Site hosted by Angelfire.com: Build your free website today!

NAGPRA Issues in Hawaii, 2023.

Coverage of NAGPRA-related topics in Hawaii first came to this website in 2003 when the national NAGPRA review committee decided to devote its national meeting to the Kawaihae (Forbes Cave) controversy. Forbes cave was the most intensively covered topic from 2003 to 2007. But other topics also came to public attention, including Bishop Museum, the Emerson collection repatriated and reburied at Kanupa Cave, the discovery of ancient bones during a major construction project at Ward Center (O'ahu), construction of a house built above burials at the shorefront at Naue, Ha'ena, Kaua'i; etc.

Eventually a "mother page" for NAGPRA issues in Hawaii was created, explaining the dispute between the ethnic Hawaiian activist group Hui Malama i na Kupuna o Hawai'i Nei" headed by Eddie Ayau, which favors repatriation/reburial, vs. some recognized ethnic Hawaiian cultural leaders. For example, Rubellite Kawena Johnson was a claimant opposing Hui Malama for control of the Mokapu bones; Herb Kawainui Kane was a claimant competing against Hui Malama for control of the Forbes Cave artifacts; and both Ms. Johnson and Mr. Kane publicly opposed Hui Malama's assertion that the Providence Museum Spear Rest was a manifestation of the living spirit of a warrior. The mother page provides an overview of these issues and a list of links to all the annual NAGPRA-Hawaii compilations. See
https://www.angelfire.com/hi2/hawaiiansovereignty/nagprahawaii.html

The Forbes cave controversy up until the NAGPRA Review Committee hearing in St. Paul, Minnesota, May 9-11, 2003 was originally described and documented at:
https://www.angelfire.com/hi2/hawaiiansovereignty/nagpraforbes.html

The conflict among Bishop Museum, Hui Malama, and several competing groups of claimants became so complex and contentious that the controversy was the primary focus of the semiannual national meeting of the NAGPRA Review Committee meeting in St. Paul, Minnesota May 9-11, 2003. A webpage was created to cover that meeting and followup events related to it. But the Forbes Cave controversy became increasingly complex and contentious, leading to public awareness of other related issues. By the end of 2004, the webpage focusing on the NAGPRA Review Committee meeting and its aftermath had become exceedingly large, at more than 250 pages with an index of 22 topics at the top. See:
https://www.angelfire.com/hi2/hawaiiansovereignty/nagpraforbesafterreview.html

That large webpage became so difficult to use that it was stopped on December 29, 2004; and a new webpage was created to collect news reports for NAGPRA issues in Hawai'i during year 2005. An index for 2005 appears at the beginning, and readers may then scroll down to find the detailed coverage of each topic. For coverage of NAGPRA issues in Hawai'i in 2005 (about 250 pages), see:
https://www.angelfire.com/hi2/hawaiiansovereignty/nagprahawaii2005.html

For year 2006 another new webpage was created, following the same general format. See:
https://www.angelfire.com/hi2/hawaiiansovereignty/nagprahawaii2006.html

NOW BEGINS YEAR 2023

================

LIST OF TOPICS FOR 2023: Full coverage of each topic follows the list; the list is in roughly chronological order of the first occurrence of a topic, created as events unfold during 2023.

(1) Cornell University has returned ancestral remains to the Oneida Indian Nation that were inadvertently dug up in 1964 and stored for decades in a school archive. Twenty-two “funerary” objects that were interred with the remains also were returned. The objects include pieces of pottery, a piece of leather, a large mammal skull fragment and an acorn.

(2) Eddie Ayau, founder of Hui Malama i na Kupuna o Hawai'i Nei, represented by Native Hawaiian Legal Corporation, has filed a lawsuit against the state of Hawaii, the city of Honolulu and a real estate developer to stop construction work and halt pending permits for The Park at Ke’eaumoku, a multi-use residential/commercial condominium project, began in summer of 2022 following the demolition of the block of well-loved stores and restaurants.

(3) Kaua'i island newspaper weekly history column on April 22, 2023 describes an event from April 1993 when hunters stumbled across a family burial cave in Waimea Valley used for many generations. The hunters reported to government authorities they had found human remains, medical examiner ruled them to be ancient, family members were unsuccessful in getting control of them and police reburied them in the cave. [note: NAGPRA had been enacted in 1990]

(4) New autobiographical documentary movie "KAPU: Sacred Hawaiian Burials" about an ethnic Hawaiian who was shown his family's burial cave in Puna (Hawaii Island) at age 8 and then, as an adult, discovered that a developer planned to bulldoze the cave.

(5) U.S. Navy Pacific Missile Range Facility on Kaua'i hosts a ceremony with lineal descendants to reinter Native Hawaiian remains found in its grounds during the past year resulting from storms and shifting sands.

(6) "Skeptic Magazine" article severely criticizes and provides a scholarly rebuttal against a "hit piece" published by NBC News, Pro-Publica, SFGATE and AOL against Tim White, an emeritus professor at University of California Berkeley, because he maintains a large collection of human bones separated into categories (such as femurs) according to the type of bone with no effort to keep together the bones from particular individuals. The main topic discussed in detail is the technical distinction between bone collections kept for research purposes vs. bone collections kept for teaching purposes.

(7) (a) December 6, 2023: U.S. Dept of Interior news release announces Final Rule for Implementation of the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act to streamline requirements for museums and federal agencies to inventory and identify Native American human remains and cultural items in their collections.;
https://ictnews.org/opinion (b) December 12: Hawaii Public Radio reports: Change of federal law intends to help Native Hawaiians reclaim ancestral bones.

(8a) December 26, 2023: Wounded Knee descendants group plans ceremony for artifacts
A group of Wounded Knee descendants is planning to burn recently repatriated artifacts on December 29
[The controversy in South Dakota over preserving historical artifacts from the Wounded Knee massacre in museums for education of future generations vs. repatriating artifacts to tribes who might rebury them or "send them to the ancestors" is reminiscent of the controversy in Hawaii 20 years ago over what to do with the Forbes Cave artifacts and ka'ai containing the 500-year old remains of Liloa, stored for a century in Bishop Museum.]
(8b) January 9, 2024; A new decision has cancelled the planned burning of the artifacts.

(9) Pro-Publica year-end summary of NAGPRA repatrations nationwide. American museums and universities repatriated more ancestral remains and sacred objects to tribal nations this year than at any point in the past three decades, transferring ownership of an estimated 18,800 Native American ancestors, institutions reported. And more repatriations are forthcoming. Museums, universities and government agencies have filed 380 repatriation notices this year — more than the previous two years combined — under the federal Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act, declaring that they plan to make human remains and burial items available to tribes.

================

FULL TEXT OF ARTICLES FOR 2023

https://ictnews.org/news/university-returns-native-remains-dug-up-in-1964
Indian Country Today News Friday February 24, 2023

University returns Native remains dug up in 1964
The remains, possibly more than 300 years old, were unearthed on an upstate New York farm

Michael Hill, THE ASSOCIATED PRESS

Cornell University has returned ancestral remains to the Oneida Indian Nation that were inadvertently dug up in 1964 and stored for decades in a school archive. “We’re returning ancestral remains and possessions that we now recognize never should have been taken, never should have come to Cornell and never should have been kept here," Cornell President Martha E. Pollack said at a small repatriation ceremony Tuesday, according to the university. Pollack apologized on behalf of the Ivy League school in Ithaca, New York, noting the “disrespect shown to these ancestors.”

The remains, possibly more than 300 years old, were unearthed by people digging a ditch for a water line on an upstate New York farm east of Binghamton in August 1964.

Police called a Cornell anthropology professor, who determined the remains belonged to a young adult male of Native ancestry. Repatriation records recently filed with the federal government indicate the remains represent “at minimum” three people.

The remains were stored on campus until after the professor’s death in 2014, when they were transferred to the anthropology department. They were rediscovered by colleagues during an archival inventory.

“These individuals, an adult man, a child of four years or younger and another child or adolescent of undetermined age, will be once again laid to rest in the traditions of our people,” Oneida Indian Nation Representative Ray Halbritter said at the ceremony.

Twenty-two “funerary” objects that were interred with the remains also were returned. The objects include pieces of pottery, a piece of leather, a large mammal skull fragment and an acorn.

The Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act requires federally funded institutions, such as universities, to return remains and cultural items.

Cornell is among colleges, museums and other institutions returning Native American artifacts and ancestral remains. Colgate University in November returned to the Oneidas more than 1,500 items once buried with ancestral remains, some dating back 400 years.

The dig site in Windsor, New York. was once a large settlement located on the banks of the Susquehanna River, in the traditional territory of the Oneidas.

================

https://www.courthousenews.com/discovery-of-native-hawaiian-burial-sites-during-condo-construction-prompts-lawsuit/
Courthouse News Wednesday March 1, 2023

Discovery of Native Hawaiian burial sites during condo construction prompts lawsuit
Work has continued on new high-rises in Honolulu despite the discovery of multiple burial sites.

CANDACE CHEUNG

HONOLULU (CN) — A Native Hawaiian man has sued the state of Hawaii, the city of Honolulu and a real estate developer to stop construction work and halt pending permits until proper assessments and consultations can be done after Native Hawaiian burial sites were uncovered during a redevelopment project in one of Honolulu’s major shopping and residential districts.

Backed by the Native Hawaiian Legal Corporation, plaintiff Edward Ayau says in a lawsuit filed Monday that Ke’eaumoku Develoment and the state have, in violation of statutory and administrative guidelines, refused to adhere to established process for the discovery of Native Hawaiian remains over 50 years old and in doing so, caused unnecessary disruption of the remains, preventing Hawaiians from engaging in mālama iwi, the traditional cultural practice of caring for ancestors.

“Where human skeletal remains are reasonably believed to be Native Hawaiian, [State Historic Preservation Division] shall determine whether to preserve in place or relocate the burials, following consideration and application of the criteria stated in HAR § 13-300-36 and in consultation with appropriate council members, the landowner, and any known lineal or cultural descendants,” Ayau says in his complaint.

Since construction began, 15 separate burial sites have been uncovered, as well as a former ʻauwai (a ditch or canal) and a buried road.

Ayau, a Native Hawaiian and possible descendant of those buried at the Ke’eaumoku site, takes issue with how Native Hawaiians have been left out of the process as all but approximately five sets of remains have been disinterred and relocated.

An archaeological inventory survey approved in 2021 indicated a high probability that there could be historically significant discoveries based on similar burials of iwi kūpuna — literally bones of ancestors — previously uncovered nearby, including over 60 sets of remains relocated for the construction of a Walmart across the street from the condo site.

Despite pushback from the community and local businesses, including the well-known Pagoda Hotel, that originally occupied the area, several acres of land near the state’s largest mall were sold off early last year. Construction of what will be The Park at Ke’eaumoku, a multi-use residential/commercial condominium project, began in summer of 2022 following the demolition of the block of well-loved stores and restaurants.

Ayau claims no archaeological survey or assessments were conducted after demolition and despite the subsequent findings of burials and related sites and features. The state and city have granted several permits for work at the Ke’eaumoku site and construction has continued despite the discoveries.

According to the complaint, the State Historic Preservation Division decided to authorize relocation for all the found remains without input from possible descendants, the Oʻahu Island Burial Council or the Native Hawaiian community at large.

The developer and the state have considered the newfound burial sites as “inadvertent discoveries” to avoid triggering further archaeological or preservation assessments. But Ayau says that “based on the AIS’s disclosure that encountering burials during construction was likely, these additional burials are not 'unanticipated' burials.” He also contends that beyond the survey’s discoveries, the burial sites were known to Native Hawaiians through either oral orr written testimony.

Ayau wants a court order barring any further disturbance to the remains, the Ke'eaumoku Development ordered to halt all construction operations, and for the state and city to rescind permits granted to the site.

-----

** Ken Conklin's note:
Eddie Ayau's legal complaint (by Native Hawaii Legal Corporation) can be seen at
https://www.courthousenews.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/02/ayau-v-soh-keeaumoku-complaint-oahu-cc.pdf

Edward Halealoha Ayau worked closely with Hawaii Senator Inouye to develop and implement the NAGPRA law passed by Congress in 1990. [Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act] He was founder and head of the Hui Malama i na Kupuna O Hawai'i Nei whose purpose was to get museums and other institutions to surrender native Hawaiian bones and artifacts to be ceremonially reburied. The "Forbes Cave" controversy was the focus of a major hearing before the NAGPRA Review Committee in May 2003, where several competing individuals and groups of claimants demanded that Bishop Museum in Honolulu must surrender bones and artifacts that had been taken from the Kawaihae cave on Hawaii Island. For a major webpage about the NAGPRA law, including numerous subpages covering many related controversies and tracking news reports and commentaries year-by-year from 2003 to now, see
https://www.angelfire.com/hi2/hawaiiansovereignty/nagprahawaii.html

For Conklin's detailed analysis of major issues related to Hawaiian bones and burials, including citations to sources, see "Hawaiian Bones -- The 3 Rs -- Rites For the Dead, Rights Of the Living, and Respect for All" at
https://www.angelfire.com/planet/big60/HawaiianBonesDetailed.html

------------------

https://www.thegardenisland.com/2023/04/22/lifestyles/island-history-a-burial-cave-was-desecrated-in-waimea-valley-kauai/
The Garden Island Saturday April 22, 2023, Island History

A burial cave was desecrated in Waimea Valley, Kaua‘i

By Hank Soboleski

In April 1993, hunters stumbled upon a burial cave deep inside Waimea Valley several miles above Waimea town. Within the cave, they uncovered five human skulls, bones and cloth material.

Police were then notified and removed the remains in a plastic bag.

Deputy Police Chief Kenneth Robinson said police needed to remove them to determine if they were the remains of hikers who’d vanished in the Koke‘e area. He also said police handled them carefully with no intention of desecrating anything.

But, when Aletha Kaohi of Waimea — a historian and preservationist of Hawaiian culture and artifacts whose ancestry extends back six generations to Kaumuali‘i (the last king of Kaua‘i) — learned the details of what had occurred, she protested, insisting the cave had been desecrated.

She said, “The police should have been able to recognize a burial cave and that when it is ancient, it is no longer their responsibility. Hawaiians believe bones have life, and when you put them in a plastic bag, you snuff out the spirit in them.”

She was also personally offended, since the bones were, in fact, those of her ancestors. She explained that when she was a child, she and her father, William Kapahukaniolonookainoahou Goodwin, often rode horseback into the valley and visited that very same cave — the burial cave of her ancestors.

Kalani Flores, a member of the Kaua‘i Historic Preservation Review Commission, said the police should have first consulted an authority on Hawaiian artifacts, and by improperly disclosing the cave’s location, they’d caused Hawaiian families to worry that people would begin searching for caves to collect or sell the artifacts they’d find.

Edward Ayau, spokesman for the state Historic Preservation Division, also stated that by law, police should have brought an archaeologist to the cave before removing the remains.

Upon examination, the county medical examiner deemed the remains to be ancient and those of a family — an infant, a teenager and two adults – but the fifth skull was unknown.

Aletha Kaohi was unsuccessful in reclaiming the remains before police reburied them at the cave.

--------------------

https://www.khon2.com/local-news/protecting-sacred-hawaiian-burials-is-a-david-v-goliath-tale/
KHON2 Honolulu TV station Saturday April 22, 2023

Protecting sacred Hawaiian burials is a David v. Goliath tale

by: Sandy Harjo-Livingston

HONOLULU (KHON2) — It’s your chance to see one of the most important documentaries on Native Hawaiian culture this year.

For hundreds of years, Native Hawaiians had a rich spiritual belief system that heavily relied on the lives, experiences and knowledge of their ancestors, also known as kūpuna.

In particular, on Hawaiʻi Island, Native Hawaiians utilized caves to lay the sacred remains of their kūpuna. These caves provided protection as well as a means of visitation and meditation. As Hawaiʻi became colonized by Europe, the United States and other interests, many of the sacred burial caves were gutted, either by looters or for development purposes. Although the sacred cave burials became a part of Hawaiʻi’s past, one man felt the calling to preserve his kūpuna’s final resting places.

Keoni Alvarez was born and raised on Hawai’i Island. He returned to his home in 2019 to take on the mission of saving the memories of Hawaiʻi’s ancestors. Fortunately for the world, Alvarez decided to make a documentary on his work and the resultant outcomes. “Over twenty years ago, I found my calling when I stumbled upon a secret cave in the forest near my ancestral home of Puna on Hawaiʻi Island,” reminisced Alvarez. What he found in these caves changed his life forever. “Inside this cave were iwi, the sacred bones of Kānaka maoli from generations past. At only eight years old, I could not begin to imagine how this discovery would change my life,” he said.

Alvarez explained that in 2002 his district was targeted by developers who wanted to obtain a bit of affordable property on the Big Island. “Faced with a powerful, wealthy outsider who threatened to plow through the cave near my home, I found myself in my very own David vs. Goliath scenario,” explained Alvarez.

Kapu: Sacred Hawaiian Burials is a new documentary that sheds light on the Native Hawaiian struggle to preserve their heritage, traditions and kūpuna. (Photo/Keoni Alvarez)

KAPU: Sacred Hawaiian Burials promises to take viewers along Mr. Alvarez’s journey in realizing his identity, heritage and ultimately his legacy within the tradition of protecting his land for his people. “Until I know what will happen to the property, I will remain the keeper of this cave to prevent this burial ground from going under,” said Alvarez.

Kapu has made a big splash in the film world. The passion and deep devotion to his work that one experiences is palpable. The brilliance of this full-length documentary is that you feel like you are standing beside Alvarez as he takes his quest. The documentary has won numerous awards at film festivals such as the Hawai’i International Film Festival.

On Tuesday, April 25, you can experience the documentary at the State Capital Auditorium for yourself.

A Hawaiian independent producer, director and writer from the island of Hawai’i, Alvarez was able to travel the world for several years on Norwegian Cruise Line where he worked in the Broadcast department. This experience introduced him to many different cultures, peoples and places. In 1990, he began his career as a graduate of Na Leo O Hawaiʻi Public Access Station and the WGBH Producers Academy in Boston. Through his early adulthood, he always enjoyed filming his Hawaiian culture through stories, language and dance. He said his goal is to inspire his students to express themselves and to take pride in their culture.

Palikapu Dedman organized a protest against the largest mass burial desecration in Hawai’i’s history. This burial ground is the most important historical site at Kapalua on Maui. The site was unearthed when digging began for the Ritz Carlton Hotel in Kapalua. When the importance of the discovery was realized, the hotel was moved inland. The area, which contains over 900 ancient Hawaiian burial sites dating between 610 and 1800, has been recognized as a sacred site. This burial ground and Palikapu’s stand to protect it started a movement of thousands of Native Hawaiians protesting to protect burials. “He is recognized and respected in the Hawaiian community for his knowledge and activism to protect Hawaiʻi’s culture, land and natural resources,” said Alvarez.

Kalaʻi Kamuela is another Native Hawaiian who has been working with Alvarez. “I descend from thousands of generations of kūpuna. The only reason I exist today is because of my kūpuna. I have kuleana, duty, obligation and responsibility to mālama and protect iwi kūpuna burials. I am Kālai. I am moʻopuna,” said Kamuela.

Alvarez, who wrote, produced and directed Kapu will be in attendance at the State Capital showing of the film. He hopes that more legislators and island leaders — like Mayor Mitch Roth (pictured below) — will take the time to see and understand the quest to protect these sacred sites. You can see the film on Tuesday, April 25. The event begins at 5 p.m. and concludes at 8 p.m. It is free and open to the public.

----

** Ken Conklin's note: This TV news report is a bit disjointed because of the insertion of information about Palikapu Dedman and the desecration of a burial ground in the sand dunes on the property of the Ritz Carlton Hotel in Kapalua on Maui, in an area known as Honokahua. A corporation was excavating near the shoreline to build a large hotel. The hotel was redesigned to be set back farther from the shoreline. There is now a burial ground on the ocean side of the Ritz Carlton Hotel, set off from the rest of the hotel property by bushes and informational signs asking tourists to show respect. The Honokahua controversy appears to have been brought to a final conclusion reasonably satisfactory to both the developers and the ethnic Hawaiian activists. For further information about Mokapu and Honokahua, see
https://www.angelfire.com/hi2/hawaiiansovereignty/nagpramokapuhonokahua.html

---------------------------

https://www.thegardenisland.com/2023/07/17/hawaii-news/pmrf-hosts-ceremony-to-reinter-native-hawaiian-remains/
The Garden Island [Kaua'i] Monday, July 17, 2023

PMRF hosts ceremony to reinter Native Hawaiian remains

By Dennis Fujimoto

Courtesy of U.S. Navy Pacific Missile Range Facility Public Affairs [* Photo caption] Capt. Brett Stevenson, commanding officer of the U.S. Navy Pacific Missile Range Facility at Barking Sands, offers a ho‘okupu (gift) of naupaka from Kuaki‘i during Ka Mauiki‘iki‘i O Ke Kauwela at the crypt on the base near Kekaha.

BARKING SANDS — The lineal descendants of iwi kupuna discovered on the grounds of the U.S. Navy Pacific Missile Range Facility (PMRF) were joined by leadership of the facility during the two-day Ka Mauiki‘iki‘i O Ke Kauwela, or celebration of the summer solstice.

The protocol and ceremony wrapped up on June 21 at the crypt at PMRF.

“It is our sacred duty to honor the iwi kupuna, and the connection with the Native Hawaiians who rest on these grounds,” said PMRF Commanding Officer Capt. Brett Stevenson. “PMRF is entrusted with watching over this sanctuary, and ensuring the care of the iwi kupuna. PMRF is honored to be included in the broader ‘ohana of the descendants.”

During Ka Mauiki‘iki‘i O Ke Kauwela, participants honored their ancestors and laid to rest iwi kupuna discovered at PMRF over the past year.

Because PMRF is situated on ancient burial grounds, the climate change, storm and tidal surge conditions have resulted in a shifting landscape that reveal the iwi kupuna.

When remains are discovered, cultural experts at PMRF work in consultation with the lineal descendants in accordance with Native Hawaiian traditions and customs on the most appropriate path forward, whether in reburying the remains or conducting an archaeological process to inter the remains at the crypt.

On the evening of June 20, the descendants gathered for a sunset ceremony where the iwi kupuna were repatriated following the appropriate cultural protocols and entombed into their moe loa, or eternal resting place. The crypt was then resealed for the final time. Tara del Fierro, the cultural resources manager and archaeologist at PMRF, said a new crypt will be added to the site.

During the solemn ceremony, the descendants, PMRF leadership team and guests placed lei and gently tossed flowers on the crypt. Stevenson added to that lei ho‘okupu with the presentation of a native naupaka plant from Kuaki‘i, or Divers Landing, at PMRF, where major storm surge had revealed iwi kupuna. Stevenson’s ho‘okupu is for the future design of the crypt, and to create a lasting connection to the site.

“Our responsibility in creating this sanctuary will always endure,” Stevenson said. “It is one of my most important responsibilities.”

** Ken Conklin's online comment: It's good to know that the lineal descendants are happy to have the U.S. Navy as kahu (custodians and guardians) of the iwi kupuna (bones of their ancestors).

---------------

https://www.skeptic.com/reading_room/bone-wars-how-activists-are-targeting-teaching/
Skeptic Magazine Wednesday November 22, 2023

BONE WARS:
HOW ACTIVISTS ARE TARGETING TEACHING

by Elizabeth Weiss & James W. Springer

On March 5, 2023, NBC News, in conjunction with ProPublica,1 a nonprofit newsroom that investigates “abuses of power,” published what can only be described as a hit piece against the legendary paleoanthropologist Tim White, now a professor emeritus at the University of California, Berkeley. Other news outlets, such as the SFGATE and AOL, picked up the story.2, 3 The article revolved around Tim White’s use of a skeletal teaching collection that may contain Native American bones and teeth.

UC Berkeley has recently faced criticism for having Native American bone collections and, thus, they have changed their policies to ramp up repatriation efforts, abandoning their long-held view that teaching and research should be prioritized. Repatriation involves turning over bone and other artifacts to a Native American tribe that claims an ancestral connection to them.

Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA) and similar state laws were intended to unite human remains, sacred objects, associated funerary objects, and items of cultural patrimony with their lineal descendants and culturally affiliated tribes. Teaching collections, which are of unknown origin and have been used to train the next generation of osteologists— from forensic anthropologists to orthopedic doctors—were not intended to be included in these laws. Yet, repatriation activists are attempting to claim these collections, and they are also attacking those who have used the collections. University administrators, including anthropologists working to repatriate remains, are helping this latest phase in the repatriation compromise. Repatriation activists have already successfully campaigned to remove the name of the first anthropology professor at UC Berkley, Alfred Kroeber, from the anthropology building.4 Tribes have also successfully claimed artifacts that have no affiliation to Native Americans, such as a 16th century Spanish breastplate.5

Screenshot: UC Berkeley removes name from Kroeber Hall (YouTube) Alfred Kroeber was the first professor of anthropology at UC Berkley. In 2021, the university removed his name from the anthropology building. (Credit: Screenshot of UC Berkeley video by Roxanne Makasdjian and Clare Major)

Let us now return to Tim White. As one of the world’s most influential paleoanthropologists, he shaped the field on multiple levels. He discovered two species of over 4-million-yearold early human ancestors from Ethiopia: Ardipithecus kadabba and Ardipithecus ramidus. These two species are close to the base of the human evolutionary family tree. They are the best contenders for the first early humans, over a million years older than Lucy’s species, Australopithecus afarensis. White is also the author of the best-selling textbook, Human Osteology,6 a beautifully illustrated work that helps guide students in learning bone anatomy and contains fascinating case studies of forensics, human evolution, and archaeology. White revived research on cannibalism, and in 1992 put forth a rigorous method to ensure that sites where cannibalism was indeed practiced, are correctly assessed.7

Alfred Louis Kroeber
Alfred Louis Kroeber, regarded as the founder of the study of anthropology in the American West, shown here circa 1907. In 1901, he began his more than 40-year career at UC Berkeley’s Department of Anthropology, and was Director of the university’s anthropology museum from 1909 to 1947. (PIC 1978.128 courtesy of UC Berkeley, Bancroft Library)

Because he understands how valuable bones are in telling us about the past, White has also been conscientious in following repatriation laws, such as NAGPRA.8 He played a key role in the repatriation debate, rightly arguing that repatriation of remains needs to be made on a preponderance of evidence, scientific and otherwise, that shows an affiliation between the human remains and the modern-day tribal claimants. In one case, White, along with Robert Bettinger of UC Davis and Margaret Schoeninger of UC San Diego, sued the University of California for access to study 9,000-year-old Paleo-Indian remains found on the campus which could help us understand the First Americans. The researchers lost the lawsuit on the grounds that the tribes claiming the remains (who were not parties to the suit) would have to be made parties to the suit to adjudicate adequately the claims of the plaintiff-anthropologists, and that therefore the plaintiffs’ suit would be dismissed.9 The remains were transferred to the La Posta Band of Digueño Mission Indians based on a geographic link coupled with oral creation myths. At UC Berkeley, White was, for many years, part of the university’s repatriation committee in which he served in an advisory role (professors don’t make repatriation decisions; chancellors do) and strictly adhered to the law, which calls for a balancing of scientific proof along with other evidence.

Tim White started teaching at UC Berkeley in 1977; for decades, he has taught osteology to thousands of students. Human osteology is learned by anthropology students who plan to go into human evolution research, archaeology, and forensics, but it is also a class for future orthopedic doctors. These students were taught to identify human remains, understand bone biology, and determine basics such as the sex of the remains. There is no way to teach someone osteology correctly without using a skeletal collection as reference.

Teaching collections are distinct from research collections, which have information of provenience (origin), and documents regarding excavation history, and can be assessed for details including antiquity, number of individuals, culture, and much more. Research collections ought not to be used for teaching (so that research collections stay intact), and one of the first changes that I (EW) made when I got to San José State University was to properly separate teaching and research collections, including ensuring that others followed the new stricter guidelines.

Teaching collections are in place to teach, but they also help the maintenance of research collections by allowing osteology to be taught with remains that are of unknown provenience. As I (EW) explain to my students, the “UK” marks on the bones in our teaching collection do not stand for “United Kingdom” but for “unknown.” In other words, they cannot be affiliated with any tribe.

In the ProPublica/NBC article, Tim White was accused of poor storage of human remains because there were drawers of bones that were sorted by bone, e.g., a drawer of femora (thigh bones) or a drawer of humeri (upper arm bones). This is an appropriate storage method for teaching collections; every university that I (EW) have visited—from the U.S. to Canada and across the Atlantic in Europe down to Kenya in Africa—uses a similar sorting method for their teaching collections. Accusing White of mishandling remains for this practice is absurd; further absurdity ensued when the authors attempted to paint this as some house of horrors that evokes an evil professor standing over his past victims.

In addition, the university and the journalists acted as if White had hidden this collection from repatriation efforts. But there was no clandestine action at all on White’s part. He followed both the legal requirements of NAGPRA and the university policy. NAGPRA requires federally funded institutions, such as universities, to repatriate human remains when they can be affiliated to an existing tribe. The law was designed to be a compromise. It allows for the continuation of research on unaffiliated collections as well as the continuation of maintaining teaching collections. It is not a law about reburying Native American skeletal remains; it is intended to repatriate ancestral bones to culturally affiliated tribes.

Thus, the collection White used to teach classes from 1977 to 2018 was never subject to NAGPRA, as the remains are of unknown origins and cannot be affiliated to any specific tribes. Indeed, the remains may not even be Native American! As Tim White explained about teaching collections: “There’s nobody on this planet who can sit down and tell you what the cultural affiliation of this lower jaw is, or that lower jaw is. Nobody can do that.” The articles criticizing White do not dispute that assertion or provide any basis for disputing it. Furthermore, the UC Policy10 that was in effect from 1985 through 2020, and only changed in 2021,11 stated that:

…the University’s collections of human remains and Cultural Items serve valuable educational and research purposes important to the enhancement of knowledge in various disciplines. The University maintains these collections as a public trust and is responsible for preserving them according to the highest standards while fulfilling its mission to provide education and understanding about the past and present through continued teaching, research, and public service.

Further, regarding teaching collections, the policy statement included the following:

Given the importance of the study of human osteology in archaeology, paleontology, and comparative morphology, and the importance of skeletal material in training students at the lower division, upper division, and graduate level, campuses normally retain the discretion to use such items in teaching. Campuses are encouraged to take into consideration the views and concerns of Native American and Native Hawaiian representatives when making decisions regarding the teaching and research use of Native American and Native Hawaiian skeletal materials.

This policy even allowed for culturally affiliated collections to be maintained and utilized, but left the decision up to the tribe rather than the university:

In circumstances in which cultural affiliation (or cultural association) has been established or other repatriation requirements have been met but in which an affiliated (or associated) tribe has chosen not to request repatriation, an affiliated (or associated) tribe may request that the affiliated (or associated) remains or Cultural Items not be used for teaching or research. The decision of the affiliated (or associated) tribe as to whether the remains and cultural items can be used in teaching or research shall normally be accepted as final by the University, subject to exceptions provided by federal law.

These policy statements were written in anticipation of NAGPRA’s passing. The policy, which balanced Native American concerns with those of the university’s education and research mission, was replaced by a policy that abandoned this balance and called for a cessation of research and teaching on all collections until it can be determined they do not fall under NAGPRA, or California’s equivalent CalNAGPRA.12

In 2019, the University of California’s president called for reporting of all skeletal collections on all ten campuses, which went beyond simply looking at anthropology department research collections. It was at this point that White notified Hearst Museum Director Lauren Kroiz and NAGPRA Liaison Tom Torma of the teaching collection. Thus, all along the way, White scrupulously followed the rules of the University of California and never broke state or federal repatriation laws.

The teaching collection White used was created before his arrival; it is over a century old. Teaching collections usually contain remains from a variety of sources. At San José State University where I (EW) teach, the teaching collection predates not only my arrival but also that of my predecessor; it contains remains from medical donations, remains likely purchased from India when it had a thriving skeletal trade, and remains likely from historical and archaeological sites. The collection at UC Berkeley, from descriptions found in letters to the Native American Heritage Commission13 (the nine-member body administering the California Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act) written by Dr. Sabrina Agarwal, the University’s Chair of the NAGPRA Advisory Committee, seems similar to the collection at San José State University and to many teaching collections around the globe.

Repatriation of remains needs to be made on a preponderance of evidence, scientific and otherwise, that shows an affiliation between the human remains and the modern-day tribal claimants.

Upon examination of the collection Sabrina Agarwal noted that 22 individuals were not Native American; these likely came from medical donations, as determined by writing on the bones. However, she also stated that there was a minimum of 95 individuals who could be Native American.14 It is difficult to fathom how she came to this conclusion. Minimum number of individuals (MNI) is a technique used to determine the minimum possible number of individuals from a site of commingled burials; it cannot be used for a collection that has been built from an accretion of materials over decades and which contains many fragments. For instance, in a site where there are 15 left femora and 9 right femora, the assumption is that if you can match 9 of the left femora with the right femora, then the MNI is 15.

However, if you had the same number of femora and some were of an unknown side, you may get a very different MNI—for instance, with 7 left femora, 9 right femora, and 8 un-sided femora, the MNI is 12. The 7 left femora and two of the un-sided femora can be paired with the 9 right femora, the remaining 6 un-sided femora could be paired to give three more individuals; thus, the number is 12. There are other methods that use landmarks, require that each bone be at least 50 percent complete, or look at zones of bones rather than sides. Regardless of the specific method used, the techniques further take into account bone size and the individual’s estimated age at death. Considering that the teaching collection was described by Agarwal as represented by “thousands of smaller disarticulated and commingled skeletal and dental remains,” there is no way to determine MNI in such a collection.

Another issue is that Agarwal wrote in her letter to the Native American Heritage Commission that “no in-depth or destructive analysis was made”; yet, she could somehow detect that the majority of the teaching collection could have come from Native American remains. How could this be determined? Even with close examination and in-depth analysis of the remains, determining ancestry requires nearly complete skulls or DNA. Even if she is correct in her assumptions, this still leaves the fact that repatriation laws are not acts to rebury Native American bones; they are to repatriate remains to affiliated tribes. I (EW) reached out to Agarwal asking how she concluded that there was a minimum of 95 individuals and how she concluded that these remains were Native American; no reply was received.

It is likely that UC Berkeley’s teaching collection will be lost, and tribal repatriation activists will bury the remains, even if they are not Native American. This will open the door for more losses of teaching collections. Once research collections are slated for repatriation, tribal activists will come for teaching collections believed to be Native American; then they will come for all human bones. And it’s worse than that—I (EW) have been told that even images of skeletal remains (Native American or not) may cause “harm” to tribal members. Even X-rays are already a target, as we have written about in the journal Regulation.15

Such procedures that harm science in general and anthropology and archaeology in particular won’t end there. In the ProPublica/NBC article we mention in the opening paragraph, the cultural director of the Santa Ynez Band of Chumash Indians, lamented that, “The university housed recordings and items that ethnographers and anthropologists had previously collected from Chumash elders.” And, she said: “They stole those items.” Don’t be surprised if they come for ethnographic materials next.

The scandal-promoting news reports, with their expressions of anguish, anger, horror, and shame, accompanied by accusations of desecration, stealing, looting, lying and grave robbing, ignore the question of why Tim White, or anyone else, would legitimately want to study bones. The answer is that they provide unique information and insight—not available from any other source—into human history and prehistory. These include disease, injury, occupational activities, diet, DNA relationships, the presence of certain alleles with known adaptive value, the age and sex structure of the population, population size and density, and cultural practices associated with disposition of the dead. In Europe and Asia, where such research is not suppressed, scientists are making huge strides in pursuing such inquiries.

The same scandal-promoting reports ignore the complexity of NAGPRA, which requires evidence of cultural affiliation for repatriation to occur. In many cases, repatriation activists offer as evidence oral traditions that have no temporal or geographical grounding, but rather consist of tales of supernatural creatures and events that would not be accepted as evidence if offered by any other racial group in the United States.

If public schools cannot teach Biblical creationism (as courts have so ruled, including the United States Supreme Court in the Louisiana creationism case), it is difficult to see why Native American animist creationism should be accepted as proof in American legal proceedings. END

About the Author

Elizabeth Weiss, professor of anthropology at San José State University, has spent over two decades studying skeletal remains to try to understand past peoples’ lives. Weiss has written over 100 articles in journals ranging from the American Journal of Physical Anthropology to Quillette. You can find more of her work at: elizabethweiss74.wordpress.com.

James W. Springer is a retired attorney and anthropologist based in Peoria, Illinois. He is the co-author, with Elizabeth Weiss, of the book Repatriation and Erasing the Past (University of Florida Press, 2020), which takes a critical look at laws that mandate the return of human remains from museums and laboratories to ancestral burial grounds.

References

1. https://bit.ly/40fTPuu
2. https://bit.ly/40cVam7
3. https://aol.it/3K3agEV
4. https://cnn.it/3lzyM7n
5. https://bit.ly/3TJU6mZ
6. White, T. D., Black, M. T., and Folkens, P. A. (2011). Human Osteology: Third Edition. Academic Press.
7. White, T. D. (1992). Prehistoric Cannibalism at Mancos 5MTUMR-2346. Princeton University Press.
8. https://bit.ly/3JJ2rD8
9. White v. University of California, 2012 WL 12335354 (N.D. Cal. 2012), aff’d, 765 F.3d 1010 (9th Cir. 2014), cert. denied 136 S. CT. 983 (2016)
10. https://bit.ly/3LQbrc5
11. https://bit.ly/3K9cfrv
12. https://nahc.ca.gov/calnagpra/
13. https://nahc.ca.gov/
14. https://bit.ly/42RHcb5
15. https://bit.ly/3FLzbdt

---------------------

(7) (a) December 6, 2023: U.S. Dept of Interior news release announces Final Rule for Implementation of the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act to streamline requirements for museums and federal agencies to inventory and identify Native American human remains and cultural items in their collections.;
(b) December 12: Hawaii Public Radio reports: Change of federal law intends to help Native Hawaiians reclaim ancestral bones.

https://content.govdelivery.com/accounts/USDOI/bulletins/37e9309

U.S. Dept of Interior news release

Interior Department Announces Final Rule for Implementation of the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act
U.S. Department of the Interior sent this bulletin at 12/06/2023 02:00 PM EST

WASHINGTON — The Department of the Interior today announced a final rule
https://www.nps.gov/subjects/nagpra/regulations.htm

to revise regulations that implement the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA). These regulations provide systematic processes for returning Native American human remains, funerary objects, sacred objects, or objects of cultural patrimony to lineal descendants, Indian Tribes, and Native Hawaiian Organizations (NHOs). The revised regulations streamline requirements for museums and federal agencies to inventory and identify Native American human remains and cultural items in their collections.

“The Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act is an essential tool for the safe return of sacred objects to the communities from which they were stolen. Among the updates we are implementing are critical steps to strengthen the authority and role of Indigenous communities in the repatriation process,” said Secretary Deb Haaland. “Finalizing these changes is an important part of laying the groundwork for the healing of our people.”

Enacted in 1990, NAGPRA, which is administered by the National Park Service, requires museums and federal agencies to identify Native American human remains, funerary items, and objects of cultural significance in their collections and collaborate with Indian tribes and Native Hawaiian organizations to repatriate them.

"NAGPRA is an important law that helps us heal from some of the more painful times in our past by empowering Tribes to protect what is sacred to them. These changes to the Department's NAGPRA regulations are long overdue and will strengthen our ability to enforce the law and help Tribes in the return of ancestors and sacred cultural objects," said Assistant Secretary for Indian Affairs Bryan Newland. 

"The new NAGPRA final rule is the result of many months of nation-to-nation consultation, collaboration across the Department and federal family. It represents an all-of-government approach to respecting and strengthening our Indigenous connections, enhancing our nation-to-nation relationships, and fully upholding our trust and treaty responsibilities,” said Assistant Secretary for Fish and Wildlife and Parks Shannon Estenoz.

In October 2022, the Interior Department published a proposed rule for public comment and received 181 individual submissions that yielded over 1,800 specific comments. The final regulations incorporate input from all comments, especially those from Tribes and NHOs to the maximum extent possible.

The final rule makes a number of changes, including:

Strengthening the authority and role of Tribes and NHOs in the repatriation process by requiring deference to the Indigenous Knowledge of lineal descendants, Tribes and NHOs.

Requiring museums and federal agencies to obtain free, prior and informed consent from lineal descendants, Tribes or NHOs before allowing any exhibition of, access to, or research on human remains or cultural items.

Eliminating the category “culturally unidentifiable human remains” and resetting the requirements for cultural affiliation to better align the regulations with congressional intent.

Increasing transparency and reporting of holdings or collections and shedding light on collections currently unreported under the existing regulation.

Requiring museums and federal agencies to consult and update inventories of human remains and associated funerary objects within five years of this final rule.

Secretary Haaland made the announcements in remarks at the 2023 White House Tribal Nations Summit, which provides an opportunity for the Biden-Harris administration and Tribal leaders from the 574 federally recognized Tribes to discuss ways the federal government can invest in and strengthen nation-to-nation relationships as well as ensure that progress in Indian Country endures for years to come.   

The final rule will publish in the Federal Register in the coming days. Visit the National NAGPRA website for more information.
https://www.nps.gov/subjects/nagpra/index.htm

---------

https://www.hawaiipublicradio.org/local-news/2023-12-12/change-of-federal-law-intends-to-help-native-hawaiians-reclaim-ancestral-bones
Hawaiʻi Public Radio December 12, 2023

Change of federal law intends to help Native Hawaiians reclaim ancestral bones

By Kuʻuwehi Hiraishi

** Photo caption:
File - Legislators have argued that Hawaiian burials near the coast will soon face coastal erosion, exposing the iwi kūpuna that were once sacredly placed there.

The federal government has made it easier for Native Hawaiian families to make claims for the return of iwi, or ancestral remains, currently housed in museums and other institutions. Since 1990, repatriation efforts under the Native American Grave Protection and Repatriation Act were limited to claims by Native Hawaiian organizations, like the Office of Hawaiian Affairs.

Recent changes to the law regulators call "NAGPRA" will provide greater deference to Native Hawaiian families, as long as they provide a reasonable belief of their connection to specific ancestral remains.

"That’s definitely the biggest change in the NAGPRA regulations that applies to all Native Americans, not just Native Hawaiians, and should really help especially where there’s some ambiguity in situations where there’s some ambiguity in where certain human remains came from," said Kamakana Ferreira, the lead compliance specialist at OHA." "Hopefully this will encourage more claimants to come forward and we see the process move a lot faster and museums put up less roadblocks." Ferreira has spent more than a decade handling repatriation and historic preservation issues for the agency. "Now there’s supposed to be more deference to the claimants. We don’t want cases that take years and years. It’s draining. It’s time consuming. And it can be costly. So hopefully this helps everybody involved with the ultimate goal of getting ancestral remains back to where they belong," he continued.

Interior Department Secretary Deb Haaland said the updates to the NAGPRA are critical steps to strengthening the authority and role of Indigenous communities in the repatriation process. The law has been under review by the U.S. Interior Department since October 2022.

-------------------

(8a) December 26, 2023: Wounded Knee descendants group plans ceremony for artifacts
A group of Wounded Knee descendants is planning to burn recently repatriated artifacts on December 29
[The controversy in South Dakota over preserving historical artifacts from the Wounded Knee massacre in museums for education of future generations vs. repatriating artifacts to tribes who might rebury them or "send them to the ancestors" is reminiscent of the controversy in Hawaii 20 years ago over what to do with the Forbes Cave artifacts and ka'ai containing the 500-year old remains of Liloa, stored for a century in Bishop Museum.]
(8b) January 10, 2024; A new decision has cancelled the planned burning of the artifacts.

(8a)
https://ictnews.org/news/wounded-knee-descendants-group-plans-ceremony-for-artifacts
Indian Country Today Tuesday December 26, 2023

Wounded Knee descendants group plans ceremony for artifacts A group of Wounded Knee descendants is planning to burn recently repatriated artifacts on December 29

AMELIA SCHAFER

RAPID CITY, S.D. – Last November, more than 150 items stolen from mass graves of Wounded Knee massacre victims were returned to a group of descendants, the Si’Tanka Ta’ Oyate O’mniceye (Descendants of the Si’ Tanka Nation). Now, a year later, the group plans to burn the artifacts to mark the end of the one-year traditional bereavement period called wasigla.

In 1890, more than 300 Lakota men, women and children were killed by the United States military. The military had been sent to Pine Ridge to stop a potential “Indian uprising.” Instead, they encountered a band of Mniconju Lakota led by Chief Spotted Elk (nicknamed Big Foot by the military). The military misinterpreted the group’s ghost dance songs as an intent to attack and opened fire on the band. Now 133 years later, the descendants of those who survived the massacre are working to preserve the memory of what happened that day.

A majority of the items are clothing, mostly moccasins and ghost dance shirts. All of the clothes had been removed from the victims of the massacre by grave robbers. Some moccasins have blood splatters on them. The rest are peace pipes, dolls, two tomahawks, a bow and arrows and a few beaded lizard and turtle amulets/pouches containing umbilical cords.

Children's moccasins taken from the graves of Wounded Knee Massacre victims were housed in the Woods Memorial Library in Barre, Massachusetts. (Photo courtesy of Cedric Broken Nose)

Mixed in amongst the artifacts are items from other tribes, Ojibwe moccasins, Dakota and Cheyenne beadwork and other items from other tribes were scattered in. Those items will also be burned.

All repatriated items came from the Woods Memorial Library’s Founders Museum Collection in Barre, Massachusetts. The museum qualifies as a private collection.

The Founders Museum did not respond to a request for comment. It is unclear if the museum’s entire “Native American Collection” was given to the Wounded Knee descendants or just the Wounded Knee-related items.

Out of fear for the items being stolen in the future and a desire to honor Lakota traditions, the group is choosing to burn all artifacts except for the peace pipes, on the 133rd anniversary of the massacre.

The group's leader Cedric Broken Nose, Oglala Lakota and a descendant of Chief Spotted Elk, said burying them wouldn’t successfully return the items to the ancestors, rather the smoke created from the fire would carry the items up. The group has been advised by a medicine man as to what they should do with the artifacts.

“We don’t want these items to end up in a museum, they don’t belong in there,” Broken Nose said. “If we were to bury them the grave robbers would steal them, that’s how they ended up in a museum in the first place.”

Broken Nose said all groups that had been gathering seasonally since the initial repatriation had all agreed to burn the items by October 2023.

“Every year the ancestors come back for their items, but since they can’t take the items they take relatives,” Broken Nose said. “One hundred and thirty-three years later we need to give those items back to them. They’re trying to come back for the items but they can’t, so they take a spirit, they take a life, that’s how powerful they are.”

The group has been working with Oglala Sioux Tribe President Frank Star Comes Out on how to properly handle the objects and ceremony.

“These items don’t belong to us, they belong to the ancestors,” Broken Nose said.

Despite the group's plans, some Wounded Knee survivor descendants claim they were left out of the process. The group said there are more than 500 descendants of Wounded Knee survivor James Pipe on Head alone, the grandson of Chief Spotted Elk.

Broken Nose said just in Oglala, South Dakota over 30 families descend from Spotted Elk. This specific group is comprised of descendants who have met since 1980.

Calvin Spotted Elk, a citizen of the Oglala Sioux Tribe, said he feels the descendants have not been properly included in the decision-making process, especially those who live out of state. Spotted Elk lives in California.

“What really matters is that one family is making the decisions,” he said. “It is not our way for one family to make the decisions.”

Spotted Elk said he feels burying the items is more in line with Lakota tradition.

Broken Nose said out of respect for maintaining good intentions around the items during the mourning period, the group will not be commenting on the claims made by Spotted Elk.

Spotted Elk also alleged the group has not followed guidelines set out by the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA).

Under the 1990 legislation, museums or other institutions that accept federal funding must compile an inventory of Indigenous cultural items and initiate repatriation of the collections and remains to tribes or family members.

While the act does set guidelines for the repatriation of Native American items, including remains and funerary objects, it does have its limitations. It only applies to museums or other institutions that accept federal funding, including the CARES Act (Coronavirus Aid, Relief and Economic Security Act). Private collections are not subject to the federal legislation.

In a typical NAGPRA-guided repatriation, items would be returned to direct descendants or the tribe from which the items came.

A press release from the Founders Museum dated April 2022 stated the items were repatriated in “the Spirit of the Native American Grave Protection and Repatriation Act,” not under NAGPRA. In January 2022 the museum began to take steps to repatriate the library’s Native American collection.

In the meantime, the survivors’ descendants group has discussed sending the items to the Oglala Lakota College, Red Cloud Museum and Crazy Horse Memorial. Currently, the items are on a loan to the college. The Crazy Horse Memorial is too far from the reservation and community members couldn’t easily access items to pray, Broken Nose said.

The group said the Red Cloud Museum doesn’t have an adequate temperature-controlled climate the items require but will reconsider once the Heritage Museum is constructed.

Several survivors of the Wounded Knee Massacre visited the United States Congress in the late 1930s to discuss what happened that day. (Photo by Amelia Schafer, ICT/Rapid City Journal)

For now, the peace pipes will remain at Oglala Lakota College, as will the other items until they’re burned.

This story is co-published by the Rapid City Journal and ICT, a news partnership that covers Indigenous communities in the South Dakota area.

-----------------

(8b) January 9, 2024; A new decision has cancelled the planned burning of the artifacts.

https://ictnews.org/news/wounded-knee-group-decides-not-to-burn-artifacts-plans-next-steps
Wounded Knee descendants decide not to burn artifacts
Two tribes called on the group of descendants of Wounded Knee Massacre survivors to not burn repatriated artifacts as planned on the massacre’s 133rd anniversary

by AMELIA SCHAFER

RAPID CITY, S.D. – More than 150 recently repatriated artifacts from the Wounded Knee Massacre were set to be burned December 29. Instead, tribal leaders from the Cheyenne River Sioux Tribe and later the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe asked to halt the ceremony.

On December 29, instead of burning the artifacts, descendants of Wounded Knee Massacre survivors gathered to pray, sing and remember the over 300 Lakota men, women and children killed by the United States military.

The issue stems from disagreements over what to do with items repatriated from the Woods Memorial Library’s Founders Museum Collection in Barre, Massachusetts. While one group of descendants planned to burn artifacts, others requested more time to consider alternatives.

In November 2022, the Woods Memorial Library’s Founders Museum gave items back to a group of descendants of Wounded Knee survivors. The group, Si’Tanka Ta’ Oyate O’mniceye (Descendants of the Si’ Tanka (Big Foot) Nation), is comprised of Mniconju and Hunkpapa Lakota survivor descendants most of whom live in the Oglala area on Pine Ridge.

Following the massacre, several survivors chose to settle in the Oglala area, said the group’s historian Michael He Crow, Mniconju Lakota. He Crow’s own family settled in the Oglala area after the massacre.

The repatriated artifacts had been taken from the mass graves of Wounded Knee Massacre victims killed in 1890. The military had been sent to Pine Ridge to stop a potential “Indian uprising.” Instead, they encountered a band of mostly Mniconju Lakota led by Chief Spotted Elk (nicknamed Big Foot by the military). The military misinterpreted the group’s ghost dance songs as an intent to attack and opened fire on the band.

The items returned from the Founders Museum were stolen from the graves of Wounded Knee victims. Most of the items are clothing – moccasins and ghost dance shirts. Some moccasins have blood splatters on them. The rest of the items are several peace pipes, hand drums, a few dolls, two tomahawks, a bow with arrows and a few beaded lizard and turtle amulets/pouches containing umbilical cords.

Mixed in amongst the artifacts are items from other tribes – Ojibwe-style moccasins, Dakota and Cheyenne beadwork and other items.

The Founders Museum is a private collection of items. As such it is exempt from provisions from the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA). The repatriation did not have to follow federal guidelines. Instead, it was “inspired by NAGPRA,” according to the museum’s initial press release. As such, the items were given back to a group of the museum’s choice. The Founders Museum did not respond to requests for comment about the repatriation process. Since the artifacts were returned, the group has hosted public meetings once a month, sometimes twice a month, for community members. The meetings were meant to be a way for survivor descendants to voice their opinions, He Crow said.

“The Cheyenne River tribe supported what we planned to do up until October of this year (2023),” He Crow said.

The tribe published a statement on the eve of the Wounded Knee ceremony voicing its opposition to burning the artifacts. In his initial statement, Chairman Ryman LeBeau asked that the ceremony be halted until all descendants had a chance to give input.

"The Wounded Knee artifacts issue is between the tribes and families of the descendants. We respect the decision to be diplomatic in dealing with such historical artifacts," LeBeau said in an email to ICT and the Rapid City Journal. "We are working collectively toward a positive outcome with our relatives. Overall, this is still an ongoing process and we are still in communication with the Oglala Sioux Tribe and Standing Rock Sioux Tribe on what further steps need to be taken."

Standing Rock Sioux Tribe Chairwoman Janet Alkire issued a statement on December 30th in opposition to the burning ceremony. “Today, I understand that the Barre Museum returned Wounded Knee artifacts to the Oglala Sioux Tribe. For the record, descendants from the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe were not included in the determination of disposition for these cultural items. The massacre at Wounded Knee was a direct result of the assassination of our Grandfather Tatanka Iyotaka (Sitting Bull) and the Hunkpapa descendants of the massacre must have their voice heard as well,” Alkire said in the press release. The Standing Rock Sioux Tribe did not respond to requests for comment.

The descendants group had chosen to burn the items as they believed the smoke from the items would carry the artifacts back to the spirits. Some items, like pipes, wouldn’t be burned. The group also feared that if buried, the artifacts would be stolen and taken back to a museum like they were after the massacre. “The objects are part of the people that died there. Those were real personal things to them. And so it would be like an extension of their bodies and a part of them physically. So, (putting them in a museum) it would just be like displaying a hand or foot that was repatriated. So it's not something that we would have hoped that people believe in doing,” He Crow said. “For example if it was a hand or a foot you brought back, are you going to display that in a museum and charge people to see?”

The Oglala Sioux Tribe had been involved with the group's plans and President Frank Star Comes Out had attended meetings regularly. “It feels kind of strange that they (the other tribes) would do this right now,” He Crow said. “I mean, they had a whole year to talk about it, but they didn’t come to us. … I really don't know what their motivation is. It could be outside influences that are motivating their decisions. The only way we'll know what is going on is to have these meetings and they can inform us because at the beginning they supported what we're doing.”

In the days leading up to the 133rd Wounded Knee ceremony, the group had become aware of other parties requesting that items not be burned. “We had a meeting on Wednesday and I told people just to be aware that if anything happens, then we can make some changes,” He Crow said. “So, we were a little bit prepared, but we didn't expect it to happen that way.”

Now, it’s up to the Oglala Sioux Tribe to plan an intertribal meeting about the future of the artifacts. It’s unclear when that meeting will take place.

------------------------

https://www.propublica.org/article/repatriation-progress-in-2023
Pro Publica Tuesday December 26, 2023

The Remains of Thousands of Native Americans Were Returned to Tribes This Year Following decades of Indigenous activism and the 2023 publication of ProPublica’s “Repatriation Project,” federal officials have seen more activity leading to the return of ancestral remains to tribal nations than any other year since 1990.

by Logan Jaffe, Ash Ngu and Mary Hudetz

American museums and universities repatriated more ancestral remains and sacred objects to tribal nations this year than at any point in the past three decades, transferring ownership of an estimated 18,800 Native American ancestors, institutions reported.

And more repatriations are forthcoming. Museums, universities and government agencies have filed 380 repatriation notices this year — more than the previous two years combined — under the federal Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act, declaring that they plan to make human remains and burial items available to tribes.

“By every measurement, this has been a record-breaking year,” Melanie O’Brien, manager of the Interior Department’s National NAGPRA Program, said during a recent federal review committee hearing on repatriation. “I’m reminded every day that with each notice that gets published and every inventory that is updated, it means that another ancestor is closer to being respectfully returned.”

The increase follows a ProPublica investigation that revealed how institutions have for decades failed to fully comply with NAGPRA, in some cases exploiting a loophole that allowed them to keep the remains by denying their connections to present-day Indigenous communities. And some institutions, including Harvard University, pursued destructive scientific studies on those remains without the informed consent of descendants.

In response to our reporting — which included a dozen stories and an interactive database that allows the public to see the status of repatriation in their communities — there has been widespread acknowledgment of past failures. More than 70 news outlets cited ProPublica’s database to report the repatriation progress of institutions in their communities. And coming regulatory changes promise to improve the repatriation process, experts said.

At the start of 2023, museums had yet to repatriate more than 110,000 Native American remains, which equated to more than half of what they had reported holding in their collections, despite NAGPRA’s passage 33 years ago. As the year draws to a close, that figure has dropped to about 97,000. To date, about 180 museums that have reported holding ancestral remains have not begun repatriating at all.

“It’s just mind boggling why these entities would have vast large collections of human remains,” said Armand Minthorn, a former council member for the Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla Indian Reservation in Oregon who now serves on the National NAGPRA Review Committee, a federal advisory board. “The fight goes on, but we’re not going to give up.”

The work of pushing for accountability and repatriation has long been led by Indigenous people. Before the passage of NAGPRA in 1990, tribal citizens and leaders protested the outsized power that institutions had in determining cultural connections that could lead to repatriation. Grassroots efforts have also shaped newly revised NAGPRA regulations that will go into effect next year.

Typically, institutions and agencies file repatriation notices after extensive consultation with tribal representatives. Publication of such notices means legal control of the remains and objects can be transferred to tribal nations named in the document.

O’Brien said the notices are a barometer of how actively institutions are working to comply with the law. While it’s difficult to pinpoint an exact explanation for the increased repatriation activity, she said, reporting from ProPublica and scores of local news outlets that cited our repatriation database likely contributed to the uptick.

“The attention and awareness due to ProPublica’s reporting is a part of it,” O’Brien said in an interview. “In addition, the significant amount of local reporting that has followed ProPublica’s reporting has increased awareness of repatriation.”

ProPublica’s database incorporated information from Federal Register notices to make the National NAGPRA Program’s repatriation database searchable by tribe for the first time. For many years, the database could only be searched by institution. Identifying which notices tribes had been included in required sifting through the Federal Register.

Gordon Yellowman, a former NAGPRA coordinator for the Cheyenne and Arapaho Tribes, said in an email to ProPublica that ready access to these reports had aided his tribe’s repatriation efforts. Changes Among Institutions With the Most Unrepatriated Native American Remains

ProPublica reported this year that 10 entities — including top universities, a state-run museum and the U.S. Interior Department — hold about half of the remains that have not been repatriated under NAGPRA.

For years, the University of California, Berkeley, held the largest number of ancestral remains — a result of fostering aggressive excavations throughout the state that resulted in the school collecting the remains of at least 12,000 Native American ancestors from the late 1800s to the 1980s. Only about a fourth had been repatriated.

But in late October, the university’s standing changed as a federal notice showed UC Berkeley was preparing to repatriate some 4,400 ancestors and 25,000 items taken from burial sites in the Bay Area, the ancestral and present-day homelands of the Ohlone people.

Now, the Ohio History Connection is the institution that has the nation’s largest number of unrepatriated remains — at least 7,100 in total. The Illinois State Museum is close behind as it works to repatriate the remains of about 1,104 ancestors excavated from burial mounds in Fulton County, Illinois.

Lawmakers in Ohio and Illinois passed legislation this year with the aim of removing barriers to repatriation for the museums and tribes alike, while allowing land to be set aside to rebury the thousands of ancestors in each state.

Both museums have told ProPublica that they are committed to repatriating everything in their collections that was taken from Indigenous graves.

Harvard’s Peabody Museum, the institution with the third largest collection under NAGPRA, has made similar pledges as it has reckoned with its past collection practices. “We are one of the worst offenders, and that’s why Harvard’s actions, and lack of action, have attracted attention and criticism, and why we will be watched closely in terms of what steps we take next,” Kelli Mosteller, executive director of the Harvard University Native American Program, recently told the Harvard Gazette, a university-sponsored publication. A Senate Inquiry Into Institutions With the Largest Collections

In April, 13 U.S. senators pressed the five institutions with the most Native American remains to explain why decades later they still hadn’t repatriated their holdings. Citing ProPublica’s reporting, the senators asked how they made decisions and whether they accepted Indigenous knowledge as evidence in determining cultural connections. Almost all said that they had begun working to establish better relationships with tribes only in the last several years.

The Illinois museum said it frequently initiates contact with tribes on repatriation, marking a change from how it previously approached NAGPRA work. In the past and under different leadership, ProPublica reported, the museum favored scientific and historical evidence despite the law’s requirement that various other forms of information, including oral history, have equal merit.

All five institutions said they value Indigenous knowledge as a form of evidence.

Megan Wood, director of the Ohio History Connection, said museum staff in June were “going through the entire collection box by box as requested” to fulfill a request from tribes to reunite each ancestor with items they were originally buried with. Chief Glenna J. Wallace of the Eastern Shawnee Tribe of Oklahoma wrote a letter of support for the museum to the Senate committee, stating that leadership changes had led to “an awakening” at the Ohio History Connection. “As a former vocal critic and now an advocate of the Ohio History Connection, I am confident you will witness long overdue dramatic changes in the near future,” Wallace wrote.

Federal data shows the museum did not complete any repatriations this year.

Neither did Indiana University. The school’s close tribal partner, the Miami Tribe of Indians of Oklahoma, declined to comment to ProPublica. But Julie Olds, the tribe’s cultural resource officer and NAGPRA committee chair, this summer told the National NAGPRA Review Committee during a hearing that the perceived slow pace of repatriation at the university is not reflective of the quality of its relationship with the tribes. “From the vantage point of the Miami people, meaningful consultation has been going on for [a] significant period of time,” Olds told the committee. Interior Department Says It Will Prioritize Repatriation

The rise in repatriations this year coincided with an Interior Department review of how NAGPRA should be enforced after tribes and descendants said overwhelmingly that the law was not working. The revamped federal rules will go into effect in January.

As Interior officials worked to finalize the new regulations this fall, they acknowledged in internal memos that the department itself holds one of the largest collections of Native American ancestors, echoing ProPublica’s analysis. In total, federal data shows Interior agencies have repatriated more than three-quarters of the human remains they have reported collecting from Native American gravesites. But the department’s efforts over the decades have still left it with the unrepatriated remains of more than 3,000 ancestors. There may also be more that the department has not yet accounted for, Interior’s chief of staff, Rachael Taylor, said in one memo.

She sent a Sept. 21 directive to agencies — including the Bureau of Indian Affairs, Bureau of Land Management and National Park Service — to prioritize compliance with NAGPRA “with the clear intention” of completing repatriations. She noted that the department has a “critical leadership role” in complying with the law that it also administers and enforces.

A month later, Interior officials said in a follow-up memorandum that the department would centralize its repatriation policies and efforts rather than leave compliance decisions to a patchwork of agencies. These agencies maintain their own inventories of ancestral remains and items, which obscured the breadth of the Interior Department’s holdings under NAGPRA.

The new mandates mark a shift at Interior. Earlier this year, a spokesperson told ProPublica that Interior’s agencies were not required to consult with tribes about the possibility of repatriating human remains for which no tribal connection had been determined unless a tribe or Native Hawaiian organization made a formal request for them. Now, the Interior Department says it will ensure “proactive compliance” with NAGPRA.

Emily Palus, who leads the Interior Department’s division of Museum and Cultural Resources, told the National NAGPRA Review Committee last month that the proposed new action plan is a “game changer.” “I am saddened that it has taken this long,” she said.

===============================
===============================

LINKS

This present webpage covers only the year 2023.

For coverage of events in 2005 (about 250 pages), see:

https://www.angelfire.com/hi2/hawaiiansovereignty/nagprahawaii2005.html

For year 2006 (about 150 pages), see:
https://www.angelfire.com/hi2/hawaiiansovereignty/nagprahawaii2006.html

===========

Send comments or questions to:
Ken_Conklin@yahoo.com

GO BACK TO: NAGPRA (Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act) as applied to Hawai'i -- Mokapu, Honokahua, Bishop Museum Ka'ai; Providence Museum Spear Rest; Forbes Cave Artifacts; the Hui Malama organization

GO BACK TO OTHER TOPICS ON THIS WEBSITE