Federal Involvement In Native American Art And Spirituality
Eve Auction House And The Acoma Ceremonial Shield Part 2
Who decides what is art and what is sacred? What happens when the lines are blurred?
In this series of in-depth articles, LAND+OBJECT explores the intersection of Federal, Tribal, and Spiritual law through the story of a stolen war shield and the presaged chaos that unfolded.
This is Part 2, to read Part 1 please click here.
As a result of this scandal, the auction experienced a low turnout and many bids failed to meet the estimates set in place by EVE.1 Following the federal letter of complaint, EVE pulled the shield from the auction.
Official representatives of the Haa’kumeh, Diné (Navajo), and Shiewhibak (Isleta) tribal governments felt that loopholes within existing laws allowed Native American art collectors to purposefully exploit sacred items and traffick the objects overseas to be sold at auction.2
The Native American Graves and Repatriation Protection Act of 1990, or NAGPRA, designates ownership of Native American remains, funerary objects, and other sacred items to the lineal descendants of the item or its tribal government.3
NAGPRA was originally enacted with the intention of repatriating the more than 20,000 skeletal remains from museums, universities, and other federally funded institutions as tribes sought to regain sovereignty through the repatriation of these remains and have them reburied.
When signed into law, institutions were required to create a list of their inventory and distribute it to indigenous nations across the United States so that they could request items for repatriation. While this act does a great deal to protect remains and items of cultural patrimony within the United States, there are legislative issues that prevent the protection of these objects on an international scale.
Secondly, this act does not take action against private individuals or non-federally funded entities such as auction houses. As a result, on March 31st, 2016 the PROTECT Patrimony Resolution was then introduced by Congressman Steve Pearce to formally condemn the theft, illegal possession, sale, transport, and export of sacred tribal objects and to seek additional assistance from various branches of the federal government.
However, this may not be in the best interest of tribes that seek a greater degree of sovereignty and autonomy from the United States government. Traditional dispute resolution practices in which the family of both the victim and the offender consult elders and/or spiritual leaders to resolve the issue in an alternative manner may be ignored by the federal approach which utilizes punitive measures and an expensive legal system.
Furthermore, the definition provided within NAGPRA regarding what classifies an object as one of sacred importance leaves much to be desired. It’s important to note that indigenous artists do create many art objects specifically made for sale and are easily found online and at well-publicized events such as the Santa Fe Indian Market and the Gathering of Nations. Sacred objects, however, have oftentimes been passed down and safeguarded in spite of devastating historical tragedies. Others may have been created to be used during a ceremony or event. Some may have been created only to be intentionally destroyed or slowly decay.
Then-Governor of the Acoma Pueblo, Kurt Riley agreed that it would be difficult for a person outside of a tribal nation to understand which items held sacred value and which were art objects, “It’s a struggle to actually define what an item of cultural patrimony is.”4 It can be agreed, however, that art objects are representational of an aspect of the culture whereas sacred objects are integral to the culture and are oftentimes recognized as having the same rights as a human being.
This concept of non-humans having human rights is illustrated in New Zealand as lawmakers have given the Te Awa Tupua (Whanganui) river the same legal recognition as a human being in March of 2017.5 The Whanganui Iwi tribe was overwhelmed with this result after their 140-year battle to protect the river, which they consider to be “an indivisible and living whole”.
In response to weak legislation that was unable to adequately protect the Acoma ceremonial shield, United States senators introduced legislation with similar intentions as the New Zealand government. However, unlike the New Zealand government, which benefits from strong Maori representation, Native Americans are a minority within the legislative decision-making process in the United States. Because of this disparity in representation, it’s possible that legislation may be introduced which is counterintuitive or overreaching to the tribe’s wishes. Further complicating matters, when tribal members are involved, they may pass legislation that affects hundreds of other tribes with differing viewpoints, however, obtaining the full consent and input for each and every tribe would be extremely difficult.
Under the PROTECT Patrimony Resolution, federal agents of the Department of Homeland Security would be authorized to investigate cases of suspected illegal possession of sacred tribal objects. These items are likely held in the homes of private collectors and on indigenous reservations. The use of teargas, rubber bullets, attack dogs, and water cannons in below-freezing conditions on unarmed Native American protesters at Standing Rock by the very same department occurred as this bill was passing the house and senate.6 7 The UN among many other organizations, communities, and individuals came forward as vocal opponents against their treatment of Native Americans. 8
On July 6th 2016, the Safeguard Tribal Objects of Patrimony (STOP) Act, introduced by Senator Martin Heinrich sought to close the loophole preventing present legislation from adequately protecting items of cultural patrimony from leaving the United States. Penalties would be increased for offenders but during a two-year amnesty period, sacred items could be voluntarily returned without disciplinary action.
This act also assigns the United States Government Accountability Office to complete a report about items of cultural patrimony that are illegally trafficked, along with recommendations to the Department of Justice, the Department of State, and the Department of the Interior on how to end this practice.
Inherently, many problems arise when items of cultural patrimony are cataloged and elders are forced to divulge information about the item. In the act, there is no mention of…
Thank you for reading!
Eve Auction House And The Acoma Ceremonial Shield Part 3 can be found here.
Schilling , Vincent. "Paris Auction Update: Acoma Shield Pulled, Attendance Low Amid
Protests." Indian Country Media Network. May 31, 2016. Accessed March 31, 2017.
"Heinrich Introduces Bill To Prohibit Exporting Sacred Native American Items" U.S. Senator
Martin Heinrich of New Mexico. July 06, 2016.
Schaaf, Gregory. "Acoma Ceremonial Shield Questions." Telephone interview by author. April 5, 2017.
“Heinrich Introduces Bill To Prohibit Exporting Sacred Native American Items" U.S. Senator
Martin Heinrich of New Mexico. July 06, 2016.
Dwyer, Colin. "A New Zealand River Now Has The Legal Rights Of A Human." NPR. March
16, 2017. Accessed May 01, 2017.
Nigro, Michael. "The Revolution Will Not Be Televised... But It Will Be Livestreamed." The
Huffington Post. March 17, 2017.
PROTECT Patrimony Resolution, H.Con.Res.122 (2016)
Bearak, Max. "U.N. officials denounce ‘inhuman’ treatment of Native American pipeline
protesters." The Washington Post. November 15, 2016.