Resource Archive Page

Articles reprinted from past ATADA Newsletters

Table of Contents

Articles relating to general collecting issues

Articles relating to issues that a collector faces in today's market

Technical articles on collectible antique and tribal art

Articles about related historical issues

Articles relating to issues of special importance to Native Americans that are not always understood by collectors

 

Media Files

Media Files - antique and tribal art issues as seen from the point of view of the outside world reprinted from The ATADA Newsletter. You may track reports of various recent court cases as they proceeded through the US court system here.

Media Files from the Winter 2005 Issue of The ATADA Newsletter

Media Files from the Winter 2004 Issue of The ATADA Newsletter

Media Files from the Fall 2004 Issue of The ATADA Newsletter

Media Files from the Summer 2004 Issue of The ATADA Newsletter

Media Files from the Spring 2004 Issue of The ATADA Newsletter 

Media Files from the Winter 2003 Issue of The ATADA Newsletter

Media Files from the Fall 2003 Issue of The ATADA Newsletter

Media Files from the Summer 2003 Issue of The ATADA Newsletter

Media Files from the Fall 2002 Issue of The ATADA Newsletter

Media Files from the Spring 2003 Issue of The ATADA Newsletter 

Media Files from the Spring 2002 Issue of The ATADA Newsletter 

Media Files from Earlier Issues of The ATADA Newsletter

Click here to return to Legislative Alert Page Table of Contents

Report from the ATADA Law Committee on Feather Issues

by Roger Fry and Len Weakley

From the ATADA Newsletter, Fall, 2004, Vol. 14 No.4

As a number of members may know, we act as co-chairs of the ATADA Law Committee. We are wondering whether there are questions that our members may have regarding conservation and related laws that impact tribal art dealers and collectors, or that may be of general interest. If so these could form the basis for a column in the ATADA Newsletter. Questions could be submitted to us our contact information is at the end of this report. Answers could be general and constitute our personal views on the law or laws, rather than legal advice, which should not be given in a column such as this. The person presenting the question could be identified, or not, depending on his or her preference.

We had an opportunity to talk about some of these laws at the annual meeting in Santa Fe in August. Also, we have written a number of times about eagle and migratory bird feathers. We all have the message on that. Under no circumstances should eagle or migratory bird feathers be offered for purchase or sale, or for barter, or be imported or exported. Of course, this includes bird parts, such as talons and even nests and eggs. There is no exception for antique Indian objects containing these parts, even ones which were acquired years ago. A lesser known but related aspect of this involves feathered objects from the Amazonian Indian tribes of South America. Unless these objects were imported into this country before the Endangered Species Act of 1970, they are probably illegal as well. If anyone has any doubts about this just read Ron McCoy's article in the summer issue of American Indian Art, regarding the director of the Smithsonian who forfeited his entire collection of Amazonian feathered objects. The advice from the Law Committee is do not purchase or sell these Amazonian feathered objects unless you can be assured that they were imported legally. Deal with reputable dealers and collectors and obtain documentation verifying that the objects were imported per Act. Also, do not be misled by Internet offerings of feathered Amazonian pieces. This does not, in any respect, make them legal. In fact, many are likely illegal.

There are undoubtedly other legal issues that come to mind from time to time. Accordingly, we would like to encourage people to fax or e-mail questions to which we will attempt to respond directly or in future editions of this publication. Our e-mail addresses are lweakley@rendigs.com and wfry@rendigs.com. The fax here is (513)381-9206 and the phone number is (513) 381-9200. We are looking forward to hearing from you and seeing you at the next show.

Feathers and the Law

  Associate Ron McCoy's article for the ATADA Newsletter, Summer, 2003, Vol. 13 No.3 on a matter of interest to many ATADA members

Back in 1991, Roanne Goldfein, the editor of American Indian Art Magazine, approached me about an idea.   She and Mary Hamilton, the magazine's publisher, wondered whether I would be interested in writing a four-times-a-year column about legal issues associated with the buying, selling, and collecting of American Indian art from a non-lawyer's perspective.     (Since then, I've often wondered if what they really meant was, if Ron understands the legalities involved, anyone can.)   I agreed to the suggestion, assuming we would probably run out of material after four or five columns.    

That was a dozen years ago, and finding something to write about has never posed a problem.   In fact, what with such topics to draw from as loan agreements, authentications, guarantees, appraisals, consumer protection legislation, auction rules, and the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act, there's been something of an embarrassment of riches.   This is certainly the case with feather law, the subject of the very first "Legal Briefs" column and one frequently revisited since.   The reason for this is not hard to discern, given the fact that so many objects of American Indian are (or at one time were) decorated with feathers.

The term "feather law" refers to the federal government's effort to protect certain species of birds.   This effort is buttressed by the provisions of the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (1918), Bald Eagle Protection Acts (1940, 1962) (also known as the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act), Endangered Species Act (1973), and the regulations for enforcement set forth by the U. S. Department of the Interior's Fish and Wildlife Service.

The Migratory Bird Treaty Act (1918), according to an informative fact sheet produced by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, makes it "unlawful to kill, capture, collect, possess, buy, sell, trade, ship, import or export any migratory bird, including feathers, parts, nests or eggs."   Birds not covered by the protective mantle include the house sparrow, starling, feral pigeon and such resident game birds as the pheasant, grouse, quail, and wild turkey.  

The Bald Eagle Protection Act (1940, 1962) extended protection to bald eagles in 1940 and to golden eagles in 1962 (at which point it becomes known as the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act).  

The Endangered Species Act (1973) offers protection to all species whose populations are in jeopardy.  

The stated goal of this body of law is the protection of endangered and threatened species of birds.   This directly affects those who buy, sell, and collect American Indian art because the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service believes one way to protect the birds in question is through the elimination of "any commercial market for the birds themselves, as well as their feathers and parts".   (Conditions exist under which permission may be obtained for acquiring birds and their feathers, but these do not have any legitimate bearing on the American Indian art world.)   And it makes no difference -- repeat, no difference -- how old the object on which the feathers happen to be located might be and, hence, how old the feathers themselves might be (the determination of which is not an exact science).

Most questions involving Indian art and feather law concern eagle feathers.   Under some circumstances, you may legally possess them.   It is, for example, legal to possess bald eagle feathers legally acquired prior to June 8, 1940, when the Bald Eagle Protection Act took effect.   It is also legal to possess golden eagle feathers lawfully acquired before October 24, 1962, when the Bald Eagle Protection Act's provisions were extended to that bird.   In essence, then, bald eagle and golden eagle feathers may be "grandfathered" into a collection.   But, according to Fish and Wildlife Service regulations, these feathers may not be "imported, exported, purchased, sold, traded, bartered, or offered for purchase, sale, trade or barter".  

So, while there are provisions for the lawful possession of bald eagle feathers acquired before June 8, 1940, and golden eagle feathers acquired before October 24, 1962, you cannot possess any that you acquired through "purchase, sale, trade or barter" after those dates.

Good information about these laws can be found on one of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service's websites maintained by the Wildlife Rehabilitation Directory through the University of Minnesota http://www.tc.umn.edu/~devo0028/laws.htm and saved at http://www.atada.org/eagleprotectact.html on 2/18/07.   The penalty information about fines and sentencing found at those sites, however, no longer applies.   All fines and sentences are now determined by Federal Sentencing Guidelines.   The Federal Sentencing Guidelines employ a nearly esoteric, definitely complicated, formula.   (Anyone who wants to immerse themselves in this swamp can begin by accessing the website of the Federal Sentencing Commission at   http://www.ussc.gov/guidelin.htm.)   That formula is based on such factors as the monetary value of the illegal commodity and the defendant's past criminal history.   The result is a range of sentencing options for the judge.   But as a general rule, for all three statutes -- the Migratory Bird Treaty Act, Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act, and Endangered Species Act -- upon conviction one could be facing a year in prison and a maximum fine of $250,000.

Over the years, I have experienced the American Indian art world as a student, gallery director, collector, and academic.   I am reasonably confident that I have heard just about every argument that can be made against federal feather law.   ("How can penalizing people for having old feathers protect birds living today?" or "How can the government render my _____ worthless by making it illegal for me to sell it?," etc.) If you want to argue the merits of feather law, there are two ways to do so:   lobby against it (not a promising avenue) or get yourself arrested and become the focal point for a test case (recommended only for masochists).

Anyone who buys, sells, or collects American Indian art needs to be keenly aware of the fact that the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, which enforces feather law, is not joking around.

ATADA members are well aware of the result of a recent collaborative effort conducted by the Federal Bureau of Investigation, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, National Park Service, and Norwegian law enforcement to round up dealer-violators of both NAGPRA and feather law.

According to federal authorities, this investigation led to Allard Auctions paying a fine for selling Kachina dolls decorated with migratory bird feathers, as well as the well-publicized arrests of some folks whose names are familiar in the American Indian art world: Tim Kornwolf, an Indian art dealer from Stillwater, Minnesota Joshua Baer, longtime participant in Santa Fe's Indian art market and Thomas Cavaliere, a Santa Fe-based dealer in Indian arts.

Each of these gentlemen were convicted of violating feather law, and while none of them was drawn-and-quartered by way of punishment, one can only imagine the penalties imposed by anxiety, downright awful publicity, the financial drain of hiring attorneys, and the resultant existence of federal conviction records.   The U.S. Supreme Court's recent decision not to even bother hearing Tim Kornwolf's appeal pretty much puts the capper on things for now.   As a result, feather law is much more likely to remain as is, rather than undergo any major changes in the near future.

With all that said, here are three pieces of advice -- not legal advice, which I don't give, but some practical advice -- which readers may take or leave as they choose:

1.   Anyone who traffics in feathers -- not necessarily feathers as such, but also feathers as decorative components of objects -- needs to know exactly what type of feathers are involved.   If the feathers come from a protected species you are breaking federal law and would be well advised to keep away from them.   The "Oops, I didn't know they were prohibited feathers" excuse is a non-starter because legal authorities do not view ignorance as a particularly persuasive line of defense.

2.   I have often heard people who should know better suggest that if they get busted on a feather charge they can always say, "Your Honor, I asked the undercover agent if he/she was a undercover agent and he/she said, 'No.' So, since I've been entrapped I can't be held accountable."   Now, just think about that one for a moment.   Let's say a federal agent infiltrates a drug cartel and one of the heavies asks, "Are you an undercover agent or what?"   Does any reasonable person really believe the infiltrator is required to respond, "Well, now that you mention it, yeah, you're right, I'm a fed"?   This kind of reasoning sinks in the legal seas.

3.   Here's another defense that has not fared well of late:   "The undercover-agent-buyer and I agreed that if she/he bought $275,000 worth of merchandise I'd give her/him a gift -- your Honor, a gift -- of three eagle feather war bonnets.   Since they're gifts, and not part of the sale, I haven't violated the law."   The problem here is that the "gift" can be interpreted as an essential condition of the sale, and therefore a critical element in the entire transaction.

If you want to travel down the long, winding, tortuous road of the law, then pack your bags and get ready for the journey.   All in all, it might be wise to heed the motto "just say no."   Or, if you happen to be of a more literary mind, the Irish poet Thomas Moore's 1808 poem "Corruption" contained the following lines that seem pertinent when the subject of feather law comes up:

Ron McCoy teaches history at Emporia State University (Kansas) and writes the quarterly "Legal Briefs" column for American Indian Art Magazine.   He wishes to stress that he does not offer legal advice and anyone in need of such advice should consult an attorney.

On Collecting Antique Native American Art

By Marcy Burns

This is a slightly revised version of an article that appeared in the Wilton Show Section of The Arts and Antiques Weekly in March, 1999. It is the first of what we hope will be many articles intended to address in a positive way the misinformation that is being disseminated about the antique Native American and tribal art markets. We invite other people to contribute by submitting articles of their own to publications that reach out to a broader public. - Marcy Burns.

Expanding public exposure to the beauty of antique Native American art has resulted in an ever growing group of people inspired to become collectors. The novice collector, however, asks how to go about defining such a collection. While this is a typical question posed when beginning any type of collection, there are several unique considerations that need to be addressed when collecting antique Native American art.

There are some common cultural misconceptions that need to be clarified before one can address specific collecting issues. Many people think that antique Native American art is a narrow specialty. In fact it is quite broad. There are hundreds of tribes, each with its own unique history and culture. There was never one single American Indian way of life or culture.

Moreover, traditional Native cultures did not have the concept of art as we understand it. Objects that we label as art were created by Native Americans as objects of beauty to be appreciated in their daily use. Only after commercialization occurred were objects made to be sold or traded without regard to function. Distinctions made between objects made for daily use and for ceremonial use can also be fuzzy. For example, is a hat made to wear while hunting ceremonial because its wearer prayed before starting out on the hunt?

A collector can choose to collect within a category of manufacture (basketry, for instance), a tribe (Penobscot objects), a period (Historic Pueblo pottery), a specific historic event (objects related to the introduction of the horse to the Plains Indians), a type of object (musical instruments) or a design motif (objects with human figures). Geography can be a defining boundary, as can a type of workmanship (objects that are twined). Within the chosen focus, there are still further choices.

Another common misconception is that Native American cultures were destroyed as a result of contact and conquest by European-Americans ("Anglos" ). Survival of Native American identity and pride have proven these beliefs to be erroneous, although the various Native cultures certainly were dramatically impacted. Collectors from early contact and since have ensured the preservation of the details of Native material culture.

Tribes in the Eastern part of the United States came into cataclysmic contact with Europeans in the 18th century, a much earlier date than Western tribes experienced. Adventurers and expeditions often legitimately acquired objects representing Native daily life, such as clothing, weapons and hunting equipment. This impulse to collect was fueled by the desire to give people back home a taste of the sophistication, diversity and beauty of Native American material culture.

Major collections from those earliest contact days are primarily located in Europe (in England, Finland, Russia, Germany, Austria and Italy) but are rarely found in American museums. The earliest American collections were, in fact, formed by explorers such as Lewis and Clark, and by early New England seafarers who traveled to the Northwest Coast. (The Peabody Museums in Cambridge and Salem, Massachusetts, are prime locations of these early collections.)

As the various tribes in the East accommodated themselves to the dominant Anglo culture, they began to make objects they could sell or trade, many of which contained both traditional and borrowed motifs. This helped to provide a means of livelihood for the Indians in what for them was also a New World. Curios made by the Iroquois around Niagara Falls in the late 19th century are obvious examples.

Western tribes came into overwhelming contact in the 19th century. First Spanish and then Anglo conquest forced the removal of Western tribes to missions and reservations. The process was finalized with the completion of the Transcontinental Railroad by 1880 and the final "resettlement" of the Plains Indians to reservations.

Objects from the 1860-1880 period are far more rare than objects from the later Reservation era. These earlier objects were used by their owners until worn out. The objects produced for the later commercial market were often collected new and preserved thanks to the Victorian era conviction that the Native Americans were a "Vanishing Race" and that aspects of their culture needed to be preserved for prosperity.

Shops, including the well known Fred Harvey stores, opened along the railroad lines. Native people brought their wares to the railroads to sell directly to the tourists. Traders marketed old and new objects through catalogs to buyers in the East. In fact, traders often initiated designs and marketed specific types of wares that they thought would sell, thereby directly influencing the designs and types of objects that Native people produced.

Because many people in today's society recognize the terrible injustice of what happened to Native cultures upon conquest, they also presume that most objects were seized from their makers without compensation. While there certainly were some objects taken from battlefields, etc., the majority of antique items offered for sale today were acquired by trade originating with their Native owners.

There is clear documentation that some objects brought high prices even at the time of their original sale. These include certain baskets made by well known weavers, fine early Navajo blankets made for wear and pottery made for sale by famous potters. Moreover, older is not necessarily more valuable. It all depends what the object is and how the market responds to that particular type of object.

What to collect? Collecting antique Native American art can be a major undertaking. Working with an established, reputable dealer will generally aid you when making critical decisions. Be sure to work with a dealer who will fully represent and warrant in writing all objects he or she sells.

As in all fields of collecting, aesthetics should be your starting point start with what you like. A collection will eventually define itself if you purchase objects to which you respond. Reach for the highest quality that is within your budget. Value always rests with quality in workmanship, condition and aesthetics.

You can further define what you are collecting by considering the following criteria. These can impact the value and marketability of any object. Be careful to be informed, for what you may presuppose determines value may in fact actually be treated differently by the marketplace.

  1. The period in which the object was made.

  2. The area and/or tribe from which the object comes.

  3. The type of workmanship used to create the object. (The commercial market prefers certain types of manufacture.)

  4. The materials out of which the object is made.

  5. The historical importance of the object.

  6. The documentation that accompanies the object, including the name and history of the maker. 

  7. Accurate provenance is rarely found for antique Native American objects since this was not something early collectors considered important. When there is documentation, it does not automatically impact market value, although it sometimes does. 

  8. The rarity of the object. The ethnographic importance of the object versus its artistic value. 

  9. The design motifs on the object (for example, objects with human figures American flag motifs often bring higher prices than earlier examples that contain traditional geometric motifs). 

  10. The age of the object. Age may or may not determine value. For example, baskets woven by Washo weaver Dat-so-la-lee under the patronage of a trader in the early 20th century are among the most expensive baskets ever sold. 

  11. Legal criteria. Certain antique objects made by Native Americans include materials that are deemed illegal to sell in today's marketplace by federal and state laws. Examples include objects that violate various endangered species laws, title questions on certain ceremonial objects and objects excavated illegally. Working with a reputable and knowledgeable dealer can help protect you.

There is a long history of collectors valuing and preserving Native American art. As you take your first steps in acquiring these objects, you open yourself to an opportunity to learn about many different types of people and ways of living. It can provide you with many years of stimulation and intellectual growth. Enjoy your journey!

Marcy Burns has been a collector of antique American Indian art for over 28 years, and has been a dealer for 15 years. She is a member and former president of the Antique Tribal Art Dealers Association (www.atada.org) whose members fully warrant in writing all objects that they sell.

 

Enhancing a Collection's Value

by Charles H. Lange

copyright 1997 by ATADA

One of the most serious points of contention between the professional archaeologist/ethnologist and the amateur (variously referred to as a pot hunter or vandal) is the fundamental desirability of complete and accurate record keeping. While publishing is usually the ultimate goal of the professional, this aim is often of little concern, at least immediately, to the amateur.

Future plans, or goals are often nebulous - for both the professional and the amateur. Ultimately, in either instance, items in a collection inevitably take on definite values. Sooner or later, a collection is significantly enhanced by a backup set of records, both written and photographic. Any item in a collection is given far greater value, either in a professional context or in a monetary sense, by the presence of documentation as to the initial finder or collector, the date of finding or acquisition, the original location of the find, the maker if known, the tribe or culture of origin, and any other information regarding the item - whether such accompanying data seems relevant, or important, at the time of acquisition.

A case in point is a Winchester '73 rifle that I acquired as a present from my father in my sophomore or junior year in high school, about 1933 or 1934. We were told by the dealer in our home town in Wisconsin from whom he bought it that the rifle originally belonged to a Sioux bodyguard for Sitting Bull when the latter was first taken prisoner by the Indian police. At the time, in the early 1030's, my father and I saw no reason not to believe this account as we happily added the weapon to our collection.

Recently, about a year and a half ago, a highly regarded gun dealer in New Mexico expressed an interest in this rifle. The individual's appraisal of the Winchester '73, 44-40, was:

"1st Model Rifle, 24" octagonal barrel, full magazine, 10 brass tacks in a cross shape on right side of stock. 11 brass tacks in shape of cross on left side of stock."

He added, "Without fuller history -- $2500" and "With Sitting Bull History -- $10,000 and up".

At the present time, sixty years later and 1,200 miles away in New Mexico, there is no way to obtain proper documentation for this Winchester. It may have been possible to get the papers at the time of acquisition, but we were not sufficiently sophisticated to ask for supporting evidence at the moment.

Now, the matter is closed except for the lingering wish that we had greater appreciation of the value of documentation.

With somewhat less precision, the same principle would apply to archaeological or other ethnographic specimens. Anthropology has long stressed the need for data in regard to both time and space considerations - what chronology can be applied as well as the geographical location, and within this, the specific stratum in which the item was found. To such considerations should be added context, or associated artifacts.

Time and space provide distribution and sequence data, leading to culture areas or ventures into the old-fashioned area concept. These interpretations lead to reconstruction of culture history - a basic concern of anthropology since its beginnings more than a century ago.

MAKING CONNECTIONS...

Ramona Morris presents an alternate point of view

Most of us would agree that the urge to create art and to recognize beauty in the creations of artists and artisans is universal to the human condition. For many of us, collecting and living with beautiful objects is a passion and necessity. In general, collecting "fashions" go in cycles, with one type of object, or region, or period receiving attention and then another. The competition for choice pieces can be fierce as prices rise and availability diminishes. No one wants to be left with the crumbs!

How many times have we heard that "collecting isn't as much fun as it used to be..." Prices are too high, desirable objects are too scarce, and the stress of competition often replaces the joy of discovery. How can someone build an interesting, cohesive collection under these conditions? What can we do to bring fun back into collecting?

One approach that can be very rewarding is to develop "connections" that transcend time and region. This approach can lead to new avenues of connoisseurship. It can open one's eyes to innumerable possibilities, all highly individual, depending only on one's chosen theme.

One intriguing approach would be to trace universal symbols those designs that keep turning up in cultures across vast distances and thousands of years. One can see how the spiral design could have been reinvented many times -- it is based on a form that recurs often in nature, the curve of a ram's horn, the curl of a fossil ammonite. Beautiful examples of this design occur in the embroidery on Hausa robes, and in the swirls on prehistoric Caddoan ceramics. Concentric circles could be the echo of tree rings, moon dogs, ripples in a pond or, more fascinating, the results of phosphenes on the human eye. What do they represent to the Australian aboriginal when they appear on the churinga stones, or an Eskimo when they are carved into a mask?

Utilizing natural forms can't explain where the swastika came from - a purely artificial construction found for at least 3,000 years in many reincarnations. And who thought of the eye or circle on the hand? This design is found from Tibet to Alabama, and is a totally cerebral concept.

Searching for examples of these designs from various sources could lead one to totally new fields of collecting and scholarship.

Another approach could be through relationships in form, finish or function.

Why do we find a particular type of finish on ceramics throughout the world at a particular stage in a culture's development? It is not like the shape of an adze where form follows function producing the most efficient design for its use. Ceramic finish is surface decoration in its purest sense. Does the human mind work within a set series of patterns, a worldwide concept of texture, a cerebral ideal of form?

Why is it that an extremely sophisticated shape, the stirrup spouted jug, is found in isolated areas of North, Central and South America over a period of at least 2,000 years with no intervening examples? Was its development a result of the movement of people and ideas from the coast of Ecuador to the mountains of Peru and to the Valley of Mexico, the American Southwest and the Mississippi Valley? A thousand-year gap appears, or a voyage of thousands of miles, but the later forms still mimic the earlier ones. This shape also turns up on the west coast of Africa among the Teke and Mangbetu of Zaire.

Another intriguing example of similar form is the star shaped stone mace head design reminiscent of the European "morning-star" that can be found in an area encircling the Pacific Ocean. Variations in the shape are echoed in copper and wood as well. These are undoubtedly a localized development rather than copies of European trade goods, as they occur much earlier than their European counterparts. Are there examples to be found on the route from the Pacific to Europe? Where are the earliest examples found, the most unusual materials used?

A collection using those criteria can be built without compromising the quality of the aesthetic. Every culture has multiple layers of refinement. Does the object show the touch of the maker's hand, the inner vision that is his/hers alone, or shared within a group, is there balance, refinement, whimsy or surprise? A collection using "connections" as a premise is only limited by the imagination of the collector.

The Sioux have a phrase for it..."Mitakuye Oyasin - We are all connected".

MEDIA FILE 2001...

Excerpts from recent magazine, newspaper and Internet articles of interest to the membership. All opinions are those of the writers of the stories and of the people quoted, not of ATADA. Members are encouraged to submit press clipping or e-mail links for publication in the next Newsletter.

"In Once-Lost Books, the Code Behind Indian Rock Art" reads the headline in Jim Robbins' June 19 story in The New York Times.

Datelined Portland, Ore., that story begins, "Throughout the Great Plains, images of men, horses and a nomadic way of life have been scratched into rock walls, a pictographic record whose precise meaning has long been a mystery to modern eyes.

"But researchers have recently unearthed documents that are helping them pry far more detail from the images found on rock faces from Writing-on-Stone Provincial Park in southern Alberta to the cactus-studded plains of northern Mexico. They say most of the images are a form of picture writing, a cross-tribal code that was widely recognized.

"'Indians the length and breadth of the Plains were doing this stuff,' said Dr. James D. Keyser, a regional archaeologist for the United States Forest Service in Portland whose three decades of work have helped crack the code. 'Any American Plains Indian anywhere could have looked at these pictures and given you significant detail.'

"The documents that have emerged," the story continues, "are ledger books containing drawings by Plains Indians, some from the early 1800's, when the influx of white settlers and missionaries began pushing Indians from their territory. In addition to the ledger books, the new analysis has also been aided by finer dating techniques and new ethnographic literature. The new understanding comes as rock art faces increasing threats from vandals and weathering.

"Representational rock art is classified as ceremonial, in which the art was a depiction of a spiritual or shamanic event, and biographic, which is a narrative, usually about one person. Between 1600 and 1750, the biographic style of rock art began to develop, though the figures were generally crude, little more than stick figures. Although sexual encounters were sometimes depicted, the majority of images recorded battle exploits. Horses and guns were added to the art in the 18th century. 'Today you wave your stock portfolio," Dr. Keyser said. "In those days you bragged about your warrior accomplishments. There was no higher honor."

"The artwork took a qualitative leap in the early 1800's. European artists like Karl Bodmer and George Catlin, who had come to the frontier to paint Indians and their way of life, influenced the tribal art in turn. The native forms evolved quickly from stick figures to become far more realistic, with fully executed, yet stylized, horses and people, most scratched in the West's abundant soft sandstone with an antler or bone or, less frequently, painted on cliffs, primarily in a soft ocher color. While the style evolved over three centuries, the symbols and the meaning of the work remained consistent, even during the trauma of the contact period. That 'language' is the focus of the lexicon.

"Details in the artwork had a larger, very specific meaning that served to broadcast tales of bravery not only within one's tribe, but to whoever chanced to pass these prehistoric billboards, usually written on prominent landmarks or at spiritually significant locations. The biographic imagery includes both pictograms - symbols like a stick-figure man - and ideograms, pictures that represent a concept. A floating hand, for example, means that whatever it was drawn near was seized by the artist.

"Other conventions include a right- to-left organization, with figures facing left. While the figures are fairly realistic, their organization is not, with action over a period of time all in a single image. In other words, a single image of a warrior off his horse standing over a falling opponent, and behind him a muzzle blast in the air and a dotted line across the ground, covers several things. The horse shows that he rode up, the dotted line shows that he dismounted to fight on foot, considered a very brave act, then fired a muzzle blast and proceeded to encounter his enemy in hand-to-hand combat. 'It's as if you put the action of a four-panel Peanuts cartoon in one panel,' Dr. Keyser said.

"The most represented items are people, horses and sometimes other animals, guns, teepees and horse tack. Later, soldiers, wagons and forts entered the pictures. In 1924 a pictograph of an automobile was carved at Writing-on-Stone by Bird Rattle, a Blackfoot chief.

"Specific acts of bravery were crucial because they were required for warriors to become chiefs. The artwork, in a sense, is a way of keeping score.

"As the free-roaming culture of the Plains Indian came to an end, they stopped carving pictures in the rock and instead painted pictures on buffalo robes and teepees, and in ledger books in the same pictograph language. Ledger books are large bound volumes of white paper, often with blue ruled lines that were used to keep accounts. The books, along with colored pencils and pen and ink, were given to captive Indians so they could spend part of their confinement telling stories in pictography, sometimes for art's sake and sometimes for small amounts of money. 'They drew what they knew: the good old days,' Dr. Keyser said.

"Some whites, fascinated by the language in the ledger books, annotated the drawings with explanations of what the artists were talking about in their preliterate rock art. These explanations of the Indian symbology, along with ethnography, are the heart of the new lexicon.

"Dr. Keyser and a dozen or so other researchers have uncovered lost or forgotten ledger books, one at a time. Each time, the annotated ledgers provided a few more interpretations of the rock art symbology. Dr. Keyser, who has compared rock art, early decorated buffalo robes and the ledger art, said the symbols remained remarkably consistent from the early rock art through the reservation period.

"One of the most informative contributions to the lexicon was by Five Crows, a chief of the Flathead Indians in northwest Montana, who went by the Anglicized name of Ambrose. After Christian missionaries arrived, the warrior chief sat down in 1842 and drew a series of battle pictographs with ink and paper. He explained what each meant to Father Pierre-Jean De Smet, and De Smet translated.

"The date of the ledger was crucial because it was done while the nomadic and warrior way of life was still taking place, not as a recollection. (The only ledger earlier is an 1834 one done by Four Bears, a Mandan chief.) Dr. Keyser pored over the ledger, comparing the symbols interpreted by De Smet with the hundreds of images he had traced and photographed on rock walls in his own three decades of research.

"One simple Ambrose line drawing interpreted by De Smet, for example, was a battle between Flathead Indians and five Blackfeet. It portrays an enemy Blackfoot warrior lying in a circle and Ambrose carrying a bag surrounded by tiny lightning bolts. The two are, in turn, surrounded by symbolic rifles. De Smet's interpretation shows that a warrior lying in a circle meant that he fought from a pit. The bag, with lightning, carried by Ambrose is described by De Smet as a medicine bundle, which conferred supernatural power.

"This drawing added a couple of symbols to the lexicon - the charged medicine bag and the circle indicating a foxhole were symbols familiar to Indians at the time. There are about 100 symbols in the lexicon and perhaps 50 to 100 more to decipher. The translation of the ledger and the basics of the approach are explained in Dr. Keyser's book, 'The Five Crows Ledger: Biographic Warrior Art of the Flathead Indians,' published last year by the University of Utah Press.

"Another symbol is the decorated horse halter, portrayed in rock art as comblike. All halters were assumed to represent scalps hung from the bridle. But variations can show different things. One type, hanging on the horse's jaw, was indeed a scalp, while another, drawn below the jaw, was a chain-mail bit from the Spanish Southwest. A third, suspended in front of a horse, referred to the Blackfeet's Horse Medicine Cult, whose members tied a bundle to the horse's halter to give the animal strength and speed and make it impervious to bullets.

"The evolving lexicon has had practical impact, most notably in the case of a scalp found in a storeroom at the Smithsonian Institution. It was rumored to belong to a young Nez Percé man, but without confirmation it could not be repatriated.

"A ledger drawing done by a Crow Indian named Medicine Crow - who was known to be at the battle - showed the Crow getting close enough to strike his opponent. The victim's hairstyle was Nez Percé, and details fit accounts of the battle. It was enough to repatriate the scalp to the man's ancestors in 1998, and it was buried.

"Speaking of Dr. Keyser's work, George Horse Capture, a member of the Gros Ventre tribe and a special assistant for cultural resources at the Smithsonian's National Museum of the American Indian, said: 'It's a great study. He's going in the direction of specificity, far more than any of his predecessors were able to do.'

"Ledger books are scarce, though Dr. Keyser hopes that more will turn up. Current information has come from a couple dozen ledgers. They are also prized by art collectors and can fetch $50,000 to $100,000 each. Many ledger books have been cut up and the pictures sold, so the books' archaeological value has been lost.

"The rock art, too, is at risk. Much of it has naturally weathered, and some of it has fallen victim to humans. 'When a museum has jackhammered them out of a wall or someone has shot them up with a gun,' Mr. Horse Capture said, 'it makes you feel like crying.'"

In her June 22 Antiques column in The New York Times, Wendy Moonan's story was headlined, "African Art for Sale, in Abundance"

"You have to know how to get rid of ideas that turn out to be wrong," said Hubert Goldet (1945-2000), a Parisian who collected contemporary paintings as a young man, then switched to African tribal art for the rest of his life,"the story began.

"A dedicated aesthete," Moonan continues, "he was 26 when he bought his first piece of African sculpture. By the time he died he had accumulated 640 African objects - masks, jewelry, reliquaries, statues, beadwork and textiles - in his Paris apartment. In 1979 he told a reporter at Arts d'Afrique Noire, 'Today, if I were to no longer collect tribal art, I think that I would not collect anything.'

"Mr. Goldet's collection of African tribal art, considered one of the most important in the world, will be auctioned on June 30 and July 1 in Paris. Because it is too large to be displayed properly in the salesrooms of Drouot, the auctioneer François de Ricqlès has organized the sale at the Maison de la Chimie, 28 Rue St. Dominique, in the seventh arrondisement near Les Invalides... The 400-page catalog, in French and English, costs about $60. It can be viewed at www.dericqles.com (information: 011 331 4874 3893).

"'He bought things up until three months before he died,' said Alain de Monbrison, a Parisian friend and the owner of Galerie Alain de Monbrison. 'He sold fewer than 10 objects over the 30 years he collected.' In 1999 he donated three pieces to the Louvre.

"Mr. de Ricqlès expects the auction to total at least $5.3 million, and the figure could go higher. Many of Mr. Goldet's works came from well-known early French and Swiss collectors, including Maurice Nicaud, Henri Kamer, Charles Ratton, Robert Duperrier and Pierre Vérité. Several of the pieces have been exhibited in museums. 'This is the most important public sale of African art since the New York auction of the Helena Rubenstein collection in 1966,' Mr. de Ricqlès said.

"Mr. de Monbrison, who served as an expert for the Goldet sale, said, 'It is a unique collection in terms of its quality, quantity and diversity.'

"It was perhaps inevitable that Hubert Goldet would collect something. He came from a family whose fortune was made in banking and oil, and he grew up with Impressionist paintings. He wanted to be involved in the art world from an early age. After spending time in the sales department of one of his family's businesses, he quit to study at the École du Louvre. In 1968 he joined Sotheby's in London, writing catalogs in the Impressionist and Modern Art department. In 1971 he returned to Paris to become the founding editor of Art Press, a contemporary art monthly. He accumulated paintings by Dubuffet, Tapiès, Alexander Calder and contemporary American artists. He left the magazine in 1974 to devote himself fully to African art. He took his new passion very seriously, spending hours at the Musée de l'Homme, studying books, visiting primitive art galleries and attending auctions. He amassed an important library on African art, which he later donated to the Quai Branly Museum in Paris, scheduled to open in 2004.

"'He was fascinated by this "total art" that conferred enormous beauty on ordinary household utensils and ritual and religious articles,' Mr. de Monbrison said. He bought very rare Dogon, Punu, Kota, Fang and Baule sculptures as well as everyday objects like arm and ankle bracelets, stools and headrests. In the 1970's African art was a stepchild in the art world. There was a prejudice against it because it is not made as art and it is rarely signed or dated. 'The notion of authenticity, when it concerns Western painting and works of art, is based on a knowledge of the identity of the artist and that the piece in question was executed during a certain given period,' wrote Lynne Thornton in an article about the Goldet collection in the February 1981 Connoisseur Magazine. 'Here, the sculpture is not only anonymous but its age is generally of little importance.'

"For Ms. Thornton, authenticity in black African sculpture means that the object was made with a ritualistic significance (not for tourists) and shows signs of wear. The masks and figures that Mr. Goldet bought all have patina. They were used in daily rituals, festivities, funerals and fertility rites.

"African sculpture is made by animists who confer a soul on inanimate objects, even tools and spoons. The materials employed include terra cotta, stone, iron, wood, bronze, gold and ivory. In his 1968 book 'African Art,' Pierre Meauzé, curator of the Museum of African and Oceanic Art in Paris, wrote about how Africans view raw materials: 'Since wood is a living material, it is felt that the masks and statuettes derive their magical power from the branch or trunk of a tree whose roots drew nourishment from the earth. Such a process is not so much sculpture as the transmutation of power through the modification of form.'

"Lot 205 in the sale, a female Baule Kpan mask from Ivory Coast, is a good example of how objects can be imbued with magic. Totally arresting, the 18-inch-tall carved wood mask has closed eyes, a long, sharp nose and a small oval mouth with teeth showing. Its high headdress is a mix of carved braids and chignons. The cheeks and forehead are scarified with beadlike decoration. Though slightly cracked, in its simplicity it is riveting. The catalog reports that such masks are used as part of a masquerage, a daylong performance in which an entire village marks the death of a notable or an important celebration. The piece is considered very rare, and the estimate is $200,000 to $266,666.

"African art was not particularly popular in the 1970's, so Mr. Goldet initially did not find it difficult to purchase pieces from galleries and other collectors. He was also lucky to be able to buy newly imported sculptures. In the 1970's, African art was coming into Europe with immigrants from the African colonies as they achieved nationhood. There were few rules on exporting African art. 'In most of the former French colonies, you now need a permit to export art,' Mr. de Monbrison said. 'But it's really too late. Most of the important objects left Africa long ago. In the countries where Islam has been embraced, the destruction has been huge.'

"Mr. Goldet shared his collection with few people. Photographs of his apartment show shuttered windows and an assortment of good 18th-century French antiques covered with statues, sculptures and objects. What could not be placed on furniture ended up on the floor.

"Those in Paris for the Goldet sale can also see Dogon masks at Galerie Jean-Jacques Dutko, in a show celebrating the publication of 'Masques du Pays Dogon,' published by Adam Biro. Sotheby's May 19 sale of African and Oceanic works in New York totaled $6.8 million. (Christie's did not have an African art sale this spring.) And the Brooklyn Museum of Art has reinstalled 250 works from its substantial African holdings, making it much easier to study the art. Mr. Goldet was, predictably, ahead of his time."

From our Arizona correspondent, two links to online information and a poll concerning Kennewick Man:

AOL Research & Learn: Archaeology/Anthropology AOL Research & Learn: Poll

Stephen Kinzer's July 3 story in The New York Times was headlined, "An Indian Craftsman Sees Glass Full of Possibilities, "and was datelined Taos, N.M. 

The story began: "Glassmaking is not an art normally associated with American Indians, but Tony Jojola wants to change that. Mr. Jojola, considered by many collectors to be among the most original glassmakers in the country, recently showed more than 100 of his works at the Wheelwright Museum of the American Indian in Santa Fe, N.M. Although the exhibition won him the kind of praise that would send many artists back to their studios to produce more, Mr. Jojola has instead chosen to embark on a mission to introduce his art form to Pueblo Indians. "Last year Mr. Jojola opened a workshop here, where he teaches young people to express themselves in glass. He accepts all applicants who appear serious, but his main goal is to show Indians a path that few have considered. 'I got thrown out of high school myself, so I know the problems these kids face,' said Mr. Jojola (pronounced ho-HO-la) while a handful of his students blew glass through pipes or watched over their kilns. 'Crafts were part of my family heritage, and I tried making pottery and jewelry. Nothing really grabbed me until I discovered glass. I knew right away that there was definitely something there. To me glass is a lot like clay, but it takes clay a step further. It's like clay you can't touch. When I started doing this 25 years ago, there were only three or four Native Americans who had even tried making glass objects,' he continued. 'Now there are 10 or 12 who are serious about it.'

"Mr. Jojola, 43, an Isleta Pueblo, described glassmaking as 'a way to take old traditions and apply them in a new and very beautiful way.' Much of the work he and his students produce reflects tribal heritage. Some of their glass bowls and vessels are made in shapes originally developed by Indian basketmakers. Others are decorated with ancient patterns or symbols. Some older Indians worry that glassmaking will never provide as reliable an income as making jewelry, ceramic pottery or other traditional Indian crafts, and they are reluctant to encourage their children to study it. Mr. Jojola and his supporters reject this notion. 'Many people have a tendency to believe that Indian art becomes inauthentic when it becomes creative,' said Lloyd Kiva New, a Cherokee who founded the Institute of American Indian Arts in Santa Fe nearly 40 years ago. 'I don't hold with that idea. I think Indians have the same right to invent and create as anyone else in the world.

"'There are inconsistencies to people who object to Indians working in glass,' Mr. New said. 'In the 17th century Indians started working heavily in beads that had been imported from Italy and Czechoslovakia. They developed a very fine craft art, which people now accept without question as Indian. The same can be said about silver, which has led to a wonderful output of Indian jewelry design, but which Indians in this country didn't use until the Mexicans introduced them to it in the 1850's. They grabbed it, took it and ran with it. That's just what Tony wants to do with glass.'

"For some who doubt whether glassmaking can rise to the level of fine art, Mr. Jojola's recent exhibition may have been a revelation. Several of his pieces are translucent and flecked or lined with colorful patterns that are free, bold and abstract. Others refer to traditional motifs that have been handed down over generations. Many works convey a combination of earthiness and spirituality. One piece, a white-tinted bowl with golden spots, carries patterns inspired by petroglyphs. Another, a red crocodile, bears a row of yellow diamond shapes down its back. Also on display were a thunderbird inlaid with lapis lazuli, a vase made with bits of coral, a three-foot-long water serpent with a long curved horn, and an oval spirit face with an expression crafted from chips of colored glass.

"Mr. Jojola is among a group of Americans who have raised glassmaking to a new level of quality in the last few decades. He studied with Dale Chihuly, whose work has been exhibited in more than 180 museums and who has made large-scale glass installations across the United States and in many other countries. Mr. Chihuly donated several pieces of equipment to the Taos workshop.

"Among Mr. Chihuly's teachers was Harvey Littleton, whose pioneering work at the University of Wisconsin led him to be considered the father of the studio glass movement in the United States. If this chain of training can be said to have passed from Mr. Littleton to Mr. Chihuly to Mr. Jojola, the next link may be represented by the young people at the Taos workshop. One of these students is Floyd Marcus, 26, a San Juan Pueblo. He represents Mr. Jojola's ideal because his central ambition is not simply to become an artist but also to return to his town and teach glassmaking to other Indians. If enough students who emerge from the workshop take that route, the notion of spreading glassmaking through Southwestern tribes may come to fruition.

"'I want to help get kids out of the cycle of drinking and that whole path,' Mr. Marcus said after laying down a large set of pincers with which he had just placed a bowl into a firing oven. 'Glass represents a great responsibility as a material. It's very demanding and unforgiving. If a young person learns the idea of limits and boundaries in glasswork, plus the teamwork and collaboration you need in making glass, I think that will carry over into the rest of life. This is something that can have a real social as well as artistic impact.'

"Mr. Marcus said he planned to spend the next five years learning not just the craft of glassmaking but also the mechanics of setting up a workshop where he can teach it. He said he hoped to spread it through Indian communities across this region. 'Glass could become a real form of expression for us, on the same level as baskets and pottery,' he said. 'If I can get 10 or 15 people in my pueblo to focus on this for a while, we'd do work just as good as Chihuly. I'm sure of it. Who knows, we might come up with a Picasso from the pueblo.' "

Smithsonian Official's Artifacts Investigated "read the headline of Elaine Sciolino's July 7 story in the New York Times.

"The United States Fish and Wildlife Service,"the Washington-datelined story began, "is investigating whether the private collection of Amazonian artifacts owned by Lawrence M. Small, the secretary of the Smithsonian Institution, contains feathers and other items taken from endangered species, a senior official at the service said today.

"The wildlife service, an agency of the Department of the Interior, has received enough information about the collection both from published photographs and anecdotal information from ornithologists that an investigation is warranted, the official said. An investigation was originally opened last November but halted last March after Mr. Small and his lawyer sent copies of import permits and written assurances that his contract with the seller of the collection required her to obtain the appropriate permits, the official said. 'Enough things have popped up for us to have to reopen the investigation,' the official said.

"He added that agents had examined and re-examined photographs of the collection, 'and every time you look at something you may see something you don't see the first time.' The wildlife service has asked to examine Mr. Small's collection, some of which is housed in a 2,500- square-foot private gallery in an apartment near his home in Washington, and he has agreed to the request.

"Mr. Small's personal lawyer, Daniel H. Squire, said, 'Not only is he willing, but he is anxious to have the collection inspected as soon as possible and I've so informed the Fish and Wildlife Service.' Mr. Squire, a partner at the firm of Wilmer Cutler & Pickering, added that Mr. Small bought the collection of hundreds of artifacts, including arrows, capes, headdresses, masks and spears from a private dealer in 1998. That contradicts a story on the collection in last December's issue of Architectural Digest that said Mr. Small and his wife, Sandra, bought much of the collection on trips to remote villages in north-central Brazil in the 1980's, when Mr. Small was a senior executive with Citicorp. Other pieces were bought from collectors, the article said. Mr. Squire said he could not explain the contradiction.

"The collection was mounted by a husband-wife team of architects rather than curators for its aesthetic appeal rather than as a scholarly exhibition in the apartment, which Mr. Small sometimes uses for fund- raising dinners.

"The investigation, first reported today by the Hearst Newspapers, is not based on hard evidence that laws have been broken, the wildlife service official said. However, h