Repatriation & Institutional Reckoning:

My Experience as a Fellow on the Mimbres Sites Reconciliation Project¹

“If we are truly interested in repatriation as a form of restorative justice, if we want to actually return these ancestors and objects to their appropriate places of origin, then we need to reexamine the people, processes, social relations, and knowledges that shaped these collections…” ²

Dr. Margaret Bruchac, Anthropologist & Coordinator of Native American & Indigenous Studies, University of Pennsylvania

Introduction & Background
This past summer, I had the opportunity to work on a project both months and centuries in the making. Personally, I became aware of the Mimbres Sites Reconciliation Project just last fall, during my first semester as a graduate student in the Heritage Studies and Public History (HSPH) program at the University of Minnesota – Twin Cities (UMN). Realistically, though, this story began over 90 years ago, when the founder of the UMN Anthropology Department (my alma mater), Albert Jenks, and his graduate students exhumed hundreds of Native remains and artifacts from the Mimbres Region of the American Southwest. Initially funded by our very own Minneapolis Institute of Arts (MIA), the majority of Jenks’ findings were transported to Minneapolis, where they were housed at the University of Minnesota, the MIA, and later the Weisman Museum, without consent from their living relatives. 

While the remains are now in the stewardship of the Minnesota Indian Affairs Council (MIAC), the majority of the funerary objects remain at the Weisman to this day – despite 1) the passing of the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA) in 1990, and 2) the request for their return by associated tribes in 2014. The aim of the Mimbres Reconciliation Project, then, and my role within it, is to eventually return these ancestors and objects back home. In doing so, we hope to rectify not only the past 30 years of non-compliance, but also the injustices that occurred 100 years ago, and the centuries-old legacy of white-supremacy and extractive practices that underpin them.

Phase I: Navigating the Database & Creating a User-Guide
Like any project, the first portion of my fellowship involved catching up with the project’s history and previous contributions. In this endeavor, I was able to work closely with the Anthropology Department’s Lab and Collections Manager, Matt Edling. Via various Zoom meetings, he introduced me to the project’s newly-created Elevator database, which houses digital records of each bowl, artifact and burial exhumed by Jenks and his crew. The purpose of this database is especially important to the project’s mission as it serves as an accessible inventory of the collections, not only for the University, but for Tribal Historic Preservation Offices (THPOs)—key facilitators in the repatriation process. My role, then, was to make sure the database was both accurate and navigable before sending it their way.

Database Accuracy 
To ensure accuracy, I first compared the existing database records to the original excavation notes and the records of the Minnesota Indian Affairs Council. In doing so, I made sure each burial was accounted for, and marked any accompanying artifacts or bowls as “associated” or “unassociated” funerary objects. This is an especially significant distinction, as it identifies an object as having been placed with burials, and therefore, subject to repatriation under NAGPRA.

Database Navigability
Next up, I made sure THPOs could navigate the database with ease by creating a User-Guide. In the process, I made sure to reflect on my own experiences as a novice user, as well as gather feedback from my supervisors, Matt Edling and Professor Kat Hayes, along the way. In the end, the User-Guide turned into a 12-page PDF, divided into five sections: Sign-In, Home Page, Browsing Collections, Basic Searches, and Advanced Searches. Each section and subsection was bookmarked to ensure users could easily find their desired section. The document has since been linked to the database for easy access for THPOs and other approved users. 

Phase II: Working “Hands-On” (COVID-style)
Come mid-July, the University implemented in-depth processes so certain staff, faculty, and graduate students could access facilities in a safe manner. Archaeology being a rather tactile discipline, I too masked up and made my way to West Bank for the first time since March, to work in a secluded lab. Here, I went through bags of ceramic sherds (pieces of pottery), faunal remains (animal bones), and scanned many glass slide images photographed during the initial excavations. I performed these tasks in hopes of locating any missing funerary objects, remains, or, at the very least, any missing provenience information in the images that may help define objects as burial associated (or “funerary”).

On another note, this hands-on work allowed me to practice proper protocol for handling archaeological and archival materials, and I was especially grateful to be equipped with masks, gloves, disinfectant, and a personal working space to reduce exposure as much as possible.

Concluding Remarks
As someone who aspires to work in collections management, the opportunity to work on this project was paramount. On one hand, I learned alongside a collections manager, engaging first-hand in practical tasks related to the job. On the other hand, I was also able to participate in the eventual reckoning of an almost century-long wrong-doing, committed by the same institution I attend. Though I know there is much more that needs to be done within and beyond this project, I can go forth more prepared to undergo the tedious yet restorative process that is repatriation, while working to disengage from the extractive practices that brought us here in the first place.

NOTES:
1. “In NAGPRA (25 USC 3005 and 43 CFR 10.10) the term repatriation means return of possession or control of Native American cultural items to lineal descendants, culturally affiliated Indian Tribes, and Native Hawaiian organizations.”  “Glossary.” Native American Graves and Repatriation Act, National Parks Service, U.S. Department of the Interior, http://www.nps.gov/subjects/nagpra/glossary.html. 

2. Bruchac, Margaret M. “Lost and found: NAGPRA, Scattered Relics, and Restorative Methodologies.” Museum Anthropology 33.2 (2010): 150.

Laura Meier is a second year graduate student in the Master in Heritage Studies and Public History program at the University of Minnesota – Twin Cities, following the program’s archaeological heritage track. Her research interests include the ethics of collections management, and the intersections of accessibility and knowledge sovereignty in digital platforms.