The Acoma Shield
Editor’s Note: My last newsletter included a segment on the Acoma shield that inspired some comments that were definitely interesting both in a positive and negative way. I started the segment by saying that “things are not always as they seem”. From the beginning we have sought the truth and have offered what we have learned for the reader to judge the merits. I was accused by one reader of being an accessory to the theft and legally culpable as having knowledge that implicated me . This is patently absurd, insulting. and unfortunately typical of the politically correct climate we all share that rejects questioning anything that deviates from accepted beliefs of good and evil.
Below is a copy of the affidavit in the case. The document states that the shield was entrusted to Bennie P. Sarracino who was born in 1906 and died in 1987. and lived at Acoma. The shield apparently went missing in the 1970’s; however, there was, to my knowledge, no mention that a theft was reported. The shield was said to have been passed to “successive caretakers”. In line 12 of the affidavit mentioned a photograph
of the Acoma shield prior to its theft as having been reviewed by and identified by Carmelita Sarracino who signed the affidavit. Carmelita Sarracino was the granddaughter of Bennie Sarracino and between nine and nineteen when she allegedly last saw the shield. It is interesting to speculate whether her memory was sufficient to make a credible identification almost 50 years later. In the affidavit no basic description was provided of the shield, the imagery, or even the dimensions. The shield was removed in violation of Acoma law in the 1970’s. The Acoma pueblo is located atop a 367-foot mesa.in New Mexico. No explanation was provided in all the media coverage, affidavit, or pleadings how a non-Indian might have been able to steal the shield without being detected or without the theft having been reported to the authorities for ten to fifteen years. It is interesting that I have heard visitors describe Acoma as a fortress, which logically leads to speculation as to how this theft could have occurred. Apparently none of these facts were noteworthy to any of the reporters covering this theft.
From various media reports it appears that the shield was acquired in the 1970’s by Jerold Collings Mother who then left it to her son when she passed away. Collings sent it to Eve auction in Paris in 2015. When the Acoma/US Department of Justice saw the promotional material for the 2016 auction they then sought a warrant from a federal judge in New Mexico to obtain a civil forfeiture complaint against the auction house. As the owner Collings had 30 days to object. He did not. In 2019 he signed a settlement agreement with Governor Brian Vallo of Acoma releasing the shield to the U.S. Justice Department.Eve auction complied and transferred the shield to the US Justice Department... I suspect but have no first-hand knowledge that the Justice Department must have agreed to not pursue any charges against Collings or his family in exchange for his agreement with Vallo.
So what do we know that happened.. This case never went to a French court which as in the past might have been a problem for the Acoma. How do we know the auction shield was the same shield claimed by the Acoma. Since the theft was not according to all the media coverage reported, how do we even know that it was stolen.. This was not a NAGPRA claim although some of the media sources suggest that it was. Possibly the problem here came from the affidavit where it was clearly stated that the object was stolen in the 1970’s. I am not a lawyer but the alienation clause in NAGPRA clearly states: “ Unclaimed Cultural Items - Native American human remains, funerary objects, sacred objects, or objects of cultural patrimony 1. That have been excavated or discovered on, and removed from, Federal lands after November 16, 1990” I am not aware of any other part of NAGPRA that supercedes this alienation clause date.; however, if there is such a section it would seem logical that this would have been a logical claim to be made against Collings for his cooperation.
This is curious because on December 18, 2018 the Department of Justice did use NAGPRA to seize an Acoma shield being offered in a Montana gallery. We don’t have the facts of this case but it does make one wonder what the date of alienation was and whether this was the tipping point for a NAGPRA case.
The Justice Department is a 10,000 pound gorilla that can make their own rules. I would imagine Collings was advised to give it up and not spend by one estimate I received well over $50,000 fighting the government on a case that they could win by attrition.
As to the attribution, in my judgment Eve auctions got it right. Based on Barton Wright’s book on Pueblo Shields the construction is typical of what both the Jemez and Acoma did in the mid-19th century. As to this having been a repainted Comanche shield taken by the Acoma, I don’t believe it. There was also a rumor in 2016 that this shield was repainted. I have no idea whether this is true.
Finally, I am not judging the outcome of this case. The shield belongs with the Acoma. However, if an Acoma sold it in violation of Acoma law, the individual should be punished. I fault the media for not asking questions on how this went down. This is some terrible reporting. And if our media continues to be the lap dog for whatever their current master dictates, there is not much chance that they will keep the process honest and above board for everyone. Interesting how art mirrors our world.
