. Robert E. Bieder: The return of the ancestors
239
become remains, skeletons, skulls, osteological data, or resources. These are the terms
of another cultural world; a perspective that is foreign to many Indians and to their
world view.
In closing, it may be useful to suggest why this issue has surfaced now; an issue,
that many archaeologist assert is *one of the most important issues facing archaeolo-
gists in the United States.â First, I think that the growing Indian militancy in the 1960âs
and 1970âs released much of the seething resentment Indians felt for American society
and it was the academic anthropologist and archaeologist that they could attack with
impunity. It was the American Indian Movement (AIM) that spearheaded this resist-
ence to âcultural genocideâ and also pushed that first Iowa incident and forced the
state to return the bones of the woman for reburial. With that incident another Indian
group American Indians Against Desecration was formed as an adjunct to the Interna-
tional Indian Treaty Council and began to call for the repatriation of bones and grave
artifacts. Two other groups the National Congress of American Indians and the Native
American Rights Fund also became active in the movement and were able to focus po-
litical and media attention on the issue. The whole movement has now spread interna-
tional and various indigenous groups are beginning to demand the return of their an-
cestral bones and artifacts from museum around the world. Native Americans are now
beginning to look into European museum holdings of these items with the intention of
seeking their return.
Second, the international focus on human rights has alerted the general public to
the realization that perhaps the Indians are right. Told to consider how they would feel
if their parents or grandparents were placed in museums, the public has sided with In-
dians on this issue.
Third, the general public is tired of what they perceive as the abuses of science; a sci-
ence that makes them feel confused and impotent and no longer in control of their des-
tinies. They have become more critical of science as their lives are complicated by com-
puters, cars, and appliances that do not function. Jaded and distrustful of the claims of
science, the public has inclined toward an anti-science and perhaps anti-intellectual
position.
Fourth, both politicians and conservative religious groups (creationist) have joined
the Indians on this issue as a means to attack various enemies. Western politicians espe-
cially see in this issue an easy way to attack the eastern establishments and intellectuals,
grab attention and pass laws that cost no money. Religious groups also see the issue as
one that can be used to attack intellectuals, universities, science (the evolutionary
establishment) and eastern institutions.
Fifth, and last, pending legislation in Congress to create an American Indian Mu-
seum on the mall in Washington provides a natural vehicle for highlighting the issue
and will compel institutions receiving federal funds to return bones that can be identi-
fied by family or tribe. This legislation will enable Indians to pursue legal claims that
Previous court decisions would not allow.
The bone repatriation issue has disrupted the old relationship between anthropo-