The Work of Repatriation in Indian Country

By Colwell-Chanthaphonh, Chip | Human Organization, Fall 2012 | Go to article overview

The Work of Repatriation in Indian Country


Colwell-Chanthaphonh, Chip, Human Organization


The Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA) is widely acknowledged to have had a profound effect on museum practice and policy over the last two decades. Museum professionals and practicing anthropologists have published extensively on their experiences and perspectives. However, far less serious and systematic attention has been given to how NAGPRA has been implemented in Indian country. This paper provides the results of an online survey of tribal repatriation workers to help establish a baseline understanding of their personal backgrounds and motivations, their viewpoints of how the legislation has impacted Native communities, their experiences in employing the law, and their collective vision for NAGPRA's uncertain future.

Key words: NAGPRA, repatriation, labor, law, web survey, Native Americans

Introduction

In 1990, the United States Congress passed into law the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA). One of NAGPRA's central elements establishes a process that provides tribes the opportunity to claim from museums certain kinds of objects and ancestral human remains from federal agencies and institutions that have received federal funding (McKeown 2008). This expansive law has transformed the relationship between Native Americans and the hundreds of museums across the United States that hold Native American cultural items and human remains (Fine-Dare 2002; Killion 2008; Mihesuah2000).1

Despite NAGPRA's broad impacts, scholarship has principally focused on positive case studies (Fenton 1989; Merrill, Ladd, and Ferguson 1993), historical explanations and accounts (Bieder 1992; Harper 2000), implementation guidance (Abraham, Sullivan, and Griffin 2002; Wilde and Brown 2003), philosophical and paradigmatic deliberations (Blair 1979; Zimmerman 1992), and legal arguments (Bruning 2006; Hutt 2004). With such an impassioned subject, combative and anecdotal accounts predominate in the literature (Deloria 1992; Meighan 1994). Many highlight singular conflicts, such as the so-called Kennewick Man controversy (Ray 2006; Watkins 2004). Particularly absent in this dialogue - and, thus, absent in the conceptual view of many interlocutors - is an understanding of repatriation workers who are themselves Native American or are employed by tribal governments. Where tribal repatriation workers have participated in the dialogue, they have generally been keenly insightful but limited to arguing specific cases or sharing personal experiences, often their frustrations (e.g., Ayau and Tengan 2002; Hill 2006), rather than providing a systematic attempt to illuminate how NAGPRA is applied in practice across Indian country.2 Yet, there are currently 565 federally recognized tribes and hundreds more Indian groups, Native Alaskan corporations, and Native Hawaiian Organizations, all of which have a potential legal, political, and cultural role in the daily work of implementing the United States' primary repatriation law.

Tribal repatriation workers are a vital part of NAGPRA's political economy. Tribes are the main counterpoint to museums, the central focus of the law's mandate of consultation, the communities that make the claims that remove items from museums, and the law's intended foremost beneficiary (McKeown and Hutt 2003). By ignoring this key segment of the labor force in the repatriation industry, the law's full range of impacts and effects remain unknown. Even more than two decades after the law's passage, there is little critical understanding of how tribal repatriation workers became involved in this work, their perceptions of the law's progress, their experiences of the law's impact on their communities, and their views of the law's uncertain future. This paper presents the summary results of one of the first published surveys of tribal repatriation workers, to provide an entry point to more systematically evaluate how NAGPRA has impacted Native communities and their advocates. …

The rest of this article is only available to active members of Questia

Already a member? Log in now.

Notes for this article

Add a new note
If you are trying to select text to create highlights or citations, remember that you must now click or tap on the first word, and then click or tap on the last word.
One moment ...
Default project is now your active project.
Project items

Items saved from this article

This article has been saved
Highlights (0)
Some of your highlights are legacy items.

Highlights saved before July 30, 2012 will not be displayed on their respective source pages.

You can easily re-create the highlights by opening the book page or article, selecting the text, and clicking “Highlight.”

Citations (0)
Some of your citations are legacy items.

Any citation created before July 30, 2012 will labeled as a “Cited page.” New citations will be saved as cited passages, pages or articles.

We also added the ability to view new citations from your projects or the book or article where you created them.

Notes (0)
Bookmarks (0)

You have no saved items from this article

Project items include:
  • Saved book/article
  • Highlights
  • Quotes/citations
  • Notes
  • Bookmarks
Notes
Cite this article

Cited article

Style
Citations are available only to our active members.
Buy instant access to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

(Einhorn, 1992, p. 25)

(Einhorn 25)

1. Lois J. Einhorn, Abraham Lincoln, the Orator: Penetrating the Lincoln Legend (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1992), 25, http://www.questia.com/read/27419298.

Cited article

The Work of Repatriation in Indian Country
Settings

Settings

Typeface
Text size Smaller Larger Reset View mode
Search within

Search within this article

Look up

Look up a word

  • Dictionary
  • Thesaurus
Please submit a word or phrase above.
Print this page

Print this page

Why can't I print more than one page at a time?

Help
Full screen

matching results for page

    Questia reader help

    How to highlight and cite specific passages

    1. Click or tap the first word you want to select.
    2. Click or tap the last word you want to select, and you’ll see everything in between get selected.
    3. You’ll then get a menu of options like creating a highlight or a citation from that passage of text.

    OK, got it!

    Cited passage

    Style
    Citations are available only to our active members.
    Buy instant access to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

    "Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences." (Einhorn, 1992, p. 25).

    "Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences." (Einhorn 25)

    "Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences."1

    1. Lois J. Einhorn, Abraham Lincoln, the Orator: Penetrating the Lincoln Legend (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1992), 25, http://www.questia.com/read/27419298.

    Cited passage

    Thanks for trying Questia!

    Please continue trying out our research tools, but please note, full functionality is available only to our active members.

    Your work will be lost once you leave this Web page.

    Buy instant access to save your work.

    Already a member? Log in now.

    Oops!

    An unknown error has occurred. Please click the button below to reload the page. If the problem persists, please try again in a little while.