September 2025
Most readers of this newsletter will be familiar with the fact that
claims about clandestine burials at former Indian Residential Schools
have been made without any evidence. What they are probably less aware
of is that the acceptance of these false claims was facilitated by the
destruction of the discipline of archaeology. This is because
archaeology often is sympathetic to postmodern relativism, where
pandering to subjective aboriginal “ways of knowing” has replaced the
objective search for truth.
On May 27, 2021, the Kamloops Indian Band announced
that “the remains of 215 children” had been “confirmed”, and that some
of these children were “as young as three years old”. A month and a half
later, however, on July 15,
2021, the Ground Penetrating Radar (GPR) operator, Sarah Beaulieu –
who is not a geoscientist, but a conflict anthropologist from the
University of the Fraser Valley – noted that no remains had been
identified, only 200 “targets of interest”. (Why had Beaulieu reduced
the number from 215 to 200? Because she had been informed that Simon
Fraser University archeologists had previously investigated part of her
surveyed area, and they had not discovered any remains.)
Although Beaulieu had stated in her presentation that GPR could not
determine the existence of remains, and excavations were needed for any
such confirmation, the aboriginal representatives present kept implying
that bodies had been found. Beaulieu, however, did nothing to check
these false inferences when she was listening to the comments being
made. Lisa Hodgetts, the President of the Canadian Archaeological
Association (CAA), also talked about “pain” and “trauma” being
experienced by Band members when she provided commentary on Beaulieu’s
presentation. Kisha Supernant, the Chair of the CAA’s Working Group on
Unmarked Graves, then made references to using GPR for “the detection of
unmarked graves” when she provided her reaction to the findings
discussed by Beaulieu.
The emotive tone of the event meant that a great deal of media
coverage continued to report or imply that unmarked graves had been
found, but at least Beaulieu did make the point that excavations were
necessary before any such conclusions could be reached. This was
different than the more recent actions of archaeologists Terence Clark
and Andrew Martindale (from the University of Saskatchewan and the
University of British Columbia respectively). These archaeologists have
been encouraging aboriginal communities to believe that remains have
been found. Clark’s suggestions about children
“lying on their side” in pits appear to have led Sechelt Chief Lenora
Joe to state in 2024 that “GPR identifies 40 unmarked children’s graves
only large enough for the young bodies to lay in the fetal
position”.
A few months ago, Martindale was more explicit: he
told the media that “We have identified 342 unmarked graves. 111 of
these are possible graves, 133 probable, and 98 are likely”. (The
contradiction between definitively identifying “unmarked graves”, and
then referring to them as being “possible”, “probable” and “likely” went
unnoticed by the media.) Martindale even appears to have concocted a
story to fill out a report he received. During a CBC podcast in 2022
hosted by Duncan McCue, Martindale stated that Monty Charlie, an elder,
told him that a child had been buried near an apple tree. Martindale
added that Charlie didn’t provide any details as to how this happened.
But then, in 2025, when recounting his conversation with Charlie to a
journalist, Martindale said that the elder claimed a nun pushed a young
girl out a third story window and buried the child next to the apple
tree.
This raises questions about what is occurring in archaeology
departments. Why is archaeology, which used to be one of the more
scientific areas of the Humanities, using its academic status to give
legitimacy to false claims? Why are Terence Clark and Andrew Martindale
engaged in spreading misinformation when it is known that GPR cannot
distinguish human remains from other soil disturbances, and that the
only way to determine this is to excavate? The answer is that
indigenization processes have been unfolding for over 20 years, to the
point that the Tri-Council Policy Statement: Ethical Conduct for
Research Involving Humans now states
that approval must be sought from communities before research involving
them is embarked upon.
This was shown in the Kamloops case. Hugo Cardoso, the Chair of the
Archaeology department at Simon Fraser University, stated
in an email that five archaeologists had reviewed Sarah Beaulieu’s
report. When further questions were asked about this, however, SFU
archaeologist George Nicholas said
that he had been advised by the Kamloops Indian Band’s lawyer that he
should not discuss the case.
As a result of these kinds of restrictions, the GPR reports produced
by archaeologists/anthropologists from the University of the Fraser
Valley, the University of British Columbia, and the University of
Saskatchewan have not been released to the public. This means that the
methodology for making all of these “unmarked graves” or “probable
burials” announcements cannot be evaluated.
Even worse than the secrecy that is being perpetuated by these
agreements is the intimidation of those who ask questions about the
“unmarked graves”. Archaeologists like Kisha
Supernant (University of Alberta) and Dana
Lepofsky (Simon Fraser University) have labelled those engaged in
critical analysis guilty of “residential school denialism”. This is
having an impact on graduate students. Benjamin Kucher, a graduate student from the University of Alberta who was
recently appointed Chair of the CAA’s Indigenous Issues Committee,
states that demanding evidence is an indication of a colonial mindset.
He argues that “indigenous sovereignty” gives aboriginal communities the
right to decide who gets to examine the data that they collect. This is
in spite of the fact that public funding is used to undertake these GPR
surveys.
What is occurring in archaeology is a microcosm of what is unfolding
at universities more generally. This is that the academic mission is
being subverted by advocacy considerations. In archaeology, for example,
Kisha Supernant argues for “archaeologies of the heart”. Although she claims that “rigor”
is an important part of this, there is no evidence to support her claim.
Instead, we see Supernant smudging with her graduate students and encouraging them to believe that
there are “thousands” of clandestine burials across the country next to
residential schools. This is in spite of the fact that no children have
been reported missing.
Many people think that universities are esoteric institutions not
connected to reality. But, as the case of the Kamloops “grave error”
deception shows, serious consequences result from academics
disseminating false information. The Kamloops claim, as well as those
allegations emerging from Kuper Island and Sechelt, have resulted in the
public accepting policies that will have massive implications. It also
has needlessly caused pain and trauma in aboriginal communities, because
there is no evidence to date of even one clandestine burial.
Currently, a number of Canadian archaeologists are assisting the
Aboriginal Industry in fomenting grievances so it can continue to siphon
money away from providing much needed services in aboriginal
communities. The discipline of archaeology in Canada needs to recommit
to academic values, and stop giving disciplinary legitimacy to
politically motivated and socially destructive findings.
Frances Widdowson (widdowsonfrances@gmail.com)
is a professor who was wrongfully terminated from Mount Royal University
in 2021. She is currently directing documentaries about academic freedom
and the “grave error” deception at Kamloops. You can read more about her
case and her work on the website https://wokeacademy.info.
Help us maintain freedom in teaching, research and scholarship by joining SAFS or making a donation.
