Thesis (Ph. D.)--George Washington University, 1996. / Includes bibliographical references (p. 393-413), and bibliographical footnotes.

Thesis (M.A.)--University of Virginia, 1998. / Description based on content as of June 1999; title from title screen.

abstract: This dissertation examines a practice of scientific museums in the 19th and early 20th centuries: the exchange of their duplicate specimens. Specimen exchange facilitated the rise of universal museums while creating a transnational network through which objects, knowledge, and museum practitioners circulated. My primary focus concerns the exchange of anthropological duplicate specimens at the Smithsonian Institution from 1880 to 1920. Specimen exchange was implemented as a strategic measure to quell the growth of scientific collections curated by the Smithsonian prior garnering to the broad political support needed to fund a national museum. My analysis examines how its practice was connected to both anthropological knowledge production, particularly in terms of diversifying the scope of museum collections, and knowledge dissemination. The latter includes an examination of how anthropological duplicates were used to illustrate competing explanations of culture change and generate interest in anthropological subject matter for non-specialist audiences. I examine the influence of natural history classification systems on museum-based anthropology by analyzing how the notion of duplicate was applied to collections of material culture. As the movement of museum objects are of particular concern to anthropologists involved in repatriation practices, I use specimen exchange to demonstrate that while keeping objects is a definitive function of the museum, an understanding of why and how museum objects have been kept or not kept in the past, particularly in terms of the intentions and value systems of curators, is critical in developing an ethically oriented dialogue about disposition of museum objects in the future. / Dissertation/Thesis / Ph.D. Anthropology 2014

Thesis: Sc. D., Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Department of Aeronautical Engineering, 1916. / MIT Institue Archives Thesis Coll.: copy is the Smithsoniam Institution publication. / Publication 2414. Hodgkins fund. Originaly prepared by Hunsaker as his Eng. D. Thesis, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Dept. of Aeronautical Engineering, 1916. According to the MIT Registrar's Office, this degree was changed to an Sc.D., 1923 June 12. Original thesis did not contain the three plates. / by Jerome C. Hunsaker ... assisted by T. H. Huff, S. B., D. W. Douglas, S. B., H. K. Chow, S. M., and V. E. Clark. / Sc. D.

The events of 9-11 resulted in a slew of policy, procedural, and organizational changes within many government departments as the U.S. government took many steps to enhance security to prevent future terrorist attacks. The emphasis on high threat targets by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and other government agencies, such as the White House, the Capitol and Congressional office buildings, major infrastructure and facilities within US cities, airline travel, ports and economic supply chains has generated a great deal of debate and attention. There are however, targets that are considered low risk situated in high threat areas that also provide open access to the public for which security professionals are responsible that should not be overlooked during the War on Terror. The question is how low risk targets in high threat areas should be protected? What resource distribution makes sense? What practices should be applied to achieve security? The purpose of this research is to look at one of these targets, the Smithsonian Institution and how the Smithsonian Institution's Office of Protection Services (SI OPS) responded to the terror attacks of 9-11 and the ongoing threat. Four factors will be examined: (1) the screening process, (2) the budget, (3) the security policy formulation process, and (4) training. The study focus is based on data derived from semi-structured interviews and a review of SI documents. Examining post 9-11 security changes allows one to see how SI OPS has evolved in its attempt to meet both internal security demands and expectations against an external security concern. The findings reveal SI OPS initially underwent significant changes within the four factors in the three years following the attacks of 9-11. However, limited resources and manpower strains have played major roles in the subsequent decline in some of the factors after their initial increases. Although a return to the security levels immediately following 9-11 may not be imminent, it is recommended that OPS management make stronger efforts to communicate with non-security managers and return to more stringent visitor screening procedures. / Ph. D.

This project argues that by examining how non-indigenous individuals such as American scientists and Euro-American explorers thought and formulated ideas about indigenous mounds proves that their construction of racial identities is inextricable from their understanding of the landscape. The mounds proved to be “mysterious” man-made features to non-indigenous people who interacted with these places in the decades and centuries after they were constructed. The mystery behind the mounds stemmed from a general lack of written record about the mounds, giving non-indigenous individuals a “free hand” to offer theories about their original purpose. Each chapter of this project examines a window in time, beginning with early European exploration and continuing through the twentyirst century, which reveals the changing role the mounds played in understanding North America’s indigenous past. This project builds upon theories of landscape history and intellectual environmental history, demonstrating that the mounds challenge preconceived notions about regional definitions and the Euro-centric divide between what is labeled North American “pre-history” and “history.” For example, mounds exist in the American South, but they also exist in places such as Michigan, Massachusetts, Ohio, and Oklahoma. Additionally, the presence of large American Indian urban centers built around mound structures that rivaled European cities at the time, challenging Euro-centric definitions about North American “pre-history.” Although this project is not an indigenous history, it is important to recognize the significance of mound structures for American Indian people overtime. By unpacking some of the history of important sites such as the Nanih Waiya mound near Philadelphia, Mississippi, and the Kituwah mound near Bryson City, North Carolina, this project acknowledges a long cultural connection to specific mound sites for some modern American Indian people. The fact that in 1996 the Eastern Band of Cherokee purchased the Kituwah mound, and in 2008 the state of Mississippi gave Nanih Waiya to the Mississippi Band of Choctaw Indians, dramatically alters the end of this story. Thus by tracing this story through the twentyirst century, this demonstrates the complexity of repatriation and contemporary issues of “who speaks for the tribe” remains, offering a different direction in which the story of American Indians is told.