Ethnohistory, Annotated Bibliography

This push for historical recognition was the topic of publications in the late 1970’s. Bruce Trigger’s “Brecht and Ethnohistory,” Karl Schwerin’s “The Future of Ethnohistory,” and James Axtell’s “Ethnohistory: An Historians Viewpoint” advocate the intentional promotion of Ethnohistory in historical publications and conferences. They also propose more academic distance in ethnohistorical study. The closeness that was necessary in ICC claims constrained the discipline to anthropology rather than history. A measure of historical distance without moral or ethical judgment tells a stronger history of the people being studied. They also advocate for further studies in the postcolonial world as nations rediscovered their histories after European

Ethnohistory and Archaeology: Approaches to Postcontact Change in the Americas by Daniel Rogers, Samuel Wilson and Cultivating a Landscape of Peace: Iroquois-European encounters in Seventeenth Century America by Matthew Dennis, and “Ethnohistory for a Tribal World” by Frederick Hoxie, reexamined previous studies of Native American population. Traditional historians as well as ethnohistorians examining cultures though oral histories viewed indigenous populations as “primitive” and “uncivilized.” These labels stereotyped indigenous populations and condoned domination my “civilized power.” Rogers, Wilson, Dennis, and Hoxie advocated for greater cultural sensitivity and considering historical actors in their larger historical structures. Instead of viewing Native American history as a “clash of cultures.” Instead of a contest where one culture must be dominate, cultures coexist and interact exchanging power and perspective. They also highlight the significance of telling the history of everyday life instead of the history of great individuals or culture altering events. This sensitivity and everyday history help open conversations about cultures and undermines Eurocentric or romantic views of indigenous

These publications advocate for the use of self-identifying terms for people groups to avoid ethnocentrisms or racist implications in research. They emphasize the role of most ethnohistorians as “educated outsides” to the cultures they examine, and must examine identities and biases carefully as they seek to decolonize the narratives surrounding indigenous people. They also highlight indigenous agency in the historical narrative and the acknowledgment of power dynamics in intercultural interactions. Indigenous peoples were not and are not passive observers to the historical narrative. Their identities and actions shape their cultures and interactions with people groups. This awareness depicts the complexity and resilience of indigenous population without falling into racial stereotypes or