Can Repatriation Heal the Wounds of History

Dados Bibliográficos

ID11664629
AutoresChip Colwell (0000-0003-0836-3394, autor correspondente)
Ano2019
Volume41
Fascículo1
Páginas90-110
Data de publicação2019-02-01
Peer ReviewedSim
Open AccessNão
TipoARTICLE
PeriódicoThe Public Historian (JOURNAL)
Identificadores do periódicoISSN: 0272-3433 • E-ISSN: 1533-8576
EditoraUniversity of California Press (PUBLISHER • US)
DOI10.1525/tph.2019.41.1.90
OpenAlexW2913686661
IdiomaEN
Citações recebidas19
Referências citadas14

In 1990, the US Congress passed the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA), which in part established a legal procedure for Native Americans to reclaim cultural items and ancestral remains from museums and federal agencies. Many advocates have framed NAGPRA as a kind of restorative justice in which “healing” is fundamentally integrated into the repatriation process. This article engages with a growing literature that ensures questions of healing are not just casually asserted but closely examined, by critically analyzing why and how NAGPRA has led to the kinds of conflict resolution and peace-building envisioned by some of its proponents. A survey of tribal repatriation workers reveals that “healing” for Native American communities is not uniform in practice or merely the end point of conflict. Rather, it is expressed in five different themes, illustrating that healing is one component of a complex socio-political process that circles around the law’s implementation

Criminology · Cultural property · Economic Justice · Ethnology · Native american · Political science · Politics · Repatriation · Restorative justice · Sociology · Anthropological Studies and Insights · Cultural Heritage Management and Preservation · History · Law · Museums and Cultural Heritage