10.4 Repatriation of cultural artifacts and human remains (NAGPRA)

NAGPRA, a landmark law, protects Native American cultural items and human remains. It requires federal agencies and museums to inventory and return these items to tribes, addressing historical injustices and unethical collecting practices.

NAGPRA's implementation faced challenges like incomplete documentation and tribal disputes. However, it's had a profound impact, strengthening cultural revitalization efforts, addressing historical trauma, and improving relationships between tribes and federal agencies.

Understanding NAGPRA and Its Impact

Purpose and provisions of NAGPRA

Top images from around the web for Purpose and provisions of NAGPRA

• 

  Category:Ohlone Costanoan Esselen Nation - Wikimedia Commons View original

  Is this image relevant?

• 

  Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act - Wikipedia View original

  Is this image relevant?

• 

  Digital Repatriations: Historic Recordings Returned to Passamaquoddy Tribe — Blog of the Long Now View original

  Is this image relevant?

• 

  Category:Ohlone Costanoan Esselen Nation - Wikimedia Commons View original

  Is this image relevant?

• 

  Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act - Wikipedia View original

  Is this image relevant?

1 of 3

Top images from around the web for Purpose and provisions of NAGPRA

• 

  Category:Ohlone Costanoan Esselen Nation - Wikimedia Commons View original

  Is this image relevant?

• 

  Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act - Wikipedia View original

  Is this image relevant?

• 

  Digital Repatriations: Historic Recordings Returned to Passamaquoddy Tribe — Blog of the Long Now View original

  Is this image relevant?

• 

  Category:Ohlone Costanoan Esselen Nation - Wikimedia Commons View original

  Is this image relevant?

• 

  Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act - Wikipedia View original

  Is this image relevant?

1 of 3

• NAGPRA protects Native American cultural items and human remains facilitating their return to tribes and descendants
• Federal agencies and museums must inventory cultural items and human remains initiating repatriation process
• Consultation with Native American tribes required ensuring proper handling and return of items
• Non-compliance penalties imposed safeguarding indigenous rights
• Covered items include human remains, funerary objects, sacred objects, and objects of cultural patrimony (wampum belts, ceremonial pipes)
• Review committee established overseeing implementation and resolving disputes
• Implementation timeline set gradual process for inventory and repatriation (5 years for inventory completion)

Historical context of artifact repatriation

• 19th and 20th century collecting practices often unethical exploited Native American communities (grave robbing, coerced sales)
• Scientific racism and anthropological studies objectified Native peoples fueled by misguided theories of racial superiority
• Native American displacement and cultural suppression led to loss of ancestral lands and cultural practices (boarding schools, forced relocation)
• Cultural ownership vs. scientific value debate emerged challenging traditional museum practices
• Indigenous perspectives on death and ancestral remains often conflicted with Western scientific approaches (spiritual beliefs, cyclical view of life)
• Preservation of cultural heritage became priority for Native communities reclaiming their history and traditions
• Human rights and dignity considerations gained prominence in discussions of repatriation (UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples)
• Museum practices shifted towards collaborative curation and ethical collecting policies (co-curation, community consultations)
• International precedents influenced NAGPRA (Australian Aboriginal remains repatriation, New Zealand's Te Papa Tongarewa museum)

Implementation and Impact of NAGPRA

Challenges in NAGPRA implementation

• Incomplete or inaccurate documentation hampered identification and tribal affiliation (poor record-keeping, lost provenance)
• Disputes over tribal affiliation arose complicating repatriation process (overlapping historical territories, mixed ancestry)
• Limited resources for smaller institutions hindered compliance (lack of staff, funding constraints)
• Conflicting claims between tribes created additional hurdles (shared cultural items, historical migrations)
• Legal cases and precedents shaped interpretation of NAGPRA (Kennewick Man case, California missions repatriation)
• Amendments and updates to the law addressed emerging issues (2010 rule on culturally unidentifiable remains)

Impact of repatriation on communities

• Cultural revitalization efforts strengthened through restoration of traditional practices and ceremonies (renewal of burial rites, revitalization of languages)
• Intergenerational knowledge transfer facilitated bridging gaps in cultural continuity
• Historical trauma addressed providing closure for families and communities (healing ceremonies, community gatherings)
• Past injustices acknowledged fostering reconciliation and understanding
• Tribal sovereignty strengthened through increased control over cultural resources
• Nation-to-nation relationships with federal agencies improved (government-to-government consultations)
• Educational initiatives expanded through tribal museums and cultural centers (Agua Caliente Cultural Museum, Tohono O'odham Nation Cultural Center)
• Community-based research projects empowered Native communities in documenting their own histories
• Challenges in reintegrating repatriated items addressed (storage facilities, cultural protocols)
• Long-term preservation efforts by tribes developed ensuring continued care of cultural heritage (tribal archives, conservation workshops)