There is a 1983 book by Lewis Hyde called The Gift: Imagination and the Erotic Life of Property whose thesis is that "a work of art is essentially a gift and not a commodity." In one of the early chapters he explores the idea of an "Indian giver." (I read parts of this book years ago, and here I am dredging up some ideas from my rather vague memory.) According to him, the east-coast Indians had some ceremonial objects (the tobacco pipe, for example) which were considered too important to be owned by individuals, but which were deemed to belong to the whole community. It was an honor to be the temporary caretaker of such an item. The possessor was expected to keep it for a few weeks and then pass it on to some other worthy person in the community, and in the meantime, to make the object available whenever it was needed. When the Indians first "gave" these objects to European colonists, they meant it as a token that they accepted the newcomers as respected neighbors and community members, and they expected the custom to be followed. The Europeans didn't understand this, however, and tended to keep the items as permanent trophies. When the Indians asked for the items to be returned, it was either because the objects were needed to perform some ceremony, or because the Indians were trying to teach the Europeans some manners!

While this makes a charming story, I must admit some skepticism. Lewis Hyde didn't impress me as a reliable anthropologist or historian. He is a "Luce Professor of Art and Politics" in the department of American Studies at Kenyon College. He writes more like a philosopher or art historian - lots of inference and interpretation, very little evidence. That's probably why I never finished the book.

There is also a web site called The Straight Dope which gives another theory about "Indian giver."