In the heated battle of who can control the past critical information and an abundance of education is being lost from the study of ancestral remains. The Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act of 1990 (NAGPRA) is plummeting our modern society into the past. Archeologists now not only have to deal with the difficult task of piecing together the remains of past generations, but to now take on the daunting task of upholding science in the courthouse.
How can a society point a finger and determine whom in fact owns our past? If we look back far enough into time we see our origins as a common ancestry, and we are in fact descendants of a single race that migrated throughout the globe. There are eleven tribes fighting for the burial rights of more than one thousand Native American skeletons found in the Fonto national forest in Arizona dating back to almost two thousand years. Four tribes from southern Arizona want the bones buried on there reservation, because they believe that they are descendants of the Anasazi (the bones that were found). Also the Hopi and the Zoni believe they have rights to Anasazi bones, because they state also they are culturally affiliated. These debated claims are dangerous to the future of anthropology. Native Americans making claims to ancestral remains almost two millennia old is like an American citizen laying claim to the bones of King Henry VIII or even Napoleon. There is no need for Native Americans to claim a piece of everyone’s heritage and bury bones which will further our knowledge of the past, because in the end it will only lead to utter chaos.
The repercussions of NAGPRA are staggering. The loss of valuable information to help scientists as well as people understand who contributed to the colonization of North America in prehistoric times is one of the many problems. 9,300-year-old bones were found on a riverbank in Washington in 1996. At first these bones were thought to be from a white settler, but in all actuality the bones turned out to be the oldest ever found in North America. Many Native American tribes have already laid claim to “Kennewick Man”, but paleo-anthropologists believe Kennewick man may have arrived by boat from Polynesia, or coming over the Bering Strait from Siberia as most of the Native Americans did. If NAGPRA wins the legal battle a valuable amount of information may be lost forever.
“Tracing a single Native American family from the 1780’s through the 1920’s posed a number of challenges,” for Claudio Saunt, author of Black, White, and Indian: Race and the Unmaking of an American Family. (pg. 217) A family tree is comprised of genealogical data that has many branches that take form by twisting, turning, and attempting to accurately represent descendants from the oldest to the youngest. “The Grayson family of the Creek Nation traces its origins to the late 1700’s, when Robert Grierson, a Scotsman, and Sinnugee, a Creek woman, settled down together in what is now north-central Alabama. Today, their descendants number in the thousands and have scores of surnames.” (pg. 3)
“Skeletons in the Closet”, written by Clara Spotted Elk, is a well-built argument, but it can be enhanced to become immensely effective. Firstly, Elk’s position is effective in obtaining her purpose and connecting her audience to it, because she includes a broad scope and background of the problem in the first few paragraphs. She describes the amount of Indian skeletons preserved and contained by American museums, through the use of data and statistics. For instance, Elk states: “we found that 18,500 Indian remains…are unceremoniously stored in the Smithsonian’s nooks and crannies” (13-15). By using this data, the background of the argument is illustrated to assist the audience in understanding her argument. Now, by knowing this statistic, readers can connect with Elk and her assertion, since we realize that there are plenty of skeletons that
On July 26, 1996 two individuals were walking along the bank of the Columbia River near Kennewick, Washington, did not expect to find one of the oldest complete skeletal remains in the world. While, Kennewick man has gained considerable notoriety, debates have grown over the application of the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA) and whether the Native Americans or Archaeologists have the rights to the body. As soon as the body was found it was studied by anthropologist James Chatters and he discovered “that the skull had characteristics unlike those of modern Native Americans” (Native Americans and Archeologists). As a result, it did not qualify under the NAGPRA rules. However, conflict arose because the Department of Interior and many Native American tribes are contesting that evidence found by the archaeologists. But, while it goes against Native American beliefs to inspect the bodies of their ancestors, any evidence that was gathered during the trial, in regards to the origin of Kennewick man, was necessary in order to find out to whom he belongs. Now, the skeleton is currently being kept at the Burke Museum in Washington State, where it is not on display. I believe that is where he should stay until more information about him is found. Finally, in regards to the presentations, I will be taking about who cares about the Kennewick Man, Lise Anderson and Jen Gray will be tackling the topic of opinions, Matt Ruffcorn will do the basic information about the Kennewick Man, Austin Eibel will talk about the conflict affected and finally, Matt Hellinghouse will talk about the research from an archaeological perspective.
Ironically the burial ground’s discovery came from a land of no significance to prime, for an intended thirty-four-story federal office building. An environmental impact statement set off archeological test excavations, by producing an 18th century map delivering necessity to substantiate or disprove survival of a “Negro’s Burial Ground” (Kutz 1994).
Cherokee Indians “Memorial of Protest of the Cherokee Nation, June 22, 1836” in The Cherokee Removal: A Brief History with Documents, ed. Theda Perdue and Michael D. Green (Boston: Bedford/St. Martin’s, 2005), 87
The implementation of the NAGPRA has provoked a ranging conflict in interest between two groups, the scientists on one hand and the Native American tribes on the other. As expressed by Burt, scientists have held that the skeletal remains are a source of information that helps in relating the early and the new world (304). They argue that understanding the human evolution is beneficial to the modern communities as they are able to appreciate their history and origin. Conversely, the Native American tribes are of the views that preserving human remains prevents their spirits from resting. Unrest of the spirits may bring misfortune on the current and future generations. In terms of learning their history, the Native Americans bel...
With the dwindling population of Native Americans, it is fair to assume that most do not want their culture to die out. The falling rate of Native Americans could be the fire needed to get them active in their heritage. It is the perfect opportunity to learn more about their own culture and pass along the knowledge, discovering new art, stories, and history through their elders and oral traditions. From another view, their role is to also gain a voice in politics to help preserve their tribes and reservations, as well as try to keep unemployment and poverty rates
This article focuses mainly on the emergence of the first people in America: Who they are, where they came from and how they got to America. He discussed three main routes as to how they arrived in America, none of which were without criticism. In trying to determine who the first people in America are, Hadingham began with the Clovis points and their creators, the Clovis people, who lived about 12,500 to 13,500 years ago, and tried to trace their origin. According to the article, a Gault site was first investigated in 1929 and the Clovis people who inhabited the Gault seem to have stayed there for long periods. Also from this site, the Clovis people seem to have preyed on mammoths, deer, turkeys, horses, frogs, birds, turtles and other small animals.
As children, students are taught from textbooks that portray Native Americans and other indigenous groups as small, uncivilized, mostly nomadic groups with ways of life that never changed or disfigured the land. Charles Mann’s account of Indian settlements’ histories and archaeological findings tell us otherwise. Mann often states in his book 1491: New Revelations of the Americas before Columbus that the indigenous groups of North and South America were far more advanced and populous than students are taught. He focuses on many different cultural groups and their innovations and histories that ultimately led to either their demise or modern day inhabitants.
The Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act established Indian nations as the owners of Native American cultural objects, including human remains, which were found on Federal land. It requires that the American Indians provide substantial amounts of information to validate their claims. However, only federally recognized tribes are recognized under this act, so if you are an unrecognized tribe good luck claiming anything that belongs to you. After this, the existing anthropological literature will be consulted. In some instances, Indians will disagree with the literature and take steps to correct it. Indians are also likely to provide additional information that had not yet been documented. The interpretations will be written from the perspective of the claiming tribe, how they view the world, and their perception of significance of objects in religious ceremonial rites. While some might raise the question of scientific objectivity, no one will deny that this perspective had often been lacking in the literature. These interpretations are bound to bring about new insights which will challenge earlier assumptions (5).
The history of the relationship between Indigenous Peoples of the North America and European settlers represents a doubtlessly tragic succession of events, which resulted in a drastic decline in Indigenous population leading to the complete annihilation of some Native groups, and bringing others to the brink of extinction. This disastrous development left the Indigenous community devastated, shaking their society to its very pillars. From the 1492 Incident and up to the 19th century the European invasion to the North America heavily impacted the social development of the Indigenous civilization: apart from contributing to their physical extermination by waging incessant war on the Indian tribes, Anglo-Americans irreversibly changed the Native lifestyle discrediting their entire set of moral guidelines. Using the most disreputable inventions of the European diplomacy, the colonizers and later the United States’ government not only turned separate Indigenous tribes against each other but have also sown discord among the members of the same tribe. One of the most vivid examples of the Anglo-American detrimental influence on the Native groups is the history of the Cherokee Nation and the U.S. Indian Removal Policy. The Cherokee removal from Georgia (along with many other Indian nations) was definitely an on-going conflict that did not start at any moment in time, but developed in layers of history between the Native Americans, settlers of various cultures, and the early U.S. government. This rich and intricate history does not allow for easy and quick judgments as to who was responsible for the near demise of the Cherokee Nation. In 1838, eight thousand Cherokees perished on a forced march out of Georgia, which came to be called the T...
In his essay, “The Indians’ Old World,” Neal Salisbury examined a recent shift in the telling of Native American history in North America. Until recently, much of American history, as it pertains to Native Americans; either focused on the decimation of their societies or excluded them completely from the discussion (Salisbury 25). Salisbury also contends that American history did not simply begin with the arrival of Europeans. This event was an episode of a long path towards America’s development (Salisbury 25). In pre-colonial America, Native Americans were not primitive savages, rather a developing people that possessed extraordinary skill in agriculture, hunting, and building and exhibited elaborate cultural and religious structures.
Kathryn book Life in the Pueblo is based on excavations that she did at Lizard Man Village (Kamp, 1997). This was a small pueblo located in Arizona which is believed to be inhabited between 11th and 13th century. These ancient excavations were first carried out by United States Forest Service and were parts of Grinnell College field school (Kamp, 1997). The aim of the book was to describe Lizard Man Village and present excavation processes and analysis. Kamp 1997 offers archaeological interpretation of the site in relation to the past understandings. She bring out successfully three narratives. These narratives include ethnographic data in relationship to traditional accounts from Hopi (a place which is believed to be the first resident of Lizard Man) (Kamp, 1997). He also bring out clearly the issue of archaeology as well as fictional account basing it on both ethnography and archaeology.
When a suspicious body appears in the morgue, the forensics team goes to work. The body, if still covered in tissue goes to the forensic pathologist who will study the tissue extensively. If a conclusion is unable to be reached through this process, the pathologist will remove the tissue from the bone and send the skeleton to the forensic anthropologist. In other cases, the victim is found with no to little tissue on the bone, making it nearly impossible for a layman to discover any identifying characteristics about the person. The forensic anthropologist’s first job is to determine the sex, age and race of the victim (Sauer, 1998).
To examine the changing identity of America, one must look first at America’s first citizens, the Native Americans. While no one can simply place all Native Americans under the same group, many of the tribes held the same ideals. One ideal