scholarly journals Artifact Repatriation and Collection Documentation

Author(s):  
Dan E. McGregor

The Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA) became law in November 1990, giving Native Americans control over the disposition of human remains and certain artifacts with which they have "cultural affiliation". For East Texas, most Native American burials are unquestionably affiliated with the Caddo Tribe of Oklahoma. Implementation of NAGPRA will affect the archaeological data base for East Texas. Repatriation of human remains and associated artifacts to the Caddo Tribe will be required of most curation facilities with collections from this region. Under NAGPRA, future excavation and analysis of human remains and associated artifacts will become increasingly difficult for Federally-sponsored projects.

Author(s):  
Charles R. Cobb

This book synthesizes the landscape histories of Native Americans in southeastern North America from the arrival of the Spaniards in the sixteenth century to the first decades of the American Republic. Relying on archaeological data and historical sources, the work outlines the ways in which Native populations accommodated and contested the growing encroachments of colonialism and colonial powers. Traditional landscape practices were greatly transformed by epidemic diseases, chronic warfare, and a widespread slave trade in Indian populations. Research demonstrates that populations adapted to these challenges in two major ways. First, they built on traditional histories of mobility to develop new modes of migration and travel to escape regions of conflict and to gain access to important colonial towns and resources. Second, seeking safety in numbers, Native Americans increasingly formed coalescent communities composed of two or more cultural groups. These coalescent communities evolved into the groups known today as Cherokees, Choctaws, Creeks, Chickasaws, Catawbas, and Seminoles. The study further explores how the evolution of these groups was connected to events and processes of the broader political economy in the Atlantic World, including the rise of plantation slavery, the growth of the deerskin trade, the birth of the consumer revolution, and the emergence of capitalism.


Author(s):  
David H. Jurney ◽  
John Ippolito ◽  
Velicia Bergstrom

The debate over the use of fire by Native Americans has been a lively one for many years. Did they or did they not set fires? If they did, how frequently and for what purpose? If not, did they take advantage of naturally occurring fires for the same purposes? If so, how frequently and to what intensity did those natural fires occur? These seem like relatively simple questions that should elicit focused, directed research that would, in tum, produce straightforward answers. In some parts of North America, this has indeed been the case. Ethnographic documentation, corroborated by archaeological research, has produced unequivocal evidence that the first Americans used fire extensively to manipulate the environment in which they lived. This article examines early historic accounts of Native American use of fire in Texas, and the frequency of natural fires. These data are important not only to our understanding of the extent to which humans altered the landscape, but also how plant communities adapted to fires. Often, we interpret paleoenvironmental data to reflect climatic changes. However, we must also understand the factors that may have contributed to these changes in pollen sequences and soil formation processes.


Author(s):  
Jay C. Blaine

Dee Ann Story recently pointed out how little really is known about the archaeology of Texas Caddoan sites. Specifically, she notes how very few Caddoan sites have been systematically excavated and analyzed in Texas. There has been some substantial effort in this direction recently as witnessed by the renewed investigations at the Sam Kaufman (Roitsch) site by the Texas Archeological Society and the Texas Historical Commission. However, it seems evident to some of us that while investigations of the prehistoric Caddoan archaeological data base has been less than adequate, our understanding of historic Caddoan groups remains even less satisfactory. In fact, archaeologically it is not yet possible to specifically and reliably identify many eighteenth century Indian sites in Eastern Texas as being affiliated with Caddoan peoples. Nor can we identify these Caddo from the many, more or less itinerant, candidates from among other tribes who may have paused and settled within known Caddoan tribal boundaries in historic times.


2006 ◽  
Vol 71 (3) ◽  
pp. 501-521 ◽  
Author(s):  
Susan B. Bruning

Debates over disposition options for an inadvertently discovered set of early Holocene human remains known as Kennewick Man have fueled discussions about the scientific, cultural, and ethical implications of the anthropological study of human remains. A high-profile lawsuit over Kennewick Man has led to the most extensive judicial analysis to date of the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA), the primary law affecting access to, and the ultimate disposition of, ancient human remains found in the United States. However, despite years of litigation, some key questions remain unanswered. The judicial decisions in Kennewick address important questions about determining Native American status and assessing cultural affiliation under the law. However, the court opinions fail to address the role of scientific study within NAGPRA's confines. This article examines NAGPRA and concludes that two provisions in the law expressly permit the scientific study of human remains if certain conditions are met. Significantly, Kennewick Man might have qualified for study under NAGPRA even if found to be Native American and culturally affiliated with the claimant tribes, which would have enabled study to proceed from the outset while the parties debated the issues of Native American status and potential cultural affiliation.


Polar Record ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 53 (2) ◽  
pp. 220-224 ◽  
Author(s):  
Naohiro Nakamura

ABSTRACTThe challenges faced by indigenous peoples in repatriation negotiations vary across the globe. In 2012, three Ainu individuals launched a legal case against Hokkaido University, demanding the return of the human remains of nine individuals and a formal apology for having conducted intentional excavations of Ainu graveyards, stolen the remains and infringed upon their rights to perform ceremonies of worship. This action marked the first of such legal cases in Japan. The Ainu experienced both legal and ethical challenges during negotiations with the university; for example, while the claimants applied the Ainu concept kotan as a legal argument for collective ownership of the remains, Hokkaido University claimed the lack of assumption of rights relating to worship under the Civil Code of Japan. There has been significant progress recently on repatriation, mainly due to the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act in the US, and several meaningful recommendations have been made to ease the repatriation process. However, such recommendations are often case specific and variations in the experiences of indigenous peoples from country to country have not been widely documented. This article discusses the challenges faced by the Ainu in repatriation negotiations in Japan, with a particular focus on the difficulties of applying indigenous customs and philosophies within legal frameworks.


1997 ◽  
Vol 62 (4) ◽  
pp. 600-608 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kurt E. Dongoske ◽  
Michael Yeatts ◽  
Roger Anyon ◽  
T. J. Ferguson

Archaeologists and Native Americans apply different concepts to classify ancient groups of people who lived in the past. This is a topic of current interest because many archaeologists in the United States are now having to determine the cultural affiliation of the materials they study to comply with the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act. The Hopi and Zuni tribes in the American Southwest are used as case examples to examine how and why archaeological and tribal views of cultural affiliation are divergent. We suggest anthropological perspectives of culture need to be reintegrated into archaeological theory in collaboration with Native Americans in order to interpret the past in a manner that is both useful and interesting to the multiple audiences interested in our work.


Anthropology ◽  
2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Russell Thornton ◽  
Jamie Geronimo Vela

Hundreds of thousands—some say 1 million—Native American skeletal remains are held in institutions around the world. Probably half are in the United States. How many tribal objects are held is unknown, but the number is in the many millions. Hundreds of remains and thousands of objects are uncovered every year in the United States, mostly by construction projects. That Native American tribes and individuals have been disenfranchised from ancestral remains and important tribal objects is a terrible facet of American history; it is also of great discomfort to Native Americans. The situation is exacerbated as some remains and objects are from atrocities in American Indian history, e.g., the 1890 Wounded Knee and 1864 Sand Creek Massacres. Many objects are symbolic and sacred, necessary in Native American ceremonies and rituals. On occasion, repatriation requests were granted by museums; but Native Americans were virtually at their mercy. Native Americans lobbied for the eventual passage of two federal laws preventing further disenfranchisement from remains and objects, and requiring their repatriation. In 1990, the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA) was passed. It provided legal protection to Native American and Native Hawaiian graves. It also mandated repatriations to lineal descendants or federally recognized tribes of culturally affiliated human remains, funerary objects (objects associated with burials), objects of cultural patrimony, and sacred objects held in institutions receiving federal funding. A year earlier, the National Museum of the American Indian (NMAI) Act of 1989 had passed. It called for only the return of human remains and funerary objects held at the Smithsonian. (Given this act, the Smithsonian was excluded from NAGPRA; the NMAI Act was amended in 1996 to include objects of cultural patrimony and sacred objects.) State laws at this time were limited in scope or not applicable, and mostly referred to burials. The most well-known are Iowa’s Burial Protection Act of 1976, and Nebraska’s Unmarked Human Burial Site and Skeletal Remains Protection Act of 1989. Subsequent to NAGPRA, repatriation state laws were enacted, e.g., California developed a law along the lines of NAGPRA. Most relevant institutions now have created repatriation policies in line with, and sometimes going beyond, NAGPRA and state laws. While causation is hard to ascertain, these developments—especially NAGPRA—have influenced international repatriation, either within or between countries. Too, international events have influenced the United States, and the United States has repatriated to other countries, and they to the United States.


Author(s):  
Timothy K. Perttula

The introduction of the horse to the Americas by Europeans, particularly the Spanish, after 1492 played a very important role in Native American history and societal change. As Peter Mitchell has commented in his book Horse Nations: “the horse was so very widely introduced to population across the world after 1492. It can thus provide a constant against which to evaluate the many changes that those populations experienced after European contact, while highlighting the ‘radically different meanings and impacts in distinctive cultures’ that its arrival heralded.” Among the Caddo Indian peoples, the horse was introduced in the late 1600s from Mexico as well as the Jumano tribe of the Southern Plains, leading to the development of new means to “trade, move, and raid,” and move equipment, as mounted warfare came to dominate the Southern Plains of North America after about the early 1680s. By 1719, the Caddo were domesticating feral horses, as the horse became well integrated into their farming economies. By this time, the horse was the prime exchangeable commodity for Caddo societies south of the Red River. The Jumano Juan Sabeata had described the Tejas or Hasinai Caddo groups in the early 1680s as “a settled people [who]…raised grain in such abundance that they even fed it to their horses." In addition to the horses, the Caddo also obtained horse gear, such as bridles and saddles. When La Salle came to East Texas in 1686, after his expedition to find the Mississippi River had failed along the Texas Gulf Coast, he purchased several horses from the Hasinai Caddo; when he set out for the Mississippi River in 1687, he did so on horses previously purchased from the Caddo. Father Anastasius Douay, who accompanied La Salle, said that horses were common property among the Caddo and could be purchased for a single iron hatchet. In 1690, when Henri de Tonti was in Kadohadacho villages along the Red River in northeastern Texas, he commented that they had 30 horses, which the Kadohadacho called cavali (after caballo, a horse in Spanish). Furthermore, the Nabedache Caddo in East Texas “possessed them in such numbers that there were four or five about each house." The livestock brought by the Spanish to East Texas became part of the Hasinai herd after the missions were abandoned in 1693. By this time, the Caddo had already begun a profitable trade in salt, pelts, and horses with French Louisiana and Illinois colonies; in 1714, the Frenchman St. Denis established the Natchitoches post at the abandoned 1702 Natchitoches village to commence formal French involvement in trade with Native Americans. For the sale of horses at the French post at Natchitoches, the Hasinai Caddo received firearms, powder and lead balls, hatchets, knives, hoes, glass beads, mirrors, cloth, garments, and alcohol. By about 1716, “the Hasinai and the Cadohadachos marked, respectively, the saturated frontier of horses moving eastward, and of muskets moving westward in trade." As late as 1800, the Barr and Davenport trading house in Spanish Nacogdoches, Texas, acquired 500 horses from the Hasinai Caddo groups and immigrant Indians living in East Texas.


2011 ◽  
Author(s):  
Elizabeth Focella ◽  
Jessica Whitehead ◽  
Jeff Stone ◽  
Stephanie Fryberg ◽  
Rebecca Covarrubias

2019 ◽  
Vol 42 (2) ◽  
pp. 32-39
Author(s):  
LaNada War Jack

The author reflects on her personal experience as a Native American at UC Berkeley in the 1960s as well as on her activism and important leadership roles in the 1969 Third World Liberation Front student strike, which had as its goal the creation of an interdisciplinary Third World College at the university.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document