change resilience.

The Nevin site in Maine has become a contested space as Wabanaki people seeking to repatriate their ancestors confront archaeologists who adhere to the antiquated postulates of their predecessors. Warren K. Moorehead, of Phillips Academy's archaeology department, focused field work on Maine's so‐called “Red Paint” cemeteries from 1912–1920. Moorehead acknowledged the antiquity of the cemeteries but saw the people as members of a “lost civilization” culturally distinct from later Indigenous groups. Douglas Byers succeeded Moorehead and excavated graves at the Nevin site from 1936–1940. Despite radiocarbon dates and a better understanding of the Archaic period, Byers did not attribute Nevin's lavish grave goods to that early era. The confusion sowed by Moorehead and Byers still influences contemporary archaeologists and museum personnel who resist Wabanaki efforts to repatriate their ancestors under contemporary legislation. Despite the lack of robust research on in‐migration, prevailing ideas about the Late Archaic in Maine envision a population replacement by southern immigrants. This hypothesis opposes claims of cultural connectedness by contemporary Wabanaki peoples. Here, we explore the archaeological legacy associated with the Nevin cemetery and challenge archaeologists to confront colonialist science that permeates repatriation.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract