Introduction
American Indians have fought for over a century to end the practice of removing human remains and cultural items from American Indian graves, lands, and communities. These objects have been treated as collectibles to be stored, studied, and displayed in museums and repositories in the name of scientific study, education and cultural preservation. Such practices flourished because despite the existence of federal laws that protected gravesites and property, the laws did not extent to American Indians. Instead their dead and cultural items were treated as property for the benefit of the American Public and as a result, American Indians have been methodically disenfranchised and denied access and authority over their graves and cultural …show more content…
Additionally, this paper will contextualize and analyze the legal interpretation of NAGPRA in relation to the Kennewick Man case of the 1990s. The discovery and the subsequent interpretation of the remains by Smithsonian archaeologists, led to considerable controversy and debate over the ownership and classification of Kennewick Man as American Indian. In which the Umatilla people and other tribes have claimed Kennewick Man as their own and wanted the remains returned to them for reburial under NAGPRA. Moreover, this paper will suggest policy recommendations, in favor of traditionalist tribal members, and advocating for responsive and responsible interpretation of NAGPRA in relation to the body of the Kennewick Man. In addition, this paper will connect these perspectives to theories of American Indian identity, postcolonialism, relativism and critical museum studies to support a traditionalist tribal member point of …show more content…
The law also requires that federal agencies must work with tribes and Native Hawaiian organization when remains and cultural items are discovered or removed from federal or tribal lands. These practices are initiated by statute 25 U.S.C 3001 and regulations in 43 CFR 10. The statue outlines the framework of NAGPRA while the regulations provide the implementation process including timelines, procedure, and guidelines and as a consequence NAGPRA’s reach is expansive. All federally recognized tribes, including Alaska Native villages and Native Hawaiian organization, are allowed to repatriate under NAGPRA. Every federal agency except the Smithsonian Institution and every institution that meets NAGPRA’s definition of museum and receives federal funds including universities, state or local governments, libraries, state historic preservation offices, community colleges, small historic houses, and local parks are required to participate in the repatriation
American Indians have fought for over a century to end the practice of removing human remains and cultural items from American Indian graves, lands, and communities. These objects have been treated as collectibles to be stored, studied, and displayed in museums and repositories in the name of scientific study, education and cultural preservation. Such practices flourished because despite the existence of federal laws that protected gravesites and property, the laws did not extent to American Indians. Instead their dead and cultural items were treated as property for the benefit of the American Public and as a result, American Indians have been methodically disenfranchised and denied access and authority over their graves and cultural …show more content…
Additionally, this paper will contextualize and analyze the legal interpretation of NAGPRA in relation to the Kennewick Man case of the 1990s. The discovery and the subsequent interpretation of the remains by Smithsonian archaeologists, led to considerable controversy and debate over the ownership and classification of Kennewick Man as American Indian. In which the Umatilla people and other tribes have claimed Kennewick Man as their own and wanted the remains returned to them for reburial under NAGPRA. Moreover, this paper will suggest policy recommendations, in favor of traditionalist tribal members, and advocating for responsive and responsible interpretation of NAGPRA in relation to the body of the Kennewick Man. In addition, this paper will connect these perspectives to theories of American Indian identity, postcolonialism, relativism and critical museum studies to support a traditionalist tribal member point of …show more content…
The law also requires that federal agencies must work with tribes and Native Hawaiian organization when remains and cultural items are discovered or removed from federal or tribal lands. These practices are initiated by statute 25 U.S.C 3001 and regulations in 43 CFR 10. The statue outlines the framework of NAGPRA while the regulations provide the implementation process including timelines, procedure, and guidelines and as a consequence NAGPRA’s reach is expansive. All federally recognized tribes, including Alaska Native villages and Native Hawaiian organization, are allowed to repatriate under NAGPRA. Every federal agency except the Smithsonian Institution and every institution that meets NAGPRA’s definition of museum and receives federal funds including universities, state or local governments, libraries, state historic preservation offices, community colleges, small historic houses, and local parks are required to participate in the repatriation