Ka Wai Ola - Office of Hawaiian Affairs, Volume 10, Number 11, 1 November 1993 — NAGPRA: new dialogue opens [ARTICLE+ILLUSTRATION]

NAGPRA: new dialogue opens

by Deborah L. Ward November 16, 1993 will be a historic day in the transformation of museums and federally-funded institutions holding collections of Native American and native Hawaiian cultural objects and human remains. It ushers in a new era for eonsultation between Native Americans and museums and federal agencies on the treatment, care and disposition of their eollections of skeletal human remains, funerary objects (burial goods), sacred objects and objects of cultural patrimony. The Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA), enacted by Congress on Nov. 16, 1990, provides a process for the return of certain cultural items to Native Americans and native Hawaiians. when requested and within the definitions of the law. NAGPRA makes illegal the trafficking of those items, and sets forth procedures for the control of their excavation. NAGPRA serves to protect Native American burial sites and regulate the removal of human

remains, funerary objects, sacred objects and objects of cultural patrimony that are located on federal and Native American lands. It balances the interest of Native Americans, in the rightful and respectful return of these cultural items, with the interests of museums in retaining this iieh cultural heritage, scientific investigation and public education. Step one: summary of eolleetions

The act requires federal agencies or museums with control of Native American associated funerary objects, sacred objects, or objects of cultural patrimony to provide a written summary of such objects and to notify the affected Indian tribes or native Hawaiian organizations by Nov. 16, 1993. The summary must describe the scope of the museum or agency's collection, the kinds of objects included, any reference to where they were collected, how and when they were acquired and any known cultural affiliation. OHA land and natural resources officer Linda Delaney, whose division is monitoring the law,

says, "We are expecting hundreds of summaries. Every museum or university on the East Coast probably has Hawai'i collections. Michigan has a lot, so do West Coast museums. Yale, Harvard and other universities will all be affected." Consultation begins Onee the summary is sent out, museums and agencies are to begin a process of consultation with appropriate tribal representatives, native Hawaiian organizations and traditional religious leaders with cultural affiliation to the items, who wish to request the repatriation, or return, of their cultural objects.

Step 2: detailed inventories and claims process In addition, the act gives museums and federal agencies two more years, until Nov. 16, 1995, to complete a detailed inventory of these same collections. They then have six months to notify lineal descendants, affiliated tribes and native Hawaiian organizations of objects subject to possible repatriation. At that continued on page 4

Dialogue opens on return of cultural items

frotn page 1 point, Native Americans (including Alaska Natives) and native Hawaiian groups may view documents, consult with the museums, and present their case for repatriation of an item. Only groups as defined in the law with standing — lineal descendants of Native American tribes, native Hawaiians, Alaska Natives and native groups of cultural affiliation — may make a elaim for materials. Cultural affiliation means that there is a relationship of shared group identity whieh ean be reasonably traced historically or prehistorically between members of a present-day īndian tribe or native Hawaiian organization and an identifiable earlier group. The museum or agency must then decide if the cultural item meets the requirement of law for repatriation. If there is a dispute over the return of an item, it may be brought before an advisory review committee comprised of representatives of Native American, museum and scientific organizations. Dr. Timothy MeKeown, cultural anthropologist and NAGPRA program leader in the National Park Service, Archeological Assistance Division, spoke last month at a workshop to members of the Hawai'i Museums Association. He says "the real focus of NAGPRA is about dialogue, to provide a forum for

consultation between native groups and museums." Associated and unassociated ftmerary objects MeKeown says the law defines funerary objects as items whieh were part of a culture's death rite or ceremony, and are reasonably believed to have been put with the human remains at the time of burial. This category includes items exclusively made for burial purposes (such as a funerary urn). Sacred objects The act defines sacred objects very narrowly as specific ceremonial objects needed by traditional Native Ameiiean (or native Hawaiian) religious leaders for the practice of traditional Native Ameiiean religions by their pre-sent-day adherents. Cultural patrimony

Cultural patrimony refers to objects with ongoing historical, traditional or cultural importance central to the Native American group or culmre itself, rather than property owned by an individual, and whieh could not be alienated, appropriated or conveyed by any individual tribal member. Native Hawaiian organizations The law defines "native Hawaiian organizations" as any organization whieh a) serves and represents the interest of native Hawaiians, b) has as a primary and stated purpose the provision of services to native Hawaiians, and e) has expertise in native. Hawaiian affairs. NAGPRA

explicitly names Office of Hawaiian Affairs and Hui Mālama I Nā Kūpuna O Hawai'i Nei as native Hawaiian organizations. "Native Hawaiian" is simply defined as any individual who is a descendant of the aboriginal people who, prior to 1778 oeeupied and exercised sovereignty in that area now constituting the state of Hawai'i. MeKeown said NAGPRA does not address whether institutions may unilaterally conduct osteological examinations (study of bones) of remains they are about to repatriate, but he noted that the law should not be considered a justification for further scientific study. The request to conduct studies of the bones is a legitimate subject for museums and native groups to discuss, MeKeown said. "They are not archeological resources any more," he said. "They are human beings. They need to be treated as human beings." The law directs that remains be expeditiously returned when affiliation ean be shown, unless such items are indispensible for completion of a specific scientific study, whieh would be of major benefit to the United States. In such a case, they must be returned within 90 days of the study's completion.

OHA land officer Linda Delaney says "NAGPRA is trying to heal deep wounds. It means a fundamental shift in what museums are, who they are, how they will now relate to native people." While praising the law's intent, she said OHA has concerns over proposed regulations being drafted to clarify the law.

Historic Preservation Council member Gladys A. Brandt, testifying at a Sept. 15 Native American Consultation oversight hearing, called for museums and federally-funded institutions to involve native peoples in the early stages of preparing their inventories, so that they don't just meet the requirements of the law, but also the needs of native people. Brandt also asked that disputes over identity or use (of cultural items) should give equal weight to native spiritual beliefs. OHA administrator Richard Paglinawan, in written testimony submitted in July to the National Park Service on NAGPRA rules, questioned the law's very narrow definition of sacred objects. "OHA believes current use should not be the criteria used to decide questions of ownership or possession. ... Unless an object was freely given and the gift ean be verified, ownership does not rest with an institution. It rests

with the people culturally and spiritually affiliated with the object. Certain sacred objects, by their nature are subject to desecration if taken from the eommunity of their origin." Adds Delaney, "To the traditional Hawaiian mind, it is artifieial to separate sacred and patrimonial. Patrimonial objects are part of a larger context. This repatriation is a fundamental part of rebuilding a native Hawaiian nation. Native Hawaiians onee exercised a sovereign nation status, the highest sovereignty of any native govemment in the U.S. "Native Hawaiians feel a very profound sense of responsibility for our cultural heritage. But it is only for us to ask about the proper care of retumed remains and cultural patrimony. There will need to be a process of consultation within the Hawaiian eommunity itself. There must be deep discussion on the issues of care. To rebuild a nation this process will be vital." While mainland museums must confront the fact that their collections of native goods were symbols of conquest, she believes that Hawai'i museums, in particular Bishop Museum, have a different history and are conscious of their role as stewards in trust of the cultural patrimony of native Hawaiians.