- Home
- >
- Preservation Archaeology Blog
- >
- What cyberSW’s New NEH Award Is Making Possi...
Sarah Oas, Preservation Archaeologist
Caitlynn Mayhew, cyberSW Native American Fellow
(February 3, 2025)—On January 16, 2025, we proudly announced that cyberSW had received a $350,000 grant from the National Endowment for the Humanities (NEH) for a new initiative, “Expanding cyberSW: From Archaeological Research to Cultural Revitalization.” We wanted to share in our own words what this funding really means for cyberSW.
Sarah
Transforming cyberSW
cyberSW, an archaeological database decades in the making, has been available online for about five years, providing an unparalleled source of archaeological information on more than a millennia of settlements across the US Southwest and northern Mexico, and detailed data concerning the ceramic and sourced obsidian objects found within them. When I joined the project in the spring of 2022, exciting new developments were in the air, including plans to expand the utility and vision of what cyberSW could be.
Beyond communicating about settlements as a whole, cyberSW would now tell a more intimate story about what was within settlements—the hearths, pits, and homes that made up the built lives of the inhabitants, as well as the materials and possessions associated with those places. All of this took a great investment in gathering available data and standardizing it, as well as incorporating archaeological information about additional kinds of technologies, everything from shell adornments to the prized ground stone possessions which transformed all manner of plant, animal, and other materials into cuisine and crafts.
My introduction to Archaeology Southwest and the cyberSW project was also marked by an additional inflection point, one born of a recognition that cyberSW, while built on the material legacy of countless generations of Indigenous history, was not terribly useful or interesting for many Indigenous communities and Tribal collaborators as it was. The then-newly assembled Tribal Working Group was instrumental in clarifying many of these insights, and they clearly signaled that humble “ecofacts” were an essential part of the archaeological story that Indigenous community members would want to engage with.

In the US Southwest, studies of artifacts, particularly decorated ceramics, hold a special place in archaeology. Painted pots, projectile points, and other Indigenous ancestral belongings capture the public imagination and shape ideas of what archaeology is all about. In contrast, the excavated remains of plant and animals, sometimes dubbed “ecofacts,” are bulky and unwieldy and rarely get featured in museum displays. Logistically, collections of plant and animal materials often require additional considerations and funding for analyses from specialists, like myself, who can parse through the remnants of burned seeds and fragmented animal bones to tell us about cuisine, medicine, crafting, and other ways people, plants, and animals were intertwined in the past. Where projectile points and ceramic sherds are immediately recognizable to archaeologists, ecofacts often exist in seemingly impenetrable matrices such as unprocessed soil samples. Out of sight, out of mind.
The minimization of plants and animals in archaeological research and museum collections places archaeology in a position very much at odds with Indigenous communities’ views. Archaeologists are traditionally trained to focus on people and the things they produce. For instance, a bone needle receives far more attention than an “unworked” bone fragment. In the process, archaeologists reduce and distort millennia of complex biological, social, and spiritual relationships and lose important insights into other fundamental aspects of these relationships that nurtured human–nonhuman relationships over generations, co-creating human societies and landscapes through time. When archaeologists overlook the importance of the legacy (material and otherwise) of human and nonhuman relationships, we run the real risk of declaring ourselves “experts” without expertise in these situations.

As a result of the expertise shared by the Tribal Working Group, our cyberSW team pivoted to prioritizing and adding archaeological plant and animal data to the growing cyberSW intrasite experience. The advertisement for a cyberSW Indigenous Fellow position also took on a new focus, one developing a project that would center on plants and animals. We were ever so fortunate that the fellowship position connected us with Caitlynn Mayhew, whose creativity and vision directed the Digital Indigenous Field Guide project that has now been funded by the National Endowment for the Humanities.
I am heartened by ways the field of archaeology continues to learn and grow from Indigenous voices on these topics, including recent updates to NAGPRA regulations concerning the remains of animals in archaeological collections. I am even more excited for the next chapter of cyberSW that has been funded by the National Endowment for the Humanities. The Digital Indigenous Field Guide project will be both innovative and transformative for the website by respectfully blending the strengths of traditional Western scientific research disciplines (for example, archaeology, ecology, biology, etc.) and the knowledge and history maintained by Indigenous communities concerning the ways people, plants, animals, and indeed landscapes are connected and sustained through time.
Caitlynn
The cyberSW Digital Indigenous Field Guide
First and foremost, I would like to thank everyone involved in the project and in the grant proposal process—from our former Tribal Director of Tribal Collaboration in Research and Education, Ashleigh Thompson, to our current cyberSW and Archaeology Southwest team members, Joshua Watts, Jeff Clark, Skylar Begay, Andre Tagaki, and Sarah Oas. This was indeed a genuine team effort, with insightful input from the Tribal Working Group. Of course we extend the utmost respect and gratitude to our partnering Indigenous communities. We will share more about our Indigenous community partners in the coming months as we continue to establish partnerships.
In brief, the cyberSW Digital Indigenous Field Guide is an adaptation of a pet project I started a few years back. I still can’t believe this project has taken flight and grown from handmaking labels of the Indigenous names species in my traditional language Diné Bizaad, in personal field guides to developing a co-managed digital field guide with phone app potential! The National Endowment for the Humanities (NEH) grant award enables cyberSW to enhance its web platform and develop features like the Digital Indigenous Field Guide. We now have the resources to turn our digital field guide from a general reference guide into a collaborative educational tool for cyberSW users and our partnering Indigenous communities.

This expansion is exciting and overwhelming, to say the least. I’m not a creature who seeks the spotlight, and I’ll quickly retreat behind the camera to continue working on this project. The real stars of this show are our more-than-human relatives and our Indigenous collaborators. Nonetheless, I’m eager to continue this journey into the next development phase and share our story thus far.
Here’s where we are in the process and a snapshot of what this project means to me. For the past year, we have focused on developing a formal Collaboration Agreement with a potential partnering Indigenous Nation here in southern Arizona. It’s essential, for me and as outlined in the mission of Archaeology Southwest, that Indigenous Knowledge Systems are protected and shared conscientiously. Our Indigenous partners have the right to control and manage their data, so our collaboration process must reflect this responsibility to the best of our ability. Developing these relationships and agreements is as important and impactful as any of the other outcomes of this project.
We first approached our potential collaborators with two phases of this field guide project. Phase I was a narrow proof-of-concept where we focused on 30 species of birds for the field guide content. Phase II, contingent on the NEH grant, would allow us to expand the project’s content to include Cultural Keystone Species (CKS). Indigenous nations may adopt the concept of CKS to advocate for conservation initiatives to protect culturally significant species. This is a relevant and increasingly urgent area of study because Indigenous reservations and trust lands are becoming island-like ecosystems as neighboring landscapes experience development. These spaces may be considered safe zones for biodiversity, and traditional knowledge systems could be essential for creating sustainable management practices.

At its core, the field guide will include the general components from Western science (common/scientific name, description, habitat, diet, etc.) in addition to the traditional name in Akimel O’odham, as well as a small introduction to the cultural significance of the species to the community. There will even be an option to explore a range map of the species with markers for the sites where that more-than-human relative can be found in the cyberSW database. We’re thinking about the user experience for this sort of resource and anticipate working closely with our Indigenous collaborators to design a website and app that are both compelling and intuitive. Because this field guide is digital, our team can readily update the content. This is a bonus as the naturalist community prepares to change common names for select species, mainly birds, to address eponymous and offensive names. In contrast, paper field guides are at risk of being outdated as soon as they’re off the press.
Our team envisions this project as a contribution to sustainable community building, Indigenous Data Sovereignty, and cultural revitalization. This is just a start, as we hope to further develop the content by connecting with Heritage centers and the partnering Nation’s educational programs to include full translations in Akimel O’odham. We’re ready and excited to adapt the content to meet the community’s needs.
Regarding the processes in which I’ll collect data for the field guide, I aim to incorporate a mix of the backcountry and urban spaces. The latter is essential because I recognize some of our Indigenous youth live in urban spaces, and connections to their Indigenous community or natural spaces might not be as strong. That’s okay. You can still see more-than-human relatives in these spaces, but what does this say exactly? This is where the project resonates with me.
For example, when I’m driving along McDowell in Phoenix and see a Harris’s hawk in a tree or a cottontail rabbit in a patch of grass in the Biltmore area, it makes me think. I think about a time when their ancestors lived in a pre-contact landscape, not a concrete jungle. I think about how their survival in a changing landscape, now compounded by climate change, mirrors the disruption and erosion of Indigenous culture and identity. I see these more-than-human community members, but I wonder if others take the time to notice.

The homeland we inhabited was our original classroom, and our first teachers were the elements of nature and our more-than-human relatives (plants and animals). Community wasn’t defined just by human relationships but by all entities within the ecosystem. Now, our history has been drastically shaped by countless events that have left their scars, one of which was the severance between humans and the natural world. We need to know how our natural community has changed and where we can find our relatives. We need to know who in the community remembers their traditional name and why this relative is vital to the culture. Our survival is dependent on our community.

At the end of this journey, I hope we will have our trusty cyberSW Digital Indigenous Field Guide in-hand, and we can walk with our Indigenous community partners to bring our natural community together once again—healing as one.
Thank you for your time, your mind, and your continued support. I look forward to keeping you updated on this adventure.