NAGPRA (the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act) was passed on November 16, 1990. It defined ownership and provided for the return of Native American (including Hawaiian) human remains and objects from museums. It also established procedures for future acquisitions. Subsequently, human remains and certain objects could be claimed (or repatriated) by lineal descendants or federally recognized tribes under certain conditions.
The passage of NAGPRA was the end result of a long history of protest on the part of Native people against the desecration of human remains and culturally important objects. Although many archaeological sites were protected and preserved as federal property, not until 1986 did tribes gain the opportunity to express their views about excavation on federal lands. In the 1970s the Native rights movement spearheaded by AIM brought attention to the issue of possession, sale, and display of human remains and cultural artifacts, picketing some sites and protesting in other ways. Non-Indians began to express support for the Native American position, and in 1989 Congress provided for the repatriation (return home) of human remains from the Smithsonian Institution. Shortly after, NAGPRA passed.
This law mandated that museums and other institutions that receive federal money return human remains and the grave goods associated with them when these items are claimed by known lineal descendants or a federally recognized tribe with a cultural affiliation to the remains. If the cultural affiliation is unknown, a case can be made for a tribe that “aboriginally occupied” territory where the remains and objects were found. The law required museums to publish inventories identifying the geographical and cultural affiliation of each item of human remains and associated funerary objects in their possession. These inventories also included culturally unidentifiable human remains. By 2007, inventories accounted for the remains of 158,008 Native American individuals. Of these, 26 percent were repatriated. Many tribes in the Midwest have reburied remains that they repatriated, often in specially designated places.
LISTEN TO JOHN LOW DISCUSS THE REPATRIATION EFFORTS OF HIS COMMUNITY, THE POKAGON POTAWATOMI. Help
10:03 mi.
The law also provided that tribes can claim grave goods not found with human remains, sacred objects needed by religious leaders today in practicing religion, and objects of “cultural patrimony,” that is, objects with ongoing historical or cultural importance central to a Native group. Museums draw on their records and consultations with tribal governments and religious leaders to produce descriptions of “collections” of cultural objects identified by their geographical and cultural affiliations. Tribes and lineal relatives demonstrating affiliation can claim these objects.
[X] Close
This is the first of a three-part series to bring light to the cultural significance of an Oneida Wampum Belt that has been encased as a display in the Field Museum of Natural History in Chicago, Ill. for several decades. It is the intention of all three Oneida Nation communities to have the belt returned to the Oneida people.
The spirit of a wampum belt seemed to be present during a meeting with the three Oneida Nation communities and the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Review Committee (NAGPRA) last weekend in Myrtle Beach, N. C.
The summit was held in an attempt to reach a finding to determine how a sacred Oneida Wampum Belt, currently in the possession of a Chicago museum, would be returned to the Oneida people.
Claims were presented to the NAGPRA from the Oneida Nation of Wisconsin and the Oneida Indian Nation of New York who both contend they are the appropriate recipients of the wampum belt that has been a part of the Field Museum of Natural History located in Chicago, Ill. since the turn of the century.
All parties displayed Native respect for the belt with occasional disagreement from representing attorneys regarding legal issues.
It was apparent that the sacred purpose of the belt demanded that kind of respect. The three communities also acknowledged during their oral presentations, the cooperation and understanding necessary when addressing the wampum belt.
Oneida Nation of Wisconsin Tribal Chairwoman Debbie Doxtator expressed the need for mutual respect in consideration of future generations and to insure continuity of culture and traditional values. “We need to work together to ensure that our children from all three communities will have the opportunity to experience our culture at its fullest,” Doxtator said. “We should try to focus on our commonality to come to a resolve that will be in the best interest of all concerned.”
The issue of possession arises from a determination by NAGPRA that the ancient belt, by federal law, should be returned to the Oneida people. Both the New York and the Wisconsin Oneida Nation communities, as well as the Oneida of the Thames [in Canada] were present to express their mutual concerns regarding the disposition of the spiritual and cultural significance of the wampum belt to the Oneida people. [The three groups have not been able to agree on which community should receive the belt, so it remains at The Field Museum] From Kalihwisaks, November 7, 1996 (Newberry Library, McNickle Collection, Tribal Newspapers)
NAGPRA also made it illegal to sell or buy or transport for sale Native remains or sacred objects and objects of cultural patrimony without the legal right to do so. After 1990, a buyer or seller had to prove the right of possession by having the consent of the party with the authority to dispose of the items. Most states now have grave protection laws and some provide for repatriation.
The law established the conditions under which scientific research can be done on the human remains and funerary objects found on federal land after 1990. Scientists need a permit from a federal agency and must consult with the appropriate tribes. If the remains or objects are found on tribal land, scientists need tribal consent. After the studies are expeditiously completed, the objects are subject to repatriation.
A national review committee monitors the identification process, helps settle disputes between tribes or between tribes and institutions, and makes recommendations about the care of repatriated objects and the disposition of unclaimed human remains. This committee meets publicly, usually twice a year.
[X] Close
The human remains were included in the inventory submitted to the National NAGPRA Program in the early 1990s and the Detroit Institute of Arts had been in consultation with NAGPRA representatives from Michigan over the past 10 years regarding the disposition of the human remains. Physical anthropologist David Barondess from Wayne State University examined the bones in the summer of 2008 and determined that the 145 fragments of human bone represented a minimum of 10 individuals; 8 adults and 2 subadults. Mr. Barondess determined that the human remains were consistent with remains of Native Americans through dental traits and markings consistent with Native American burials in the Michigan area, such as disarticulation practices and the presence of copper. Mr. Penney [Vice-President of Exhibitions and Collections and Curator of Native American Art] stated that the Detroit Institute of Arts believed the evidence showed by preponderance that the human remains were most likely collected from a burial site somewhere in the vicinity of Detroit, were brought to the museum sometime between 1939 and 1950, and therefore would be subject to the disposition process.
Mr. Eric Hemenway, research assistant for the Little Traverse Bay Bands of Odawa Indians, thanked the Review Committee for hearing this disposition and the National NAGPRA Program for their assistance. The Little Traverse Bay Bands of Odawa Indians in conjunction with the Sault Ste. Marie Tribe of Chippewa Indians, the Bay Mills Indian Community, and Keweenaw Bay Indian Community, the Lac Vieux Desert Chippewa Tribe, the Grand Traverse Band of Ottawa and Chippewa Indians, the Little River Band of Ottawa Indians, the Saginaw Chippewa Indian Tribe, and the Pokagon Band of Potawatomi Indians request a recommendation for disposition of human remains in the possession of the Detroit Institute of Arts, Detroit, MI. Mr. Hemenway prepared a small historical report of tribal history in Michigan which describes the Indian tribes with the strongest historical presence in Michigan. These were the Odawa, the Ojibwe, and the Potawatomi, collectively known as the Anishnaabek. In April 2008, Mr. Hemenway contacted Mr. Penney concerning a small collection of human remains, accession number X1989.2633-19660, and through consultation began the process to bring the request before the Review Committee. Mr. Hemenway described the evidence they believe showed by a preponderance of the evidence that the human remains were of Anishnaabek ancestry. One, the predominant tribes of Michigan during historical and prehistoric times were the Odawa, Ojibwe, and Potawatomi. The Review Committee members had copies of support letters from the tribes in Michigan. Indian tribes with a historic, but not current, presence in Michigan were contacted for support. Written or verbal consent was submitted by both the Sac and Fox and the Wyandot Nation. Scientific work was done to prove that the human remains were Native American.
Review Committee Motion
Mr. Steponaitis stated, in light of the earlier question by Ms. Bernstein, that while the evidence in this case was not overwhelming, it was sufficient to show that the human remains were Native American. Mr. Monroe made a motion to approve the request for disposition of Native American human remains representing a minimum number of ten individuals from the Detroit Institute of Arts to the Little Traverse Bay Bands of Odawa Indians in conjunction with the Sault Ste. Marie Tribe of Chippewa Indians, the Bay Mills Indian Community, the Keweenaw Bay Indian Community, the Lac Vieux Desert Chippewa Tribe, the Grand Traverse Band of Ottawa and Chippewa Indians, the Little River Band of Ottawa Indians, the Saginaw Chippewa Tribe, and the Pokagon Band of Potawatomi Indians. Mr. Steponaitis seconded the motion. The motion was adopted unanimously.
(NAGPRA. Review Committee Meeting Minutes, Thirty-eighth Meeting, San Diego, California. 11-12 October 2008. pp. 19-20. http://www.nps.gov/history/nagpra/REVIEW/meetings/MINUTES.HTM)
