3
SAMUEL ALFRED BARRETT
1879 - 1965
David W. Peri and Robert W. Wharton
University of California, Berkeley
During the midafternoon of Tuesday, March 9, 1965 at Santa Rosa,
California, after making a brilliant recovery from a fractured hip some two
months earlier, Samuel A. Barrett suffered a series of cerebral hemorrhages.
He died at 9:55 that same evening at the age of eighty-six.
Samuel Alfred Barrett was born on November 12, 1879 in Conway,
Arkansas. His parents were L'illian Mary Stryker and Samuel Eliphlet Barrett,
both from New York. In 1888 the family moved from Waterville, Kansas to Los
Berros, California. Here Mr. Barrett formed the company of Barrett and Lewis
General Merchandise. Dr. Barrett's brother, and the only other child of
Samuel and Lillian, Theodore Roy, was born at Los Berros on January 10, 1890.
Following four years' residence in Los Berros the family moved to the Indian
Territory of Oklahoma. They settled at Ocarche where his father again opened
a general store. At thirteen young Samuel had his first contact with American
Indians, the Cheyenne and the Arapaho. Later he witnessed an Arapaho Sun
Dance.
In 1893 Barrett accompanied his father to the World Columbian Exposi-
tion in Chicago. While at the Exposition, Barrett, at 14, was introduced to
Frederic Ward Putnam and Franz Boas. Later he was associated with both Putnam
and Boas. Putnam was the Chairman of the Department of Anthropology at the
University of California, Berkeley, where Barrett received his Ph.D., and Boas
was one of his professors at Columbia University.
The family moved from Ocarche to Calpella, California.  It was here
that Samuel Barrett began in earnest his anthropological career with the Pomo.
After a year's stay they moved a few miles south to Ukiah and again his father
opened a general store. Most merchants discouraged the patronage of the Indi-
ans as they felt it would antagonize their white clientele. The Barretts,
however, encouraged Indian patronage, and went so far as to build an arbor
with tables for the Pomo to eat their lunch while in town shopping. Barrett
remarked that his father's store had periodic runs on canned salmon when the
Indians were in town.
Barrett often reminisced about his youthful experiences with the Indi-
ans while in Ukiah. The wages he received from working in his father's store
he used to collect baskets and other ethnographic material. He often went in-
to debt with his father when his buying activities far exceeded his allowance.
He bought, traded, and sold baskets utilizing every opportunity to improve his
collection. On his days off he hitched up his team and visited local ran-
cherias, expanding his collection and gathering ethnographic data. Since the
local railroad stopped in Ukiah, Barrett capitalized on the tourist trade,
selling baskets. He also became a buyer for an Eastern store which had added
baskets to its line of merchandise. With the profits he realized from the
tourist trade he payed off his father and increased his wholesale activities.
4
While his early interest in native materials led him to daily contact
with the Pomo through their patronage of his father's general store, he was
simultaneously developing interests and skills which would benefit him in his
later career.
His other fields of interest ranged from collecting and classifying
bird's eggs, to taxidermy, animal keeping, and photography. One of Barrett's
trademarks was the camera. On his collecting trips as a boy, and all through
his professional career his camera was standard equipment. Barrett progressed
from the early box camera to the very latest in 16 mm. motion picture cameras;
from taking still pictures to producing motion pictures. He was later to di-
rect American Indian Films. The majority of his ethnographic publications
always included a series of photographic plates.
Barrett graduated from the Ukiah Grammar School in 1895 and from the
Ukiah High School in 1899. His entrance into the University of California at
Berkeley in 1900 heralded the beginning of his formal training. Barrett en-
tered the University desiring to pursue his study of aboriginal peoples; how-
ever, the Department of Anthropology was yet to be created. His first academ-
ic major was mining engineering and later chemistry. With the formation of
the Department of Anthropology in 1902, Barrett transferred and studied under
Pliny Earle Goddard, John Campbell Merriam, and Alfred Louis Kroeber. His
courses in anthropology as an undergraduate included: General Introduction
to Anthropology, North American Ethnology, Athapascans of the Pacific Coast,
North American Archaeology, North American Languages, Geological History of
Man, and Experimental Phonetics. As a graduate student: Advanced Work in
Primitive Languages and Advanced Work in Ethnology.
As an undergraduate he was appointed Levi Strauss Scholar for 1903-
1904 and again for 1904-1905. In 1905 he received the degree Bachelor of
Science. As a graduate student he was appointed Le Conte Memorial Fellow and
Goeway Scholar for 1905-1906, and museum assistant in the Department of An-
thropology for 1906-1907. Barrett was the first academically trained museum
associate in the department's newly organized museum. He received the Master
of Science degree in 1906, his thesis being the EthnoGeography of the Pomo
and Nei2noring Indians.
In 1907-1908 Barrett attended Columbia University where he studied un-
der Franz Boas, Adolph Bandelier, Berthold Laufer, and Livingston Farrand.
Under Boas his courses included American Languages, Advanced American Lan-
guages, The Negro Question, and Ethnography of America and Siberia. Other
courses included Early Spanish Sources of American Ethnography, Bandelier;
Archaeology of Peru, Bandelier; Ethnology: Primitive Culture, Farrand; Gener-
al Anthropology, Farrand; and Archaeology and Ethnology of China with special
reference to Farther India and Central Asia, Laufer. The courses taught by
Boas and attended by Barrett were small enough that they were often held in
Boas's office. Of his courses at California, Barrett often found himself the
only student and more often than not the course was conducted by the profes-
sor over lunch or dinner at an oyster house on Eddy Street in San Francisco--
Kroeber was that professor.
Barrett returned to Berkeley where he was awarded the degree Doctor
of Philosophy in May, 1908 with his dissertation Pomo Indian Be r   . He
was the first graduate student in anthropology at Berkeley to receive his
doctorate, the first awarded in anthropology west of the Atlantic seaboard.
Shortly after receiving his doctorate, Barrett, in June of 1908,
signed a contract with Marshall H. Saville. He served as ethnologist of the
George G. Heye Expedition for the year 1908-1909 engaging in ethnological and
linguistic research among the Cayapa Indians of Ecuador. It was during his
work with the Cayapa that Barrett contracted Blackwater fever and subsequently
acquired his second trademark--his white hair.
While in Ecuador, at the suggestion of A. L. Kroeber, Barrett was
offered the position of Curator of Anthropology by Henry L. Ward, Director of
the Milwaukee Public Museum. Barrett's duties were to include the organiza-
tion of the department, display of specimens, and the expansion of the museum's
ethnological collection. His salary was $2000 per year. Ward wrote of the
position: tIt affords a great and glorious opportunity for the dissemination
of anthropological knowledge among the masses and for some little time will
also afford a considerable amount of good hard work but ultimately I hope and
expect that it would also offer a fair amount of time for investigation and
field work, although of this latter it1can never hope to offer the facilities
that some of the larger museums have."1
Of the position Kroeber wrote to Barrett in Ecuador: "I think the
chance an excellent one. Milwaukee is hardly the place that one should pick
out as an anthropological center of promise, and yet they have plenty of mon-
ey, which after all is the main thieg. One could do more there with ample
funds than at Harvard without any."   In a later communication to Barrett,
Kroeber wrote: "As I may have told you, I look upon this opening as so good
that I seriously considered recommending myself for it, 3and if it had not
been for my many connections here, might have done so."3
Barrett was Curator of Anthropology from 1909 to 1920. He subsequent-
ly became the director and held the position until 1940.
Barrett found his new responsibility difficult--there was much to do
and little to do it with. As McKern (1965:115) aptly pointed out; "The situa-
tion at Milwaukee was one that offered a minimum of opportunity and a maximum
of challenge. The Museum at that time was, at best, a third-rate institution
of its kind. . ..t' This was not to remain the situation for long. In thirty
years Barrett transformed the museum from a "third-rate" institution to one
of the nation's leading museums, a "1museum from the lowlands of the past to
the present aspiring hillside" (McKern 1965:11h). The history of the Milwau-
kee Public Museum under the leadership of Samuel A. Barrett is a history of
expansion and innovation. While director, Barrett organized and led the fa-
mous Cudahy-Massee-Milwaukee Museum African Expedition of 1928-1929. The ex-
pedition had as its primary objective the collection of African wildlife for
building museum groups. Enough materials were gathered for the construction
of forty-four mammal, thirty-seven bird, and ten ethnological groups. Barrett
had as his slogan, "Bring 'em back and make 'em look alive."
On August 15, 1912 Barrett married Eileen Cecilia Bray of Milwaukee.
No children were born to the Barretts; however, Samuel Barrett adopted Carl
Fellons, his wife's son by a former narriage. His name was subsequently
6
changed to Charles Theodore Barrett.  Samuel Barrett was devoted to his wife
and son all during their lifetimes.  In 1917 they suffered a great loss when
their only son was struck down by a taxicab in Milwaukee and died at the age
of eleven. The Barretts never fully recovered from the shock.
The association with the Milwaukee Public Museum expanded Barrett's
horizons to include not only the activities of the museum and other North
American Indian groups but an interest in the direction of civic affairs.
On June 17, 1936 Marquette University awarded Barrett a certificate
for "distinctive civic service, far reaching and beneficent in its effect on
the community and helpful in building up a constructive community program."
Barrett was one of the founders and president for several years of the Milwau-
kee Government Service League. On December 7, 1939 the League paid tribute
to Samuel A. Barrett for a "Quarter Century of Service." They wrote of him:
He has become more than a public personality--he has become an insti-
tution in Milwaukee. . .*. By virtue of his knowledge, his personal.ity
and his leadership, he has transformed what is ordinarily a mausoleum of
specimens into a liv4ng, teaching instrument of the great sciences in
which he is learned.
The honor which pleased Barrett the most was the resolution passed by
the League. It read:
. . the trustees and officers of the League be authorized and directed
to establish the "Samuel Alfred Barrett Award" to be granted each year to
a senior student from each of the Milwaukee High Schools, and resolved
further, that in addition to an individual personal award a suitable
plaque be erected in a public place listing the recipients of the annual
award for excellence in student leadership, knowledge of local civic af-
fairs and participation in conmunity undertaking,
In 1939, on the recommendation of the Executive Faculty of the Med-
ical School at Marquette University, Barrett was appointed Professorial Lec-
turer in Medical Anthropology.
Due to his wife's ill health Barrett resigned as Director of the Mil-
waukee Public Museum on January 1, 1940 after twenty years of service. On
December 21, 1939 he was appointed to the honorary post of Director Emeritus,
the first director to be awarded this honor.
The Barretts traveled to Florida where they built a small house at
New Port Richey.  It was here in May of 1940, at the suggestion of A. L.
Kroeber, that George Creel, United States Commissioner of the Golden Gate
Internationa1 Exposition offered Barrett the directorship of the Indian Exhib-
it on Treasure Island, San Francisco, California.  Barrett accepted and by
all standards the exhibit far exceeded everyone's anticipations for its suc-
cess.
A. L. Kroeber was director of the Far Eastern Section of the Army
Specialized Training Program, located on the Berkeley campus.   In September
of 1943 he suffered a heart attack which necessitated several months of rest.
At Kroeber's request, Barrett became the associate director, and remained
with the program until December of 1944.
7
With the end of the Army Specialized Training Program, the Barretts
spent.their time in traveling to and from Florida, Wisconsin, and California.
Barrett utilized his time in writing and editing much of the ethnographic
material that he had collected earlier. During this period his wife's health
became increasingly worse and they abandoned their vagabond activities and
settled in Sonoma, California. Mrso Barrett's illness was diagnosed as cancer
and it was here that Barrett suffered his worst tragedy. Eileen Barrett died
on June 11, 1953 after forty-one years of marriage.
In 1953 A. L. Kroeber asked Barrett to participate in research which
Kroeber had begun some years earlier.  It was Kroeber's thought to collate
all the anthropological and other data as well into a series of monographs on
the Indians of northwes-tern California. On August 26, 1953 Barrett was ap-
pointed Research Associate of the Museum of Anthropology, a position which he
occupied until his death.
Barrett decided that his wife's death might have been prevented or at
least forestalled if more was known about the early symptoms and characteris-
tics of cancer. To this end he brought to bear all his energy on the prob-
lems of breast cancer. From July 1953 to June of 1!957 in collaboration with
John M. Kenney, M.D., he researched and developed tactile models used for
teaching the diagnosis of breast cancer. In these efforts Barrett and Kenney
were supported by the American Cancer Society.
As the cancer project drew to a successful close, Barrett felt that
he could now -resume his research with Kroeber on the Indians of northwestern
California. Their research included the use of Kroeber's unpublished materi-
al, a survey and synthesis of the relevant anthropological literature, field
work by Barrett, and to a large extent the collections of the R. H. Lowie
Museum of Anthropology.  Their first joint monograph, Fishing Aong the Indi-
ans of Northwestern California, was issued in 1960 as volume 21, number 1, in
the University of California's series, Anthropological Records.
In July of 1954 Barrett was called upon to testify as an "expert" wit-
ness on behalf of the California Indians. Before the Indian Claims Commis-
sion, Barrett testified as to land use and occupancy by certain California
Indian tribes. Eleven different publications by Barrett were admitted as
evidence in support of his arguments.
Of the many activities that involved Barrett at the Berkeley campus,
the one that pleased him the most was the illustrated lectures he gave on the
Cayapa Indians of Ecuador to Professor John Howland Rowe's Anthropology 105b
(South American Indians) class.
The period between 1953 and 1957 found Barrett doing independent
field work among the Hupa, Yurok, and Karok in connection with Kroeber and
his research. He later extended his field activities to include many of the
central California tribes. As a result, he and Kroeber were led to the reali-
zation that there remained sufficient traditional culture to warrant its docu-
mentation. From Barrett's point of view there was only one way that this
could be documented effectively.  Barrett and Kroeber discussed the idea of
motion pictures and mutually agreed that it was worth a try. Barrett returned
to the field with his camera, and succeeded in recording those activities he
8
found extant. This first venture led to the establishment of American Indian
Films. This was to be the final major research undertaken by both Kroeber
and Barrett.
Throughout Barrett's career he remained active in professional organi-
zations. He held membership in the following: American Anthropological Asso-
ciation, American Ethnological Society, American Folk Lore Society, American
Association of Museums, Mid-West Museums Conference, Wisconsin Academy of
Science, Wisconsin Historical Society, President of the Wisconsin Archaeologi-
cal Society, Fellow of the American Association for the Advancement of Science,
Fellow of the Royal Geographical Society, Fellow of the Royal Astronomical
Society, and a Fellow of the Society for American Archeology.
Among the many honors and distinctions conferred upon Barrett was the
honorary degree Doctor of Science by Lawrence College in 1929 for his "re-
searches in anthropology and skilled management of a great museum," and honor-
ary member of Phi Beta Kappa. On March 15, 1926 Barrett was awarded the
Lapham Medal by the Wisconsin Archeological Society for "distinguished service
in anthropological research." The Society further honored him in 1953 by
awarding him the Pioneer Certificate "in appreciation of sustained interest
and efforts in promoting the study and preservation of Indian antiquities in
Wisconsin."  He was also a member of Sigma Xi and Pi-Gamm  Mu.
Samuel Alfred Barrett's death termirated a career of seventy-one
years which began at the age of fifteen. His death was more than the loss of
a distinguished anthropologist, it was the loss of a dear friend and colleague
to all of those who knew him. Although ethnography and museology were the
core of Barrett's interest, he ranged over a variety of other fields. There
was no area, no interest and no activity that was not grist for the Barrett
mill.
Throughout Barrett's career he was driven by a compulsion to preserve
the rapidly vanishing culture of the American Indians. In his later years he
became frustrated by his advancing age and the many new problems he perceived.
It was this compulsion, this frustration and his commitment of long standing
to the ideals and philosophies of his science that renewed his strength and
gave him the desire to endure, sometimes against overwhelming obstacles.
Barrett's compulsion toward the preservation of aboriginal life was not pres-
ervation for its own sake, but for a larger and more meaningful objective.
It was to provide the empirical data necessary for the development of theory
and the general advancement of knowledge. It was further, to provide the im-
portant and necessary orientation for future students of culture and the sub-
sequent advancement of his discipline. To these ends Barrett's career was
devoted.
It is difficult to estimate the impact mde upon Barrett by A. L.
Kroeber and Franz Boas. The results, however, were profound and were to re-
main with Barrett throughout his professional career. Barrett received his
training when American anthropology was essentially under the domination, or
at least profoundly influenced by Boas. As Barrett's professor, Kroeber, who
also received his training under Boas, followed many of the precepts that
Boas advocated, though he differed in several respects. As a graduate stu-
dent, Barrett came under the direct influence of Boas when he attended
9
Columbia University. Boas stressed the primacy of direct firsthand informa-
tion and the importance of observed fact over theory. "As a matter of princi-
ple, Boas came to insist more and more on the thoroughgoing description of
all cultural data as the sole warrantable scientific attitude. House types,
basketry, social structure, beliefs and tales must all be registered faith-
fully and with the fullest detail possible" (Lowie 1937:131). One has only
to glance over the table of contents of Barrett's monographs and his list of
publications and later, ethnographic films, to readily see the impact of Boas
on Barrett.. Like Boas, Barrett must be understood first.of all as a field
worker. Nowhere did Barrett attempt to summarize his views on culture or the
cultures with which he worked. "'On the one hand, our duty is to gather the
raw facts before they disappear; on the other hand, when can one be sure of
having all the data that would warrant definitive interpretation?" (Lowie
1937:152). It was to this philosophy that Barrett committed himself.
Boas was also characterized as, t"a practical administrator, a theorist
on the funlctions of museums, an organizer of expeditions and of publication
series" (Lowie 1937:130). One has only to review Barrett's association with
the Milwaukee Public Museum to find parallels, though of a lesser magnitude.
Barrett was not only a practical and efficient administrator as Curator of
Anthropology, but also as Director of the Museum. He brought new ideas re-
garding the scope and purpose of museums, innovated changes in its techniques
and theories of exhibition; and organized and led numerous expeditions. He
was, further, influential in initiating the Museum's Bulletin series as its
primary source of publication and instigated the Year Book series of the
museum.
While the study of material culture and museology are areas which
held particular interest for Barrett, they in no way represent either the
range or depth of his interest. Barrett was a field anthropologist who, in
the tradition of his discipline, utilized direct firsthand information which
formed the basis of his contributions to knowledge. It might be said that
Samuel A. Barrett and others like him provided the foundations upon which
modern anthropology is built,
Contributions to the Ethnography of North America
Barrett's contributions are by no means solely reflected in his pub-
lished writings and motion pictures. He also contributed significantly by
his extensive field collections for research and exhibitiono
Samuel Barrett was most noted for his contributions to the ethnography
of California and primarily the Pomo. From 1903 to 1907 he engaged in system-
atic field work and collecting among the Pomo, Miwok, Maidu, Yokuts,- Yuki, and
Wintun for the Department of Anthropology under the sponsorship of Mrs. Phoebe
Apperson Hearst. From 1894 to 1949, Barrett consulted some 703 Pomo inform-
ants each for varying lengths of time and on various aspects of Pomo culture.
His first major published work was his masters thesis The Ethno           of
the Pomo and Neighboring Indians. He set as his problem the discovery of
boundaries, both territorial and linguistic of the Pomo and their neighbors.
His secondary problem was an exploration of the linguistic relationships be-
tween the seven Pomo groups, and those geographically related to them.
10
His doctoral dissertation in 1908 and second major publication was
Pomo Indian Basketry.  Although Barrett had collected information earlier re-
garding Pomo basketry it was not until 1904 that he began to systematically
record data for his dissertation. Barrett concentrated his field work among
the Northern, Central and Eastern Pomo.  He set as his problem the materials,
techniques, forms, and ornamentations. The various designs, their patterns
and arrangement and the terms used to describe these were of special interest
to him. In order to accomplish this he took into the field eight hundred and
forty patterns depicted on photographs of three hundred and twenty-one bas-
kets. He also utilized the baskets he found in the possession of his inform-
ants.  Barrett's monograph on Pomo basketry is still the most definitive
study yet undertaken.
A third major work was Pomo Mths published in 1933. Field work was
conducted primarily between 1903 and 190   while at the University of Califor-
nia and again in 1914 and 1915 for the Milwaukee Public Museum. Barrett col-
lected an extensive series of myths--some 108--from the Central, Northern,
and Eastern Pomo. The myths were taken as free translations where his inform-
ants'had command of English, or through an interpreter.   Others were recorded
in text with inter-linear and free translations. Only the free translations
were subsequently published, however, Barrett strived to maintain the integ-
rity of each myth. Barrett's monograph, however, was more than a mere compi-
lation of myths. He characterized and classified myths, in addition to dis-
cussing the Pomo mythological system and religious concepts. He also
discussed the use of numbers, provided a catchword guide, Pomo-English,
English-Pomo glossary, and an all inclusive index. These additions facili-
tated the further use of the study.   Pomo Myths, in addition to providing
primary data and comparisons with other Central California groups, also
served to corroborate Kroeber's regional divission of California mythology in-
to a north central and south central group. Barrett also concluded that the
master creator, Madumda, and Coyote were one and the same being.   Pomo nths
remains today the most definitive study yet undertaken in its field among the
Pomo. It is also the most extensive work of its kind among any California
Indian group.
Barrett's last published contribution to the ethnography of the Pomo
was his two volume work Material Aspects of Pomo Culture published in 1952.
Field work for these two volumes was carried on sporadically between 1894 to
1900, 1903 to 1907, 1914, 1915, and 1948 and 19h9. Barrett's objective was a
descriptive inventory of.Pomo material culture. He also incorporated data on
various ceremonies, and life cycle material as well as an account of the
Bloody Island Massacre. He utilized the knowledge of more than 98 informants
from all of the Pomo divisions.   He concentrated on the Pomo residing in the
southern part of the Clear Lake region since there existed various special-
ized cultural features based upon the lake envirorment.
While still on the Berkeley campus, Barrett collected material and
conducted research among the Sierra Miwok. It was here that he collected the
majority of his data for his and E. W. Gifford's joint monograph:   Miwok
Material Culture, published in 1933. Their monograph is essentially an inven-
tory of the material culture of the Sierra Miwok. They also attempted to de--
fine, though briefly, the cultural position of this group in relation to
other Central Californian groups.
11
Barrett's appointment as Curator of Anthropology at the Milwaukee
Public Museum in 1909 took him from California and he became involved with
other concerns and other American Indians. One of Barrett's responsibilities
was to build the museum's ethnological collection and he was subsequently
sent into the field on numerous occasions.  He utilized this opportunity not
only to collect but to observe and record as much data as time and circum-
stances allowed.  Barrett was never satisfied with simply collecting but
tried to combine this with actual observational recording of cultural data
when the opportunity afforded itself.  One of Barrett's first assignments was
with the Chippewa and Menominee Indians of Northern Wisconsin.
The object particularly in view upon this occasion was the collecting
of ethnological material for the museum, together with all possible data
concerning the life and culture of the peoples visited. Fortunately, dur-
ing this time the opportunity came to witness the so-called dream dance
among both the Chippewa and the Menominee.
Also much Information was obtained concerning other phases of the
ceremonial life of these people, embracing the medicine lodge, the ceremo-
nial games, the ceremonial feasts, and the smoking customs (Barrett 1911:
253).
This assigmnent was Barrett's second experience outside of California and
resulted in his f irst pub li cation (The Dream Dance of the Ch i22ew and
Menominee Indians of Northern Wisconsin)-dealing with other than the Califor-
nia Indians.
In 1911 Barrett spent six months for the Milwaukee Public Museum with
the Hopi primarily at Mishongnovi though vissiting the other villages at inter-
vals. Barrett's material and information were utilized in the preparation of
museum groups. Barrett used this opportunity to collect botanical, geologi-
cal, and zoological material as well. He was taken into the Snake and Ante-
lope Kivas where he witnessed and recorded various rituals. He also observed
and photographed the Snake Dance. Barrett was affectionately- known to the
Hopi as "goat whiskers" because of his white goatee. The majority of his
Hopi material he never found time to publish and still remains in manuscript
form. Only one short article, An Observation On Hpi Child Burial, was pub-
lished in the American Anthropologist.
Barrett spent the winter and spring of 1914-1915 among the Kwakiutl
of Alert Bay, PortHardy, Fort Rupert, and among adjacent tribes.   It was
here that Barrett assembled the Milwaukee Museum's extensive Northwest Coast
collection. The collection of masks assembled by Barrett was one of the most
representative of its kind. While in Victoria, B.C., he met Dr. Newcombe,
from whom he purchased the Haida totem pole which later stood in front of the
Milwaukee Public Museum.
After forty-seven years, Barrett again returned to the Kwakiutl, this
time as director of American Indian Films. He made extensive film recordings
of Kwakiutl ceremonies and technologies. As part of the results of the field
work two films were produced: THE WOODEN BOX MADE BY STEAMING AND BENDING
and THE TOTEM POLE.
12
It was in the summer of 1915 that he worked among the Paiute and
Washo of California and Nevada again collecting specimens and data for the
construction of the museum's ethnological group-building program'. The Paiute
and the Washo were selected as representative of the Great Basin Culture Area.
It was Barrett's practice to first of all observe, wherever possible, the
manufacture and use of various items before collecting them.  Therefore, he
remained in the field untill he had secured enough data and collected enough
specimens and in so doing familiarizing himself with the culture. It was
then that Barrett sent for the museum's artist and together they made a small
scale model of the later life-size group. Barrett then brought in his inform-
ants who commented upon the accuracy of the model. Changes were made until
the model met with the approval of all his informants. One of the results of
this field work was Barrett's paper, The Washo Indians, published in 1917.
Dr. Warren L. d'Azevedo has remarked T63:6) that rrett's monograph on the
Washo "was the first major study of this culture by a professional anthropolo-
gist." Forty-five years later Barrett recorded, on film, material for the
motion picture PINE NUTS: A FOOD OF THE PAIUTE AND WASHO INDIANS OF CALIFOR-
NIA AND NEVADA.
In the summer of 1921 Barrett and the museum's artist, George Peter,
worked with the Blackfoot at Browning, Montana. On this occasion Barrett was
particularly interested in gathering data for a reconstruction in the museum
of the buffalo drive, or "piskun."  Barrett also collected medicine bundles
and related ceremonial paraphernalia. -While among the Blackfoot he made a
special study of their sweat lodge, the "iniskim"' or buffalo bundle, and
ceremonial lodges. Brief accounts on his research were subsequently published
in three articles in the museum's year book of 1921. Forty-one years later,
in the summer of 1962, Barrett returned to the Blackfoot where he made exten-
sive film recordings of their ceremonies and general daily activities.
Barrett's last major work and consequently his final published contri-
bution to the ethnography of California was his and A. L. Kroeber's Fishing
Among the Indians of Northwestern California. The monograph undertakes a
definitive description of the various practices related to the taking of fi sh,
shell fish and sea mammals. Harold E. Driver, in review of the work (1960:
1079) remarked:
This reviewer will venture a prediction that Kroeber's and Barrett's
descriptive study of fishing will be regarded as a more valuable item of
anthropological bibliography a century or half century hence than most
contemporary theoretically orientated works of comparable size. Theory
can become outdated, but the primary evidence on which valid generaliza-
tions must be based will always be timeless. The authors are to be con-
gratulated for producing an outstanding comparative work that will be a
model for some time to come.
Archaeology
Though Barrett is most noted for his ethnographic research, he how-
ever contributed significantly to the archaeology of Wisconsin. He also
undertook, to a limited extent, archaeological investigations in California
and the southwestern United States. His first archaeological experience
while a student at the University of California was the excavation of a
13
burial site on Putah-Creek near Winters, California in 1905. Barrett's
second experience was excavating as well as supervising the excavating at the
Emeryville shell mound from May to June 1906.
In addition to Barrett's curatorial responsibilities and ethnographic
researches, he figured prominently in the archaeology of Wisconsin.  As McKern
has pointed out (1965:115):
.  . his major efforts in the field were directed towards starting a new
chapter of archaeological research in Wisconsin. The technical methods
which he introduced in this work were superior to any employed at that
time west of Ohio and north of the Southwest's pueblo area. It was prima-
rily due to Barrett's archaeological efforts in Wisconsin that professional
interest in neighboring areas was stimulated, resulting in initial or in-
tensified archaeological programs evolving in Michigan, Illinois, Iowa and
Minnesota.
Barrett's first published monograph on Wisconsin archaeology, with
E. W. Hawkes, was The Kratz Creek Mound Group, published in -1919. In the sum-
mer of 1917 Barrett made a preliminary survey of sites located on the shores
of Buffalo Lake, Marquette County, Wisconsin. Two sites were selected for
work; however, only one, the Kratz Creek site, was excavated. Barrett, E. W.
Hawkes, and two others undertook the excavation. From their data, Barrett
and Hawkes concluded that at least two cultures were indicated and three
types of mounds were present: conical, linear,.and effigy. They also noted
several methods of construction. Conicals, though consistent in form,
varied according to their construction and use. Linear mounds were relative-
ly few, and unimportant. The effigy was found to be most important and oc-
curred.in several types. Certain mounds were found to be used as special
repository and crematory altars.  Excavation indicated the presence of sever-
al types of sacrifice, including the possibility of htman sacrifice.
Barrett is most noted for his monumental study of Astalan located in
Jefferson County, Wisconsin. Astalan has been described as one of the largest
and most famous archaeological site in Wisconsin and the northernmost exten-
sion of middle Mississippian culture. The most striking features of the site
are its large earthen pyramids and the construction of sizable stockaded
villages. The builders of Astalan, who have been characterized as intruders,
established permanent villages, were sedentary agriculturists, and practiced
cannibalism. The site was first reported in 1836 by Judge N. F. Hyer, who
described it briefly, in addition to mapping it. His data was made available
a year later in the form of a newspaper article.  Hyer mistakingly attributed
the building of Astalan to the Aztecs of Mexico, hence its name. It wasn't
until 1850 that Increase A. Lapham with some degree of accuracy surveyed and
described the site. His findings were made available in 1855 in his Antiqui-
ties of Wisconsin, published in volume seven of the Smithsonian Contributions
to Knowledge. The first scientific and the most comprehensive excavation of
the site was undertaken by Samuel A. Barrett. The first survey and excavating
began on July 10, 1919 and continued through September 30 of that year. Fur-
ther excavations were conducted from June until September of 1920. Barrett
conducted a short and final session from June to July, 1932.
It wasn't until late in the first field session that one of the most
striking features' of the site was excavated: the stockaded nature of the
14-
enclosure. One of the many conclusions at which Barrett arrived was the
evidence of nonceremonial cannibalism based on the recovery of skulls,.indi-
cating they had been fractured. for the brains; long bones cracked for the mar-
row and dismembered arms and legs. The human bones recovered were associated
with animal and fish bones in refuse pits. On the basis of the inventory of
material.culture, Barrett concluded Astalans' relationship with the middle
Mississippian culture.
Barrett's findings were painstakingly described in his monumental
study of some 500 pages, Ancient Astalan, published in 1933.  The study was
locally known'and referred to as "Barrett's Bible."
One of'Barrett's most important field experiences as a professional
anthropologist took place in 1908-1909. Hired as an ethnologist by Marshall
H. Saville for George.G. Heye, Barrett undertook field research among the
Cayapa Indians of Ecuador. The focus of his study was linguistic and ethno-
logical reporting. It was on this expedition that he made full use of photo-
graphic recording to augment his other field techniques.
While the purpose of Barrett's expedition was to determine the source
of gold and platinum. objects unearthed by Saville, he quickly learned that
any.inquiry into this subject would lead to his immediate and forcible expul-
sion from the Rio Cayapa region.  He, however, proceeded with the task of an
ethnological and linguistic investigation, the results of which were published
in 1925 as a two volume work in the Museum of the American Indian series, In-
dian Notes and Monographs, No. 40, The Cayap Indians of Ecuador. Though of
lesser importance, Barrett published, in 1909, a short article on the Cayapa
numeral system for the Frederic Ward Putnam anniversary volume. Barrett's re-
search among the Cayapa is the first ethnological account by an American
trained anthropologist of any South American Indian group.
The Museum Years
Barrett's position as museum assistant in the Department of Anthro-
pology for 1906-1907 can be perceived as the preface for his years as the
Director of the Milwaukee Public Museum. To attempt to isolate one or several
factors which would explain Barrett's rise from Curator of Anthropology in
what was then a third rate.municipal museum, to the Directorship and estab-
lishment of one of the foremost municipal museums, would be impossible if not
facetious.. Examination of the Barrett, Milwaukee Public Museum years reveals
much about the individual and the mechanisms he.employed.
Barrett's personality is a factor which cannot be held in abeyance
without lending severe distortion to these years. Successful mastery and
meaningful contribution to.any endeavor cannot be attained by passive examina-
tion or interest.  The dynamics that this man possessed were both his weak-
ness and.his strength.  His.convictions and the strength to carry out his
ideas are the features which separated him from so many other men.
We have suggested that Barrett should be considered a field anthro-
pologist.  There is ample evidence for this in his pre-professional interests
and activities and later, his professional training. It was while he was in
Ecuador that he learned of the position at the Milwaukee Public Museum. In
keeping with his training and experience, his first task upon accepting the
position was to put the department under his charge on a professional and
business-like basis. Unwilling to delegate too much authority or responsibil-
ity, changes which were introduced in the Department of AnthropcAogy were
revolutionary rather than transitional.
Without documentary evidence of the first causes championed by Barrett,
it would be possible to predict with accuracy what they would be. Of prime
importance would be a systematic program of field research and ethnological
collecting. Such a program would be a logical outgrowth of previous experi-
ence and his current situation.
There are certain themes which are recurring throughout Barrett's
career. Three of these are particularly noticeable: the first is the empha-
sis on field research; the second, the use of photography as a tool for re-
search and as a method for presenting information; and a third, interest in
and emphasis on publication.
The implication of volume one of the Bulletin of the Public Museum of
the City of Milwaukee appearing one year after the beginning of Barrett's
association with the museum cannot be appraised. If coincidental, it is in-
teresting, if not, it is very important. This series provided a convenient
resource for publication of materials of local interest, and findings of a
much larger scope.
The need to reach the scientific community with a publication series
was fulfilled by the bulletins. Information of a mechanical nature dealing
with the administration was disseminated in its annual reports. A third pub-
lication series. was implemented in 1921, the "fYearbook." This series provided
a logical mechanism to convey, to the ever increasingly important public, what
activities were being undertaken by their-museum.  In this series appear pro-
gress reports of various kinds.  Independent research conducted by staff mem-
bers was presented in a popular form. In addition, nontechnical information
concerning projects for the improvement of the museum were also nade avail-
able. Such articles had implication far beyond the subjects they sought to
explain. The general public, through such articles, were permitted a "back
stage"l view of the operation of the museum and the preparation of its exhibits.
The collections and new accessions were also made known to the public through
such articles.  Perhaps of greatest importance, the reader was given special
knowledge of what "his" museum was doing, which was previously unavailable.
The yearbooks, like the museum itself, was a mechanism of visual education.
The reader not only saw photographs of the preparation areas of the museum,
but was exposed, vicariously, to the various field situations that the staff
worked in.
Barrett contributed to the field of museology as Curator of Anthro-
pology and also as director of the museum. His interest in developments in
this field and his contributions illustrate his notions of the educative func-
t-ion of a public museum. Henry L. Ward, director of the Milwaukee Museum at
the beginning of Barrett's association, stressed the need for a curator of
anthropology who would subordinate his personal research to the goal of
16
popular visual education. Considerable emphasis was placed on several person-
ality characteristi cs that this department head should -have. Included among
these was the ability to or-ganize much diverse material that had accumulated
over the years and was to become part of the collection. During the first
two years as Curator of Anthropology, Barrett did not have exhibit space, or
even adequate wprk space.  In fact, the building which was to house the
museum had not been completed. "In a letter concerning the position, Ward in-
formed Kroeber that the new curator would probably have to find work space in
a closet for a year or more. This possibility was substantiated by Barrett.
Barrett's contributions to museology were only partially original.
This.is not to indicate that-his role was merely the passive application of
principies discovered and tried by others. The genius of his contribution
lay in his ability to select ideas and innovations, modify them, and trans-
late them into reality. With popular education as his major task, it was im-
perative that any program have popular interest and support.
The Barrett era was characterized by the implementation of numerous
projects. While those that are most commonly known pertain to traditional
forms and subjects of anthropological research, of equal value and importance
were projects undertaken to improve the visual educational function of the
museum.. Throughout his professional career, Barrett attempted to portray re-
ality as accurately through, visual media as was possible. Among the Cayapa
and earlier in California research, Barrett carried and used the camera to
supplement verbal description. Viewing this activity from the contemporary
scene, his action was neither unique or of particular importance. If, how-
ever, he is considered on an equal basis with his contemporaries, the use of
a camera was an important innovation and preceded its common use in ethno-
graphic field research by considerable years. The'camera became an essential
tool of the museum, and its value and importance increased proportionately
with each year. By 1929, the audio-visual services had expanded to the ex-
tent that-it was necessary to house this service outside the museum. In ap-
praising the crowded situation in the old museum building, McKern (1956:111)
stated; "The extensive, growing Museum loan service is now housed on the
first floor of the old Line Material building where 100,000 visual aids, in-
cluding 9,000 motion picture films, are kept, . . . and without room for nor-
mal expansion." While Barrett's early interest in the use of the camera was
as a research tool, the new circumstances in the museum provided an easy
adaptation to record the activities of the museum for public -information serv-
ices. The importance of the use of the camera during Barrett's museum years
is attested to by his policy, that all museum sponsored field studies were to
employ the use of cameras in research, and for the recording of the study
itself.
Illustrated lectures became an important addition to the popular edu-
cation program of the museum. The comprehensive program of lectures tQ
school children is claimed as a first by the Milwaukee Public Museum. While
many of these lectures were conducted on a formal basis and supplemented with
slides and motion pictures, numerous other situations existed within the ex-
hibit area of the museum where lectures of a less formal nature were held.
17
One of the easiest and most direct methods of conveying information
in'this situation was by the recreated environmental settings. As Coleman
'(1927:232) has commented:
A group is an installation of related objects or models with realistic
setting. In most highly developed form, it is a sort of stage-effect
enclosed in a specially lighted case and viewed through a window...
The group represented an effort to make museums interesting to lay-
visitors by resort to dramatization, and doubtless it offers the most
successful way of conveying information about the manner of life of man
or beast. As an object of interest and beauty a group is attractive, and
as a vivid portrayal it is profoundly impressive.
It is unfortunate that we camnot credit Barrett with the origin of
this unique and extremely sound notion on public education. We can, however,
give him credit for elaboration and innovation in the group building idea.
Barrett's contribution to the development of this method for the visual pres-
entation of information will probably stand as his monument in the field of
museology. The origin of the idea of group building was attributed to Carl
Akeley, by S. A. Barrett.
Just down the avenue stood the taxidermy shop of Carl E. Akeley who did
mounting of birds and mammals for the museum.  Up to that time every bird
was mounted on a polished wood perch, every mammal on a slab of polished
wood. This was true not only here but everywhere else in the world as
well.
Carl Akeley conceived the revolutionary idea that birds and nammmals
could be mounted in environmental settings. This "visionary" notion met
with set opposition, but Carl persisted. The result was our muskrat
group which is as perfect today as it was when first built in 1889. That
is the origin of the idea of habitat groups, a museum display technique
which has spread far and wide over the world and which is not at all con-
fined to the display of birds and mamnmals. It is now used to the great-
est possible advantage in all scientific fields, in history, in industrial
exhibits, in fact in every branch of museum work (Barrett 1962:30-31).
While Akeley provided the group idea, Barrett elaborated on it and applied
the principle to nearly every department of the museum. Not content with the
success in portraying birds, mammals, and other forms, he constructed groups
of historical incidents, and of somewhat greater importance the placement of
anthropological subjects in similar settings. From his early field research
among the Hopi, Blackfoot, Kwakutl, and Pomo, Barrett constructed groups from
the daily lives of these people. The visiting public was allowed glimpses
into the lives of these people which had previously been confined,to the few
anthropologists fortunate enough to work with them. If the cliche about one
picture being equal to a thousand words is true, the value of these groups is
inestimable.
Barrett estimated the value of the groups, both life-size and minia-
ture, at $1,000,000. While it would be impossible to obtain an unbiased ap-
praisal equal to this figure, the number of people who have viewed and bene-
fited from these exhibits, the service they have rendered and continue to
render, may make this a conservative estimate. Whatever their value, their
importance to the field of museology is one that is lasting.
The museum-wide program of group building reached one of its peaks
with the attempt to portray extremely large geological features.
The changes which are constantly occurring on the surface of the
earth and the processes by which these are brought about, have always
been difficult to illustrate in a museum exhibit.  For this reason they
have been. often neglected, although of the greatest scientific importance.
It is so obviously impossible to inclose any part of a glacier, a geyser,
or a volcano within the glass of an exhibition case, that the constructors
of such exhibits have tried to show these natural objects by specimens of
the materials that are produced or acted upon, accompanied by photographs
and relief maps of the country in which they are found.   These suit the
purpose very well and explain to those familiar with geology the various
processes which are going on in different parts of the world. It was
felt, however, that those of the general public who were only mildly in-
terested in the earth sciences, would find such exhibits difficult of com-
prehension.
In order to overcome such deficiencies in the exhibits of the Museum,
the Director, together with the Chief Artist and the writer, projected a
series of life-sized environmental groups--seven in number, each designed
to show some particular geological process actually in operation. These
were to combine with a geological lesson, a representation of some of the
most famous scenic places in the United States (Edwards 1926:122-123).
This monumental task, its conception, planning, and successful execu-
tion are indicative of Barrett and the kinds of projects he undertook and com-
pleted. His skill and polish as an administrator is attested to by the suc-
cessful completion of these and later projects.
Survey of the Yearbooks, and Barrett's personal chronology reveal the
importance of field work. As we have shown, Barrett's early life was punctu-
ated with moves back and forth across the United States. His professional
career is similarly punctuated. His occupations were consistent, however; he
took every opportunity to broaden his horizons both geographically as well as
professionally. In many senses, the peak of his field research experience
came while he was the director of the Milwaukee Public Museum. We have shown
that field work expeditions were instigated for the benefit of-various museum
departments. As there developed more demand on Barrett's time, there were
fewer opportunities for field work. He, however, stimulated his staff to con-
duct the anthropological field work that he would have conducted, had time
permitted. The anthropological aspects of the Grand Canyon research appear
almost parenthetically in the Yearbooks. Barrett never lost his interest in
the department that had provided his first position. He rarely allowed work
in areas that did not hold particular interest for him. The point is rather
subtle.
Barrett has been described as a field anthropologist, and there are
subtle indications that support this contention although they are not often
evident. Field work as a recurring theme has been indicated by the building
of various groups based on original research.
No better example of the skills and techniques possessed by Barrett
can be found than the Cudahy-Massee-Milwaukee Museum African Expedition, 1928-
19
1929. Metaphorically speaking, no greater "field" existed than that of
Africa. While other areas might have profited by a similar expedition, no.
other area enjoyed the same public appeal as did the "lDark Continent."  The
benefits of patrons and the importance of public appeal were facts which
Barrett had come to value.  The experience of directing a rapidly growing
institution in what Kroeber had indicated as something less than a hotbed of
anthropological interests led 'to"an awareness of these facts. The organiza-
tion of the African Expedition il.lustrates the final honing of a precision
set of skills which is rarely encountered.' The employment of these skills
need not, and in fact does not indicate that the expedition was organized un-
der false pretences or that the goals of the expedition were sacrificed to
some ulterior motive.  The implication is that these skills afforded the pa-
trons and the public a greater return on their 'investment than they might
have otherwise received.  Not to be discounted, however, is the fact that
almost parenthetically the possibility of collecting ethnological material
from one or two native tribes was included in an expedition whose focus was
a faunal collection stressing "big-game animals."
Various scales can be employed to weigh the success of the expedition.
In many respects, the caution employed in preparation, selection, and proce-
dure forecast the results.  As Barrett stated, "the final results far exceeded
the picture we painted." This is applicable to not only the collection of
fauna, but also to the collection of ethnological'material as well as written
descriptions, and 'sizable amounts of motion picture footage and lantern slides.
It was Barrett's pr'actice, during most of 'his professional career, to
keep personal diaries during his major field experiences.  The daily events
that lend fle.sh and blood to official reports and published articles from his
years in the museum took the form of letters and personal diaries.   The per-
sonal journals provide rare glimpses of Barrett the man, which is so often
missing from other accounts. Consequently, the fullest picture we have comes
from periods in which he was in the field. Certainly the information gained
from these journals does not provide sufficient information for the sort of
sketch that would be most useful or appropriate. What we do have from these
are flashes of personality, examples of his humor, and general statements of
the mode of operation that lended distinctiveness to the Barrett years. Much
of the material about the expedition has been derived from these letters and
journals.
The scope 'of the African Expedition was sufficiently broad to make
difficult a detailed analysis of the function of the director.   It is, how-
ever, possible to provide some insights of a general nature. The 'responsibil-
ity of the director is stated in the expedition's slogan:  "Bring 'em back
and irake 'em look alive." This was accomplished by using .members of the, muse-
ium staff, the artists, taxidermists, and other specialists.  The Director
took as his task the general organization of the field work, and the supervi-
sion of his staff.  Of extreme importance was his photographic recording of
the expedition itself and its objectives.  While the note and measurement'tak-
ing of the taxidermist could restore the animals to their former stature, and
the artist's sketches could reconstruct the environmental settings in which
they made their home, still something lacked--animals in their living environ-
ment. This gap Barrett filled through the use of his photographic skills.
20
The same held true for the various African groups with which the expedition
came in contact.  The educative aspects of the project both as recreations in
the museum and as a visual record were the prime task of the director.
As Barrett was in ultimate charge of the expedition, the responsibil-
ity for its success or failure was on his shoulders. He was acutely aware
that cooperation in the field, as in the museum, largely determined the suc-
cess of the expedition.  In examination of the functioning of a safari and
the role of the native porters, Barrett made the following observation:
Much of course depends upon the head man. He has full charge of all
the boys, except cooks, personal boys, gun bearers and trackers. If he
is a good firm leader, no trouble will occur. If he is not, then there
is no end of trouble. We had two head men. One was always shouting at
his men and taking them to task for any little thing. He was a tempest
in a teapot, literally.  As long as he was our head man we had one diffi-
culty after another, acts of insubordination were frequent and there was
trouble all around. And this is a most serious thing when you are off
out in the veldt many miles from anywhere and are so situated that the
success of your whole expedition depends upon the team work of the whole
safari personnel.
Our second head man was of a very different type. He was quiet and
firm. He said little but when he spoke the boys knew that his orders
were to be obeyed and that quickly. He was not in the least unkind to
them. He was merely efficient and business-like, and the boys respected
him Immensely (Barrett 1928a:577-578).
This moralistic story has more than an incidental meaning to the
success of the African Expedition. The qualities praised by Barrett in the
second head man were, in fact, those that made the entire project a success.
Barrett often said that there could be only one captain for a ship, or one
director for an expedition.  The qualities of the head man, and the culmina-
tion of leadership, both responsibility and authority in one individual are
the qualities that made Barrett's field projects successful.
Consideration of the African Expedition began with an appraisal of
the success of the project. It was suggested that the administrative skills
of the director were indicative of the success of the venture. In terms of
more conventional standards, Barrett's statement of the results should serve.
The modest hopes we had expressed in respect to the amount of materi-
al we might secure were far exceeded by the final results. We succeeded
in securing full group material for forty-four species of mammals and
thirty-seven species of birds.  In addition to this we were able to make
more or less complete collections from ten of the native tribes. Further,
and entirely incidentally, we secured certain botanical specimens and conL
siderable numbers of insects.  There were secured also some thousands of
still pictures and over forty thousand feet of motion picture negative.
Also color notes and background sketches, plaster casts, and a most valua-
ble series of notes (Barrett 1928b:227).
21
From the standpo int of research, the African Expedition was the last
mjor contribution that Barrett made during his years at Milwaukee. The
Depression and the years that followed were not conducive to field work. The
funds to all public institutions were severely reduced and research of any
nature became a memory and a hope of the future. The Federal Government came
to the aid of the nation through varioous public supported projects. One of
these was the Work Projects Administration.
For years, thoughts had been turned to the rany projects within the
museum which should be undertaken. Barrett and his staff submitted a proposal
to the Federal Government for a revolutionary program. Essentially the plan
ws to capitalize on the unemployed craftsmen and artisans by organizing them
into a useful, well directed group, working toward the solution of the prob-
lems that had plagued the museum for a number of years. With funds channeled
through the WPA various projects were begun. The number of people who had
been unemployed and the various projects on which their services were applied
.made necessary expansion to space outside the Milwaukee Public Museum. Under
this program extensive construction of group and exhibits was initiated.
Preparation of materials long needed for exhibits and the designing and paint-
ing of various murals were also begun. As the initial project which had been
attempted by Barrett as an experiment caught hold and grew, it became neces-
sary to enlarge the program to serve more institutions than the Public Museum.
To find sufficient work to keep this new staff occupied, it was necessary to
solicit requests from other educational institutions and museums. Barrett
served as the director of this new organization which had as its budget
$l,000,000.
On January 1, 1940 after thirty years of service, Barrett tendered his
resigrnation. The size and meaning of his contribution to the museum through
the concept that he referred to as the Modern Museum Idea cannot be fairly
appraised by only considering the Milwaukee Public Museum. Notions that he
fostered and those that he elaborated served to revolutionize the museum
field. One of Barrett's greatest wishes was that he not be retired into what
he referred to as the "rocking chair fleet." On the surface the appearance
might have been given that official retirement would lead, as it does in many
cases, to the completion of various research, several publications, and then
oblivion. Those who knew Barrett realized this would hardly be the case. We
have referred to the Cudahy-Massee-Milwaukee Museum African Expedition as the
final honing of a set of precision tools.  In the case of many, following re-
tirement, the tools lose their edge, but not so in the case of Barrett. Per-
haps it was due to the time involved in reaching this level that allowed the
skills to remain as useful for as long as they did. Perhaps it was merely
the nature of the man.
Golden Gate International Exposition
Following a period of less than five months' "retirement," Barrett
was called on to direct the Exhibit of Aboriginal Cultures of the Western
Hemisphere at the Golden Gate International Exposition of 1940. This exposi-
tion had been preceded by a similar one held in 1939. The change for 1940
was the addition of cultural materials from Middle and South America.
Barrett's task as director was to organize an exhibit depicting the cultures
of the Western Hemisphere. Such a task could easily involve research for a
22
year and an additional year for gathering the specimenso Under the conditions
set for the exhibit this had to be accomplished in a little over a month. The
notions of public education through visual material remained the over-all
organizing principle for this exhibit.
With the cooperation of the Public Museum of the City of Milwaukee,
The Museum of Anthropology at the University of California, and the Middle
American Research Institute of Tulane University, the specimens were gathered
and the exhibit opened on schedule. It is acknowledged that much of the
administrative framework from the preceding year was still intact, however,
Barrett's acceptance of the directorship, the opening and operation of a suc-
cessful exhibit further served to demonstrate his ability as a museum adminis-
trator.  He brought to bear all his skills plus a genuine and deep interest
in.presenting the American Indian to the publ'ic. In every sense Barrett at-
tempted to convey knowledge of an anthropological nature to the public through
visual media.  In the room housing material from the Northwest Coast, Barrett
utilized the house poles exhibited a year earlier and simulated a dwelling
typical of this culture area to house the exhibit, Similarly, a special room
was constructed in the form of a hogan for the Navajo exhibit.  Not content
with sterile displays of material culture and crafts, he attempted to bring
more of the daily and religious lives of various people to cognizance through
a fuller use of the visual media. To fill out the picture of Navajo life, a
chanter was brought to the exh'ibit and demonstrated the techniques of sand
painting. An attempt was also made to explain some of the esoteric aspects
of the ceremonies of which sand painting is an integral part.
In a sense the exhibit's success is aptly summarized by its director
for 1940.  "By whatever yard stick the exhibit of Aboriginal Cultures of the
Western Hemisphere is measured; size, scope, or public service rendered, we
feel that it was eminently worth while and that it contributed in no small
measurg to the total success of the Golden Gate International Exposition of
1940 0 ">
Armyr Specialized Trining Program
The war years saw the establishment of an Army Specialized Training
Program on'the Berkeley campus of the University of California. Kroeber, the
director, was striken with a heart attack, and was forced to delegate his
authority. Barrett was invited to join this program in the capacity of Admin-
istrative Assistant. When Kroeber was no longer able to meet the denands of
the project he appointed Barrett as Associate Director.  Barrett was familiar
with administrative procedures; however, he lacked the years of classroom
experience that the rest of the staff brought to the project. Barrett often
remarked that this training program was as close as he ever came to formal
classroom teaching.
Briefly, the Army Specialized Training Program was designed to impart
vast amounts of knowledge to the "students" in a minimum length of time.   Di-
visions were established within the program to provide instruction in special-
ized areas. Kroeber and later Barrett's division was Far Eastern Languages.
Both men were ably assisted by a staff of specialists representing several
fields of endeavor. The program attempted to use the "Area Concept," and as
a consequence specialists from various Social Sciences and the Humanities
23
were brought together. In terms of the goals that the Army set for this
program on the Berkeley campus, it fell short of its expected success.
Barrett's specific contribution to the Army Specialized Training
Program, beyond his administrative work, was the formulation and implementa-
tion of a course in methods of field research. He was forced to approach
this subject in an extremely narrow fashion. In fact, he was only permitted
to teach a course dealing with information techniques.  In this regard, he
employed his knowledge of interviewing, as he had learned it as a student and
from practical experience.  One part of the course, and perhaps the most im-
portant innovation for the teaching of field technique, was the use of a bi-
lingual informant in the classroom. Each in turn, the students would inter-
view the informant in his native language. Following this the informant
would rate the researcher as to his ability to derive factual knowledge
through interviews.
After only eighteen months, the Army felt it was advisable to elimi-
nate the program.  In Barrett's seventy-one year anthropological career, only
those eighteen months were spent in formal instruction, and only part of that
time was spent in the classroom.
Cancer Research
Following the war years, the Barretts moved back and forth across the
continent, visiting. Meanwhile Barrett was completing various research that
had not been possible due to time and other commitments. His wife's increas-
ingly ill health made it necessary that they establish a permanent home. It
was in Sonoma, California that they settled.  On June 11, 1953, after suffer-
ing many years of illness, Eileen Barrett died.  The cause of death was cancer.
Shortly after her death Barrett, at the suggestion of Dr. M. Fernan-
Nunez, was persuaded to apply his skills and experience to research in cancer.
While Barrett had no formal training in medicine, his experience in model and
group building from the museum years provided the best background to work in
one phase of cancer research. It was Barrett's opinion that, had it been
possible to detect cancer at an earlier date, somne additional years of life
,might have been given his wife. Previously, in Milwaukee, Barrett had been
involved in a project for the American Cancer Society. Dr. M. Fernan-Nunez
was Professor of Pathology at Marquette Medical School in Milwaukee; he be-
came Chairman of the American Cancer Society, Wisconsin Division, Committee
on Cancer Education. At that time the facilities of the museum's Modeling
Division were made available for the construction of an extensive series of
visual cancer models.
The medical details of that work were directed by Dr. Nunez. The
remainder of the work was under the stupervision of Barrett who became famil-
iar with the processes, materials and techniques involved.
In 1953, Dr. Nunez suggested to the American Cancer Society that
Barrett might be interested in re-engaging in model making similar to that
done in Milwaukee, a quarter of a century earlier.
24
Following discussions with Dr. John M. Kenney of Santa Rosa, Califor-
nia, then Chairman of the California Division's Committee on Cancer Education,
and at his suggestion, a proposal was submitted to develop and produce tac-
tile models of various organs commonly effected by cancer. It was the goal
of this project to make available to greater numbers of medical students and
nurses the opportunity to detect possible malignant growths through the use
of tactile models.
Barrett stated the proposed uses of the models.
The opportunity for students to examine patients with cancer is rela-
tively limited. These models, which will demonstrate both the normal and
cancerous organ, will make possible unlimited opportunities for such exam-
ination.
Also the opportunity for instruction of lay groups under proper super-
vision is unlimited.  These models in the hands of a physician or a nurse
in a large industrial plant 6for instance, could be most helpful in the
sDread of cancer education.
For Barrett, the cancer work differed from his museum experience only in sub-
ject matter.  The media were the same, and the nurpose was again to educate
Wy providing a simulated experience.
Using a specially constructed building on his property in Sonoma,
Barrett established a laboratorv. His first task was to experiment with
various materials and processes that he might duplicate as closely as possible
the subject. Considerable time and expense were involved in these phases,
however, the results were encouraging.  With a small grant from the Cancer
Society, with the counsel of Dr. Kenney, and-generous contributions of materi-
als from business firms, Barrett began his operation. He approached the manu-
facturers of industrial supplies, and persuaded an engineer to design and
build a special furnace to be used in his process.
An administrator of the California Division of the American Cancer
Society mde the following comment about Barrett's project:
For the past two years the American Cancer Society, California Division,
has been supporting a project of Doctor S. A. Barrett, of Sonomna. Doctor
Barrett has developed a tactile model of the human breast in which he has
been able to incorporate several pathological conditions. As far as we
know, this is the first time that such models have been perfected to the
state that Doctor Barrett has been able to attain. We feel also that
they are as near 1Sfelike as possible, and far superior to any others
that we have seen.
Perhaps the greatest tribute that was paid to Barrett for his work in
cancer research came from Dr. Nunez, his first medical colleague.
I have always regretted that your life work was not in the field of
medicine. You certainly would have -made signal contributions to our
science.  But I am somewhat-compensated by yvour present interest and devo-
tion to a gield of medicine in which you are making a very definite con-
tribution.
Barrett continued his work with the tactile models until 1957 when
the Society felt it was no longer financially possible to continue its sup-
port. Once again Barrett had succeeded in contributing to education through
the design and construction of visual material.  In this project a new dimen-
sion was added, that of the tactile.
American Indian Films
Barrett found partial satisfaction for his compulsion to record the
rapidly vanishing culture of the American Indian. His frustration of age and
the perception of new problems was met by a method of recording which was
more efficient and exacting than any he had previously encountered.
From Barrett's earliest beginnings in anthropology the camera was one
of his trademarks. In the 1920's his photographic interests took a new turn.
The development of the motion picture camera opened new horizons for recording.
These early interests in photography were to culminate in American Indian
Films.
While conducting the field work for the proposed series on the materi-
al culture of Indians of Northwestern California, Barrett discovered that
there was sufficient traditional culture extant to warrant its recording on
film. He, however, insisted that the recording be made with "complete fidel-
ity to ethnological detail."
In January, 1957 he conducted a survey among the Clear Lake Pomo and
Northeastern Maidu as a preliminary step to later film recording.  It was his
idea that a project yielding research materials was suitable justification
for its undertaking. Barrett, with the support of A. L. Kroeber, applied for
funds from the University of California's Institute of Social Sciences and
the Department of Anthropology's research fund. With these, they produced
THE TULE BALSA, the pilot film for the later American Indian Films project.
At a later date, Barrett approached E. W. Gifford, and together they
prepared a proposal for making documentary films. This project, however,
failed to materialize. Barrett refused to abandon his interest in the appli-
cation of documentary film technique to ethnographic subjects.
One of the weaknesses of the Barrett and Gifford proposal was failure
to utilize the skills of professional film makers. Barrett modified and ex-
panded his aims and objectives to include the production of educational films
and to this end he incorporated professional film makers. With Kroeber,
Barrett submitted a proposal to the National Science Foundation incorporating
these new aims. While the principle goal of the project was the production
of educational films, its secondary objective was the documentation of the
remaining forms of traditional American Indian life. One very important
aspect of the project was the awarding of two fellowships to students trained
in anthropology who were to receive specialized instruction in the application
of film to ethnographic subjects. Kroeber was to be the principle investiga-
tor and supervising director and Barrett the assistant investigator and direc-
tor of production. Kroeber was responsible for the overall direction of the
project while Barrett undertook the field work and supervised the production
of the films. To these ends they were aided by the research assistants of
the project.
26
In August of 1960, the Course Content Improvement Section of the
National Science Foundation awarded to Alfred Louis Kroeber and Samuel Alfred
Barrett as co-directors a grant for the establishment of the project American
Indian Films (see Barrett 1961).
As co-directors, they proposed that the films could be utilized to
fill a gap in the experience of many students. There were fewer and fewer
situations whereby students could have direct firsthand field experience with
native peoples on the undergraduate and graduate levels. They proposed that
the films could be made in such a way that they would record rapidly vanish-
ing cultures, make possible the visual presentation of these materials to
large numbers of students, and bring the "living laboratory" of the anthro-
pologist to the classroom.
Kroeber's untimely death on October 5, 1960, left Barrett with full
responsibility and he was subsequently appointed director and principal in-
vestigator. Barrett held this position until his death when William R .
Bascom was appointed director.
In February of 1965, the National Science Foundation found that they
could no longer support the project in the light of its original goals. As a
consequence, they awarded a grant for the orderly termination of American In-
dian Films. This final phase of the project's work is to make available its
total results to research by scholar and the production of additional films.
The first field research of American Indian Fi lms was in Northwestern
California where Barrett recorded on film the manufacture and use of the
Sinew Backed Bow. Barrett moved from this specific area to subjects having
greater meaning for the understanding of the culture of Californian Indian
groups generally. He produced films on the preparation of various native
foods which provided the cornerstone of the culture of this area.
The acceptance of a second proposal for a continuation of the project
stimulated Barrett to broaden the scope of the project. The emphasis changed
from a conscious attempt at a systematic treatment of California Indian cul-
ture, to an attempt to record any traditional cultural behavior among any
group in the Western United States. Much of the field research constituted
the restudy of groups that Barrett had encountered while at the Milwaukee
Public Museum. Extensive work was conducted on the Northwest Coast. The re-
sults of this were the films THE TOTEM PCLE, and THE WOODEN BOX. During
later years of this project field work was conducted and films produced on
subjects pertinent to the Plains area, emphasizing the Blackfoot and the
Sioux.
The third year of the project saw the beginning of field research
among Southwestern groups. It was during this year that Barrett diverged
from the pattern he had established in earlier years. While in the Southwest,
he found that there were numerous phases of traditional Navajo life extant.
The work among the Navajo probably represents the greatest contribution that
the film project made. Barrett had never attempted working with this group,
and at the age of 85 began a program of research which placed less emphasis
on subsistence or technology and stressed the recording of various ceremonies.
Some measure of the project's success in this task is indicated by the fact
27
that between June and December, 1963 four major ceremonies were recorded:
The Red Antway, Girls Puberty Ceremony, Mountain Chant, and Yeibichai. Three
of these ceremonies were recorded in their complete nine day form. While
none of the Navajo material has been released in the form of educational films,
the total footage, 46,000 feet, represents the most complete record of these
ceremonies.
The released films produced by the project were awarded many distinc-
tions. Three films, THE SINEW BACKED BOW), BUKEYES, and THE BEAUTIFUL TREE,
were accepted in the Italian Festival dei Popoli, an international review of
ethnographic and sociological documentary films. These films were awarded
the Diplona of Participation indicating they were among the few selected for
showing. THE BEAUTIFUL TREE was selected for the festival from an interna-
tional entry of more than 200 films. THE SINEW BACKED BOW, and B1CKEYES were
the only American documentary entrees selected for showing in 1962. THE
BEAUTIFUL TREE was also the recipient of the Chris Award at the 1965 Columbus
Film Festival. THE TOTEM POLE was selected for showing in 1964 at the Ameri-
can Film Festival in New York City. The CALUMET: THE PIPE OF PEACE received
the Certificate of Meritorious Participation in 1965 at the San Francisco
International Film Festival.
The fifteen films released by American Indian Films are in no way
representative of the total results of the project. There are approximately
362,569 feet of original and work print film, exclusive of released films,
and 139,200 feet of original sound tapes. This body of film represents field
work among twenty tribal groups.
American Indian Films represents Barrett's final contribution to his
discipline and probably his most significant contribution to the ethnography
of North America.
NOTES
Letters and reports cited are in the possession of the authors
'Letter from Henry L. Ward to S. A. Barrett, March 20, 1909.
'Letter from A. L. Kroeber to S. A. Barrett, February 1, 1909.
ketter from A. L. Kroeber to S. A. Barrett, March 15, 1909.
4Government Service, Vol. h, No. 6. December. Publication of the
Milwaukee Government Service League, p. 1. (n.d.)
iReport of the Director S. A. Barrett to George Creel, Commissioner
Golden Gate International Exposition, October 31, 1940.
6From the proposal for a grant from the American Cancer Society, 1953.
7'
'Letter from Dr. W. E. Batchelder to Chairman Medical Faculty,
Stanford University, 1956.
8etter from Dr. M. Fernan-Nunez to S. A. Barrett, 1955.
28
REFEREEES
BARRETT, S. A.
1911   The dream dances of the Chippewa and Menominee Indians of
northern Wisconsin.  Bulletin of the Public Museum of the City of
Milwaukee, Vol. 1, Article IV, pp. 251-[06. Milwaukee.
1928a  Jotted notes. Yearbook of the Public Museum of the City of
Milwaukee 1928, The Cudahy-Massee-Milwaukee Museum African Expedi-
ition, 1928-1929, Vol. VIII, part II, pp. 575-578. Milwaukee.
1928b  Introduction. Yearbook of the Public Museum of the City of
Milwaukee 1928, The Cudahy-Massee-Milwaukee Museum African Expedi-
tion, 1928-1929, Vol. VIII, part II, pp. 223-230.  Milwaukee.
1961   American Ind'ian f'ilms. Berkeley, Kroeber Anthropological Society
Papers, No. 25, pp. 155-162.
1962   The Milwaukee Public Museum timetable. Lore, pp. 128-137.
Milwaukee.
CCLEMAN, L. V.
1927   Manual for small museums. New York, Putnam's.
d'AZEVEDO,
1963
WARREN L
Introduction. The Washo Indians of California and Nevada.
Anthropological Paper No. 67, pp. 1-7. Salt Lake City, University
of Utah.
DRIEVER, HAROLD E.
1960   Review. Fishing among the Indians of Northwestern California,
A. L. Kroeber and S. A. Barrett. Berkeley, University of Califor-
nia Anthropological Records, Vol. 21, No. 1.
EDWARDS, IRA
1926   The new geological groups. Yearbook of the Public Museum of the
City of Milwaukee 1924, Vol. IV, pp. 122-129. Milwaukee.
LOWIE, R. H.
1937   The history of ethnological theory. New York.
McKERN, W. C.
1956   What is wrong with the present building.
Milwaukee.
Lore, pp. 110-113.
1965   The Barrett era-. Lore, pp. 114-119. Milwaukee.