Following the creation of an Anthropological Division in 1910 the Geological
Survey of Canada played a major role in the development of professional
archaeology in the country (Richling 2004). Archaeology’s appeal was very
limited, mainly because of the non-existence of spectacular remains like the
large mounds in parts of the United States that hadWred public imagination
and encouraged funding for archaeological work. Despite this, in Canada
there were some amateurs as well as theWrst semi-professional archaeologists,
such as Daniel Wilson (1816–92), and the geologist John William Dawson
(1820–99). Wilson arrived in Toronto from his native Scotland in 1853 to
occupy the chair of History and English Literature at University College. He
remained in Canada for the rest of his life. TheWrst professional archaeolo-
gist—properly speaking—in the country was the archaeological curator
at the Canadian Institute Museum, Toronto, David Boyle (1842–1911),
who was employed from 1884. Wilson and Boyle were both from Scotland,
although the latter arrived in Canada when he was only fourteen years
old. Wilson, as well as Dawson, studied at the University of Edinburgh.
There was no oYcial archaeology teaching in Canadian universities until
the late 1930s, although from 1857 Daniel Wilson had oVered a course
on ancient and modern ethnology (Killan 2004; Trigger 1981).
Hegemonic discourses and alternativesIn America—as elsewhere, as will also be seen later in the chapter—the
inferiority of non-state societies both present and past became the accepted
hegemonic discourse. Because of their assumed backwardness the natives and
their historical ancestors were not credited with the creation of any archaeo-
logical remains which resembled those of the Great Civilizations. These small-
scale societies were thought to be on the brink of extinction and some went so
far as to claim that their disappearance would be beneWcial to the nation. By
their racial and cultural nature they could not possibly be considered as
citizens of a modern nation. These beliefs became explicitly developed in
the museums opened at this time and in publications, and many archaeolo-
gists contributed to the vision of the native as retarded and in need of change.
In the US the Smithsonian Institution dedicated itsWrst volume in the
series ofSmithsonian Contributions to Knowledgeto a study of the intriguing
monuments, in the form of massive mounds, found in the Mississippi Valley,
ascribed to the mound builders (Barnhart 2005: ch. 4). Many hypotheses had
been proposed concerning their origins but in all cases it seemed clear to most
290 Colonial Archaeology