Doctoral Dissertation Improvement Grant: Properties of Cultural Property

研究生马丁Skrydstrup，博士的监督下，布林克利M。梅西克将对一种新的财产索赔形式进行比较性的跨文化研究。关于社会组织的问题很少有人像“事物是如何被拥有的”这样坚持不懈地提出来的。“本研究项目的目的是比较美国和丹麦这两个不同国家回答这一问题的方式。一般来说，前者倾向于法律的形式主义和广义交换，而后者则倾向于规则怀疑主义和特殊交换。核心假设是，这些差异，我们可以称之为“道德经济的国家”是不可分割的后殖民主义，特别是美国定居者殖民主义产生了不同形式的文化财产比丹麦帝国主义colonial.The研究是由NSF的文化人类学计划和法律和社会科学计划共同支持。在分析上，本研究将法律人类学与交换理论交叉，以调查每个文化财产制度中案例与法典之间的关系以及争端与学说之间的关系。民族志实地研究将探讨夏威夷土著组织Hui Malama I Na Kupuna O Hawai`i Nei 1996年对罗得岛普罗维登斯自然历史博物馆收藏的一个木雕拟人化人物（ki'i 'aumakua）的索赔。在这一案件中，持有机构援引第五修正案的征用条款，对《全国土著人民权利和财产法》法律中规定的土著人不可剥夺的财产理论提出质疑。第二个受到审查的案例涉及加纳阿克罗蓬的阿夸佩姆王国，该国也在1996年向丹麦国家博物馆申请了一对皇家会说话的鼓（字体）。这一主张挑战了文化财产为民族国家合法拥有的理论（教科文组织，1970年），因为到目前为止，这一主张是由非国家行为者提出的。目的是利用历史和人种学方法，探讨成文和非成文财产制度如何促成或阻碍在实地提出权利主张，以及文化财产制度如何调解和承认这些权利主张。在人类学中，这是一个在法律、历史和文化的交叉点上基本上未被探索的领域。人类学在很大程度上把财产的概念处理为关系和社会嵌入的，产生了倾向于关注财产纠纷的社会背景的民族志。相对而言，尚未探讨的是对争端和学说之间的联系，以及更一般地说，国家对土著人的承认与财产的规范秩序之间的联系的考察。关于该项目的广泛影响，希望全面了解文化财产的形成及其不同形式的严格分析将对当代文化资源管理领域的规范性辩论具有广泛的意义。

Graduate student Martin Skrydstrup, under the supervision of Dr. Brinkley M. Messick, will conduct comparative, cross-cultural research on a new form of property claims. Few questions concerning social organization have been asked with such persistence as "How do things come to be owned." The purpose of this research project is to compare the ways in which this question has been answered in two different contexts: United States and Denmark. Is generally is observed, that the former gravitates towards legal formalism and generalized exchange, whereas the later exercises rule skepticism and particularized exchange. The central hypothesis is that these differences in what we might call "moral economies of the State" are inseparable from postcoloniality, specifically that American settler-colonialism has produced different forms of cultural property than Danish imperial-colonialism.The research is jointly supported by NSF's Cultural Anthropology Program and the Law and Social Science Program. Analytically, the research intersects the anthropology of law with exchange theory to investigate the relations between cases and codes and between disputes and doctrines within each cultural property regime. The ethnographic field research will explore the 1996-claim of Hui Malama I Na Kupuna O Hawai`i Nei, a Native Hawaiian organization, for a carved wooden anthropomorphic figure (ki'i 'aumakua) held in the collection of the Museum of Natural History in Providence, Rhode Island. In this case, the holding institution challenged the property doctrine of indigenous inalienability codified in the NAGPRA laws, with recourse to the takings clause of the Fifth Amendment. The second case under scrutiny involves the Akuapem Kingdom in Akropong, Ghana, which also in 1996 requested a pair of royal talking drums (fontomfrom) from the National Museum of Denmark. This claim challenged the doctrine of cultural property as a legitimate possession of the nation-state (UNESCO 1970), in so far the claim originated from a non-State actor. Using historical and ethnographic methods, the objective is to explore how codified and non-codified property regimes enable or disenable the articulation of claims on the ground and how such claims are mediated by and recognized within cultural property regimes.The intellectual merit of this project lies in its approach to the ascendance of new forms of property; a largely unexplored terrain in anthropology at the intersection of law, history and culture. Anthropology has largely handled the concept of property as relational and socially embedded producing ethnographies which have tended to focus on the social context of property disputes. What remains relatively unexplored is the examination of the links between disputes and doctrines and more generally between state recognition of indigeneity and normative orders of property. With regard to the broader impacts of the project, it is hoped that a comprehensive understanding of the coming into being of cultural property and a rigorous analysis of its different forms will have a broad relevance for contemporary normative debates within cultural resource management.