Ancestral Pueblo. <em>Bowl</em>, 900–1300 C.E. Ceramic, pigment, 5 7/8 x 9 1/4 x 9 1/4 in. (15 x 23.5 x 23.5 cm). Brooklyn Museum, Museum Expedition 1903, Museum Collection Fund, 03.325.4009. Creative Commons-BY (Photo: Brooklyn Museum, 03.325.4009_view01_glass_bw.jpg)

Ancestral Pueblo. Bowl, 900–1300 C.E. Ceramic, pigment, 5 7/8 x 9 1/4 x 9 1/4 in. (15 x 23.5 x 23.5 cm). Brooklyn Museum, Museum Expedition 1903, Museum Collection Fund, 03.325.4009. Creative Commons-BY (Photo: Brooklyn Museum, 03.325.4009_view01_glass_bw.jpg)

DOWNLOAD

Download our app and ask your own questions during your visit. Here are some that others have asked.

Can you tell me about the 1903 museum expedition where this was collected? Did Brooklyn Museum do digs in pueblos or how did they acquire these?

Stewart Culin, an ethnographer and curator for the Brooklyn Museum, traveled to the Southwest and purchased many objects while there.

At time time, there were already some regulations on the purchase and excavation of Native American objects, both imposed by the United States Government (if the object was found on federal land) and through tribal authorities. Culin noted that objects of major significance were not for sale.

The Museum today fully complies with North American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA) and tribal authorities/governments in relation to our Native North American collections.

Where is this from?

This bowl by an ancient Pueblo artist was made in the Southwestern United States - Arizona to be specific. The artist was likely an ancestor of the current Hopi or Zuni tribes.

This bowl was found with objects inside it, which are believed by archaeologists to symbolize offerings for a deceased. It was likely found in a burial.

As a ceramics artist, I'm deeply inspired by this piece, and grateful for my opportunity to see it today. But it was acquired by the museum in 1903, which implies that it was taken from a native community with little compensation. How do you suggest thinking about these contradictory facts?

Thank you for your thoughtful question. Unfortunately, what you mention was a common scenario in the relationship between museums and Indigenous peoples in the early 20th century. In 1903, this piece would have been purchased by the curator Stewart Culin who likely obtained it on one of his early collecting expeditions to the southwest. Culin considered himself an ethnographer, not an archaeologist, so likely did not remove this from a burial himself; but I am not sure how much he may have paid for it and/or if the payment went directly to a tribal member.

As for how to think about the contradiction between being able to see the piece in public and wanting to appreciate its beauty versus reckoning with a problematic colonial collecting history...I think it is powerful that you are able to see both sides of the contradiction!

We cannot ignore the previous era's type of collecting (often called "Salvage Ethnography") -- when many curators/anthropologists/ethnographers in the United States were driven by the idea that Native American communities were going to completely vanish. They collected widely, quickly, and systematically with seemingly more care for the objects and their documentation than the living people that they collected from because they honestly thought that Native American culture was disappearing. Now, we know this was false and recognize the deep knowledge held in living source communities.

Are museums (not just in this one) ever asked to return artifacts?

Absolutely. There was a federal act passed in 1990 called Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA). Following NAGPRA guidelines, Museums and cultural institutions in the United States that held Native American cultural objects were required to send inventories of their collections to the appropriate tribal councils and representatives, who could then request objects be returned. The Brooklyn Museum supplied all Native American tribes with inventories of all objects attributed to each tribe and began hosting tribal consultations in 1995. From a museum perspective--Although tribal claims may result in the loss of certain objects or important parts of the museum's collection, tribal visits result in opening channels of communication. Native American delegations are most generous with sharing their knowledge and contribute greatly to information about the collection, as well as the proper methods of storing, handling, and exhibiting objects.

This was really interesting, I appreciate your thoughtful answers!

Bowl

Arts of the Americas

Ancient Pueblo (Anasazi) Pottery: A Spectrum of Black and White

Puebloan people excelled at creating an immense variety of pottery using only black and white. This color scheme was partly dictated by the nature of the clay and the mineral or plant paints available. Archaeologists surmise that cross-hatched designs like the one on this bowl may have represented the color turquoise—reflecting the precious stone and the color of water, a sacred commodity in the dry Southwest region.

CULTURE Ancestral Pueblo

MEDIUM Ceramic, pigment

Place Made: Prospect, Arizona, United States

DATES 900–1300 C.E.

DIMENSIONS 5 7/8 x 9 1/4 x 9 1/4 in. (15 x 23.5 x 23.5 cm) (show scale)

COLLECTIONS Arts of the Americas

ACCESSION NUMBER 03.325.4009

CREDIT LINE Museum Expedition 1903, Museum Collection Fund

CATALOGUE DESCRIPTION Ceramic, high shoulder bowl with geometric black slip design of organic forms infilled with black stripes on grayware slip. Condition good.

EXHIBITIONS

MUSEUM LOCATION This item is not on view

CAPTION Ancestral Pueblo. Bowl, 900–1300 C.E. Ceramic, pigment, 5 7/8 x 9 1/4 x 9 1/4 in. (15 x 23.5 x 23.5 cm). Brooklyn Museum, Museum Expedition 1903, Museum Collection Fund, 03.325.4009. Creative Commons-BY (Photo: Brooklyn Museum, 03.325.4009_view01_glass_bw.jpg)

IMAGE overall, 03.325.4009_view01_glass_bw.jpg. Brooklyn Museum photograph

"CUR" at the beginning of an image file name means that the image was created by a curatorial staff member. These study images may be digital point-and-shoot photographs, when we don\'t yet have high-quality studio photography, or they may be scans of older negatives, slides, or photographic prints, providing historical documentation of the object.

RIGHTS STATEMENT Creative Commons-BY

You may download and use Brooklyn Museum images of this three-dimensional work in accordance with a Creative Commons license. Fair use, as understood under the United States Copyright Act, may also apply. Please include caption information from this page and credit the Brooklyn Museum. If you need a high resolution file, please fill out our online application form (charges apply). For further information about copyright, we recommend resources at the United States Library of Congress, Cornell University, Copyright and Cultural Institutions: Guidelines for U.S. Libraries, Archives, and Museums, and Copyright Watch. For more information about the Museum's rights project, including how rights types are assigned, please see our blog posts on copyright. If you have any information regarding this work and rights to it, please contact copyright@brooklynmuseum.org.

RECORD COMPLETENESS

Not every record you will find here is complete. More information is available for some works than for others, and some entries have been updated more recently. Records are frequently reviewed and revised, and we welcome any additional information you might have.