1 In the summer of 1990, Glenbow's senior staff met to rethink the philosophical basis of our exhibits. As we turned away from a program that featured temporary, large, expensive, and often imported blockbuster exhibits we refocussed on our own collections and the knowledge bases that have developed around those collections. Through our discussions it became evident that, although each of Glenbow's curatorial disciplines (Ethnology, Military History, Cultural History, Art) has a different theoretical and practical approach to the collections, a dialogue between (or among) disciplines can often lead to new insights about the collections. The synergy that followed from these discussions suggested that multidisciplinary exhibits may offer the public a unique perspective on issues that are key to contemporary society. As the Canadian cultural profile becomes more and more multicultural and multiethnic, museums must find new and better ways of developing dialogues among the cultures represented in our collections.

2 Warriors: A Global Journey Through Five Centuries is an interdisciplinary exhibit that looks at the key factors addressed by the men and women who served or serve their society as combatants. The exhibit provides insights about combatants throughout history and raises questions about the relationship between warriors and their societies in different cultures around the world. The multidisciplinary goal, was to find commonalities among cultures while highlighting aspects which differ.

3 There is an extensive amount of literature on warfare, both from a military history1 and an anthropological2 perspective. However, we found there to be little cross-over between the two disciplines. The former is generally concerned with historical developments of weapons and tactics, the organization of large-scale armies of the state and the history of campaigns. Anthropologists more often examine small-scale societies and focus on such factors as ecology, psychology or sociobiology, which can be identified as fundamental causes of the development and persistence of warfare. This oversimplified summary of the two disciplinary points of view underscores an initial difficulty we faced in developing this exhibit: finding common ground on which to present the artifacts in our collections. Some of our early discussions were based on the work of Paul Fussell,3 a literary scholar and critic whose works focus on the experience of the individual soldier during the First and Second World Wars as reflected in the poetry and fiction that arose from those experiences. Also, of particular influence was the brilliant work of John Keegan and his approach to interpreting military history from the soldier's point of view inThe Face of Battle4

4 Our final storyline is presented in six thematic sections. The topics highlight issues of direct concern to the warrior as an individual and situates the warrior within the larger society, as well as locating him within the warrior culture. We also examine the changing ways in which warriors have reacted to the possibility of their own death — that is, changes in technology, tactics, and attitudes towards body and spiritual protection.

5 As we worked through this exhibit, issues arose that challenged both the exhibit content and the process by which it was being developed. These included: the value and problems of undertaking an interdisciplinary exhibit, the difficulty balancing the exhibit to ensure equal contributions by both disciplines and equanimity among the various cultures represented, representing other cultures, representation of women as combatants, finding artifacts that reflect the topics, and, finally, the concern that warriors not be presented as relics of the past. We believed the exhibit should provide insights about the warriors of contemporary societies.

6 This paper begins with a review of the goals and objectives of the exhibit and its components; the success of the exhibit hinges on how well these goals are conveyed to the visiting public. We then focus on the exhibit development process and discuss more fully the challenges outlined above. The paper concludes with an assessment of the process and our experiences working as part of a multidisciplinary team.

7 The goal of the Warriors exhibit was to:

8 This goal initiated a complex dialogue among the curators as we strove to balance the theoretical importance of the goal with the realities of our collections. The differences between the military history and ethnology artifacts and the types of information that accompany each made it important that we find ways of illustrating our goal, which allowed contributions from both disciplines. The six topical sections we developed followed from this dialogue.

23 It is important to distinguish between multi-disciplinary and interdisciplinary processes. Multidisciplinary exhibits draw on collections and knowledge from two or more disciplines to illustrate a thesis that has been constructed from one disciplinary point of view. An interdisciplinary approach brings to exhibit development not only artifacts and information from different disciplines, it can also foster a dialogue of the theoretical foundations underlying the areas of specialization. The disciplines that contributed to Warriors include Ethnology, Military History, Education, Conservation, Design, and Audio-Visual Production. We will focus here on the exchange between the curatorial disciplines — Military History and Ethnology. The synergy created by working from two distinctive theoretical perspectives led each of us to reconsider our own understanding of the collections with which we work. Following, we discuss the effects of an interdisciplinary approach from each discipline's perspective.

33 As the Warriors exhibit development proceeded, questions of balance arose. Balance within a multidisciplinary exhibit can be expressed in several ways. First, there is the issue of balancing the number of artifacts so that each discipline has approximately equal numbers, in each section, and throughout the entire exhibit. Second, space must be balanced so that each discipline is allocated a similar number of square metres. Third, visibility and the display techniques used must ensure equal prominence for each discipline. Fourth, each discipline may have to balance the cultures represented within its collections. Finally, curators should be given the opportunity to explore fully their disciplines' understanding of the topic. Ethnologists face the additional challenge of finding a balance between the curatorial voice and the culture of which they write. Within the overall exhibit, these balances must be presented as a cohesive whole in such a way that equity is achieved without overpowering the storyline.

34 The first four concerns address the sense of public balance in which both of the collections are highlighted to illustrate to the public that a broad spectrum of artifacts from a variety of cultures have been collected by the museum. This is important, especially for museum boards and administrators who are, rightly, concerned with the image of their museums as interesting places with diverse collections. These issues of balance speak to the multidisciplinary nature of the exhibit.

35 The interdisciplinary aspect of an exhibit is addressed only when the curators from different disciplines engage in a dialogue. The artifacts then become concrete examples, illustrating points within a discussion. A truly interdisciplinary storyline will include questions asked by each discipline — questions that pertain to a particular knowledge base but that lead everyone to look at their collections and artifacts in new and different ways.

36 Warriors is successful in achieving balance in this interdisciplinary sense. The storyline, goals and themes were developed jointly by Ethnology and Military History curators. The discussions focussed on finding an approach that would include issues of common concern. An anthropological perspective was taken on Military History collections while ethnologists took an unorthodox view of their own collections. Neither discipline assumed a primacy role by dictating the focus or defining the key issues.

37 In spite of this fundamental balance, the equity may not be apparent to the museum visitor. The Military History collections dominate the exhibit, both overall and within particular sections. The Military History label copy is longer and more personal than that which accompanies ethnological artifacts. This creates a greater physical presence and inspires emotion in the visitors. The major walk-through diorama features scenes from a medieval castle, reinforcing the impressions that Warriors is a Military History exhibit.

38 This imbalance arose from the nature of Glenbow's collections and the nature of the cultures from which we have collected. As already noted, the Ethnology collection is more diverse than that of Military History and includes more than just warrior paraphernalia. The Ethnology data base for Warriors was smaller than the Military History base. Many objects worn in battle may be part of our sacred collection. Out of respect for First Nations cultures, we exhibit such objects only with permission of appropriate representatives of these cultures. We extend this restriction to other cultures whenever we feel it is appropriate, or upon request. However, spirituality and warfare are tied together very closely and we may have been denied the opportunity to exhibit significant items in our displays. Without these objects, our discussion of the link between spirituality and warfare can be limited. The Military History collection has few similar restrictions and, therefore, presents a broader, more complete discussion of warriors.

39 From the Military History perspective, it is always of paramount importance to represent as many units and branches of service as possible. Because the focus of Warriors was restricted to combatants, support units such as supply, medical and transport were excluded. However, a representational balance was desirable between components such as infantry, cavalry, armour, artillery, air force and navy. To reflect the international nature of the collections, representation was sought from European, Canadian, North African, Mid-Eastern, Indian and Asian military forces. Finally, the balance between officers and men was essential to the exhibit, particularly in the "Warrior and Society" section.

40 There is a further imbalance within the ethnological groupings as some cultures and culture areas are over-represented (e.g. Plains First Nations), while others are under-represented (e.g., Africa and South America). Glenbow ethnologists are engaged in continuous, first-hand research among the First Nations of southern Alberta and Saskatchewan. This has increased our understanding of the ideology and nature of warfare and of the attitudes and concerns of First Nations warriors. This primary research has also inculcated a skepticism about generalizing anthropological summaries of non-Western cultures. Most cultural anthropologists do not focus on the material culture that accompanies various practices or that indicates status positions. This makes it difficult to tell accurate stories about the artifacts without undertaking an exhaustive deconstruction of anthropological texts. These deconstructions will be undertaken with less confidence as the culture under scrutiny becomes more remote from the curator's experience. We tend to stick with what we know, and this has brought an imbalance to the exhibit.

41 Museums have become a focal point of the debate surrounding the representation of minority (dominated) cultures within institutions of the majority (dominating) culture.6 This is a reflection of broader educational7 and anthropological8 efforts to present multiple perspectives on history. The developments at Head-Smashed-In Buffalo Jump,9 Wanuskewin Heritage Park near Saskatoon, and the Royal Saskatchewan Museum10 illustrate the role that First Nations advisors can play in the development of exhibit themes, objectives and even text.

42 Warriors faced the challenge of presenting objects from both non-Western cultures and from different periods of time. As Lowenthal11 points out, the latter can be a more daunting task than the former, since a researcher may be able to approach members of a non-Western culture for their own emic12 understanding or cultural insights. It is more difficult to elicit such information from medieval knights.

43 In trying to present non-Western points of view, we turned to the First Nations of western Canada. Glenbow has developed links with these nations and, through our First Nations Advisory Council (FNAC),13 has an established protocol for exhibit review. Discussions with FNAC included reviews of the concepts and objectives of each part of the exhibit as well as detailed discussions of the artifact list. We were concerned that we understood the First Nations perspectives on war and on the objects we had selected for the exhibit. From this process we learned that traditional warfare was considered to be a test of strength, not a killing ground. Further research has shown us that the political relationships among First Nations was very complex; some bands of Crée, for example, may have been at war with some bands of Siksika, while their relatives in other bands remained at peace. These complex relationships, and the implications for individual warriors, has been largely glossed over by non-Native traders, explorers, historians and anthropologists.

44 We also conducted a special review of the exhibit with a group of Peigan.14 A design concept had been put forward in which one introductory wall was to be covered with the word "warrior" in different languages. Our discussions with the Peigan focussed on the Blackfoot translation. We suggested that knats-omitax, the word for the Brave Dog Society, be used. It was made clear to us that the Brave Dogs were the camp police and that anyone could initiate or accompany a war party. Roles within the party were strictly defined, based upon one's ownership of sacred bundles, previous experiences and dreams. This is an important distinction and illuminates many writings which consider these men's societies to be parts of age-graded warrior societies. Again, the culture is more complex than it has generally been portrayed.

45 It is a Peigan tradition that, during some ceremonies, an elder is called upon to recount four of his brave deeds before certain parts of the ceremony are performed. We wanted to confirm that this "counting of coups" was a way of publicly honouring the elder. The Peigans pointed out that whoever told his stories did so in a humble manner and ended each tale with the prayer asking that the blessing that had carried him to safety be shared by all who listened to his story. "Counting coups" is not an act of social posturing or bravado. Rather, it is an open admission that people are successful because of the support of spiritual helpers. This enlightened our understanding of a specific aspect of their culture and emphasized the subtle and important ways in which Native and non-Native views affect our understanding of the world.

46 As some of our embedded assumptions about Native cultures were dispelled, we began to wonder about our representation of other cultures. The exhibit includes cultures from around the world over a span of almost 5 000 years. How well do we understand the Maori reaction to the British invasion, as depicted in one of our life-size dioramas (Fig. 3)? What symbolism underlies the elaborately feathered bow of the Urburu of the upper Amazon? How did the samurai deal with the tension of balancing the arts of war with the arts of peace? These important questions remain unanswered in Warriors. In our effort to present what we considered to be basic information, we have been unable to lead the visitor to view the world differently — through the culturally defined worldview of various warriors.

47 The storyline of Warriors is concerned more with human behaviour and cultural ideals than with technological developments or the physical structure of warrior material culture. As we developed the exhibit, we were confronted with the challenge of translating or finding ways of attaching the abstract themes of the storyline to the tangible objects in our collection. We believe that these themes raise important issues about the status and nature of warriors and we were reluctant to manipulate the objectives to fit our collection.

48 In some instances it was very easy to match objects to themes. The displays of medals awarded for service and loot given as a reward for successful campaigns demonstrate the ways in which a society regards their warriors. Similarly, comparisons of officers' and enlisted men's uniforms easily illustrate how class distinctions within a larger society are transposed into the military. The section of the exhibit which features the technology of warrior society was most easily linked to artifacts and presents an array of weaponry from around the world.

49 While there was often an obvious link between an artifact and a topic, sometimes there was a need to develop more fully the cultural context of the object. A tipi with pictographic accounts of war exploits is, clearly, a way in which Blood men were honoured for their bravery. However, the nuances regarding ownership of the designs, the public display of the accounts, and the transferred rights that accompany the tipi set this object apart from, say, Canadian Service Medals, as a way in which society acknowledges its warriors. Blood culture must be discussed extensively to ensure that visitors appreciate the differences between these two cultures. Similarly, the code Bushido held by the samurai needs to be contextualized.

50 Sometimes, it was impossible to provide full explanations within a reasonable label copy space. The imagery on First Nations shields, for example, has multiple and complex layers of cultural and personal symbolism. The meaning of many symbols was lost with the original owner; other meanings may not be understandable to those who do not share the worldview of a particular First Nation. Even the concept that these shields are animate and carry with them power can be very difficult for non-Natives understand. Concepts such as this are not prevalent in all of the societies represented in Warriors and it is this sort of distinction among the cultures that is important to the exhibit.

51 A creative tension developed from this struggle to fit the artifact to the theme and to explain abstract concepts without overburdening the exhibit with text. The curatorial approach, often, is to write a book and hang it on the wall as exhibit text copy. We all know how visually uninviting this is and how discouraging it is to the visitor. We have tried to steer away from this, and a layering of information gives the visitor the option of reading different amounts of detail. Important points are in large type and are no more than 50 words. More detailed information may run up to 150 words; it is printed in a smaller point size. We have yet to determine how well we have succeeded. We suspect, however, that our approach required a particularly innovative designer who could appreciate and understand the multi-layered and multi-facetted nature of the topic.

52 From the first curatorial meetings on the exhibit, we knew we wanted to include the story of women as warriors. How best to tell the story became the subject of some debate.

53 At the time of our initial discussions, the curatorial team of four included one woman — a curatorial assistant in the Military History Department. She was particularly concerned with the way we intended to approach and develop the story of women in battle — whether to integrate women's experiences into the main exhibit storyline at the risk of it becoming lost in the predominant male culture; or to create a distinct section in the show to feature women warriors and thus possibly over-represent their role as combatants? After considerable discussion, the curators decided to solicit opinions from the female members (about 60 per cent) of the Glenbow staff. They responded overwhelmingly in favour of producing a distinct section of the show to feature women as combatants.

54 Once we had decided on an approach to the issue, we had to find the artifacts to represent the story. Photographs were available in abundance but artifacts were almost non-existent. We decided to build the section around the display of a mannequin representing a woman fighter in the Yugoslavian partisans during the Second World War. This was a relatively simple task since the costume could be fabricated and the weapons were readily available. The mannequin was exhibited in juxtaposition with a Canadian Women's Army Corps uniform and an RCAF (Women's Division) uniform. This arrangement would represent the female combatant in contrast with the non-combatant (but equally important) Canadian women in uniform during the same period.

55 While photographs and a mannequin dressed in a recreated costume enhanced the section, it did not satisfactorily represent the substance of the theme. The challenge became locating documented artifacts that would equitably represent the story of women in battle. The search began with the Central Museum of the Armed Forces in Moscow and the Abshalom Institute in Tel Aviv, Israel. Three museums in the Russian Federation were contacted in addition to the Jewish Museum in New York City and several veteran's groups. Although all were supportive of the idea and two had artifacts representing women combatants, only one offered to loan us this rare material. The primary condition of the loan, and one that we could not meet, was for a museum representative to travel to Moscow and select the artifacts. At a late stage in the exhibit development we were faced with the grim prospect of dropping the section. Fortunately, the Polish Combatant Association in Calgary, who had been searching for material on our behalf, contacted us with the names of two women who had been fighters in the Polish Home Army and participated in the ill-fated Warsaw Uprising of August-September 1944. Mrs Marta Mankowski and Mrs Hanna Beeger (Fig. 4) came to our aid and kindly loaned us their personal photographs, identity cards and insignia, including a Home Army armband which was their only uniform. In addition, they both graciously consented to share their personal experiences in interviews which were published in the Warriors edition of the Glenbow magazine.

56 At present, we have only the comment cards with which to measure the success of the "Women as Combatants" section. None of the comments which specifically mention the section have been adverse and few have mentioned the gender issue. One irate visitor, however, left an unsigned card which was critical of a quote by General George S. Patton in the "Reflections" section. He or she suggested that the initial "S" in Patton's name probably stood for "sexist" and added that men start wars and women and children suffer the results. Our visitor went on to comment favourably on the fact that we had included a section on women as combatants.

57 As discussed above, one of the rewarding features of interdisciplinary exhibitions for curators is the opportunity to look at their own collections in different ways. The Ethnology curators are concerned that the public may harbour the misconception that the cultures represented in these collections have long since disappeared. As Western material culture spreads throughout the world, it is assumed by many that the acculturation process has been complete. In fact, many indigenous cultures are vibrant and others are undergoing a resurgence. While survival is often expressed in terms of spirituality, generally no distinction can be made among different aspects of these cultures. As we have observed in the discussion of "coups," the linkage of warrior elements with spiritual and other aspects of the culture has perpetuated the importance of the essence of being a warrior as a feature of one's cultural identity and self-esteem. In Warriors we attempted to convey the significance of the warrior traditions and its survival as part of cultural survival.

58 For the Military History curator, this thinking offered an opportunity to present the military "cultures" in the exhibit, (particularly the modern Canadian Forces) as an ongoing, vibrant and alive culture and not as anachronistic relics of a dead culture. Thus, our visitors' attention is drawn to the current customs and traditions of the Forces. Trooping the colour, mess dinners, and Freedom of the City parades are not presented as curiosities of the past but as vital and relevant elements of a dynamic military culture. To underscore this idea, a bulletin board in the "Reflections" section displays current clippings and articles germane to the life of the warrior in the 1990s.

59 Warriors is an ambitious exhibit. Through it, we merged two collections representing cultures from around the world and across five centuries. The conceptual framework focusses on warriors as people and examines the relationships that developed among warriors, between warriors and their society, and between warriors and their worldviews. This structure necessitates a multi-layered reading of the artifacts, which themselves are understood to be complex codifications of social norms and expectations. By asking our visitors to view the artifacts in new and different ways, we were also expecting them to re-examine their preconceptions about warriors — from all societies.

60 It may be premature to discuss the successes and/or failures of the exhibit; we have yet to undertake a summative evaluation. Still, a collection of over 1 000 comment cards and two critical reviews15 provide us with a measure of insight into the way the exhibit is being received. One review16 questions the values underlying the exhibit development and is concerned with the absence of any commentary regarding the nature of war as a conflict resolution process or the moral differences of a Salvadoran guerilla and a United States marine in Vietnam. Similar feelings have been expressed by visitors who wonder why we are glorifying war.

61 We have also received praise for presenting warriors in an enlightened context. Some visitors who approached the exhibit with reluctance discovered their own empathy for the individuals in the uniform. One need not love war to be concerned with the warrior. Many of the points of praise focussed on particular aspects of the exhibit: the samurai; the medieval armour; and the First Nations artifacts. It may be a characteristic of comment cards that respondents highlight features that they particularly like or dislike. It may also reflect a visitor pattern in which people come to see certain classes of objects.

62 This response pattern may also indicate a fundamental failure. Warriors is an interdisciplinary exhibit combining the artifacts, knowledge, and points of view of Ethnology and Military History. The public seems not to be responding to this mix of perspectives. I have yet to find any respondents who remarked specifically upon the juxtaposition of cultures. Perhaps this exhibition strategy is nothing strange to a museum visitor, harking back as it does to museum displays of an earlier era.17 We were concerned that cultural identity not be lost and so were careful to separate items by their origin. As a result, we may have lost a sense of commonality and with it the point that warriors are found in nearly all cultures and share many of the same concerns.

63 The interdisciplinary team approach is an invaluable strategy. As we move on to other exhibits at Glenbow, the lessons we have learned from Warriors will stimulate more creative and innovative explorations of ideas and artifacts.