Hello all,
I am a strong proponent of repatriation. One of the
many reasons I left a previous job was the fact that I did not want to take an item that should have been repatriated - and future repatriation was not on the table (also warranty of title was sketchy).
Luckily, my new place of employment just repatriated a Japanese family flag - and it went quite well. It was already in the works before I was hired, but I was able to see the process through.
Now, I'm in a weird spot. We were offered a large collection of military artifacts and archival material. Of that collection, a flag (similar to the one we just repatriated) is being offered. I have already reached out to the organization that helped us with the repatriation to see their thoughts on the item. This item could be deemed 'of important cultural significance.' Now, do I take the item only to repatriate it... or work with the donor to return the flag? It's a weird spot to be in because, if it is important, it should be returned. However, if the donor knows this... they might hold on to it.
I just finished writing our policies and procedures and, currently, it is our policy that nothing should be deaccessioned within a couple of years of acceptance unless new information becomes known which makes it suspect, falls under NAGPRA, or should be repatriated due to its cultural significance (if not under NAGPRA). However, it is also our policy that a good faith effort is made to determine an item's ethical and legal viability
before we even take the items.
Thoughts anyone?
------------------------------
Samantha Tubbs
Museum Director
New Mexico Military Museum
------------------------------