National Museum of the American Indian Policy Statement on Native American Human Remains and Cultural Materials

1991 ◽  
Vol 15 (2) ◽  
pp. 25-28 ◽  
Author(s):  
David A. Nichols

From 1783 to 1830, American Indian policy reflected the new American nation-state’s desire to establish its own legitimacy and authority, by controlling Native American peoples and establishing orderly and prosperous white settlements in the continental interior. The Federalists focused on securing against Native American claims and attacks several protected enclaves of white settlement (Ohio, Kentucky, Tennessee), established—often violently—during the Revolutionary War. They used treaties to draw a legal boundary between these enclaves and Indian communities, and annuities and military force to keep Indians on their side of the line. The Jeffersonian Republicans adopted a more expansive plan of development, coupled with the promotion of Native American dependency. Treaty commissioners persuaded chiefs to cede road easements and riverfront acreage that the government used to link and develop dispersed white settlements. Meanwhile, the War Department built trading factories whose cheap merchandise would lure Indians into commercial dependency, and agents offered Indian families agricultural equipment and training, hoping that Native American farmers would no longer need “extensive forests” to support themselves. These pressures helped engender nativist movements in the Old Northwest and southeast, and Indian men from both regions fought the United States in the War of 1812, reinforcing frontier settlers’ view that Indians were a security threat. After this war’s end, the United States adopted a strategy of containment, pressuring Indian leaders to cede most of their peoples’ lands, confining Indians to enclaves, financing vocational schooling for Indian children, and encouraging Native peoples voluntarily to move west of the Mississippi. This policy, however, proved too respectful of Indian autonomy for the frontier settlers and politicians steadily gaining influence in the national government. After these settlers elected one of their own, Andrew Jackson, to the presidency, American Indian policy would enter a much more coercive and violent phase, as white Americans redefined the nation-state as a domain of white supremacy ethnically cleansed of indigenous peoples.


Daedalus ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 147 (2) ◽  
pp. 106-115 ◽  
Author(s):  
Philip J. Deloria

Museums have long offered simplistic representations of American Indians, even as they served as repositories for Indigenous human remains and cultural patrimony. Two critical interventions–the founding of the National Museum of the American Indian (1989) and the passage of the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (1990)–helped transform museum practice. The decades following this legislation saw an explosion of excellent tribal museums and an increase in tribal capacity in both repatriation and cultural affairs. As the National Museum of the American Indian refreshes its permanent galleries over the next five years, it will explicitly argue for Native people's centrality in the American story, and insist not only on survival narratives, but also on Indigenous futurity.


1979 ◽  
Vol 66 (1) ◽  
pp. 160
Author(s):  
Wilcomb E. Washburn ◽  
Francis Paul Prucha

1968 ◽  
Vol 54 (4) ◽  
pp. 880
Author(s):  
Wilbur R. Jacobs ◽  
Reginald Horsman

1994 ◽  
Vol 16 (3) ◽  
pp. 29-32 ◽  
Author(s):  
Richard Stoffle ◽  
Michael Evans

The Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA) became law on November 16, 1990. The law addresses the rights of lineal descendants and members of American Indian tribes and Native Hawaiian groups with respect to human remains and cultural items with which they are affiliated. NAGPRA is concerned with the human remains of Native American ancestors, material goods still associated with these bodies, material goods once associated with these bodies but now separated, objects of importance to ongoing religious practice, and objects of cultural patrimony. NAGPRA sets into motion a process of identification, consultation, and recommendation about these ancestors or ancestral materials.


1972 ◽  
Vol 59 (1) ◽  
pp. 139
Author(s):  
Robert W. Mardock ◽  
Francis Paul Prucha ◽  
William T. Hagan ◽  
Alvin M. Josephy

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document