The Hopi,the katsinam,and the French courts: looking outside the law in the repatriation of Indigenous cultural heritage

Katsinam (plural of katsina) are effigies central to the religion of the Hopi people of northern Arizona in the United States. Since 2013 the Hopi have sought the return of katsinam being sold in French auction houses. The Hopi have employed a series of legal actions to stop the auctions. All such actions, however, have been consistently denied by French courts. This paper uses social science analysis to understand why the legal actions of the Hopi failed. This paper treats the case of the katsinam as a cautionary lesson in cultural heritage studies, with the goal of drawing insights that can inform other situations involving the repatriation of Indigenous cultural heritage.     

What Remains? Reconciling Repatriation,Aboriginal Culture,Representation and the Past

ABSTRACT This paper uses the repatriation and ceremonial reburial of Indigenous remains to La Perouse, an Indigenous community in Sydney, as a lens through which to examine the cultural politics of representation and recognition that are central to contemporary Aboriginal identity construction. The return of the skeletal remains of 21 individuals highlights the role that representative bodies — past and present, individual and organizational — play in engagements between the State and Aboriginal people. Heralded by some as a sincere sign of reconciliation and treated as suspect and misguided by others, the reburial produced diverse responses from both Aboriginal and non‐Aboriginal people alike. Speakers at the repatriation focused on righting the wrongs of the past, reconciliation, and moving forward in cooperation, suggesting the redemptive significance of these events. Among Kooris at La Perouse, debates about community, representation, and belonging expose the ways that Aboriginal people and communities operate through, against, and beyond ‘whitefella’ structures of recognition to define who they are and what their culture is.     

Ethnographic sound collections and Australian Aboriginal Heritage: Kaytetye song traditions remembered

ABSTRACT

Song was one of the principal methods of transmitting knowledge in the fundamentally oral societies of Indigenous Australia. As the breadth of song traditions has greatly diminished over the past 200 years, archival recordings of song now form a significant resource of intangible cultural heritage for Australia’s Indigenous people. The song performances recorded in the past are now being rediscovered, remembered and in some cases revived. This paper presents findings from a recent project involving the return of a set of poorly documented recordings of songs to Kaytetye people in central Australia. These newly discovered recordings, the earliest ever made of Kaytetye singing, are shown to be an important heritage resource for these communities. Working collaboratively with senior song experts in order to gain a better understanding of the meaning and cultural significance of various songs, I document the how this discussion of audio material generated important social-histories and memories, reinforced local understandings of rights in cultural heritage, and revealed both continuities and changes in Kaytetye ceremonial and song practice.     

Returned to Sender: Some Predicaments of Re‐indigenisation

ABSTRACT It is some 40 years since Australia officially re‐indigenised its Aborigines, at the same time giving rise to cultures of indigenism in the community at large. For those who lived in the closely settled areas, re‐indigenisation entails a new positioning vis‐à‐vis what can be recovered of traditional practices and places, but also vis‐a‐vis non‐indigenous people involved in indigenism. The paper recounts the response of one such indigenous group to the possibility of learning secrets that had long been known to white people, but not to them.     

Situating In Situ: A Critical Geography of Agricultural Biodiversity Conservation in the Peruvian Andes and Beyond

This paper investigates seed politics through the case study of a native potato repatriation and related livelihood projects at the Parque de la Papa (Parque) in the Peruvian Andes. This in situ oriented agrobiodiversity initiative launches a compelling critique—framed in distinctly spatial terms—of standard ex situ conservation paradigms and policies. Specifically, it works to decentralize seed conservation and to re‐situate agrobiodiversity within in situ sites and situations. This spatial reconfiguration has political and epistemological implications: it recontextualizes agricultural expertise and the fruits thereof in the farms and daily lives of Andean communities; it grounds political interventions, which recently led to Peru's decade‐long moratorium on transgenics; and it offers a decolonizing vision of genetic resource value. Through a variety of practices and discourses the Parque is articulating and actualizing a critical geography of agrobiodiversity and its conservation.     

(Dis)(em)placing gender at Ukwimi: refugee resettlement and repatriation in eastern Zambia

There is growing recognition within feminist scholarship that managing displacement is a highly contested, politicized, and gendered process. This article seeks to contribute by demonstrating that the processes of resettlement and repatriation (both thought of as ‘solutions’ to displacement) are also contested, politicized, and gendered. My analysis is situated within feminist geopolitics and includes empirical data collected from interviews with and observations of Mozambican/Angolan refugees, their hosts, and institutional actors at Ukwimi Refugee Settlement (URS), Zambia. Specifically, the discussion focuses on two realities. First, that resettlement to formal, organized settlements (like URS) actively displaces gender dynamics, as illustrated by the case of Mozambican refugees resettled to URS. Second, that large-scale, organized repatriation also displaces gender relationships in profound ways, as demonstrated by the large-scale repatriation of Angolan refugees from URS. In the midst of multiple displacements, the daily (and highly gendered) struggles of people at URS reflect the concrete ways in which refugees and their hosts actively seek to emplace themselves at URS.     

“‘I just don’t ever use that word’: investigating stakeholders’ understanding of heritage”

Abstract

Understanding the value of heritage sites for diverse stakeholders requires both paying attention to the fields of power in which the sites operate and applying methodologies that are open to user-defined paradigms of value. In the U.S., official discourse often frames the value of heritage sites associated the deep Native American past as archaeological sites, an interpretation that is consistent with settler colonial ideologies. This narrative generally obfuscates connections between the heritage of the sites and contemporary peoples, and it effaces the history of colonialism and dispossession. A study of stakeholder-defined heritage at two contested sites in the central Midwest revealed both congruencies and conflicts among diverse constituencies’ articulations of the sites’ value. At Mounds State Park a proposed dam and reservoir ‘Mounds Lake’ project would inundate a large portion of the site. At Strawtown Koteewi, Native American tribes have made repatriation claims under the federal Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA).The study also problematised the term ‘cultural heritage’ as it is understood and used by the different constituencies, particularly for culturally and historically affiliated Native Americans. It also highlighted the positions of the constituencies within the broader fields of power implicated in these contested sites.     

‘England Failed to do her Duty towards Them’: The India Office and Pauper Indians in the Metropole, 1857–1914

This article examines how the India Office handled cases of destitute Indians, such as sailors and servants, who were stranded in Britain. The empire provided opportunities for work and travel, yet there were no securities for those who were taken advantage of by the system. This article highlights how the India Office was the institution expected to help distressed Indians and yet the secretary of state for India consistently refused to accept official responsibility for them. Nor did the British government try to prevent the problem from occurring in the first place. Instead, the official position taken by the secretary of state for India was to let social institutions intervene, arguing that, as British subjects, Indians could receive relief through the Poor Laws. Workhouses, however, were ill suited to Indians striving to return to their homes. This article addresses these issues through examining three key periods: the early to mid-nineteenth century; a shift in the 1880s when the India Office acknowledged a better policy was needed for the treatment of destitute Indians; and, the turn of the century when a Committee on Distressed Colonial and Indian Subjects was established in 1909. Through a focused study of India Office discourses, this article addresses the ambiguity of imperial policy and assesses how it contributed to competing understandings of British responsibility over imperial subjects.     

Repatriating the Japanese from New Caledonia, 1941–46

This paper considers the negotiations for the repatriation of the Japanese residents of New Caledonia who were transferred to Australia for internment after the outbreak of the Asia-Pacific theatre of World War II. It shows that whilst the Japanese residents’ place of origin was New Caledonia, it was deemed instead to be Japan, and they were repatriated to Japan either as part of the Anglo–Japanese civilian exchange of September 1942 or after the cessation of hostilities. The paper also shows that the Australian government had security concerns regarding the Japanese before and during the war but was willing to repatriate the Japanese to New Caledonia after the war should the New Caledonian authorities have been willing to accept them back. The New Caledonian authorities’ decision not to accept the Japanese back in New Caledonia resulted in their repatriation to Japan even though some expressed the wish to return to New Caledonia.