ProPublica is a nonprofit newsroom that investigates abuses of energy. Signal as much as obtain our largest tales as quickly as they’re printed.
20 years in the past, an anthropology professor on the College of Utah requested the Nationwide Science Basis to fund analysis on Native American ancestors to find out when the cultivations of crops like corn first turned prevalent of their cultures.
This story is a part of The Repatriation Undertaking, a sequence investigating the return of Native American ancestral stays.
The research, in accordance with the analysis proposals, would contain analyzing Ancestral Pueblo stays that museums had excavated round 1900 from a few of the Southwest’s most sacred websites: a deep rift that winds by way of Bears Ears Nationwide Monument in Utah, an historical village close to cliff dwellings in Colorado and the remnants of a settlement at Chaco Canyon in New Mexico that dates again greater than a thousand years. Practically the entire stays had been held at Harvard College’s Peabody Museum of Archaeology and Ethnology and the American Museum of Pure Historical past in New York.
The evaluation would destroy parts of the ancestral stays however yield useful info, together with a extra exact date of when the people lived, Joan Brenner Coltrain, the Utah professor, stated within the analysis proposals. This info may assist the establishments lastly return the stays to descendant tribes, she stated on the time.
The NSF offered $222,218 underneath two grants for analysis that spanned eight years, beginning in 2002. However the research by no means resulted in Harvard or the AMNH repatriating human stays to any of the tribes that hint their ancestry to websites studied by Brenner Coltrain, together with the Pueblo tribes of New Mexico and the Hopi in Arizona.
As a substitute, the work impressed much more damaging analysis on ancestral stays by different scientists supported by federal funding and accomplished with out the consent of tribes, lots of which view such research as a violation of their traditions and beliefs.
“There’s somehow this perspective that this kind of research will enhance us or benefit us,” stated Theresa Pasqual, director of the historic preservation workplace for the Pueblo of Acoma. “What it does is it bolsters their careers; it bolsters their professional, academic standing. Let’s be real about it.”
In 1990, Congress handed the Native American Graves Safety and Repatriation Act, anticipating that inside a decade federally funded museums and universities would return tens of 1000’s of ancestral stays and burial objects. However as ProPublica reported this yr, U.S. museums proceed to carry the stays of greater than 100,000 Native American ancestors, nearly all of which they are saying are “culturally unidentifiable,” which means they’re unable to find out which tribe, if any, can rightfully declare them.
ProPublica discovered that by funding scientific research on Native American human stays, the NSF and different federal companies have created incentives for establishments to carry on to ancestors in ways in which undermine the objectives of NAGPRA. Federal companies have awarded no less than $15 million to universities and museums for such analysis for the reason that legislation’s passage, a ProPublica evaluation discovered.
In consequence, tribes have been not solely denied alternatives to reclaim and rebury their ancestors, but additionally excluded from having a say over the remedy of the stays.
“There’s this perverse sense of ownership, that ‘these are our samples.’ And ‘You know, we’re protecting it for the good of research,’” stated Krystal Tsosie, a Navajo Nation citizen and assistant professor at Arizona State College whose analysis focuses on genetics and bioethics.
When one other group of researchers was set to publish a examine that had concerned damaging Native American stays — together with two from Chaco Canyon used within the Brenner Coltrain analysis — some on the workforce questioned the ethics of shifting ahead with out permission or enter from tribes. However an AMNH curator, who was listed as a contributor to the examine, discouraged outreach to Pueblo leaders, in accordance with beforehand unreported emails. Involving them may trigger researchers to lose management of the venture, he wrote.
The fallout from that examine led the AMNH in 2020 to ban damaging analysis on human stays.
The museum stated in response to questions from ProPublica that it has not repatriated the ancestral stays used within the research as a result of no tribes have formally claimed them underneath the legislation. Pueblo representatives have continued to go to the AMNH and meet with employees about its assortment, the assertion added.
A number of tribal members and representatives interviewed for this story stated museums’ calls for that tribes provoke the repatriation course of place an unfair burden on them to do the work of addressing the looting of Indigenous graves.
“The museums tend to think of all these objects as their personal property, and they don’t want to turn it back over to the tribes even though much of it was unscrupulously obtained,” stated Kurt Dongoske, who’s a tribal historic preservation officer for Zuni Pueblo in New Mexico.
The AMNH additionally stated it isn’t conscious of scientific analysis it approved yielding sufficient info to permit for repatriation choices.
Harvard, which declined to remark after receiving questions from ProPublica, has prohibited analysis on ancestral stays and objects topic to NAGPRA underneath a short lived coverage that permits an exception for research accomplished with tribal consent. The college has acknowledged publicly that as a premier analysis establishment, it lengthy ignored the desires of tribal communities whereas benefiting from collections of their ancestral stays amassed by way of excavations and donations.
This yr, the Inside Division is reviewing proposed laws that might require establishments to halt analysis on Native American stays if requested by a tribe. The NSF stated in response to written questions from ProPublica that it’s dedicated to participating extra with tribes and is now starting to standardize insurance policies for funding analysis that impacts them. Underneath draft pointers that might go into impact in January, the company stated, it will require all researchers to point out that they’ve consulted with tribes on their analysis proposals earlier than acquiring an NSF grant.
Nonetheless, the NSF and different federal companies have continued to fund analysis on Indigenous stays lately.
Involving Indigenous teams in analysis can add to researchers’ understanding of ancestors’ lives and belongings, stated Pasqual, of Acoma Pueblo. With out this context, scientific research are incomplete, she stated.
Pasqual’s background in archeology helps her perceive how science’s view of her ancestors differs from that of her tribe’s tradition. Scientists and museums, she believes, have lengthy seen ancestors’ stays as objects, specimens or property. Pueblo folks have a seamless relationship with their ancestors and an obligation to steward them.
“There are a lot of folks who may see ancestors as being an open resource to do different types of DNA testing,” she stated. “We recognize that there is an ethical obligation.”
Theresa Pasqual, director of the Acoma Historic Preservation Workplace, at Pueblo Bonito.
(Russel Albert Daniels for ProPublica)
Pueblo Bonito, a large “great house,” as soon as stood 4 tales tall, in accordance with the Nationwide Park Service.
(Russel Albert Daniels for ProPublica)
“The Law Is So Vague”
For almost two centuries, museums and universities used science to justify constructing and conserving large collections of Native American human stays.
Harvard, which in the present day holds the stays of 6,000 Native People, opened the Peabody museum in 1866 with a handful of pottery and different objects, plus a small assortment of Indigenous stays that had been used to investigate the “anatomical characteristics” of the races, in accordance with the museum’s first annual report, issued two years later.
By 1900, an AMNH anthropologist with medical coaching, Aleš Hrdlička, arrange a makeshift laboratory in Chaco Canyon’sPueblo Bonito, a sprawling multistory settlement with tons of of rooms and dozens of kivas, areas which have lengthy been used amongst Pueblo tribes and the Hopi for ceremonial and social functions.
Hrdlička performed his work because the expedition’s archaeologists cleared rooms within the “great house,” together with a chamber the archaeologists labeled Room 33 the place 14 folks had been buried together with ceramics and 1000’s of items of turquoise. The workforce started taking stays and objects and sending them to New York by prepare, till issues about looting on the canyon prompted a federal probe.
One of many expedition’s benefactors defended the work as a scientific enterprise, not a looting one. However the investigation nonetheless halted the excavation, and the investigator really helpful making Chaco Canyon a nationwide park to guard it.
Of the greater than 150 ancestral stays from Chaco Canyon on the AMNH, Hrdlička helped unearth greater than half, in accordance with the museum’s stock offered to the Nationwide Park Service underneath NAGPRA.
Doorways between rooms in Pueblo Bonito
(Russel Albert Daniels for ProPublica)
David Hurst Thomas, a longtime archaeologist, stated he thought of the Chaco Canyon holdings to be the AMNH’s most essential assortment from the continent when he first stepped into his function because the museum’s curator of North American archeology within the Nineteen Seventies.
“There are people who want to call that looting, and certainly by 21st-century standards that’s true,” stated Thomas, who’s now retired. “But by late 19th-century standards, that’s one of the best digs in the country.”
Frustration that establishments had handled Native American ancestors as scientific specimens performed a significant function in driving Indigenous rights activists to push for federal repatriation laws. When Congress handed NAGPRA in 1990, lawmakers anticipated repatriation could be accomplished inside 5 to 10 years. In consequence, the legislation is proscribed in the way it addresses scientific evaluation.
Vessels labeled with numbers at Pueblo Bonito in 1896.
(American Museum of Pure Historical past Library)
“The whole concept of NAGPRA was to return these collections to tribes, so that they would have rights over them. They would be able to authorize or not authorize testing,” stated Melanie O’Brien, supervisor of the Nationwide Park Service’s Nationwide NAGPRA Program. “But that didn’t happen.”
Congress merely didn’t envision that 33 years later establishments could be the place they’re now — holding tens of 1000’s of Native American stays they’ve designated as “culturally unidentifiable” and permitting them for use for analysis, stated O’Brien.
The legislation states that it shouldn’t be interpreted as authorizing new scientific research to advance repatriation efforts. It additionally says that the one justification for halting repatriations with a view to conduct analysis is whether it is thought of so essential that the findings could be within the nationwide curiosity. And even in such instances, establishments have three months from the examine’s conclusion to return the human stays and objects to tribes, in accordance with the legislation.
No establishment has ever sought an exemption for such a examine, in accordance with O’Brien.
Stewart Koyiyumptewa, the Hopi Tribe’s cultural preservation workplace director, believes NAGPRA ought to clearly acknowledge tribes’ proper to have a say over research of their ancestors, together with people who contain taking and analyzing samples of their DNA. “But the law is so vague,” he stated.
In a letter commenting on the Inside Division’s proposed laws, Koyiyumptewa stated clarifying this may assist stop stays or objects in museums pending repatriation from getting used for scientific or museum work.
A photograph taken throughout exploration of Chaco Canyon between 1898 and 1900.
(American Museum of Pure Historical past Library)
From the attitude of his tradition, Koyiyumptewa stated, samples extracted for DNA analysis and different research nonetheless symbolize the remnants of an individual and ought to be revered. “Even though the person may be deceased,” he stated, “that small sample still has life.”
Alyssa Bader, who’s Tsimshian and an assistant professor of anthropology at McGill College in Montreal, agrees that tribes ought to have a say over the remedy of organic samples of ancestral stays utilized in analysis.
However this work will be accomplished ethically, Bader stated.
She has collaborated with Indigenous communities to look at the diets of Tsimshian ancestors and the way meals have modified within the distant and up to date previous. As her companions, Indigenous teams assist form analysis questions in methods that may profit their communities.
This collaborative work requires extra money and time however it’s well worth the funding, Bader stated. “I 100% believe that it produces better research.”
Pursuing Analysis, Not Repatriation
Quickly after NAGPRA’s passage, NSF information present, some establishments started to hunt grants to protect Ancestral stays for future scientific examine, despite the fact that Congress had known as for museums to be “expeditious” in returning them to tribes. On the time, many museums had not but fulfilled the legislation’s requirement to stock their collections.
It could take a full decade from the legislation’s passage — years longer than anticipated — for the American Museum of Pure Historical past and Harvard to completely evaluation their collections. The park service had prolonged deadlines for the establishments with huge collections to file inventories of the objects and human stays that had been taken from Native American burials. In 2000, each lastly reported that almost all of their holdings topic to the legislation couldn’t be culturally affiliated, claiming they didn’t have sufficient info to make repatriation choices.
Pueblo Bonito at Chaco Tradition Nationwide Historic Park. This nice home is the biggest of all Chacoan nice homes.
(Russel Albert Daniels for ProPublica)
For instance, the AMNH declared its whole Chaco Canyon assortment to be “culturally unidentifiable.” In federal information, the museum stated that individuals’s migrations from the canyon within the 1300s to villages in Arizona and New Mexico the place their descendants now reside left gaps in archaeologists’ information concerning the area.
Martha Graham, who oversaw the museum’s NAGPRA compliance within the Nineties, advised ProPublica that as a result of a number of tribes claimed ties to the canyon, establishments wanted much more time than the park service had granted them to seek the advice of with the tribes. Graham, who’s from New Mexico and briefly labored for the park service at Chaco Canyon, stated she appreciated the connection that the tribes, together with the Hopi, needed to the realm. She left her job in 2001. However had she stayed, she would have pressed the museum to revisit its conclusion that it couldn’t establish which tribes may reclaim what it held from the location, she advised ProPublica. “We were pretty explicit, as I recall,” concerning the want for that to occur, stated Graham.
In an announcement, the museum stated the work of “affiliating” collections didn’t finish when it filed its stock with the park service in 2000 and is ongoing. However the museum has not revised its choice, although it stated it acknowledges a number of Pueblo tribes’ ties to the canyon.
Thomas, the retired AMNH curator of North American archaeology, believed NAGPRA gave the museum much more cause to approve scientific analysis as a result of it would assist establish descendant teams for repatriation. He acknowledged in an interview that it was flawed to exclude tribes from choices about such analysis.
A gap inside New Alto, one of many nice homes of Chaco Tradition Nationwide Historic Park
(Russel Albert Daniels for ProPublica)
“Why Didn’t You Ask Us?”
Brenner Coltrain on the College of Utah pursued the primary of two NSF grants in 2002, hoping to study extra about when farming turned a central a part of life for Ancestral Puebloans who lived greater than 2,000 years in the past on the Colorado Plateau. She started by analyzing human stays previously buried in Arizona and Colorado and now held at Harvard’s Peabody museum, saying the work would “undoubtedly influence” the establishment’s closing repatriation choices.
Brenner Coltrain didn’t grant an interview for this story. In an electronic mail, she advised ProPublica that her work may assist establishments make “informed decisions regarding repatriation” however “not ensure that repatriation will follow.”
The museum had granted Brenner Coltrain entry to its assortment on the situation that she share her findings with a number of tribes, together with the Hopi, Pueblo of Acoma and Navajo Nation, in accordance with her NSF analysis proposal.
Initially, the analysis concerned having one other Utah professor analyze mitochondrial DNA, or mtDNA, which was changing into more and more prevalent in anthropological research. Extracting it required pulverizing parts of bone. The genetic materials, which is inherited from moms, may assist researchers study extra about commerce routes, human migration and matrilineal lineages.
Brenner Coltrain and her colleague hoped to assemble genetic info from greater than three dozen ancestors. However they solely had success with seven as a result of the stays both weren’t nicely preserved or had misplaced bone mass.
The method was costly and the outcomes had been disappointing, Brenner Coltrain stated in a grant report back to the NSF. It confirmed that the folks from completely different historical websites shared a typical ancestry, a discovering she stated was “perhaps not surprising,” given what was already identified about Native American genetics within the area.
However one other type of damaging evaluation that concerned analyzing the bone chemistry of 80 ancestors led Brenner Coltrain to what she thought of a extra noteworthy discovering: Corn had turn into a staple within the area by roughly 2,400 years in the past. Her closing stories didn’t say whether or not she shared this info with the tribes as Harvard requested.
Regardless that no repatriation occurred following the primary examine, she efficiently proposed related analysis in a second NSF proposal in 2007. This time, she studied the stays of greater than 140 ancestors held on the AMNH that had been excavated across the 1900s, principally from Grand Gulch, a winding canyon inside Utah’s Bears Ears Nationwide Monument. In the middle of her work, she additionally extracted bone samples from the stays of no less than two ancestors buried inside Pueblo Bonito at Chaco Canyon, in accordance with a paper she and her co-researchers later printed.
Joel Janetski, a now-retired anthropology professor at Brigham Younger College who labored with Brenner Coltrain on the second of the research, stated in an interview that the researchers had adopted all applicable pointers. They didn’t seek the advice of with tribes, he stated, as a result of they might have needed to go across the AMNH to take action and due to this fact jeopardize future alternatives to analysis its assortment.
“It would have been inappropriate,” he stated.
Pasqual climbs a mesa at Chaco Tradition Nationwide Historic Park, a spot she has visited steadily since she was a baby.
(Russel Albert Daniels for ProPublica)
As Brenner Coltrain’s NSF grant ended, one other researcher took an curiosity within the Chaco Canyon ancestors whose stays she had analyzed. Stephen Plog, a College of Virginia archaeologist, obtained samples from her and despatched them to a radiocarbon-dating lab for additional evaluation, he stated.
He co-authored a paper concerning the analysis in 2010. Nobody raised issues about his work, Plog stated in an interview: “No reviewer, nor anyone else commented to say, ‘You know, do you think it’s really right to just do destructive analysis of human remains?’”
Subsequent, he collaborated with researchers at Penn State, Harvard and the AMNH on a paper that once more centered on the ancestors from Pueblo Bonito’s Room 33. Their work was supported by NSF funding. Utilizing mtDNA, they confirmed that eight people buried collectively within the room descended from a girl laid to relaxation amongst them and that the group’s lineage spanned 300 years.
In late 2016, the workforce was ready to report their findings in Nature, the main scientific journal.
However earlier than publication, an anthropologist who wasn’t concerned within the venture urged members of the workforce to achieve out to tribes, in accordance with interviews and emails exchanged among the many researchers. It was too late to get consent for damaging evaluation that had already occurred. However the workforce may nonetheless interact with the tribes and talk about the analysis forward of publication, prompt George Perry, a professor at Penn State and co-author of the paper.
Peter Whiteley, a cultural anthropologist on the AMNH, firmly opposed the concept, saying in an electronic mail to Perry and different researchers that involving tribes would end in surrendering scientific “decision-making” to them. The workforce ought to publish first and phone the tribes later, he stated.
Whiteley knew the area, having spent a lot of his profession researching and writing books concerning the Hopi tribe. For the reason that Nineteen Eighties he had accomplished this work in collaboration with tribal members or with tribal authorities’ consent, he wrote in an electronic mail to ProPublica despatched by way of an AMNH spokesperson.
The workforce finding out the ancestors of Pueblo Bonito’s Room 33 had requested Whiteley to contribute experience on matrilineal cultures among the many Pueblo tribes however did so solely after the analysis had been accomplished. Whiteley known as the proposal to have interaction with tribes pre-publication “naive.”
“If they had wanted Pueblo and Hopi involvement, the time to seek it was at the beginning of the research, not its conclusion,” Whiteley advised ProPublica.
Regardless of opposition from others on the analysis workforce, Perry despatched letters to Pueblo and Hopi tribal officers earlier than the paper was printed. The likelihood that tribes may disapprove of the analysis was all of the extra cause to have interaction, he stated.
Looking back, Plog stated, he understands arguments towards doing the kind of analysis on Native American human stays that he and the others pursued. However he stated he participated within the perception that his findings had the potential to advance public perceptions of Native People by displaying the tradition at Chaco Canyon had rivaled different nice historical civilizations.
Petroglyphs on a wall in Chaco Canyon, one of many the bodily traces left by the individuals who lived there
(Russel Albert Daniels for ProPublica)
Koyiyumptewa, the Hopi cultural preservation workplace director, stated he felt upset upon studying the analysis had been accomplished with out the tribe’s enter.
“You know, why didn’t you ask us?” Koyiyumptewa stated in an interview.
Information headlines seized on the discovering that the Ancestral Puebloans shared a matrilineal line. One learn, “Girl Power,” one other “Moms Rule!” However that was hardly revelatory to folks like Pasqual, who hint their roots by way of Chaco Canyon and maintain cultures that heart matrilineal ties.
“We could have told you that,” she stated of the Pueblo of Acoma.
She and others say tribes have their very own methods of understanding and appreciating their previous.
In her youth, her father used to take her to Chaco Canyon and educate her concerning the individuals who constructed the nice homes and the way their practices prolong to her and others within the current. She has since pushed numerous occasions from Acoma Pueblo to the canyon, 100 miles to the north, the place she observes traces of Pueblo ancestors, their footholds embedded within the canyon partitions.
“If the Pueblo people identify themselves as descendants, that should be enough,” Pasqual stated.
Footholds embedded in a mesa make up an historical highway.
(Russel Albert Daniels for ProPublica)
@media (prefers-color-scheme:darkish) {
html:not(.force-light-mode) .repat-toc {
background-color: var(–cool-80);
}
html:not(.force-light-mode) .repat-toc-top p,
html:not(.force-light-mode) .repat-toc .repat-col h6,
html:not(.force-light-mode) .repat-toc .repat-col a {
colour: #BA9687;
}
html:not(.force-light-mode) .repat-toc h5 a {
colour: var(–gray-10);
}
html:not(.force-light-mode) .repat-toc h5 a:hover,
.repat-toc h2 a:visited {
colour: #BA9687;
}
html:not(.force-light-mode) .repat-toc-top p a {
colour: #BA9687;
}
}
html.force-dark-mode .repat-toc {
background-color: var(–cool-80);
}
html.force-dark-mode .repat-toc-top p,
html.force-dark-mode .repat-toc .repat-col h6,
html.force-dark-mode .repat-toc .repat-col p a {
colour: #BA9687;
}
html.force-dark-mode .repat-toc h5 a {
colour: var(–gray-10);
}
html.force-dark-mode .repat-toc h5 a:hover,
.repat-toc h2 a:visited {
colour: #BA9687;
}
html.force-dark-mode .repat-toc-top p a {
colour: #BA9687;
}
.repat-toc {
show: block;
background-color: #E1DCD0;
padding: 2em 3em 2em 2em;
margin-top: 2em;
place: relative;
margin-right: 2em;
}
.repat-toc-top {
show: block;
}
.repat-toc .ital,
.repat-tag .ital {
font-variant: none;
font-style: italic;
}
.repat-toc-titles {
border-top: 1px strong #000;
clear: each;
show: flex;
padding-top: 2em;
}
.repat-toc-titles .repat-2 {
width: 50%;
padding-left: 1em;
}
.repat-toc-titles .repat-1 {
width: 25%;
padding-left: 1.5em;
}
.repat-1-mobile {
show: none;
}
.repat-toc .repat-flex {
show: flex;
align-items: stretch;
justify-content: heart;
align-content: stretch;
flex-wrap: wrap;
padding-bottom: var(–spacing2);
}
.repat-toc .repat-flex .repat-block-1{
flex: 4;
}
.repat-toc .repat-flex .repat-block-2{
flex: 1;
align-content: stretch;
align-items: stretch;
border-left: 1px #000 strong;
padding-left: 1em;
}
.repat-toc .repat-flex .repat-col-stories{
show: flex;
flex-wrap: wrap;
padding-bottom: var(–spacing1);
}
.repat-toc .repat-flex .repat-col-stories .repat-col {
flex: 1;
min-width: 33%;
padding-right: 1em;
}
.repat-block-2 #repat-connect{
show: flex;
align-items: stretch;
flex-direction: column;
align-content: space-around;
hole: 1em;
}
#repat-connect .connect-item{
flex: 1;
}
.repat-toc h2 {
font-size: var(–scale0);
font-weight: 700;
font-family: var(–fonts-sans);
text-align: left;
float: left;
}
.repat-toc-top p {
text-align: proper;
float: proper;
font-family: var(–fonts-sans);
font-weight: 700;
font-size: var(–scale-1);
margin-top: 10px;
}
.repat-toc-top p a {
colour: #8A3009;
text-decoration: none;
}
.repat-toc-top p a:hover {
text-decoration: underline;
cursor: pointer;
}
.repat-toc h3 {
font-variant: small-caps;
text-transform: lowercase;
font-family: var(–fonts-serif);
font-size: var(–scale-1);
}
.repat-toc h4 {
font-family: var(–fonts-sans);
font-size: var(–scale-2);
font-weight: 700;
}
.repat-toc h5 {
font-family: var(–fonts-hed);
font-weight: 700;
font-size: var(–scale0);
line-height: var(–line-height-1);
}
.repat-toc h5 a {
colour: var(–black);
text-decoration: none;
}
.repat-toc h5 a:hover,
.repat-toc h2 a:visited {
colour: #8A3009;
text-decoration: underline;
curosor: pointer;
}
.repat-toc .repat-col img {
width: 100%;
padding-top: 1em;
}
.repat-toc .repat-col h6 {
font-family: var(–fonts-sans);
font-weight: 700;
font-size: var(–scale0);
colour: #8A3009;
}
.repat-toc .repat-col p a {
colour: #8A3009;
font-weight: 700;
text-decoration: none;
}
.repat-toc .repat-col p a:hover {
text-decoration: underline;
cursor: pointer;
}
.repat-toc .repat-col p,
.repatriation-newsletter-signup-component p {
font-family: var(–fonts-sans);
font-size: var(–scale-1);
font-weight: 400;
line-height: var(–line-height-1);
}
.repatriation-newsletter-signup-component .icon {
show: none;
}
.repat-toc .repat-col .repat-break {
peak: 25px;
}
.repatriation-newsletter-signup-component {
margin-top: 10px;
border-bottom: 1px strong #000;
}
@media display and (max-width: 60em){
.repat-flex{
flex-direction: column;
}
.repat-block-1, .repat-block-2{
flex: 1;
}
.repat-toc .repat-flex .repat-block-2{
border-left: 0;
padding-left: 0;
}
}
@media display and (max-width:48em) {
.repatriation-newsletter-signup-component {
margin-top: 0px;
}
.repat-toc {
margin-right: 0;
}
.repat-toc-top p {
text-align: left;
clear: each;
float: none;
padding-bottom: 1em;
}
.repat-toc-titles {
padding-top: 1em;
}
.repat-toc-titles .repat-2 {
padding-left: 0;
}
.repat-toc .repat-flex .repat-col-stories{
show: flex;
flex-direction: column;
}
.repat-toc .repat-flex .repat-col {
width: 100%;
min-width: 100%;
padding: 0px;
border-bottom: 1px strong;
border-color: var(–warm-30);
padding-bottom: 1em;
margin-top: 1em;
line-height: var(–line-height-1);
}
.repat-toc h5,
.repat-toc .repat-col h6 {
show: inline;
padding-right: var(–spacing-2);
}
.repat-toc .repat-col img {
show: none;
}
.repat-toc .repat-col {
show: block;
}
#repat-connect {
border-left: 0px;
border-bottom: 0px !essential;
padding-left: 0;
}
.repat-toc-titles .repat-1 h3 {
show: none;
}
.repat-1-mobile {
show: block;
margin-bottom: 1em;
}
.repat-toc .repat-flex .hide-mobile {
show: none;
}
}
The Repatriation Undertaking
View the Full Sequence
1
America’s Largest
Museums Fail to Return Native American Human Stays
2
Does Your Native Museum or
College Nonetheless Have Native American Stays?
3
The Museum Constructed on Native American Burial Mounds
4
A High UC Berkeley Professor Taught With Stays That Might Embody Dozens of Native People
5
The Metropolitan Museum of Artwork Provides A Famend Native American Assortment Regardless of Questions About Some Objects’ Origin
6
Behind ProPublica’s Reporting on Repatriation
Get in Contact
Learn about an establishment resisting repatriation? Have a private story to share? We’d like to listen to from you.
Be taught The best way to Report on Repatriation
Watch an informational webinar with our reporters.
Signal Up for the Publication
To join The Repatriation Undertaking e-newsletter, it’s essential to allow JavaScript in your internet browser.
import renderNewsletterSignup from “https://projects.propublica.org/repatriation-nagpra-database/for-cms/scripts/newsletter.js”;
const goal = doc.querySelector(“.repatriation-newsletter-signup-component”);
if (goal) {
const initialP = goal.firstElementChild;
renderNewsletterSignup({
goal,
props: { placement: “repatriation-table-of-contents” }
});
if (initialP) initialP.take away();
}
