2nd Quarter Research Project

                Laws are in place to allow people to keep their privacy and so that their personal belongings are respected as theirs. Native Americans have felt that laws need to be set as boundaries to say what objects are allowed to be displayed or sold in museums and what objects must remain on their burial grounds, undisturbed. Certain laws have been established and I believe that this is for the good because person belongings and family heirlooms are respected, and it keeps illegal activities from occurring.

                Certain laws that are enforced are in place to help collectors of Native American artifacts know what they may or may not do. These collectors collect Native American artifacts to be sold on the internet or to be displayed in museums. However, some collectors abuse their job as a collector. Some collectors will go and dig up coffins from Native American burial grounds and sell the items found there. Native Americans feel offended by this action because it is their family heirlooms and it is disrespectful to the owner and the family to dig up items that belonged to the deceased. So, laws were placed by museums and websites, such as Ebay, to help maintain legality and fairness in collecting.

                From the Office of the United States Attorneys, the law states that archaeological crime includes vandalism and theft from archaeological sites and trafficking. These archaeological and Native American sites that are protected are prehistoric sites, such as rock shelters, caves, rock art, rock alignments, earthen mounds, earthen middens, mound complexes, ceremonial centers, shell mounds, middens, refuse pits, burial pits, graves, and cemeteries. Burial sites are also protected by the law. All of these illegal excavations of Native American artifacts fall under a category called “pot hunting.” According to PBS, the repercussions of pot hunting include fines up to thousands of dollars, time in jail, and the items being seized without recompensation. It is not worth doing something unethical if a person will get punished severely and not get to keep the artifact.

                Not only does the US government have laws against illegal collecting. Also, purchase of an illegal item will end in recompensation, even if the customer and new owner of the item did not know the item was illegally collected. To provide customer guarantee, websites have their own rules to prove authenticity and guarantee that when a customer is shopping for an item, they are not buying an illegal item. Ebay states, under their section for Native American arts, crafts, or jewelry that “any item described as Alaska Native, American Indian, or Native American but be made by an enrolled member of a state or federally recognized tribe or by someone certified.” The website also says that any artifact that has unknown origin cannot be claimed to be Native American. This provides better customer satisfaction and protects funeral objects because all artifacts require proof. Burke Museum states that laws are in place to ensure legality and so that items are in the hands of their owner.

I agree with what the laws state and why they are in place. I believe that it is unlawful and unethical to dig up and sell artifacts belonging to the deceased or to the Native American tribes. I believe that if artifacts were found, the collectors should ask the owners of the artifact or find an owner and ask for their permission to sell or display the artifact. It would be quite shocking to go on Ebay and see one of your family heirlooms for sale, when it was not you or your family who put it there.

                However, there are loopholes that can be found on these rules. In my opinion, loopholes could come from an “accidental finding.” Technically, the law goes as far as to state that an artifact found in someone’s backyard or in the woods rightfully belongs to the government. However, as kids, we all like to go search for artifacts in the woods or in our backyards. How is a kid supposed to know what types of digging up “treasure” is legal. Kids at the age of five or six are not taught these kinds of rules. In my opinion, one or two items are okay. But if a kid has ten or twenty items, then the parents should be monitoring and making sure all the items found are okay by the law. But, even if parents do not realize this, law enforcement does enforce these laws. There are members of law enforcement who will raid houses, if a suspect is thought to have many illegally obtained artifacts.

These laws apply to collecting outside of Native American artifacts, but also to other tribes and groups. When I was at Macchu Picchu, our tour guide told us that a lot of the objects that were dug up were not returned to the Peruvian Government. Instead, the artifacts are housed at Yale University because it was a Yale professor who discovered them. At times, the kid rule, “finder’s keepers, loser’s weepers,” can be unfair. These artifacts at Macchu Picchu rightfully belong to the Peruvian government since they have belonged on the Peruvian land for hundreds of years.

                These laws behind collecting Native American artifacts are in place for ethical reasons and to prevent illegal obtainment of artifacts. It is unethical to dig up a coffin and look for items that were buried with the coffin just for money. Personal heirlooms and funeral items should be left undisturbed as respect. Collectors need to be able to think about ethical reasons, instead of just being unscrupulous and only caring about the value of the object. In doing so, the descendants of the Native American tribe will be much happier, knowing that they will not have belongings stolen from them for money and that their ancestor’s graves are respected.               

Pictures:

An example of where some of the artifacts were stolen from

Native American Artifacts: Spearheads, Arrowheads, and an Ax Head

An Auction House where Native American Artifacts can be sold

Native American Artifact: A Water Jar

Artifacts that have been Confiscated by the FBI

Sources:

• Chicora - Collecting Artifacts

• I used this website as an introduction to the topic of controversies surrounding collecting of artifacts in general. The website discussed possible controversies from collecting artifacts. The website also discussed the laws associated with collecting and how they can be broken.

• PBS - Safely Collecting Indian Artifact

• This website was useful in explaining the controversies involved in Native American artifact controversies. Also, it was useful in explaining the laws and how they apply. It also explained why "pot hunting" is common, due to an increase in the value of the artifacts.

• Office of United States Attorneys - Native American Artifact

• This website was useful because it is a website by the government designed to state the laws surrounding collecting Native American Artifacts.

•  Ebay Laws

• This website was helpful because it showed me that sites such as Ebay have rules as to how artifacts have to be certified, to prevent replicas from being sold as originals.

• Controversy on Collecting - American University

• This website was useful because it shows the controversies that surround collecting. It mainly states how artifacts can be acquired and the process the owners, or tribes, have to go through to prove that an artifact was originally theirs.

• Relate Native American opinions to Machu Picchu controversy

• This website provided other situations in which collectors have been scrutinized. One such example that I plan to use to relate to the circumstances surrounding Native Americans is the case that Peru plans to sue the US over the fact that Yale University houses objects that were found at Machu Picchu. Yale believes that since they found it, it’s their objects now and Peru believes that since the objects were on their land, they should have ownership over the objects.

•  The oddly aggressive enforcement of cultural artifact laws

• This website was useful because it recounted some situations when families  have experienced law enforcement of the Native American artifacts.

• Burke Museum - Archaeology Laws

• This website was useful because I was able to read the website and find  a loophole in the laws of collecting. This website was also useful because I was able to see how the laws differed at the level of the individual, the state, and the country.

•  Indiana University - Q&A 

• This website was useful because it was a questions and answers about collecting and the laws behind collecting. It was good because it defined exactly what an artifact was, which is important in knowing what is legal to collect and what is not. It was also useful because it gave insights as to how people, who are not law enforcement, can help to enforce the law.

         Latha Karne
         September 11, 2014
         H Block
         Film Essay
            In my US History class, we watched the movies Glory and 12 Years a Slave. From this, we were able to see the effects of slavery in US History within the context of attitudes towards slaves and slavery. This was all done because the filmmakers in both movies wanted to portray slavery in the most accurate way possible, but also make it entertaining so that the audience will stay engaged in the movie.

            In the movie Glory, the filmmaker’s original goal was to depict a part of history that had never before been explored. People always speak of the hardships that the white soldiers in the Civil War faced, but how many of these storytellers speak of the regiments of black soldiers. Before watching the movie, I only knew that there were black soldiers who wanted to fight, but I thought that was due to the negative view of slaves and colored men throughout the US. I felt that the white soldiers felt no empathy or sympathy towards the slaves, and instead would rather they die for their freedom instead of the white soldiers. At the time, slaves were only viewed as part of person. While watching the movie, I was shocked during the scene when Colonel Shaw reads out the rule that black soldiers will not be allowed to fight and they would be breaking the rules if the regiment continued. I was impressed with how the filmmaker presented the scene as well. In an interview, the Filmmaker stated that his main goal for the movie was to get a message across in an interesting and engaging way. I felt that he did this accurately by showing the actions throughout the movie without any commentary; it was told from a first person’s point of view. In any piece of non-fiction, the best information and emotions can be conveyed through showing the scene and describing the scene, instead of telling the events of the scene. By doing this, the audience feels empathetic towards the black soldiers of the 54^th regiment instead of not understanding their feelings. Though there were minor discrepancies between history and the film, the message that these slaves fought for what they believed in was conveyed, so the minor inaccuracies are not relevant. One other thing that was amazing was how much Colonel Shaw, a white officer, supported the black soldiers of the 54^th regiment. He stood up for the humane rights of the men and did not treat them like they were parts of people. The scene when he walks into the building and announces that his men will receive shoes is crucial to the development of the story. In that scene, it showed Colonel Shaw leaning away from the stereotypes that the black soldiers were allowed to suffer and did not need the right clothes and training equipment to fight safely. Both the black soldiers and the white soldiers of the Union were fighting for the same purpose, slaves should be free. Colonel Shaw realizes that they should be treated the same if they are fighting for the same purpose. By standing up for his soldiers, the director conveys that this is not only a time in which the soldiers are fighting for their beliefs, but also that there were some commonalities between the blacks and the whites and that this was not a movie about racial stereotypes and teaching what those were, but showing how the 54^th regiment overcame those. The filmmaker made the movie entertaining using the intense actions scenes and the music during each of the battles. I believe that it was the action scenes that made me more engaged in the movie. When the scenes got intense in the movie, I found my heart racing and anxious, wondering what was going to happen next: such as in the attack scene on Fort Wagner.

            In 12 Years a Slave, the filmmaker’s goal was to depict the cruelty of slavery. In the movie, the director Steve McQueen bases the storyline on the autobiography of Solomon Northrup. By doing this, the history of the story is completely accurate. McQueen’s goal of the movie was to depict the daily life of a slave and the harsh treatment they went through. I feel like I understood the drastic change more because Solomon was a free man before and it shows how happy he was before becoming a slave. Then, almost suddenly, it goes straight to the scene where he is being abused for stating that he is a freeman. Some film critics believe that the freedom Solomon had in New York before he was kidnapped was overemphasized. I disagree because I believe that this shows the extreme of the change. The movie was made in 2013, and the freedom that people had in time period would not relate to any audience. By portraying Solomon’s life in New York as he did, it seemed almost relatable to the audience, since our lives are somewhat similar: we go out, our families go out of town to help friends with planning a party, and we come back. Then, when it immediately switches scenes to the harshness and cruelty of the slave, many of us, as the audience, are shocked and horrified. One thing that was shocking to me was that this was a free black man from America that was kidnapped and sold into slavery. This was interesting because I had always thought that they brought the slaves from Africa and those that escaped to the North were free forever. As I watched an interview with Steve McQueen, I was impressed with how quickly he was able to convey this idea, given that it was one of his goals. I think the film also portrayed the views of slaves in a very accurate way. The scene where the attitude was most evident was when the first owner of Solomon sells him to his friend because he believes that the overseer is going to kill him. At first, my first reaction was to think that he had some signs of humanity inside of him. Then, the owner mentions needing to repay a debt to someone. This immediately indicated to me that Solomon was more of financial importance than labor importance. It was also horrifying to see Mrs. Epp’s reaction to seeing her husband take please in raping one of the slaves. Instead of lashing out at her husband, Mrs. Epp’s decides to beat the slave. In modern day, if one woman is being sexually abused, most women will defend the women and help her get to a better state. In this case, it seemed as if Mrs. Epp’s was blaming the slave for seducing Mr. Epps because she wanted to believe that her husband was perfect. Also, showing that her husband was taking a liking to slave over a white women was socially inacceptable to her and wanted to ensure that the relationship would not be viewed that way. The slave owners can see what is the right course of action, and that is evident on their faces, but they chose to act another way so that society will not think that they are not as high class as they think they are. The reality of the movie and the ability to understand the viewpoints of the slaves comes from the sights and the sound effects of the movie. For example, the scene where the kidnapper was whipping Solomon for claiming that he was a free man was difficult to watch. Even when I had to close by eyes for a second because of the horror, I could escape from the intensity of the scene and how terrible Solomon’s situation was.

            I think that watching movies can help students learn the effects of slavery in US History. It provides a visual and auditory aid, such as pictures, colors, and sounds, instead of a textbook that is not as appealing to students. One thing that is important in learning US History is being able to understand each person’s perspective to a situation which can help to understand why someone reacted one way. By studying this, I can learn the psychology behind actions and help prevent it from happening again. In the case of these two movies, the slave owners acted a certain way due to mob mentality. The movies did accomplish their goal of keeping people involved in the movie because both movies came out with significant profits. The historical accuracy of the movie was precise because the minor changes the movie made were all related to sound effects and wanting to keep people entertained. Nothing major relating to facts was changed and I still came out having understood all of the filmmaker’s and historian’s messages. 

Sources:

Inflation Calculator

Picture

Glory (G)

1. Glory (Film Review) - Rotten Tomatoes
2. Glory (Awards) - IMDB
3. Glory (Historical Accuracy) - Ashbrook, Ashland University
4. Glory (Filmmakers' goals) - FilmEducation.org
5. Glory (Costs) - IMDB

12 Years a Slave (12YAS)

1. 12 Years a Slave - The Telegraph
2. 12 Years a Slave - IMDB
3. 12 Years a Slave - HistoryExtra
4. 12 Years a Slave - Review New York Times
5. 12 Years a Slave - Box Office Mojo
6. 12 Years a Slave - Youtube Steve McQueen's Interview

Picture: