Is prehistory a bad word?

Recently I was discussing current research projects with some of my colleagues in Fairbanks when the topic of prehistory came up. This shouldn't be surprising. Prehistory is a big deal in Alaska. This is, after all, the Crossroad of Continents. By most accounts this is the place through which all migrants to America have passed at one time or another. Alaska is the meeting ground of two of the continent's largest language families: Athabascan-Eyak-Tlingit and Inuit-Yupik-Unangan. The former family migrated east and south reaching as far as the coasts of California and Oregon (languages like Hupa and Tolowa are part of the Athabascan family) and the high deserts of the Southwest US (Navajo and Apache are also Athabascan languages). Similarly, the Inuit family spread eastward along the coast, settling as far as Greenland, so that even today the language varieties spoken in Barrow and Nuuk are almost mutually intelligible. Alaska is recognized as the homeland of these two great language families.

Language gives us a special insight into prehistory, allowing us to trace the roots of language by unraveling the various changes which have given rise to today's languages.  Comparing words across languages we can identify regular correspondences which allow us to infer something about the ancestral language. For example, consider the words for hunting implements in the various Alaska Athabascan languages below.

	'snare'	'game fence'
Ahtna	ggaał	tsik
Holikachuk	ggameł	thik
Koyukon	ggooł	tłeyhtł
Tanacross	gaał	tthek
Han	gan	tthök
Gwich'in	gyah	tthał

The  correspondences between the sounds gg and g in 'snare' and between ts-th-tł-tth follow a regular pattern which allows us to infer that they were inherited from an original shared parent language (which we call Proto-Athabascan). In particular, we can see that those ancestral Athabascans also has game snares and caribou fences. This is important linguistic evidence of the antiquity of the Athabascan occupation of the place we now call Alaska.

Of course other disciplines bring us other insights into prehistory. The recent discovery of an 11,500 year old burial at the Xaasaa Na' site in the Tanana Valley provides additional evidence of the long history of occupation. In discussing this find Tanana Chiefs Conference President Jerry Isaac said, "This find is especially important to us since it is in our area, but the discovery is so rare that it is of interest for all humanity." Evidence from the past connects us to humanity. It helps us to understand who we are.

Promotory Cave, Utah

The southward migration of the Athabascans is no less amazing. It's a long way from southern Canada to Arizona. A long gap with no speakers of Athabascan languages today. But in Utah in a cave up in the hills there's a stash of 250 Athabascan-style moccasins, worn out and discarded. As if travelers had finally decided to trade in their northern-style footwear for something more appropriate to the high desert climate. Here we get a glimpse of Athabascan travelers, passing through the Utah desert some 800 years ago.

Given my own interest in prehistory I was surprised when a colleague suggested that prehistory might be considered a bad word. I admit that I share Jared Diamond's preference for dropping the 'pre-' and simply calling it history. That at least gets around the rather artificial distinction between written and non-written records. But my colleague's objection was no so much to that distinction but rather to the potential for the term history to put a focus on the past at the expense of the present and the future. To one way of thinking, to focus on linguistic history is to assert that Alaska Native languages have a rich past but no future.

But can't a language have both a rich past and a rich future? Isn't that what we see right now with efforts such as the Eyak Language Project and the Naqenaga Youtube Channel and the Alutiiq Living Words? These are efforts which celebrate the past while also looking forward. They are efforts which are grounded in a rich linguistic history. Indeed, to a certain extent language support efforts must necessarily focus on history in order to provide continuity between the language of the Elders and the language of the new speakers. It is that connection between past and future which drives us forward -- not only in language programs -- but as humans. Let us celebrate linguistic history while look forward to a new future for Alaska Native languages.