Tradition, Authority and the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act

Abstract

The Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA) was passed into law in 1990 and since that time has been implemented in ways that merit attention from scholars of religion. This article explores the legislative history of the law, analysing Native American appeals to ‘tradition’ in their quest to establish authority over disputed human and cultural remains. After a preliminary theoretical section that sets out relevant issues and questions, the essay engages a close reading of pivotal legislative hearings and reports, with attention to uses of religious and moral language. Building upon this reading, a dual analysis of Native American ‘traditional’ rhetoric is developed that examines the persuasive features of minority-specific claims, majority-inclusive claims and the combined force of these. Next, this line of analysis is framed in comparative and historical terms through a consideration of ‘revitalisation movements’. In light of this comparison, a case is made for interpreting NAGPRA and related movements as a primary means by which Native Americans manage their relationship to modernity, acting as critical citizens who demand their rights as Indians, Americans and human beings. The essay concludes by arguing for an understanding of social and discursive boundaries that neither limits nor is limited by ‘tradition’.