Term papers writing service


What aspects would you include in a pre repatriation program

Background[ edit ] The intent of the NAGPRA legislation is to address long-standing claims by federally recognized tribes for the return of human remains and cultural objects unlawfully obtained from prehistoric, historic, former, and current Native American homelands. Interpretation of human and indigenous rightsprehistoric presence, cultural affiliation with antiquities, and the return of remains and objects can be controversial and contested. It includes provisions that delineate the legal processes by which museums and federal agencies are required to return certain Native American cultural items—human remains, gravesite materials, and other objects of cultural patrimony—to proven lineal descendants, culturally related Native American tribes, and Native Hawaiian groups.

Outcomes of NAGPRA repatriation efforts are slow and cumbersome, leading many tribes to spend considerable effort documenting their requests; collections' holders are obliged to inform and engage with tribes whose materials they may possess. Historically, states only regulated and protected marked graves. Native American graves were often unmarked and did not receive the protection provided by these statutes. The colonizing population formed much of the legal system that developed over the course of settling the United States.

This law did not often take into account the unique Native American practices concerning graves and other burial practices. It did not account for government actions against Native Americans, such as removal, the relationship that Native Americans as different peoples maintain with their dead, and sacred ideas and myths related to the possession of graves.

Native Americans, as well as others, often found that the remains of Native American graves were treated differently from the dead of other races. As in most racial and social groups, Native American burial practices relate strongly to their religious beliefs and practices.

They what aspects would you include in a pre repatriation program that when tribal dead were desecrated, disturbed, or withheld from burial, their religious beliefs and practices are being infringed upon. Religious beliefs and practices are protected by the first amendment. Native Americans hold unique rights as sovereign bodies, leading to their relations to be controlled by their own laws and customs.

The relationship between the people and their dead is an internal relationship, to be understood as under the sovereign jurisdiction of the tribe.

From the beginning of the U. Description[ edit ] The Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act is a law that establishes the ownership of cultural items excavated or discovered on federal or tribal land after November 16, 1990. The act also applies to land transferred by the federal government to the states under the Water Resources Department Act. The Act states that Native American remains and associated funerary objects belong to lineal descendants.

If lineal descendants cannot be identified, then those remains and objects, along with associated funerary and sacred objects, and objects of cultural patrimony belong to the tribe on whose lands the remains were found or the tribe having the closest known relationship to them.

Nowhere has this issue been more pronounced than in California, where many small bands were extinguished before they could be recognized, and only a handful, even today, have obtained federal recognition as Native Americans and descendants of Native American bands. Congress attempted to "strike a balance between the interest in scientific examination of skeletal remains and the recognition that Native Americans, like people from every culture around the world, have a religious and spiritual reverence for the remains of their ancestors.

The act provides for repatriation of these items when requested by the appropriate descendant of the tribe. This applies to remains or objects discovered at any time, even before November 16, 1990. Nearly 670,000 funerary objects, 120,000 unassociated funerary objects, and 3,500 sacred objects have been returned.

The act divides the treatment of American Indian human remains, funerary objects, sacred objects, and objects of cultural patrimony into two basic categories. Under the inadvertent discovery and planned excavation component of the act and regulations, if federal officials anticipate that activities on federal and tribal lands after November 16, 1990 might have an effect on American Indian burials—or if burials are discovered during such activities—they must consult with potential lineal descendants or American Indian tribal officials as part of their compliance responsibilities.

For planned excavations, consultation must occur during the planning phase of the project. For inadvertent discoveries, the regulations delineate a set of short deadlines for initiating and completing consultation. The repatriation provision, unlike the ownership provision, applies to remains or objects discovered at any time, even before the effective date of the act, whether or not discovered on tribal or federal land.

The act allows archaeological teams a short time for analysis before the remains must be returned. Once it is determined that human remains are American Indian, analysis can occur only through documented consultation on federal lands or consent on tribal lands. A criminal provision of the Act prohibits trafficking in Native American human remains, or in Native American "cultural items.

Additionally, federal agencies and institutions must prepare inventories of human remains and funerary objects. Under the act, funerary objects are considered "associated" if they were buried as part of a burial ceremony with a set of human remains still in possession of the federal agency or other institution.

Consequently, this legislation also applies to many Native American artifactsespecially burial items and religious artifacts.

Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act

It has necessitated masscataloguing of the Native American collections in order to identify the living heirs, culturally affiliated Indian tribes, and Native Hawaiian organizations of remains and artifacts. In many cases, NAGPRA helped stimulate interactions of archaeologists and museum professionals with Native Americans that were felt to be constructive by all parties.

Background[ edit ] The late 19th century was one of the most difficult periods in Native American history in regards to the loss of cultural artifacts and land.

With the founding of museums and scholarly studies of Native American peoples increasing with the growth of anthropology and archeology as disciplines, private collectors and museums competed to acquire artifacts, which many Native Americans considered ancestral assets, but others sold.

This competition existed not only between museums such as the Smithsonian Institution founded in 1846 and museums associated with universities, but also between museums in the United States and museums in Europe. In the 1880s and 1890s, collecting was done by untrained adventurers. As of the year 1990, federal agencies reported having the remains of 14,500 deceased Natives in their possession, which had accumulated since the late 19th century.

Many institutions said they used the remains of Native Americans for anthropological research, to gain more information about humans. At one time, in since discredited comparative racial studies, institutions such as the Army Medical Museum sought to demonstrate racial characteristics to prove the inferiority of Native Americans.

Her husband, an engineer with the Iowa Department of Transportation, told what aspects would you include in a pre repatriation program that both Native American and white remains were uncovered during road construction in Glenwood, Iowa.

While the remains of 26 white burials were quickly reburied, the remains of a Native American mother and child were sent to a lab for study instead. Pearson protested to Governor Robert D.

Rayfinally gaining an audience with him after sitting outside his office in traditional attire. The ensuing controversy led to the passage of the Iowa Burials Protection Act of 1976, the first legislative act in the United States that specifically protected Native American remains.

Emboldened by her success, Pearson went on to lobby national leaders, and her efforts, combined with the work of many other activists, led to the creation of NAGPRA. Many of the tribes migrated to their territories at the time of European encounter within 100—500 years from other locations, so their ancestors were not located in the historic territories.

One example of controversy is that of Kennewick Mana skeleton found on July 28, 1996 near Kennewick, Washington. The federally recognized UmatillaColvilleYakimaand Nez Perce tribes had each claimed Kennewick Man as their ancestor, and sought permission to rebury him. Kennewick, Washington is classified as part of the ancestral land of the Umatilla.

  1. As head of the foundation, what is your biggest dream to realize through Repat Armenia? The colonizing population formed much of the legal system that developed over the course of settling the United States.
  2. We know already from earlier in this chapter that one of the biggest challenges facing expatriates and reasons for failure is unhappiness of the spouse.
  3. Additionally, federal agencies and institutions must prepare inventories of human remains and funerary objects.
  4. Pearson protested to Governor Robert D. Logistical help can be important to ensuring the success of an overseas assignment.

Archaeologists said that because of Kennewick Man's great age, there was insufficient evidence to connect him to modern tribes. The great age of the remains makes this discovery scientifically valuable. One tribe claiming ancestry to Kennewick Man offered up a DNA test, and in 2015 it was found that the Kennewick man is "more closely related to modern Native Americans than any other living population.

The remains were buried on February 18, 2017, with 200 members of five Columbia Basin tribes, at an undisclosed location in the area. It is not an easy business to track, but the scholar Phyllis Messenger notes that some antiquities traders have written articles denouncing the agreements, which suggests that it is reducing items sold to them.

Looting and destruction of other civilizations have been characteristics of war recorded from the first accounts of all cultures. Minik Wallace Kalaallit in New York, 1897 On September 30, 1897, Lieutenant Robert Peary brought six Inuit people from Greenland to the American Museum of Natural History in New York, at the request of the anthropologist Franz Boas, in order to "obtain leisurely certain information which will be of the greatest scientific importance" regarding Inuit culture.

They began to perform their tribal healing process and were mocked for their bizarre behavior. In February, the first Inuit died and shortly after that two more followed. By the time the sickness had run its course, two men survived. Minik was adopted by a superintendent of the museum, while Uissakassak returned to his homeland in Greenland.

Later, after being lied to and being told that his father Qisuk had received a proper Inuit burial, Minik was shocked to find his father's skeleton on display in the museum. In 1993 the museum finally agreed to return the four Inuit skeletons to Greenland for proper burial.

14.3 International HRM Considerations

Representatives of the Museum went to Greenland that year to participate. In contrast to peoples in other areas, some local Inuit thought that the burial was more desired by the Christian representatives of the museum, and that the remains could have just as appropriately been kept in New York.

Privately owned sites are controlled by the owners. In some areas, archaeological foundations or similar organizations buy archaeological sites to conserve associated the cultural property.

Other countries may use three basic types of laws to protect cultural remains: Selective export control laws control the trade of the most important artifacts while still allowing some free trade.

Recruitment and Selection

Countries that use these laws include Canada, Japanand the United Kingdom. Total export restriction laws are used by some countries to enact an embargo and completely shut off export of cultural property. Many Latin American and Mediterranean countries use these laws. Other countries, such as Mexicouse national ownership laws to declare national ownership for all cultural artifacts. These laws cover control of artifacts that have not been discovered, to try to prevent looting of potential sites before exploration.