Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-75dct Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-05-20T18:21:22.223Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Remembering Humanity: How to Include Human Values in a Scientific Endeavor

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  15 August 2005

Dorothy Lippert
Dorothy Lippert
Affiliation:
Choctaw, Indigenous Representative to the Executive of the World Archaeological Congress. Email: dorothyl@alumni.rice.edu
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The Bonnichsen decision has been heralded as a victory for anthropology, because it appears to vindicate the position of the plaintiffs who brought their suit in order to be allowed to conduct scientific research on a 9,000-year-old skeleton from North America. It appears to be a defeat for Native Americans, who view this skeleton as an ancestor and who would prefer to see the remains of this individual returned to the ground to continue the long journey back to the earth. In fact, this polarized view of the case returns the discourse surrounding repatriation to a previous level in which arguments were made over the question, “who owns the past?” While this may be a rhetorically satisfying problem to wrestle with, it does not capture the true nature of how archaeology can engage with Native people in the process of understanding ancient lives. It presumes that the past exists as a form of property. Under this simplistic construction, human remains can exist as property and can be owned by one group or another.

Type
CASE DISCUSSION
Information
International Journal of Cultural Property , Volume 12 , Issue 2 , May 2005 , pp. 275 - 280
Copyright
© 2005 International Cultural Property Society

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Atalay, Sonya. “Indigenous Archaeology as Decolonizing Practice.” Special issue, “Decolonizing Archaeology—Efforts to Transform a Discipline,” American Indian Quarterly Fall (2005).Google Scholar
Dongoske, Kurt E., et al. “NAGPRA: A New Beginning, Not the End, for Osteological Analysis—A Hopi Perspective.” In Repatriation Reader: Who Owns American Indian Remains? edited by Devon A. Mihesuah, 282–93. Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press, 2000.
McGuire, Randall H. “The Sanctity of the Grave: White Concepts and American Indian Burials.” In Conflict in the Archaeology of Living Traditions, edited by Robert Layton, 167–84. London: Unwin Hyman, 1989.
Russell, Steve. “Sacred Ground: Un-Marked Graves Protection in Texas Law.” Texas Forum on Civil Liberties and Civil Rights 4/1 (1998): 3–23.Google Scholar
Zimmerman, Larry J. “Made Radical By My Own: An Archaeologist Learns to Accept Reburial.” In Conflict in the Archaeology of Living Traditions, edited by Robert Layton, 167–84. London: Unwin Hyman, 1989.