One day I hope to start a software company that will build products that will make easier for everyone.
(Tesla’s next production vehicle, called Tesla Model X)
“If something is important enough, even if the odds are against you, you should still do it.” – Elon Musk
Introduction
“On July 28, 1996, two students discovered the half-buried remains of a ninety-three-hundred-year-old skeleton while wading in the Columbia River near Kennewick, Washington. Acting under a provision of the Native American Graves Protection Act (NAGPRA), the Army Corps of Engineers which had jurisdiction over the area, determined to return the body for reburial to five local Native American tribes (the Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla, the Yakima Indian Nation, the Nez Perce tribe, the Wanapum band and the Colville Confederated Tribes). This decision resulted in a maelstrom of protests from anthropologists and archeologists throughout the country…” (Crawford 2000, ). This paper addresses the classic issue of whether the scientist or the Native Americans should have the power to control what should be done with newly discovered ancient remains. In my opinion, the scientist deserve to study the ancient remains in the special case where the remains do not meet the NAGPRA requirements because the evidence supersedes the rational presented for repatriation.
NAGPRA Use
NAGPRA is a law that establishes the procedures when human remains or sacred objects are discovered; in order to return these specific remains and sacred objects to the rightful owner. “NAGPRA provides nationwide repatriation standards and procedures for the return of native remains and certain protected materials from federal agencies and federally funded institutions. NAGPRA is first and foremost, human rights legislation. It is designed to address the flagrant violation of the civil rights of Aerica’s first citizens. The bill was enacted reflected a compromise forged by representatives of the museum, scientific, an Indian communities. NAGPRA was designed to create a process that would reflect both the needs of museums as repositories of the nations call troll heritage and the rights of Indian people. Most importantly, NAGPRA was intended to “establish A process that provides the dignity and respect that our nations first citizens deserve” ” (Trop & Echo-Hawk 2000, 122).
The Court Case
“Kennewick Man, a 9,000-year-old individual uncovered from a riverbed in Washington State, was the center of a bitter legal dispute from 1996 to 2004. At the end of the case, the judge decided in favor of the scientists in federal district court. The skeleton remains in curation at the Burke Museum in Seattle, Washington till this day.
In this case, the oral history and Native perceptions presented by the Native Indians were dismissed as being unfounded. The court favored the data the scientist presented. Judge John Jelderks ruling was that in order to be eligible under 1990 NAGPRA Kennewick Man must have “a relationship to a presently existing tribe, people, or culture” (Graham 1). Since Kennewick Man’s culture is unknown, the tribes could not repatriate the remains.
The Case of Umatilla
When the first pilgrims arrived at Plymouth Rock, the pilgrims stole food and unique items buried by the Native Americans. Due to these actions, the pilgrims developed a law that required no one should disturb a burial unless it contains Indian remains. Indians believe due to this law, people like Dr. Samuel Morton (father of American Physical Anthropology) used the opportunity to study the craniums of the Indians. Later on, it became a federal policy to search for Indian remains in order to build up a collection for the Army Medical Museum. Before NAGPRA, Native Americans had no right to reclaim their ancestor’s remains. Even Senator Daniel Inouye mentioned that when human remains are displayed at a museum, it is typically of Indian remains. Trope and Echo-Hawk believe this situation shows that Indians are inferior to non-Indian. Once NAGPRA was passed, it showed that the US government finally respects the Indians beliefs and religious practices.
The Scientist’s View
The scientist are unhappy that the human remains and archaeological artifacts are only accessible to academic specialists. In the end, the scientist believe that repatriation would cause an irreversible loss to “science” and create obstacles that allow everyone to understand the past. decided to sue the Army Corps of Engineers was to allow scientist from various disciplines to Owsley and Jantz decided to sue in order to bring their expertise in the examination of Kennewick Man and of other ancient skeletons. As an example, when Gordon Creek remains were discovered, more people become interested in scientific topics which made allowed them to learn more about ancient cultures.
In my opinion, I believe in specific cases, the Native Indians need to allow the scientist to study the bodies. In the court cases where NAGPRA act is disregarded, there is no way for the Native Indians to retrieve their ancestors as the NAGPRA act acknowledges the beliefs and oral history of the Native Indians. Without the act, the scientist have the upper hand by presenting valuable scientific evidence that the body was not related to the local tribe. In the court of law, scientific evidence will be more valuable than oral history in the process of determining who receives the body. The reason I am arguing against the Native Indians is because I want to see the Indians retrieve as many ancient remains as possible but this can only occur once the Indians determine which cases are worth their time.
While the Native Americans claim that they have a right to their ancestor’s remains, they face tough opposition from the scientist that can provide scientific evidence that can win over most court cases. If the NAGPRA act is in play, the Native Indians do have a viable path to retrieving their ancestors, but if the act is not in play the Native Indians are better off focusing their resources on bodies that can be retrieved through the NAGPRA act.
References
Crawford. S.J. (2000). Repatriation Reader: Who Owns American Indian Remains?. In D.A. Mihesuah (Ed), (pp. 211-236). Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press.
Graham, S. (2004, February 6). Scientists Win Latest Ruling in Kennewick Man Case. Scientific American. Retrieved April 8, 2014, from http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/scientists-win-latest-rul/
Kakaliouras, A. M. (2012). An Anthropology of Repatriation. Current Anthropology, 53(S5), S210-S221. Retrieved March 25, 2014, from http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.1086/662331
Owsley, D. W., & Jantz, R. L. (2001). Archaeological Politics and Public Interest in Paleoamerican Studies: Lessons from Gordon Creek Woman and Kennewick Man. American Antiquity, 66(4), 565-575. Retrieved March 28, 2014, from http://www.jstor.org/stable/2694173
Trope. J.F., Echo-Hawk.W.R. (2000). Repatriation Reader: Who Owns American Indian Remains?. In D.A. Mihesuah (Ed), (pp. 123-168). Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press.
The Broken Reaffirmation System
As a requisite for writing my narrative essay, a couple of my colleagues and I drove to the National Steinbeck Center in Salinas to listen to three California Indians’ tribe leaders speak about their struggle to become reaffirmed. In my social science writing course we are studying repatriation of Native American burials which involves the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA). This issue affects these three tribes because only recognized tribes are protected by NAGPRA. In the case where a person finds an Indian burial on their land, in some cases it can not be returned to its original tribe because that tribe has not been recognized. The reason that I wrote this paper is to sum up all of the knowledge that I have gained from reading several chapters of the repatriation reader, watching the documentary “The Journey of Man” by Spencer Wells and being present at this talk. The ultimate goal was to gain a perspective on both sides of this issue and to determine if the scientist or the Native Americans should have the power to control the ancient remains that are discovered.
When we walked into the presentation room, I noticed that each of the tribes had set up table displays to give the audience information about the respective tribes represented on the panel. From a distance, it looked like they put quite a bit of work into it. The room was set up with chairs set up in a semi-circle fashion with the panelist directly in front of the semi-circle.
The talk was led by Alan Leventhal, a professor, archaeologist, anthropologist and ethnohistorian. For the past 34 years he has worked with the Muwekma Ohlone Tribe of the San Francisco Bay Region as a tribal ethnohistorian and archaeologist. The panel members were Rosemary Cambra, Louise J. Miranda-Ramirez, and Valentin Lopez. Rosemary was the elected chairwoman of the Muwekma Ohlone Tribe and for the past 26 years she worked to organize their tribal government involving the reaffirmation of Muwekma as a federally recognized tribe. Louise Ramirez was appointed as the Tribal Chairwoman in October 2006. She told the audience she received the support of Tribal Membership in 2013 with a vote of continuity by the Government of the Ohlone/Costanoan-Esselen Nation. Valentin is the Chairman of the Amah Mutsun Tribal Band and a Native American Advisor to the University of California, Office of the President on issues related to repatriation.
Before Mr. Leventhal’s presentation began, in Indian tradition, the host tribe began with a prayer. Out of respect when Ms.Ramirez began to speak, the entire audience stood.Mr.Leventhal started off the discussion with a presentation of the history of Muwekma Ohlone, Costanoan-Esselen Nation and the Amah Mutsun Tribal band; three groups that according to Leventhal, were terminated by an act of congress. According to Mr. Leventhal in 1996, Muwekma and Sunnol Council were the first two tribes issued previous unambiguous federal recognition. Mr.Leventhal goes on to say that in 1851 and 1852, eighteen treaties were negotiated by three Indian agents solicited by John C. Fremont, one of the first senators of California. They agreed to set aside 8.5 million acres of land for established tribes. He claims, if the tribes already had unambiguous federal recognition, then how were the tribe legally terminated. In my view, those tribes should sue the United States for not honoring those treaties. I believe they would be successful in the court case, but they would need to have access to those treaties.
Mr.Leventhal also claimed that the current acknowledgement process is a failure. He supported his claim when he quoted a line from Chief Bud Shepard, primary author of the 1978 acknowledgement regulation “…the acknowledgement process is a total failure…”. The Republicans and Democrats did not want to improve the system based on Mr.Shepard’s recommendation. According to Rosemary’s opinion, the US government is using this slow and cumbersome process to force the Indian population to slowly die out so the tribes will lose the evidence they need to support their existence. I agree with Rosemary’s opinion because I see the Indian tribes as an endangered species. Personally, I am upset to see the United States government provide support for endangered species but not reciprocate the same support for Native Americans. Mr.Leventhal’s presentation did run longer than I expected but a few people were able to ask questions. One person asked what reaffirmation means. As a status clarification that the tribes were once federally recognized and never terminated. It was difficult for him to define recognition but he cited the work of Hillary Thompson, a Navajo and chief solicitor of the interior; she defined recognition as tribal communities that receive federal actions and other services.
After the question and answer session, the event was already overtime. The heads of each tribe went on to briefly talk about the issues they face with federal government. They expressed their gratitude to the people attending the event and expressed their desire to connect with people outside of the known tribes. After that, Louise proceeded to hand out gifts to certain attendees. From my perspective, the gift seems to be made of feathers and most of look similar. After attending this event, I believe the panel discussion has provided I the necessary background to write the final paper.
Reviving the Ohlone Tribe
In the documentary, Back from Extinctio, director, Bob Gliner, once a sociology prof at San Jose State University, examines the the Muwekma Ohlone Tribe and their bid for federal recognition. This essay is a critical review of the steps the tribe took towards that goal. good
In the 1920s, the federal government declared Muwekma Ohlone Tribe extinct. According to the tribe leader Rosemary Cambra, the tribe has lived on the same land for 10,000 years. Rosemary has worked to have the tribe’s federal recognition reaffirmed. Recognized tribe are able eligible to receive land, and other economic benefits.
When freeway construction between the 101 and 85 started, the construction workers found a Muwekma Ohlone burial ground. The Muwekma Ohlone people came out to the site and followed the construction equipment to find extra burials. According to George Soto, whenever a construction worker spotted an indian burial, work must stop and the appropriate people contacted . In reality, in the old days before NAGPRA and CEQA the construction workers would ignore the burials since it cost the company time and money to file a report. When the Muwekma Ohlone people discovered bones on the construction site, they called in an archeologist from the area to verify if whether the bones are from a human or an animal. In the process, the Ohlone people have learned a lot about their ancestors lives. The tribes plan to use their ancestor’s remains as proof that the Muwekma Ohlone tribe did not leave the East Bay California.
As the Muwekma Ohlone got involved in the excavation process, the tribe developed a new relationship between the anthropologist who once controlled access to their heritage. At one point, the anthropologist played a significant role in declaring the Muwekma Ohlone extinct because the Muwekma Ohlone they were not considered culturally pure. Through their actions, they created connections with various state agencies that have had to approve each stage along the way. Since the Ohlone are able to do their own archeology, the agencies have indirectly legitimated that the Ohlone tribe exist. According to Dr.Les Field, the problem lies in the anthropological discipline because all anthropologists have their own definition of a pure tribe. So, their findings caused many tribes to become extinct in the federal system. Their mission is far from over since recognized tribes see the Ohlone tribe as a threat to the limited government funding. Till this day, the Muwekma Ohlone are still not a federally recognized tribe.
One thing that bothered me was that tribes that were already recognized used their resources to prevent other tribes from receiving federal recognition. According to the documentary, the recognized tribes did so to protect the shrinking amount of federal funding available. It is disappointing to see the potential connection with other tribes ruined because certain tribes want to keep their current lifestyle.
I thought it was ironic to see the anthropologist that declared the Muwekma Ohlone tribe extinct, decide to assist the tribe reprove their existence. Different generations and different philosophies. All archaeologists do not care about the Indians. Some are very engaged in supporting their inclusion in such work. It truly varies in time and space. I would recommend watching this documentary because the film exposes the viewers to a different culture that exist in California and also the issues California Indians deal with to be exact.
Reference
Gliner, B. (Director). (1994). Back from Extinction: The Muwekma Ohlone of the San Francisco Bay [Documentary]. United States: The Muwekma Ohlone Tribe.
A Journey towards the future
In the Journey of Man, Dr.Spencer Wells travels to a number of continents to prove that the first humans left Africa to populate the entire world. This essay is a critical review of that documentary.
Dr.Wells began his research when he meet Luca-Cavalli-Sforza, the first person to collect DNA samples on a worldwide scale. Earlier geneticists realized that the DNA found in blood could be used to reunite us with our ancestors. Mr. Sforza thought in order to work out distant family lines through blood type, the key laid in the blood of isolated populations. Good point. Yes. During his journey, he followed the mutations that occurred in the Y chromosomes to determine if someone is directly related to the earliest surviving peoples , sohe begins his journey in Africa; according to his lab data the San Bushman tribe are the earliest still living descendants of our most recent common ancestors. Their distant relatives left Africa and set in motion the migration of mankind. This created every race and nationality known today.
The next place human showed up was in Australia, but after traveling to Madurai, India he was able to prove that the band travel on the coast route. That only accounts for ten percent of the world’s population. The other ninety percent would become Europeans, Asians, and Native Americans. There was a second group that traveled to the Middle East.
According to Dr.Wells data, they had to travel through the Russian Arctic during the ice age 20,000 years ago because that was when the ocean between Russia and Alaska had receded to a certain for people to cross over. Once they landed in the Americas, the population began to swell both in North and South America due to the wealth of resources. Dr.Spencer Wells’s documentary exposes our ancestors incredible will to survive in harsh conditions.
There were two groups that faced many challenges before arriving at their destination. First, there was a group heading towards Europe, but they could not to take the direct route. According to William Calvin, there were droughts and forest fires, but in the next year there was grass and grazing animals which allowed them to survive the harsh conditions and arrive in Europe. There was another group that had to cross the Bering Sea during an ice age, in order to reach the Americas. They crossed during the ice age because the ocean that separated today’s Russia and Alaska had receded allowing our ancestors to walk across on to the Americas.
I learned a few things through this film. I was surprised to see some people reject Dr. Wells claims that all humans originated from Africa. I exhibited that feeling because I was born and raised in the United States. As a child in school, I was taught to trust the work of researchers. When he provided the scientific evidence to prove his point, I was convinced because I had not found any information that could disprove any of the points that he made in the documentary. From the other side, I find it hard to understand why the locals would believe their origin story. Even though it was passed directly from their earliest ancestor, stories tend to change overtime. Secondly, I was intrigued to see most of the equipment that he used to examine DNA. I believe without advanced technology, he could not have proved each step in his theory so quickly.
In conclusion, Dr. Wells proves that our ancestors went on a perilous journey to populate the world. It was ironic to remember what Dr. Wells said when he was in India, “Sometimes I wish I would have done something other than science.” I would recommend this documentary to those who are interested in learning about where the human race began or to people who like to like to go sightseeing.
Reference
Journey of Man: A genetic odyssey. (2009, December 17). Films On Demand. Retrieved January 27, 2014, from http://digital.films.com/play/SX29S4
SBS 200 