Editorial principles
As we grapple with the legacy of the Harriman Alaska Expedition Collection at PSU and the larger events that brought it into being, we think about the many communities, past and present, whose lives and lands have been impacted by people like Nelson and the other settler participants on the HAE.
To this end, we have identified the following editorial principles for the presentation of Nelson’s diary that draw from ongoing conversations about ethics of access and care in archival research.
Language
Refusing harmful terminology
In accordance with the guidance in the Protocols for Native American Archival Materials to “remove offensive terms from original titles and provide substitute language,” this project has replaced any derogatory terminology found in Nelson’s diary or supplementary materials from the Harriman Alaska Expedition. Any replacements are indicated by square brackets. We hold that the original offensive terms provide nothing to the educational or historical value of these materials, and only serve to replicate harm to the communities who have already been negatively impacted by the HAE.
Specifying nationhood
Writing about his relations with the many different Indigenous tribes and clans that call the coast of Alaska home, Nelson usually refers to all peoples using one general term (“Indian”) while problematically ignoring the distinctions between Indigenous nations and clans. Because we do not wish to conceal Nelson’s prejudice, we have preserved occurrences of that term (“Indian”), but wherever possible, we follow that word with our own inference, in square brackets, of the specific nation of the individual(s) about whom Nelson was writing. This inference is informed by multiple factors, including Nelson’s location at the time of writing, as well as any details Nelson provides about the person or peoples’ dress or any activities they are undertaking.
Though this editing practice helps to challenge the colonialist tendency to generalize Indigenous identities and customs, it is necessary to remember that our inferences provided in the square brackets are uncertain. Even though Nelson’s location can be a helpful clue, it should not be assumed that the Indigenous peoples he encounters are always the peoples who hold ancestral claim to that territory; this would neglect the possibilities of Indigenous mobility and travel.
Example:
From Nelson’s entry for June 19:
“At Yakutat came on board this morning…3 Indians [likely Tlingit]; one of them had sea otter skin for sale.”
That these individuals were Tlingit is strongly suggested by the location of the meeting in Yakutat bay, the homeland of the Laaxaayík Kwáan (Yakutat Tlingit). Tlingit also harvest sea otter pelts, but they are one of many groups to do so on the Alaska coast, so this cannot be a deciding factor. For this reason, we include the term “likely” within the square brackets.
Images
The question of consent
Donated with Nelson’s diary, and often drawn upon in this digital project, are the two souvenir albums of photographs that were assembled by Edward Curtis for members of the expedition. Many of these photographs feature Indigenous peoples of Alaska, who are sometimes posing and at other times seem oblivious to the shutter of the camera. Though it’s sometimes assumed that posing for a photograph indicates consent, we cannot know the terms under which Curtis convinced subjects to pose, and therefore, we cannot take posing as evidence of free, prior, and informed consent (FPIC) to being photographed. Even if individuals provided FPIC to be photographed, there is also the question of whether they gave additional permission for Curtis to circulate the photograph(s) to a public audience through the souvenir albums.
Without the knowledge of the subjects’ FPIC on both counts described above, Harriman Recollected omits Curtis’ photographs of Indigenous peoples with the exception of one photograph that enriches our research into the provenance of the Indigenous artworks donated with Nelson’s diary. This photograph is included in the artifact profile for a piece of scrimshaw.
Place names
Emphasizing Indigenous territorial ownership
An important goal of the Harriman Recollected project is to emphasize that the expedition took place on Indigenous lands and waters. At every point of the journey, the expeditioners were accountable—whether or not they knew or recognized it—to the protocols of the peoples in that given region who held ancestral claims to the land. As one way of negating those Indigenous rights, Nelson and his colleagues aboard the George W. Elder used a set of colonial names for the places they visited (names which often celebrated white colonizers who coerced and assaulted Indigenous peoples during their “explorations” — take, for example, Cook Inlet, named after Captain Cook).
We affirm the importance of “reclaiming Indigenous place names,” as outlined in a report from the Yellowhead Institute, and we strive to foreground Indigenous place names before colonial names wherever possible across our site. We provide a short territorial attribution before each of Nelson’s entries that we include on this site, stating the Indigenous territory upon which the entry was written.
These are methodologies in progress, and we welcome any feedback as we continue to expand and adjust the Harriman Recollected site. It is a project that in many ways will never be finished, as conversations in archival studies about ethics of care and anti-colonial description are dynamic and evolving.