But Adrienne, there is no MASS repatriation. Each case is
considered on its own merits. No one is being forced to return
collections on demand. The Native American group makes a claim and the
claim is examined and evaluated on an individual basis.
        Furthermore, it has nothing to do with the means of acquisition. If
the object falls int oone of the NAGPRA categories, it is subject to
repatriaion, period. No caveats. That doesn't mean it will be returned,
just that it must be reported and it is subject to claim.
         Mike Lewis

On Thu, 7 Dec 1995,
Adrienne DeArmas wrote:

> In a message dated 95-12-07 12:16:01 EST, [log in to unmask]
> (Christopher Whittle) writes:
>
> > I imagine that bonafide
> >museums have many items that have been stolen by unscrupulous or
> >overzealous collectors.  We cannot hide behind the premise that returning
> >these items to their rightful owners will disrupt our practice of museology.
>
> Again I comment - all things in moderation. I know of many examples where
> *precious* Native American objects have been traded to very scrupulous
> collectors for more precious items like guns, food and smokes! Another issue
> is the concept of ownership and the transfer of title! Many objects which
> reside in museum collections were gifts from native informants. Was the
> anthropologist supposed to ask the informer to provide a receipt with it?
> What about objects that have no known provenance? Why do they have to be
> returned (especially in those cases where the tribe does not want them, has
> no room for them and cannot care for them)? Each and every repatriation case
> should be looked at according to the circumstances of the original
> acquisition of the object, who the people were that were involved and what
> the goal of the transfer is. My point a few weeks ago remains that science as
> we know it WILL suffer as a result of repatriation and whereas I cannot
> condemn all cases, I do condemn the ideology of mass repatriation which WILL
> leave our Natural History museums EMPTY.
>
> Whew, didn't mean to get so worked up about this :?)
>
> - Adrienne
>