repatriation

First of all, I want to apologize for not writing the past few weeks. I hope to make it up with some extra length this time, because quite a lot has happened.

After my progress report meeting two weeks ago, I walked into the museum that afternoon rather apathetically. I didn’t know what I wanted to do next, and the suggestion that I try to connect things more to anthropology was weighing on me. I’ve always viewed anthropology as my fun major, whereas journalism is my practical major. It’s easy to determine what I would want to do in journalism, but I know I couldn’t stay sane without my anthro classes. How could I emphasize anthropology in my museum work? And what exactly makes an anthropological perspective different from a historical perspective in a museum’s sense? I’ve heard history majors discussing what they like about history — studying the people — but how is that different? After reflecting on these questions for a while, I have determined the difference to be in the focus: historians seem to focus on individuals or small groups (like a military company), but anthropologists study the culture as a whole. I might be wrong, but this is my rather uneducated interpretation of a question that is incredibly relevant to my life’s path.

But I digress. That day, I walked into the museum feeling lost and glum, even contemplating just going home to reflect (I didn’t). Back in the collections room, however, Lynn, a volunteer in the genealogical center and an archaeologist by trade, Jessica, and two interns were just beginning to sit down to a meeting. The interns were both also anthropology major. I was invited to join them, and we learned about NAGPRA laws.

Lynn walked us through the history of the law and gave anecdotes of her own experience. She emphasized how good the law is for building relationships with tribes in the US. Although some archaeologists and biological anthropologists lament the law’s existence because they feel they could do so much more with the artifacts, Lynn described how it is within the nature of anthropology to support the law. By recognizing — through self-detrimental action, no less — the historical property of these tribes, we show that we value and respect their history and culture. When she showed us some of the artifacts in our collection, she trembled with emotion at the history.

The level of respect she had for the artifacts was amazing. For example, because we were all girls, she specifically mentioned rules regarding “moon time” — meaning, menstruation. Apparently, women are believed to be particularly powerful during this time of the month, and, out of respect, we should not handle sensitive artifacts during those days, especially human bones.  This is one of the things that I truly love about anthropology: just how aware and thoughtful the anthropological thought process is about the intricacies of others’ beliefs. I don’t mind stepping aside every once in a while, if need be.

Back to the meeting: Lynn and Jessica asked me and the two other interns if we would be interested in learning the process of repatriating items through NAGPRA law. I heartily agreed, as did the others. Until the job is completed, we will be going through the boxes — especially the Sprague Collection — to pull out associated and non-associated ceremonial artifacts. For now, we will compile a list, but eventually we will help the museum repatriate the items.

This seems like the guidance I’m looking for. I’m fairly certain that part of my problem with the Sprague Collection is its size. I need a small project to begin with and might need to proceed with small project deadlines in the future.

The day after the meeting, I began going through a box of items that Kate had set aside because they appeared to be NAGPRA-relevant. I catalogued them onto an Excel spreadsheet and began going through other boxes. It amazes me just how bluntly disrespectful archaeologists were years ago. Sprague’s notebook clearly states that some of these were found in mounds or next to skeletons! It makes me glad to live when I live.

After going through the NAGPRA box and Sprague’s notebooks, I’m a little at a loss of what to do. The other two interns haven’t been working with me, so I can’t bounce ideas off of them. Instead, I’ve been turning to Donald for advice. I like him: he’s an older man with a long, gray ponytail with a history in historical architecture restoration, who pokes fun at all the interns. He and Lynn (they are married) are a wonderful addition to the museum’s ambiance, and I’m very happy that they are there. I feel like I can turn to them for any kind of career advice.

The obviously NAGRA things are completed, so I now have to sift through the thousands of artifacts to try to distinguish what is special from not special. I don’t know how to do this — I don’t even know which points are which! Donald recommends that I just begin to familiarize myself with the collection and focus on the differences between Woodland and Archaic points, for example. Unfortunately, this means I am back to the mental stagnancy of a few weeks ago, when I didn’t want to even look at that area of the room. I hope that my awareness of this matter will make it less of an issue. I want to want this!

I will be working on my own for now, but I really want some expert guidance. Donald says he doesn’t know much about points, and Lynn, when she’s there, is always busy in the genealogical center. Supposedly, we will be bringing in experts from the Blenner-Hasset Museum, for instance, and I will soon begin to attend lectures and conferences. Kate did these last summer, when she was heavily involved in the collection, but I’m concerned. I don’t know if I have time for all of this! I want to become obsessed with this collection, but I also don’t want to give up my other classes or large portions of my free time for it. I suppose I just need to contemplate my options some more.