NAGPRA and Native Hawaiian Organizations

NAGPRA and Native Hawaiian Organizations

Unit Author: Angela Neller (Native Hawaiian), Curator Wanapum Heritage Center

Description

NAGPRA plays a significant role in the formation of Native Hawaiian identity and authority as it relates to the identification and repatriation of human remains and cultural objects. NAGPRA creates an arena in Hawaii where objects can be alienated and appropriated given that there is no one governing body who serves the interests of all Native Hawaiians. This alienation is tied to legal, political, and cultural authority. 

Learning Goals

  • To understand the implications that NAGPRA has for all Native Hawaiians.
  • To understand how NAGPRA does or does not work for Native Hawaiians.
  • Demonstrate how Hawaiians utilize NAGPRA

Terms and Concepts

  • Identity
  • Authority
  • Recognition
  • Past vs. Present
  • Traditional vs. Contemporary Practice
  • Authenticity vs. Reproduction
  • Historicity
  • Hegemony

Readings

Articles

Angela J. Neller, “From Utilitarian to Sacred: the Transformation of a Traditional Hawaiian Object” In Pacific Art: Persistence, Change, and Meaning edited by Anita Herle, Nick Stanley, Karen Stevenson, and Robert L. Welsch (Crawford House Publishing, 2002) pp. 126-138.

E. Sunny Greer, “A Call for Healing from the Tragedy of NAGPRA in Hawaii” In Accomplishing NAGPRA: Perspectives on the Intent, Impact, and Future of the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (Corvallis: Oregon State University Press, 2013) pp. 99-113.

Videos

"Ka Hoʻina: Going Home" 

"Office of Hawaiian Affairs (OHA) TV shows, 2004-2005. Hawaiian Burials and Legislative Package." Uploaded by Lance Foster (4 Dec 2011).

"Na wai e hoʻōla i nā iwi (Who will save the bones) TRAILER." Posted by HawaiianVoice (29 Oct 2012).

"Hui Malama I Na Kupuna O Hawaii Nei:" an interview with Executive Director Edward Halealoha Ayau 

Case Studies

Hawaiian Disputes (see findings below)

  • At a March 13–15, 2005, public meeting in Honolulu, HI, the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Review Committee (Review Committee) considered a dispute between Hui Malama I Na Kupuna O Hawai’i Nei and the Bishop Museum. The dispute focused on whether three items from the Island of Moloka’i in the possession of the Bishop Museum are subject to repatriation under provisions of the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act. (https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2005-06-01/pdf/05-10816.pdf)
  • At a March 13–15, 2005, public meeting in Honolulu, HI, the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Review Committee (Review Committee) considered a dispute between Hui Malama I Na Kupuna O Hawai’i Nei and the Bishop Museum. The dispute focused on the disposition of carved sandstone blocks from the Island of Moloka’i known as Kalaina Wawae that are under the control of the Bishop Museum. (https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2005-06-01/pdf/05-10809.pdf)
  • At a March 13–15, 2005, public meeting in Honolulu, HI, the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Review Committee (Review Committee) considered a dispute between Hui Malama I Na Kupuna O Hawai’i Nei and Hawaii Volcanoes National Park. The dispute focused on whether five items in the possession of the park are subject to repatriation under provisions of the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act. (https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2005-06-01/pdf/05-10795.pdf)
  • At a May 9-10, 2003, public meeting in St. Paul, MN, the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Review Committee considered a dispute between the Royal Hawaiian Academy of Traditional Arts (Honolulu, HI) and the Bernice Pauahi Bishop Museum (Honolulu, HI). The dispute focuses on whether an appropriate repatriation pursuant to the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act has been completed between the Bishop Museum and 13 culturally affiliated Native Hawaiian organizations for 83 cultural items that were recovered in the early 20th century from the Kawaihae Caves complex on Hawaii Island, HI. (https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2003-08-20/pdf/03-21335.pdf)
  • At a November 1996 public meeting in Myrtle Beach, SC and March 1997 public meeting in Norman, OK, the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Review Committee (Review Committee) considered a dispute between the City of Providence, RI, the Office of Hawaiian Affairs, and Hui Malama I Na Kupuna ’O Hawai ’i Nei. The dispute focused on the identification of a Hawaiian figurine and right of possession under NAGPRA. 
  • At a February 1993, public meeting in Honolulu, HI, the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Review Committee (Review Committee) considered a dispute between the P.A. Hearst Museum of Anthropology, University of California, Berkeley, CA, and Hui Ma ̄lama I Na ̄ Ku ̄puna O Hawai i Nei. The dispute focused on determining the cultural affiliation of human remains collected from the beach at Waimanalo, Oahu. 
  • At a February 1993, public meeting in Honolulu, HI, the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Review Committee (Review Committee) considered a dispute between the P.A. Hearst Museum of Anthropology, University of California, Berkeley, CA, and Hui Ma ̄lama I Na ̄ Ku ̄puna O Hawai i Nei. The dispute focused on human remains derived from the Hawaiian Islands and identified at “Polynesian”. 

Websites

State of Hawaii’s State Historic Preservation Division’s Burial Sites Program