Dear Mr. Kavanagh:

 

Our museum has hosted many NAGPRA consultations with tribes since 1990, and smudging is a frequent part of those consultations.  Smudging has taken place most often in the meeting space, sometimes in a separate space with specific collections pieces, and less often, in the collections area.  We accommodate tribal requests to smudge because we consider that part of our responsibility as stewards for these objects, and we recognize that respecting such cultural practices is important for building trust relationships. 

 

Over the years, we have never observed damage to artifacts as a result of smudging.  In every case, if an object is exposed to smoke, it was for a very short period of time; less than a minute.  In addition, such a small amount of material is burned that the smoke is minimal.  The actual smudge material has always been burned in a container, so we have never experienced a problem with ashes or other debris coming into direct contact with collections.  One caveat would be that smudging does not trigger your fire suppression system, although that, too, can be mitigated.

 

I do recognize that from a conservation standpoint, exposure to smoke, gasses, light and other elements may impact objects over time.  Again, we have not ever seen any damage, although that brief exposure to smudging may have left a residue imperceptible to the naked eye.  However, in the larger context, the benefits of working collaboratively with tribal delegates to care for our objects in a manner that meets both the museum’s needs and those of descendent communities has greatly increased our knowledge about our collections and has fostered productive working relationships. 

 

In this case, I do have a question about “ownership” of the objects in question.  If they have been repatriated under NAGPRA, then they are owned by the tribe, and thus subject to the tribe’s wishes for their care, no?  Just a thought….

Best regards,

Bridget

 

 

 

Listeros (and conservators in particular):

 

An question has arisen in regard to a tribal museum for which tribe I am a sometime historical/cultural/NAGPRA consultant.

 

The museum building [which has no secure storage, only exhibition and office space] also houses the tribal NAGPRA offices. When they (the latter) receive repatriated artifacts (not burials), they often "smudge" them, smoke them as a blessing (and to fumigate them, if you will) with cedar or sage smoke. [An off-site secure storage for the NAGPRA items is available.]

 

The museum director, a tribal member and trained archaeologist, but not a long-time community resident, has issued a "burn ban" on any smudging in the building. This has upset the NAGPRA committee.

 

What say ye:

 

Is the occasional exposure [e.g., perhaps once every twenty years per artifact] of artifacts to cedar/sage smoke necessarily harmful? One of the tribe's NAGPRA board, a trained ornithologist, and the source of the above "fumigation" comment, suggests that it might be beneficial for items that have not been kept in ideal collections conditions. [I am also told that an examination of the building's blue prints shows that the exhibition space and the office space [i.e., museum and NAGPRA spaces] are on separate and distinct HVAC circuits.]

 

Thomas Kavanagh, PhD

========================================================= Important Subscriber Information:

The Museum-L FAQ file is located at http://www.finalchapter.com/museum-l-faq/ . You may obtain detailed information about the listserv commands by sending a one line e-mail message to [log in to unmask] . The body of the message should read "help" (without the quotes).

If you decide to leave Museum-L, please send a one line e-mail message to [log in to unmask] . The body of the message should read "Signoff Museum-L" (without the quotes).