Fort Ross: Cultural Identity

Introduction: Ethnic identity discourse by nature is rather complex, and it entails the discussion of several cultural components such as; the material, dietary, architecture, spatial organization, and deposit patterns that exemplify how it is a culture identity is forged, and how it changes or continues in a different setting other than its place of origin. In this paper, I will argue that Native Californians and Native Alaskans forged their native identity in their own unique way, and aspects of such identities persisted or changed in the pluralistic setting of Fort Ross. To do so, I will critique the case study by Lightfoot et al. in which guidelines for a comparison of cultures are provided. Although I agree and believe in most

As I mentioned before, this study takes place in the Russian colony of Fort Ross, California. Lightfoot et al. use archaeological methodologies to come to understand the ways in which culture changes and persists in multi-ethnic settings. Focusing on habitus (habitual) or rote (instinctive) experiences, they employ practice theory in order to grasp how it is individuals make sense of the world and construct identity on the basis of such views. The study is addressed in various levels situated through time and space. To specify, Lightfoot et al. study inter-ethnic families composed of Native Californian women and Native Alaskan men. The study takes into consideration the distinct opportunities available to each of the family members in colonial contexts. So it follows that the primordial, intuitive assumption that every individual had various opportunities to construe their surroundings in a unique manner and to create an identity on the basis of these interpretations is made. Looking at residential space, the archeologists direct their focus towards how domestic chores are assigned and trash is deposited. Ultimately, arguments in which deposits and middens are seen as a reflection of daily life are made. These enable archaeologists as well as other professionals to further study both cultural change and

In fact, the architectural designs and neighborhood layout at Fort Ross renders evidence for culture continuation. Lightfoot et al. transmit the idea that geophysical surveys and verbal accounts suggest that the structures at Fort Ross ranged from Russian style logs and planks to flattened Alaskan cabins. Such parallel phenomenon of flat cabins in both native and multi-ethnic settings, illustrates the continuation of the Native Alaskan culture in the pluralistic colony of Fort Ross. Regarding the organization of the colony, Fort Ross follows Native Alaskan principles. That is to say, evidence for residential units such as pit features suggests that Fort Ross was situated fairly close to the coast. So as evident, regional evidence allows archeologists like Lightfoot et al. to make claims about Native Alaskan culture