Ivy League Museum Latest to Remove Indigenous Items

By Isaac White.

In a landmark response to recent federal legislation, the Peabody Museum of Archaeology and Ethnology at Harvard University has initiated the removal of Native American funerary objects from its public displays. This decisive action is in direct compliance with the latest amendments to the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA), a pivotal law that mandates the repatriation of Native American ancestral remains and associated funerary objects.

The newly enforced regulations underscore a significant shift towards greater respect for and protection of Indigenous cultural heritage, prohibiting the exhibition of these sacred items without prior consultation and explicit consent from the relevant tribes.

The museum’s commitment to adhering to these regulations reflects a broader institutional ethos of respect and collaboration with Native American communities. In a statement to The Boston Globe, the Peabody Museum elaborated on its longstanding practice of engaging with tribal nations regarding its exhibits:

“Exhibitions have always been discussed during Tribal consultations and cultural items have been removed from display at Tribal request,” the museum said. “With the new NAGPRA regulations the Museum is in the process of removing all funerary belongings and likely funerary belongings off display in anticipation of consultation.”

This proactive stance underscores the museum’s dedication to ethical stewardship and cultural sensitivity, aligning its practices with the evolving legal and ethical landscape governing the display and repatriation of Native American cultural items.

In the wake of revised regulations under the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA), a wave of change has swept through museums nationwide, signaling a collective shift towards compliance and respect for Native American cultural norms.

Harvard University’s Peabody Museum of Archaeology and Ethnology is finally joining in the movement, alongside notable institutions such as the Field Museum in Chicago and the Cleveland Museum of Art, which have adjusted their exhibits in line with the new mandates. Similarly, the American Museum of Natural History in New York has decided to close two of its large halls, underscoring the impact of the updated NAGPRA regulations on museum practices across the country.

The Peabody Museum’s response to the revised NAGPRA regulations raises questions about its historical practices and the timeliness of its actions. Despite facing prior scrutiny for handling repatriation processes, the museum’s commitment to compliance is now part of a broader trend among museums.

This shift prompts inquiries into why it took so long for institutions like the Peabody to address their responsibilities under NAGPRA, and the impact of their past actions on Indigenous communities remains a subject of concern. While museums adapt, they must grapple with historical negligence in preserving Indigenous heritage, highlighting the need for more critical examination and accountability.

In an acknowledgment made in 2021, the Peabody Museum of Archaeology and Ethnology at Harvard University finally recognized the implications of its historical practices on Native American communities. Established in 1866, the museum expressed their legacy is deeply intertwined with settler colonialism and imperialism, culminating in the accumulation of one of the nation’s largest collections of American Indian remains.

This belated admission shines a spotlight on the museum’s extensive role in perpetuating past injustices, prompting questions about the reasons behind its prolonged silence regarding its actions.

The museum, underlining its obligations according to the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA), asserted that it has initiated various initiatives aimed at critically scrutinizing its history and enhancing ethical stewardship. These initiatives encompass an increase in repatriation efforts, including the return of significant cultural items to Native communities and the restitution of hair samples collected from Native American children during the 1930s.

While these actions may be interpreted as a belated effort by the Peabody Museum to address its strained relationship with Native American communities, they also raise concerns about the museum’s delay in acknowledging historical wrongdoings and the sincerity of these endeavors in fostering true healing and reconciliation.

As the Peabody Museum embarks on a comprehensive review of its exhibits to align with the updated NAGPRA regulations, the extent of the items to be removed remains uncertain. However, an update on the museum’s website has outlined plans for the temporary closure of nine galleries, with closures scheduled at various times through February 16, highlighting the museum’s proactive approach to compliance.

In its attempt to foster what it claims are respectful and collaborative relationships with Native American communities, the museum has frequently showcased exhibitions purportedly dedicated to honoring and exploring Native American heritage and perspectives. However, these efforts appear to be overshadowed by the museum’s historical practices and the vast collection of Native American remains and cultural items it amassed over the years, casting doubt on the authenticity of its commitment.

Per reporting from Harvard Magazine, “The Museum has collaborated with Tribal Nations on new exhibitions for many years, including the ongoing exhibits The Legacy of Penobscot Canoes in collaboration with the Penobscot Nation and Wiyohpiayata: Lakota Images of the Contested West co-curated with Lakota artist Butch Thunder Hawk,” the Peabody detailed in a statement. Furthermore, the museum underscored its respectful practices by noting, “The Museum has not exhibited ancestral remains for more than twenty years.”

The Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA), enacted in 1990, represents a crucial legislative framework requiring the repatriation of human remains, funerary objects, sacred objects, and cultural patrimony to Native American tribes. Initially, institutions had a five-year window to catalog their collections and facilitate the return of these items.

However, more than three decades later, challenges persist, with Harvard among those institutions still holding significant numbers of Native American artifacts, one of the largest collections in the nation. This delay has drawn criticism, notably at a conference that convened Indigenous leaders at the university.

The recent regulatory updates extend the timeline, allowing institutions until 2029 to revise their inventories and engage in consultations with Native communities. NAGPRA’s mandate underscores the principle that human remains and cultural items, particularly those obtained from federal or tribal lands, should be treated with dignity and respect, rightfully belonging to lineal descendants, Indian Tribes, and Native Hawaiian organizations.

This legislation aims to foster ongoing dialogue and understanding between museums, federal agencies, and Native communities, while acknowledging the role of museums in preserving historical and cultural heritage.

Moreover, NAGPRA outlines procedures for handling new discoveries of Native American remains and cultural items, ensuring that these are managed in a manner respectful to Indigenous heritage and legal stipulations. This framework for repatriation and respectful treatment of Native American cultural heritage underscores a commitment to rectifying past wrongs and promoting a more inclusive and respectful engagement with Indigenous cultures and communities.

Building upon its recent commitment to comply with NAGPRA regulations and to rectify past oversights, the Peabody Museum has accelerated its repatriation efforts. Recent reports from the Harvard Gazette highlight the museum’s significant progress: as of late October, the Peabody had successfully returned the remains of 4,347 individuals and 10,016 funerary objects to their respective communities.

These figures represent a substantial portion of the items previously reported to the federal government, demonstrating the museum’s recently shown dedication to addressing the concerns of Native American communities and honoring their ancestral connections. Furthering its commitment, the university has introduced initiatives to facilitate the repatriation process, including offering travel funding for tribal representatives.

This support aims to ensure that tribes can directly engage with the museum, allowing for the physical transfer of items in a manner that respects the cultural and spiritual significance of these artifacts. The revised NAGPRA regulations introduce several key amendments to enhance the repatriation process, emphasizing the importance of consulting with and obtaining approval from Native communities before displaying sacred objects.

One notable change is the directive for institutions to respect the “indigenous knowledge of lineal descendants, tribes, and Native Hawaiian organizations” throughout the repatriation efforts. Additionally, the regulations now eliminate the category of “culturally unidentifiable human remains,” refining the criteria for cultural affiliation to more closely align with the original intentions of the law. These updates underscore a shift towards a more inclusive and respectful approach to managing and returning Native American cultural heritage, reflecting a broader understanding and acknowledgment of Indigenous rights and traditions.

The Peabody Museum’s delayed compliance and past handling of repatriation processes have drawn criticism. While they are now taking steps to align with NAGPRA regulations, questions remain about why it took so long and the impact of their actions on Indigenous communities. As museums adapt, they are also facing scrutiny for historical negligence in preserving Indigenous heritage.