home
***
CD-ROM
|
disk
|
FTP
|
other
***
search
/
TIME: Almanac 1995
/
TIME Almanac 1995.iso
/
time
/
092589
/
09258900.004
< prev
next >
Wrap
Text File
|
1994-03-25
|
4KB
|
92 lines
<text id=89TT2473>
<title>
Sep. 25, 1989: Returning Bones Of Contention
</title>
<history>
TIME--The Weekly Newsmagazine--1989
Sep. 25, 1989 Boardwalk Of Broken Dreams
</history>
<article>
<source>Time Magazine</source>
<hdr>
ETHICS, Page 61
Returning Bones of Contention
</hdr><body>
<p>A bitter debate over spiritual values and scholarly needs
</p>
<p> Arriving at work one day, a Wasp lawyer for Washington's
Smithsonian Institution finds a carton on her desk. She is
stunned. Inside the box are some clumps of dirt and a note
proposing that the contents -- the remains of her grandparents,
freshly dug up from a New England cemetery -- be put on display
by the museum. The sender is a part-Navajo conservator at the
institution, furious that such a fate has befallen the bones of
his ancestors.
</p>
<p> That grisly episode (from Tony Hillerman's novel Talking
God) is fictional, but it epitomizes the tensions in a dilemma
that confronts curators, anthropologists and those Native
Americans who angrily oppose them. To many scholars, and to much
of the museum-going public, the Indian bones and burial
artifacts are valuable clues to humanity's past. But to many
Indians, these relics are sacred and the archaeologists who have
appropriated them no better than grave robbers.
</p>
<p> Last week the Smithsonian signed a landmark agreement with
leaders of two national Indian organizations that both sides
hope will help defuse the issue. The institution, which has
18,500 human remains and thousands of other burial artifacts,
agreed to inventory its collection. Remains that can be clearly
identified as belonging to an individual or a surviving tribe
as well as all burial artifacts will be offered to the Native
Americans for reburial. In return the Indians dropped their
demand that the Smithsonian surrender all its remains, many of
whose origins are unknown.
</p>
<p> For the Indians, said Walter Echo-Hawk, senior counsel for
the Native American Rights Fund, the agreement marks the
"beginning of the end of their spiritual nightmare." In fact,
some scholarly institutions have gone further: Stanford
University has consented to return an entire collection of
skeletal remains of 550 Indians, most of them from the Ohlone
tribe, to their descendants. Nonetheless, many curators and
anthropologists are worried that a sweeping national policy
would empty museums across the land. Scholars argue that
preserved skeletons and other human artifacts, particularly
those of great antiquity, provide essential information on
problems ranging from the organization of tribal societies to
the origin of certain diseases, like rheumatoid arthritis.
</p>
<p> To that argument, Native Americans answer that 1) most of
the unearthed Indian bones lie moldering and unexamined in
museum basements; and 2) little if any data gathered from their
study are shared with the descendants. According to Suzan Shown
Harjo, executive director of the National Congress of American
Indians, the only bit of information the Smithsonian ever
imparted to her group was that their ancestors ate corn. "We
could have told them that anyway," says Harjo, citing the
accuracy of Indian oral tradition.
</p>
<p> Returning Indian remains to the proper heirs is not always
easy. What contemporary group, asks David Hurst Thomas of New
York City's American Museum of Natural History, can speak for
a tribe that no longer exists? "If we find things from 10,000
years ago," he says, "it becomes tricky." Another potential
problem: misidentified remains of one tribe might be returned
to descendants of a group that was historically its mortal
enemy. Beyond that, scholars note, tribes varied widely in their
treatment of the dead; for some, the spirit left the remains,
while for others, the spirit is still with the bones.
</p>
<p> Nevertheless, common sense argues for wider acceptance of
the Smithsonian's accord, even at the risk of some loss to
scholarship. As Harjo notes, the agreement applies "modern
standards of ethics to yesterday's abuses." And it may help
forestall the future desecration of lands that others hold
sacred in memory.
</p>
</body></article>
</text>