APPENDIX 23
Memorandum submitted by the Chitimacha
Tribe of Louisiana
Mr Speaker and Honourable Members of the House of
Commons,
Today, you meet on the issue of Cultural Property:
Return and Illicit Trade. As Chairman of the Sovereign Nation
of the Chitimacha Tribe of Louisiana, United States of America,
it is my wish that the concerns of the Chitimacha people be heard,
so that a better understanding may occur between England and Native
Americans. The issue of Cultural Property: Return and Illicit
Trade is not one easily addressed. As I am unable to be here to
address the House of Commons personally, I must pray that through
my words, an understanding of our Chitimacha culture, beliefs
and history will be created and touch each and every member.
To understand our present, we must look to our
past. Most people search at some point in their lives for an understanding
of who they are, by performing genealogical studies. This endeavour
is undertaken so that the individual and their families may establish
a link with their past, to give them a sense of who they are at
present. This link to our past is an integral part of who we are
as Chitimachas.
Recognised by the French and Spanish Governments
in the 1700s, and recognised by the United States Federal Government
on 31 August 1919, the Chitimacha are the only Federal Tribe in
the State of Louisiana who still occupies a portion of our aboriginal
homelands. The Reservation that we occupy is an original Chitimacha
village. Our oral history tells that we have always been here.
Our villages were located throughout the central to lower half
of Louisiana to the coastal waters of the Gulf of Mexico. We are
a mound-building people. Our deceased have always been buried
in earthen mounds. The last traditional mound burial was approximately
75 years ago. One year ago, we reburied the remains of ancestors
who had been disturbed by a major oil company. For reasons unknown
or understood, thousands of our ancestors were disrespectfully
removed from their final resting place and taken away from their
homelands. Through repatriation, we have brought home a significant
number of our ancestors, whose remains were housed in various
institutions in the United States. This process is ongoing, as
it is our goal to rightfully return our ancestors to their home,
where they may be properly, respectfully and ceremoniously laid
to rest.
We discovered that there are two of our Chitimacha
female ancestors in the possession of the Natural History Museum
in London. The ancestral remains are without question Chitimacha,
documented as such by your museum. I am aware that your museum
institutions have self-governing laws on their side, and that
the law of NAGPRA does not apply in countries outside of the United
States. But, under English Common Law, the dead cannot be owned.
NAGPRA simply extends common law property rights to the remains
of Native Americans. Museums will argue that these remains need
to be in their possession because they may be of some "scientific
value" in the future. It does not matter that our ancestors
who are in possession of the different institutions in England
are older than our mothers. They are still directly related to
our people, known and documented to be Chitimacha. They are our
ancestors. We need to put them to rest. Their spirits will not
be at peace until they are home, and safely placed back in the
earth where they belong, resting for eternity. It is unconscionable
that our ancestors have been placed in boxes on shelves, put on
display in cases, handled and examined for research purposes,
knowing that they remain in a state of unrest. Mr Speaker, I ask
each of the members of the House of Commons to search your heart
and understand how we feel as people. I ask each member to put
aside all logic from the scientific point of view. Open your hearts
as one human being to another. For it comes down to a simple but
important fact; all human beings, regardless of race, origin or
creed deserve the right to be properly and respectfully buried
at the time of death, without fear of disturbance or treatment
as specimens. I ask the Honourable Members of the House of Commons
to honour our request for the return of our ancestors.
1. INTRODUCTION
Attached to this submission of evidence is a
formal letter addressed to the Speaker of the House of Commons
and its members from Alton D LeBlanc, Jr, Chairman of the Chitimacha
Tribe of Louisiana, United States of America. The Chitimacha Tribe
of Louisiana is a Federally recognised Native American Tribe,
who still occupies a portion of their aboriginal homelands.
2. MEMORANDA
OF EVIDENCE
(a) The Natural History Museum, London, has
in its possession the largest collection of indigenous human remains
in the United Kingdom.
(b) The Natural History Museum has always
refused requests to repatriate human remains on the grounds that
it is constrained by the British Museum Act (1963), which disallows
it to de-accession any items in its collection. The Museum also
argues that its human skeletal collection is of "considerable
scientific value".
(c) There are no national policies concerning
the repatriation of human remains or cultural items in the United
Kingdom. Unofficial policies are said to exist. Example: indication
that the Conference of Directors of National Museums and Galleries
developed an unofficial policy in 1993. To date, researchers have
been denied access to this document even when specifically requested.
(d) United Kingdom Museums may, if they wish,
follow the guidelines approved in 1994 by the Museum Ethnographers
Group "for the storage, display, interpretation and return
of human remains in United Kingdom museums" (Musuem's Journal
July 1994:23). While these guidelines stress that respect and
sensitivity must be accorded to requests for the return of human
remains and that all curators should make themselves aware of
the relevant issues, The MEG does not take any position as to
whether remains should or should not be on display, let alone
returned to relevant communities. Instead, the guidelines state
that the "rules and governance of the museum or institution
will dictate the parameters of any action", and that requests
should be resolved on a case by case basis, with consideration
of ownership, cultural significance, the scientific, educational
and historical importance of the material, the cultural and religious
values of the interested individuals or groups, and the strength
of their relationship with the remains in question.
(e) The Department of National Heritage considers
that repatriation is a matter for each individual museum. The
Museums and Galleries Commission share this opinion.
(f) With the exception of one museum, Edinburgh
University, all museums containing large collections of human
remains have thus far refused to repatriate their holdings.
(g) The repatriation issue has been high
profile in the past year, due to the return of Australian Aboriginal
remains and the return of the remains of Long Wolf from Brompton
Cemetery to Wounded Knee. The issue has attracted much media attention
and has great public support.
(h) The two Chitimacha ancestral remains
were once part of the large human skeletal collection at the University
of Oxford, and were possibly part of the Christchurch College
collection before that (as indicated by the "Ch, Ch"
listed below) which suggests that they were collected very early
on. Christchurch College is one of the oldest colleges at Oxford
University and had one of the earliest collections of anatomical/anthropological
"specimens".
(i) The first two references to the Chitimacha
ancestral remains are in the Oxford archives. The first consists
of two index entries in a card catalogue held at the Institute
of Biological Anthropology; United States, Chetimacha Indian,
Louisiana, Cranium. Adult. Female? M Knowles MS Catalogue p 21.
Pres By Dr Danberry. Ch Ch 828ecc Am 30.907. United States, Chetimacha
Indian Louisiana. Cranium. Young Adult. Female, 3rd Molars erupted
but not fully in position. Basi-occipital united Fronto-occipital
deformation? M Knowles, MS Catalogue, p 21 Am 30.908.
(j) The second reference is in a manuscript
catalogue written by J Hull in 1960. 907 (skull of) Chetimacha
Indian: no lower jaw Louisiana, USA. Presented by Dr Daubeny.
Ch Ch Ch Ch OC 828e, in Cat Cran Var Human Race. 908 (skull of)
Chetimacha Indian: no lower jaw. Louisiana, USA.
(k) The Natural History Museum, London, UK
card catalogue entries are: My ID 151, Cranium, skull, status,
present, CATNO: 907 Ch Ch 828c, Ref: Hull J 1960: (skull of) Chetimacha
Indian: no lower jaw. Tribe: Chetimache. Donor: Daubeny, Dr Location:
Natural History Museum, London. Oldlocs: Oxford University. The
second crania entry: My ID 152, Brief, cranium, Status: present,
Catno 908, Ref Hull, J 1960 Catalogue of Crania. Desc Hull 1960:
(skull of) Chetimache Indian; no lower jaw, Tribe: Chetimache,
Old locs: Oxford University.
(l) Through the English Museums own documents
we see that our ancestral remains are definitely identified as
Chitimacha (Chetimache).
(m) Under English Common Law, the dead cannot
be owned. If this is so, then how is it that English museums have
in their possession and ownership human remains? It is also English
law that any time human remains are discovered or unearthed, they
must be reburied immediately.
(n) The Native American Graves Protection
and Repatriation Act of 1990 is a law that is in force in the
United States of America. But, NAGPRA is simply an extension of
common law property rights that is given to the remains of Native
Americans.
3. CHITIMACHA
FACTS
(a) In Section 2, part I, the catalogue
identification card states Fronto-occipital deformation. It is
a well-known and well-documented fact that the Chitimacha in pre-historic
and early historic periods practised head deformation as part
of their culture (Bureau of American Ethnology, Bulletin 137:
Indians of the Southeastern United States, John R Swanton: page
540).
(b) Recognised by the French and Spanish
Governments in the mid 1700s and by the United States of America,
the Chitimacha are an intact Federally recognised Tribe still
occupying a portion of their aboriginal homelands.
(c) As leader of the Chitimacha people, Chairman
Alton D LeBlanc, Jr is knowledgeable about the Chitimacha culture
and sensitive to the issues of return of Chitimacha ancestors.
(d) Ancestral remains, even if taken from
burial grounds prior to laws about such matters designating these
acts as illegal, should not remain in museums' collections simply
because there were no laws in place at the time this desecration
took place. Ignorance which occurred in the past, is no excuse
for deliberate ignorance of the present, when there are now laws
in place for protection against grave robbing and owning human
remains.
It is the hope of our people that we will be
able to bring our ancestors home where they belong, to be respectfully
and honourably returned to the earth, where they will finally
be able to rest in eternal safety and peace. England has the opportunity,
through new government legislation, to become a leader of many
European institutions by setting a precedent for the return of
aboriginal remains home to their descendants. The Select Committee
hearing titled Cultural Property: Return and Illicit Trade is
an appropriate title. Please hold true to this sentiment.
March 2000
|
