The Smithsonian’s repatriation of Sitting Bull’s hair and leggings in 2007 was an example of the framework functioning reasonably well — an investigation conducted in good faith, a finding that the taking had lacked proper authority, and a repatriation that followed from that finding.

The family had advocated for the repatriation through the Smithsonian’s established process, and the process had produced the right outcome.

But the Smithsonian’s relative responsiveness should not obscure the broader pattern of institutional resistance that has characterized NAGPRA implementation at many institutions.

Nor should the specificity of Sitting Bull’s name and cultural significance — the fact that he is one of the most recognizable figures in American history — obscure the fact that the vast majority of NAGPRA repatriation cases involve people whose names are not known, whose lives are not documented in historical records, and whose descendants must navigate a bureaucratic process without the cultural prominence that may have helped move the Sitting Bull case forward.

The Photographs That Survived