Keeping them safe, bringing them home: Heritage and burials protocols and community involvement

By Laurie Leclair

Many of the participants in the Heritage and Burials consultations shared stories about their own experiences with repatriation. There were similarities throughout, like the need to respect the ancestors, to do the right thing, to speak the language and to perform the correct ceremonies. But also, most spoke about how their communities benefitted from the process.

The Protocol Template acknowledges how this undertaking strengthens a community by making it more connected to its heritage, the land and each other. Creating this bond starts with a shared promise, as the template states, “To care for and maintain the relations with the Ancestors.” There is the necessity “to prepare our communities and those coming in for this responsibility”. As we have heard from the participants in our four consultations, this preparation must be comprehensive: from raising awareness within the membership through communication and sharing stories with Elders and Knowledge Keepers to the conducting of ceremonies aimed at cleansing and protecting those about to enter into the process of repatriation. Having a protocol tailored to a community’s goals and capacity can help heritage workers plan out the best course of action when the event arises.

The preparation can begin along the more conventional paths of community consultation and scholarly studies. Historical and archival research, traditional mapping, Traditional Ecological Knowledge (TEK) studies, conducting interviews or establishing a field monitoring program all yield important information but also encourage members of different ages and expertise to become involved in the design. In one case, the road to repatriation blended oral history with academic research. Randy Restoule, Consultation Coordinator for Dokis First Nation, recounts a community tradition that contended that several individuals were removed from Dead Island, near the French River, sometime during the late nineteenth century and sent to Chicago. Through archival research, Restoule and his team discovered that remains were removed prior to 1875. Although the historical record did not completely jive with the oral accounts, the most crucial part of the narrative was true. It was clear that these remains were exhumed and brought to Chicago where they became part of the Field Museum’s Franz Boas/T. Procter-Hall Collection, said to have been gathered in 1893 for display as part of the World’s Fair.

The template echoed the beliefs of several of the respondents in the community consultation when it stated, “We need to right the wrong that was done in taking our Ancestors. Part of the chaos communities are experiencing is from the unrest of the Ancestors.” When Dokis First Nation researchers followed their ancestors’ trail to the Field Museum, they discovered that in many cases, individual remains were reduced to a sentence or two on a catalogue index card. For example, the person referenced above is only known as Entry 41796, Accession no. 68. But this little girl, as well as the others returning home, will be given a name by the community at a renaming ceremony. So for part of the Protocol designed by Restoule and Dokis First Nation, repairing the damage done to ancestors involves a restoration of their humanity.

Whitefish River First Nation’s Gail Kiki Pelletier worked on her community’s protocol to help bring 19 ancestors home to Old Birch Island Cemetery. Together with a group of Elders and council members, she travelled to the University of Michigan’s Museum of Anthropological Archaeology in Ann Arbor where the ancestors had been kept since 1938. This journey was the culmination of over 15 years of negotiations. In an interview from 2005, Whitefish River’s Chief Shining Turtle credited this successful outcome to his community’s knowledge of its past. “What worked in our favor,” he told Ontario Birchbark, “was the fact that we knew our history. We were honest and consistent. That convinced them that we were not going to go away. We would continue to hammer away at them.” Persistence and a strong historical grounding made this repatriation possible.

One of the principles outlined in the template reads, “The entire community must be involved and work together as a collective to protect our Ancestors, Sacred Sites and Sacred Items.” When all members of the community bear witness to the restoration of respect to ancestors through ceremonies and language, everyone benefits. It is a way to rekindle traditions, retrain the ear to language and reinforce members’ links with the land, the ancestors and spirituality. Inclusion also played a large factor in Whitefish River First Nation’s success. Pelletier was grateful for the overwhelming show of support from her community as many people participated in the funeral arrangements, herself assisting Nmishomis Gordon Waindubence in the preparation of the 19 bundles. It was very moving, Pelletier recalled, “Those spirits needed to recognize where they were, had to do ceremonies to explain that to them and to explain their pathway back, and we were able to do that.”

Repatriation can also be healing. Chief Shining Turtle believed that the ancestors’ return would “provide some closure to some very old wounds.” He recalled that something special happened, a phenomenon akin to a “spiritual awakening”, a “transformation in the community.” It was like “pieces of the puzzle being put into place.” The ceremonies brought a certain freedom and a shared goal as all those involved understood that, “It was in our hearts to make this right.” Similarly, individuals who were working on repatriation in the Robinson Huron Treaty area reported sensing the ancestors’ approbation and how this feeling told them they were following the correct path.

While the appropriate ceremonies and medicines must be applied to these situations, sometimes the old ways are not clear. But communities should not become disheartened or overwhelmed by this impediment. The protocol template states, “We may not know all the practices and ceremonies but we need to do the best that we can.” Here, whatever cultural or ceremonial challenges a community may have can be overcome by the intent to do the right thing. Gaps in cultural understanding present an opportunity to reach out, to exchange Traditional and Sacred knowledge between Anishinaabeg. And this sharing can also extend to participation in actual ceremonies and responsibilities. For example, in order for the Field Museum to begin the process of repatriation, Dokis First Nation needed the consent of 21 treaty Chiefs as well as signatures of the Grand Chief and representatives from the Algonkian Nation. All agreed. In keeping with the solidarity, when the ancestors come home from Chicago and are buried back in their sacred space, Restoule hopes that their safety can be co-managed between several neighbouring First Nations.

But as much as the process of repatriation can unite individuals within a community and among First Nations, there is a price to be paid. All who have taken part warn that this type of work is very exhausting, both mentally and spiritually. The process is long and expensive, moving ancestors is delicate and the act of reburial itself can leave participants feeling empty or overwhelmed. This caution is supported in the template’s caveat “Be prepared for the emotional, physical, mental and spiritual responsibilities and effects that this work has.” A community framing its own protocol may also have to allow for these unexpected consequences and seek guidance from its Elders as the sacred act of bringing home ancestors will impact each person and perhaps each community differently.