Hey all,
I got back from the UK last night. It was a fun trip and I spent some time in museums looking at various Roman and Celtic displays.
One thing that impressed me about the various displays was the presence of human remains. There were Roman skeletons and Celtic skeletons on display. It was refreshing to see the various displays and to read about the data gathered due to unfettered access to human remains.
This led me to wonder why there aren't any widespread repatriation movements by Italians or Celtic descendants. In other words, why did we get hit with repatriation issues that have not affected archaeologists in other countries?
I suppose that depth of time is an issue. In some cases, Italians and Brits are more temporally removed from the displayed human remains than Native Americans; but what about Kennewick Man?
So, ultimately, what brought on the revolution that got the NAGPRA ball rolling? Unhealed wounds from colonial attrocities? Native American religious beliefs? Or a combination of the two coupled with a desire to stick it to the white man?
Anyway, I'm sure there is not a definitive answer to any of these questions, and I know that NAGPRA is here to stay, but seeing those skeletons on display made me feel like I was missing out on a piece of archaeology that became unreachable with the implementation of NAGPRA.
2 comments:
Aaron,
How would you like it if I dug up your grandparents?
I think it is definitely a combination of the two. And in my opinion, work in Mexico!
Thanks for the reality check Mike, I had never thought of that issue. It's really made me think...
(enter the touching "The More You Know" theme)
I wouldn't like it if you dug my grandparents up, but my fifth Great Grandparents?
What about if you dug in a cemetery of European Americans that I had no relation to? Let's say a group of Mormon Pioneers. I'm not related to them, I share their same religious beliefs, and probably their ethnicity, but I'm not too worried about digging them up.
Post a Comment