See Attached
1
Final Project Milestone One
Jack Schoon
SNHU
9/14/2025
The Phase I survey of the 50-acre tract in Mason Neck, Virginia, has uncovered two significant archaeological contexts: a cluster of intact Native American burial mounds and the remnants of a nineteenth-century homestead with potential ties to enslaved African Americans. These discoveries bring multiple stakeholders into focus, each with differing priorities and motivations. The following analysis identifies five invested parties, the previous landowners, the private university, the state government, local Native American groups, and the publicly funded state museum, and evaluates their interests in relation to the two archaeological sites.
Selection of additional parties
From the provided list, two additional parties selected are (1) local Native American groups and (2) the publicly funded state museum. These groups represent both cultural and scholarly perspectives and bring critical ethical and interpretive considerations to the discoveries.
Statements of interest
Local native American groups. These groups are directly descended from or culturally affiliated with the builders of the burial mounds. Their primary interest lies in protecting ancestral remains, ensuring the respectful treatment of ritual offerings, and asserting sovereignty over cultural heritage. They stand to gain legal recognition of their claims under the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA) and the opportunity to strengthen cultural identity through preservation and interpretation of their ancestors’ legacies (Touchin, 2024).
Publicly funded state museum. The museum’s mission centers on preserving and interpreting regional heritage for the public. The burial mounds and the homestead both present opportunities to expand collections, develop new educational exhibits, and attract research funding. The museum would gain cultural capital, enhance public engagement, and fill interpretive gaps in both Native American and African American histories.
Invested parties and site priorities
Previous landowners. The family that owned the property for five generations will likely be more attached to the homestead foundation and outbuildings. These structures symbolize their familial legacy and may hold sentimental or legal importance related to land history.
Private university. The university will prioritize the burial mounds for their research and academic potential. The mounds represent opportunities for faculty scholarship, student training, and publicity that enhances institutional prestige.
State government. The state government is obligated to balance development interests with preservation laws. While concerned with both sites, it must prioritize the burial mounds to comply with NAGPRA, avoid litigation, and maintain public trust, though it also bears responsibility for historic preservation of the homestead.
Local native American groups. Their primary focus is the burial mounds, which embody sacred religious and ancestral value. These groups are less invested in the homestead but may support its preservation as part of broader commitments to justice and historical truth.
Publicly funded state museum. The museum values both sites but will emphasize the mounds for their rarity and research value. However, the homestead offers unique interpretive opportunities to highlight underrepresented African American slave narratives, making it equally significant for curatorial purposes.
Conclusion
The burial mounds and the homestead offer distinct historical, cultural, and ethical dimensions that different stakeholders prioritize according to their missions and values (Carter et al., 2022). Recognizing these divergent interests is essential for developing an inclusive, respectful, and legally compliant management plan for the Mason Neck tract.
References
Carter, M. L., Newman, J. L., Seidemann, R. M., & Reedy, E. A. (2022). Review of United States laws pertaining to the recovery and analysis of human skeletal remains.
Journal of Forensic Sciences,
67(5), 1876-1889.
Touchin, J. M. (2024). The Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act and Faunal Repatriation (Master’s thesis, University of Maryland, College Park).
