Module 19: African Burial Ground Controversy I:
Legal Basis of Historic Preservation

Reading: Harrington, "Bones and Bureaucrats"

The African Burial Ground is a very important find; it also stirred a lot of controversy. Therefore, it has much to teach us.

The first thing we can learn about is the importance of legislation that protects prehistoric and historic remains in the U.S. Important pieces of legislation include:

The 1966 National Historic Preservation Act

Section 106 of the Act requires federal agencies to consider the effects their actions may have on historic properties. Historic properties of local, state, or national significance may qualify for listing on the National Register of Historic Places. This applies to sites as well as buildings. Very important: "significance" is defined as:

(1) Being associated with notable persons or events;

(2) Having high artistic merit;

(3) Possessing distinctive characteristics for a time period or a type; or

(4) Having potential for yielding information about history or prehistory.

For archaeological sites, people making cultural resource assessments ask:

(1) Does site possess integrity? Tested with small sample excavations.

(2) Is it associated with a known time period? Does it yield datable carbon or artifacts that are diagnostic of a particular time period?

(3) Is it a single-component site or are there multiple separate components? Is the site confined to the plow zone (in which case it is all disturbed)?

How would we answer these questions with regard to the Late Woodland site in the Whitehouse Nature Center? With regard to the Gadson Court—Culver St. housing? With regard to the African Burial Ground?

What are the incentives for placing a site or a building on the National Register of Historic Places? Tax breaks: 20% federal, 25% state (in Michigan).

Other significant pieces of protective legislation include:

The 1969 National Environmental Policy Act

The Act requires federal agencies to consider the environmental effects of any planning activities on federal lands or using federal funds—includes an assessment of effects on cultural resources.

The 1974 Archeological and Historic Preservation Act

Also known as the "Moss-Bennett Act" or the "Archaeological Data Preservation Act," the Act directs that when an environmental impact statement determines that significant cultural resources will be damaged or destroyed, up to one percent of project funds are to be allocated to salvage or preservation. This has provided millions of dollars for archaeology and created the business of Cultural Resource Management (CRM), private consulting firms providing archaeological assessments of environmental impact and excavation of sites that are going to be destroyed. Eighty percent of all archaeologists in the U.S. are currently working in CRM, e.g., Commonwealth in Jackson, MI.

If it weren't for this legislation, GSA could have dug right through the bones, and the information on the early history of New York City would be lost—forever!