Fall 2021
The Mayo Clinic Health System is one of the most well-known networks of medical services in the world. Whether people recognize it as the largest employer in Minnesota, the #11 best medical school for research, or the #1 hospital in all of the United States, it is clear Mayo has built itself an outstanding reputation (Mayo Clinic College of Medicine and Science n.d.; Minnesota Department of Employment and Economic Development 2021). However, the founding of Mayo Clinic contains a controversial story regarding Native American Repatriation that is seldom known. This story was only brought to light in 2018 when Mayo made a public apology concerning the incident, 156 years after it took place (Collins 2018).
Marpiya Okinajin, known as “Cut Nose,” was one of 38 Native Americans executed in Mankato, Minnesota in 1862 for his participation in the US-Dakota War (The U.S.-Dakota War of 1862 n.d.). Shortly after his body was buried, a doctor dug up the body to bring to his office, dissected it, melted off its flesh, and made a skeleton with it. That doctor was William Mayo, founder of the Mayo Clinic Health System, and Cut Nose’s skeleton remained on display at Mayo until 1998 (Collins 2018). Unfortunately, the story of Mayo’s inhumane treatment of Native American remains is just one of many that have scarred Indigenous people in the United States today. There has been a long history of robbing graves, conducting experiments on ancestors’ bodies, and publicly displaying remains without taking into account the perspective of Indigenous people. In 1990, the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act, or NAGPRA for short, was passed in an attempt to combat this long history of mistreatment. The original legislation of NAGPRA stated all institutions receiving federal funding were required to inventory their Indigenous artifacts and human remains, make the inventory lists available to Indigenous nations, and return items when nations requested (Calloway 2019). This allowed Indigenous people to reclaim histories that were unjustly stripped from them, so long as they could establish lineal descent or cultural affiliation with the items in dispute (McManamon n.d.). This technicality of the law, that lineal descent or cultural affiliation had to be established for items to be reclaimed, initially caused some controversy around NAGPRA. In cases where sufficient evidence of affiliation could not be determined, such as the case regarding the well known Kennewick Man incident of the early 2000s, Indigenous nations were not given the right to reclaim items they argued were rightfully theirs. To resolve these controversies, a new regulation was added to NAGPRA in 2010, stating that Indigenous tribes could claim remains “whose affiliation cannot be established scientifically, as long as they were found on or near the tribe’s aboriginal lands” (Calloway 2019). This necessary amend to NAGPRA ensured that Indigenous people’s voices would be heard concerning these issues, and it provided a more efficient means for Indigenous artifacts and remains to be reclaimed.
In addition to combatting the history of mistreatment against Indigenous people through the return of artifacts and remains that were unjustly taken, NAGPRA also provides a means for future protection. NAGPRA requires that Indigenous nations are consulted whenever archaeological investigations encounter, or expect to encounter, Indigenous artifacts or remains. Additionally, if Indigenous artifacts or remains are unexpectedly found on Federal or tribal land, consultation of an Indigenous nation must also take place (McManamon n.d.). This aspect of NAGPRA makes sure that Indigenous people have autonomy in regards to culturally significant land and artifacts, and it aims to prevent future situations in which Indigenous items are wrongfully taken from those to whom they belong. However, if situations arise where Indigenous items are still not respected in the manner this legislation lays out, NAGPRA also establishes penalties for criminal and civil violations. Criminal violations include selling, purchasing, transporting, or profiting from Indigenous artifacts and remains, and the penalty for criminally breaking this law includes heavy fines or imprisonment on the first offense. Civil violations include failing to summarize and inventory Indigenous items, not notifying Indigenous nations of a collection, and refusing to repatriate artifacts and remains, and the penalty for civilly breaking this law includes variable fines and subpoenas (National Parks Service n.d.).
This legislation is certainly a step in the right direction towards rectifying the unjust history between settlers and Indigenous people, but it is important to understand there is still much more to be done. NAGPRA is only the next step in reflecting Indigenous voices and perspectives in the legislation of the United States.
Bibliography
Calloway, Colin. 2019. “Self-Determination and Sovereignty, 1970-2017.” In First Peoples: A Documentary Survey of American Indian History, 528–29. Bedford/St. Martin’s, Macmillan Learning.
Collins, Bob. 2018. “Mayo Issues an Apology 156 Years in the Making.” Minnesota Public Radio, September 18, 2018. https://blogs.mprnews.org/newscut/2018/09/mayo-issues-an-apology-156-years-in-the-making/.
Mayo Clinic College of Medicine and Science. n.d. “Mayo Clinic Alix School of Medicine.” Accessed November 4, 2021. https://college.mayo.edu/academics/mayo-clinic-alix-school-of-medicine/.
McManamon, Francis P. n.d. “NPS Archeology Program: The Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA).” National Parks Service. Accessed October 21, 2021. https://www.nps.gov/archeology/tools/laws/nagpra.htm.
Minnesota Department of Employment and Economic Development. 2021. “Minnesota Companies.” May 27, 2021. https://mn.gov/deed/ed/why-mn/mn-companies/minnesota-companies/.
National Parks Service. n.d. “Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act.” Accessed October 21, 2021. https://www.nps.gov/subjects/nagpra/index.htm.
The U.S.-Dakota War of 1862. n.d. “The Trials & Hanging.” Accessed November 17, 2021. https://www.usdakotawar.org/history/aftermath/trials-hanging.
