Notes

1. For earlier histories of Minnesota archaeology, see Gibbon (19XX) and Benchley et al (1997:50-58).

Bray 1980; Bray and Bray 1993; Gelb 1993; Catlin 1973; Kane et al. 1978:151, 279; Parker 1976:92; Keating 1959:246-247, 258, 354, 373.
For the Mound Builders, see Silverberg (1968) and Wauchope (1962).
Squier and Davis 1848; C. Thomas 1887, 1894; Gale 1867. For an overview of the period, see xx. Samuel F. Haven (1856) and Justin Winsor (1889) trace the development of archaeological thinking at the time.
Minnesota was opened to Euro-American settlement in stages in the treaties of 1837 and 1857 (??). The region became a territory in 1849 and a state in 1858. Information for this overview was gathered from Lewis (1898), Winchell (1911:vi-xiv), Keyes 1928, Dobbs 1997, and our own familiarity with the records of the Hill-Lewis survey.
Hill was hired to survey earthworks, mounds, and rock art in 18 midwestern states and in Manitoba. In the context of this broader project, it is estimated that he surveyed 15,000 mounds and 50 enclosures, and made 100 rock art rubbings (McKusick 1975).
Brower 1898-1904. On Brower, see Winchell 1911:x-xiv and Benchley et al. 1997:52-53. (get a Brower bio)
Nickerson, who was Harvard trained, was an independent archaeologist mainly because he had continuing difficulty in finding a professional position. In McKusick’s (1975:42) words, he “had a difficult time professionally despite excellent recommendations from Harvard’s Peabody Museum and a solid record of excavation experience from 1884 to 1901.”
Holmes at Little Falls and Pipestone; Cyrus Thomas excavation of 3 mounds in Houston Co; George Bryce at Grand Mound.
In McKusick’s (1975:43) words, “With only a few men interested in prehistoric research [in the first two decades of the twentieth century], the fabric of continuity [in prehistoric archaeological research] was fragile and vulnerable. In part the lack of institutional support may reflect the fact that archaeology had become dull. Nineteenth century research had the excitement of discovery, reports of fabulous finds, and the lure of answering questions about the lost race of mound builders, lost Atlantis, or even the lost tribes of Israel. People could relate to these themes, and it was fun to pillage sites. If one only dug, anything might be found, and there was the belief among the amateurs that they were advancing science all at the same time.”

11 Jenks refs and bio. Johnson 1992.

12 Lloyd Wilford wrote numerous unpublished site reports that are not listed here; copies of the reports are on file at the SHPO office in the Minnesota Historical Society. With the exception of his dissertation, only his published articles and notes are cited here. For reviews of Wilford’s career, see Johnson (1974a and 1983).

13 The thrust of Wilford’s research program fits easily – and understandably, given the dearth of information about the state’s prehistoric archaeological record – into what Willey and Sabloff (1980:83) describe as the Classificatory-Historical period in American archaeology. Wilford attended the 1935 Indianapolis Conference on the emerging Midwest taxonomic system as the representative from Minnesota; the conference provided him with a classificatory system that he used in his dissertation and 1941 American Antiquity article (Johnson 1986).

14 This goal was facilitated by the formation of regional conferences, such as the Plains Anthropological Conference and the Midwestern Archaeological Conference, where state-level information was exchanged. While the results of this interaction were confined to improving state-level archaeology in Minnesota, James B. Griffin at the University of Michigan (1946, 1952), Gordon Willey and Phillip Phillip at Harvard University (1958), Joseph Caldwell at the Illinois State Museum (1958), and other archaeologists were developing large-scale syntheses and interpretations of prehistoric culture change in eastern North America.

For a biography of Elden Johnson, and lists of his publications and field excavations, see Gibbon 1990 and Streiff 1990, respectively.
By now the state’s most active archaeologists had advanced graduate degrees (though not all in archaeology), and at least some professional training in archaeological field and laboratory techniques. As Benchley et al. (1997:53) phrase the shift, “the tradition of independent scholarship was giving way to the more formalized tradition of academic archeology based in colleges and universities.”
For information on the expeditions and their results, see Holmquist and Wheeler 1964, Wheeler et al. 1975 and Birk and Wheeler 1975.
Something about the research by Michlovic, Scullin, Strahan, and Brew.
Professionalization
As early as 1934, federal funding for archaeological research became available to state archaeologists from the Works Progress Administration (WPA) to provide employed to the unemployed during the depression. references to the history of the CRM movement; references to the history of archaeology during this period (c. 1900-1950), both in MN and nationally. Work by Smith, Brown, and Sackett.
Fort Snelling, which was founded in 1819, was the first permanent U.S. military establishment in the Upper Mississippi Valley. Threatened by bridge and airport construction in the 1950s and 1960s, the MHS began extensive excavations at the Fort to demonstrate that valuable early nineteenth century archaeological remains were still intact. Studies of the barracks, stables, sutlers store, the Round Tower in the new fort, and midden outside the walls of the fort, as well as of other areas, were carried out. Although the recovered information was used in the living history program at the Fort and in reconstructions of the Fort itself, the results of these excavations have not been published.
Birk on Sayers post, etc. Reports on these excavations have not been published.
For the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 and Section 106, see… For a comprehensive introduction to archaeological field projects from a CRM perspective, see the seven booklets in The Archaeologist’s Tool-Kit. William Green and Larry Zimmerman are the general editors of the series. The MHS-housed highway survey programs were discontinued in 1994, which is the year that Clem Kachelmeyer retired.
Anfinson and Peterson 1979. Trunk Highway reports
Minnesota Historical Society 1981. The Survey was funded by the Minnesota State Legislature in 1977 and 1979, and housed in the State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO). Although the project produced a report for each survey and much new information about the state’s archaeological record, “the complete survey was never published and many of its excellent recommendations were not implemented. The computerized site database was never fully implemented and fell into disuse” (Benchley et al. 1997:57).
Under Rapp’s direction, an Archaeometry Laboratory was established at the University of Minnesota/Duluth that engaged in phytolith and macro-botanical studies, geoarchaeology, trace-element analysis, and other physical science approaches to archaeology. Rapp and Mulholland, and their colleagues and students, were particularly active in northeastern Minnesota archaeology, where they established working relationships with the Superior National Forest archaeology program. The Archaeometry Laboratory and its staff were key participants in the Center for Ancient Studies and later the Interdisciplinary Archaeological Studies graduate program, both of which were dedicated to training students in interdisciplinary approaches to archaeological projects.