Levels of Historical Authoritativeness

Levels of Historical Authoritativeness (LHA) is a critical component of the research design. It is critical to understand the historical metamorphosis of contemporary issues in order to comprehend the changing nature of SARP, and how areas of negotiation are entered and internalized until new factors are re-negotiated and internalized again. This recognition of how change occurs is a vital part of negotiating change for indigenous communities in contemporary contexts, and for the future of these communities.

The process of negotiation, internalization and re-negotiation, etc, reflects the nature of change and continuity (SARP) and the ability to maintain cultural sensibilities while engaging with the western.

Example:

Issues/Events                        Indigenous                        Areas of                        Western

                                                                      Negotiation

                                                                    Internalization

                                                                 Re-negotiation, etc.

1. Origins                            origin stories                                                            Bering Strait

2. 1492                                era of domination                                                     discovery of NW

3. Education                        tribal-centered                                                          assimilationist

4. Religion                           tribal specific                                                           Christian

5. Earth                                respect                                                                      exploit

Each issues/event is informed from each respective epistemology. Once each becomes engaged in an area of negotiation, the event/issue becomes internalized and it retains authority until new information is introduced that leads to another area of negotiation where it is re-negotiated and internalized again.

Questions:

• 1. How did indigenous communities negotiate the Indian Reorganization Act while being concerned with the vitality of traditional lifeways?

  2. How has the General Allotment Act been negotiated and how did it result in Cobell vs Kempthorne?

  3. How are indigenous and western social institutions INFORMED of their respective agendas in order to participate in the contexts of SARP?

  4. What informs the necessity for the indigenous and western to negotiate?

  5. What are the non-negotiable aspects of indigenous communities that will not be negotiated in order to persist in an indigenous lifeway?

NOTE:

In order to become aware of the aspects and issues presented, research is an integral component of the negotiating process that has a direct impact on indigenous and western lifeways. Think about the transient nature of western knowledge and how it is manifested in reality. On the other hand, how have indigenous communities maintained cultural lifeways while either accepting or denying the transient nature of western social institutions.