Neo-Indians

A neo-Indian phenomenon, in which persons or groups who lack the conventionally expected ancestry or past affiliation begin to assert an Indian identity, is beginning to be recognized as having greater scale and scope than previously imagined. I explore one of the roots of the modern phenomenon in the person and early career of Craig Carpenter, in particular his relationship with the Hopi Traditionalist Movement and League of North American Indians. Carpenter and key League officers were neo-Indians who helped foster a new " traditional " Indian identity and spirituality infused with Western romanticism and metaphysics mixed with Hopi prophecy. Past observers and activists have overlooked this neo-Indian presence, describing these arenas solely as Indian and traditional. I conclude with the paradox that many modern Indians, neo-Indians, and New Agers draw their beliefs, practices, and identities from a common source due to the effective proselytizing by these actors.

During the first week's sessions of the Unsettling Genealogies Conference organized by Prof. Gordon Henry (MSU), members of the audience asked what the scope of Pretendianism, race shifting, pseudo-Indians, and self-indigenization, etc. is in the United States. I pulled together some figures from materials close at hand for easy access. I have added Lianna Costantino's information on the 2010 census. I imagine other presenters will add some additional measures, and I anticipate that Darryl Leroux will speak directly to Canadian circumstances.

This is a sample chapter from my unfinished book, "Appropriated Identities: Colonialism's Endgame for the Chumash." I've been sitting on this for a few years. I'm posting it because I know there is interest and I want to give people a chance to provide feedback before it is finalized. Send comments or feedback to [email protected].

Use of Erlandson's 1998 essay by those who promote neo-Chumash as Chumash amidst growing recognition of the extent of neo-Indianism makes it necessary to reveal additional flaws that undermine Erlandson's argument and his own damage to neo-Chumash ancestry claims.

This report evaluates the eligibility of Point Conception, California and an irregularly defined area around it for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places as a "traditional cultural property." The work was performed in 1994 as a part of the environmental review process for the proposed California Commercial Spaceport. This was the first traditional cultural property evaluation in Santa Barbara County, California. It may also be the first TCP study to engage with the issue of neo-Indian identities.

In the 1970s, a network of families from Santa Barbara, California, asserted local indigenous identities as "Chumash." However, we demonstrate that these families have quite different social histories than either they or supportive scholars claim. Rather than dismissing these neo-Chumash as anomalous "fakes," we place their claims to Chumash identity within their particular family social histories. We show that cultural identities in these family lines have changed a number of times over the past four centuries. These changes exhibit a range that is often not expected and render the emergence of neo-Chumash more comprehendible. The social history as a whole illustrates the ease and frequency with which cultural identities change and the contexts that foster change. In light of these data, scholars should question their ability to essentialize identity.

As North American archaeologists gravitate toward the collaborative mode of applied anthropology, they face new challenges. Professional authority is a key element of most collaborations, yet also can be why they fail. North American archaeologists are increasing their collaborations with indigenous groups, but encounter difficulty when their results conflict with the self-identity of their collaborators. My presentation will illustrate how many of these difficulties are inherent in the nature of identity generally, and are aggravated by the larger social contexts in which indigeneity itself has advantageous meaning.

troubling. My concerns revolve mostly around pragmatic rather than theoretical issues: (1) the artificial polarization of ''traditional'' and ''nontraditional'' groups CA6 FORUM ON among the Chumash and their anthropological ''allies''; ANTHROPOLOGY IN PUBLIC (2) the portrayal of the ''sacredness'' of Point Conception as clearly erroneous and the involvement of anthropologists in the definition of the ''Western Gate'' as conspiratorial or unethical; (3) certain interpretations that are presented-and uncritically accepted by most The Making of commentators-as facts; and (4) the lack of acknowledgment of the authors' own role in a highly charged Chumash Tradition political and economic struggle between anthropologists and Native Americans over control of the interpretation, management, and possession of heritage resources. Exploration of these issues shows that Chu-Replies to Haley and Wilcoxon mash origins and identity, the sacredness of Point Conception, and the roles anthropologists have played in interpreting and managing Chumash heritage are much less contentious or less ambiguous than Haley and Wilcoxon suggest. 1 Some historical background. The Santa Barbara Channel area, the core of Chumash territory, is now known to have been occupied for at least 11,000 years j on m c ve y e rla n d son

Focusing on Mexico and Peru with a little Bolivia thrown in, Galinier and Molinié explore the ethnogenesis of neo-Indians, an overarching term they choose to a new international identity and religion that is "reappropriating the heritage of Andean and Mexican civilizations ... [and] is being organized by people who are not from the same cultural milieu in the strictest sense" (3-4).

troubling. My concerns revolve mostly around pragmatic rather than theoretical issues: (1) the artificial polarization of ''traditional'' and ''nontraditional'' groups CA6 FORUM ON among the Chumash and their anthropological ''allies''; ANTHROPOLOGY IN PUBLIC (2) the portrayal of the ''sacredness'' of Point Conception as clearly erroneous and the involvement of anthropologists in the definition of the ''Western Gate'' as conspiratorial or unethical; (3) certain interpretations that are presented-and uncritically accepted by most The Making of commentators-as facts; and (4) the lack of acknowledgment of the authors' own role in a highly charged Chumash Tradition political and economic struggle between anthropologists and Native Americans over control of the interpretation, management, and possession of heritage resources. Exploration of these issues shows that Chu-Replies to Haley and Wilcoxon mash origins and identity, the sacredness of Point Conception, and the roles anthropologists have played in interpreting and managing Chumash heritage are much less contentious or less ambiguous than Haley and Wilcoxon suggest. 1 Some historical background. The Santa Barbara Channel area, the core of Chumash territory, is now known to have been occupied for at least 11,000 years j on m c ve y e rla n d son