There has been a lot of controversy regarding human remains and the field of archaeology for some time. The Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA) protect the Native American’s rights over their human remains and cultural items. Proposed by the Morris Udall, former Congress Member for Arizona second District, NAGPRA was passed by the Congress in November 1990. The congress’ intention was to facilitate the repatriation of the Native Americans skeleton and cultural remains that were held in museums and federal agencies. In compliance with the Act, anthropologists returned several skeletal remains that were conserved in their study laboratories and museums to the respective Native tribes. In 1998, for example, the University of Nebraska repatriated over 1702 cultural artifacts to the affiliated Native Americans (Niesel 1). This was a significant blow to the scientific and anthropology studies as it marked the loss of necessary resources in unraveling the development of the human being.
The implementation of the NAGPRA has provoked a ranging conflict in interest between two groups, the scientists on one hand and the Native American tribes on the other. As expressed by Burt, scientists have held that the skeletal remains are a source of information that helps in relating the early and the new world (304). They argue that understanding the human evolution is beneficial to the modern communities as they are able to appreciate their history and origin. Conversely, the Native American tribes are of the views that preserving human remains prevents their spirits from resting. Unrest of the spirits may bring misfortune on the current and future generations. In terms of learning their history, the Native Americans bel...
... middle of paper ...
...t.cgi?article=1447&context=facpub
Niesel, Zoe. Comment: Better Late than Never? The Effect of the Native American Graves Protection And Repatriation Act’s 2010 Regulations. Wake Forest L. Rev. 46 (2011): 837-865. Web http://wakeforestlawreview.com/comment-better-late-than-never-the-effect-of-the-native-american-graves-protection-and-repatriation-act%E2%80%99s-2010-regulations
Thomas, David Hurst. "American Museum of Natural History, New York, USA thomasd@ amnh. Org For the past eight years, the phrase ‘Kennewick Man’has been close to the lips of most American archaeologists and." (2004). Web. http://www4.waspress.co.uk/journals/beforefarming/journal_20042/news/20042_08.pdf
Willie, Burt R. "Kennewick Man-Mission Accomplished." Idaho L. Rev. 43 (2006): 301. Web. http://heinonline.org/HOL/LandingPage?handle=hein.journals/idlr43&div=13&id=&page=
Humanity became fascinated with the idea of evolution with the work of Charles Darwin and the Scientific Revolution. People began hunting for fossils that would prove that man had an ape derived ancestry (Weiner, 1955). After various years of searching, a piece of physical evidence was found in England that was said to confirm the theory of evolution (Weiner, 1955).This confirmation came from Charles Dawson’s discoveries from 1908, that were announced publicly in 1912 (Thackeray, 2011). Dawson was believed to have found the fossil remains of the “missing link” between ape and human evolution, the reconstructed skull of Piltdown man (Augustine, 2006). The material was found in stratigraphical evidence and animal remains that were, at the time, adequate enough to confirm the antiquity of the remains (Weiner, 1955). In 1915, another specimen, Piltdown man II, was found further proving this theory (Augustine, 2006). However, this was merely a hoax proven by fluorine relative dating in 1953; the artifacts and bone fragments discovered turned out to be altered to fit the proposed scenario (Augustine, 2006). The skull found was actually composed of a human braincase that was younger than the complimentary orangutan lower jaw (Falk, 2011). Both sections of the skull had been stained to appear to be from the same person of the same age (Falk, 2011).The perpetrator of this act was never caught and there are many theories proposed for the motive of this hoax (Augustine, 2006). Many people have been taken into consideration for this crime, such as Chardin, Woodward, Hinton, and Dawson (Augustine, 2006). Nevertheless, the evidence that proves that Dawson is guilty of this crime against anthropology is quite substantial compared to the evidence...
On July 26, 1996 two individuals were walking along the bank of the Columbia River near Kennewick, Washington, did not expect to find one of the oldest complete skeletal remains in the world. While, Kennewick man has gained considerable notoriety, debates have grown over the application of the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA) and whether the Native Americans or Archaeologists have the rights to the body. As soon as the body was found it was studied by anthropologist James Chatters and he discovered “that the skull had characteristics unlike those of modern Native Americans” (Native Americans and Archeologists). As a result, it did not qualify under the NAGPRA rules. However, conflict arose because the Department of Interior and many Native American tribes are contesting that evidence found by the archaeologists. But, while it goes against Native American beliefs to inspect the bodies of their ancestors, any evidence that was gathered during the trial, in regards to the origin of Kennewick man, was necessary in order to find out to whom he belongs. Now, the skeleton is currently being kept at the Burke Museum in Washington State, where it is not on display. I believe that is where he should stay until more information about him is found. Finally, in regards to the presentations, I will be taking about who cares about the Kennewick Man, Lise Anderson and Jen Gray will be tackling the topic of opinions, Matt Ruffcorn will do the basic information about the Kennewick Man, Austin Eibel will talk about the conflict affected and finally, Matt Hellinghouse will talk about the research from an archaeological perspective.
McNamara, Robert. "Indian Removal and the Trail of Tears." About.com. N.p., 2014. Web. 24 Feb. 2014. .
The Native American’s way of living was different from the Europeans. They believed that man is ruled by respect and reverence for nature and that nature is an ancestor or relative. The Native American’s strongly belie...
Kennewick Man has started and added to an immense saga about the ethics involved in excavating and studying the remains of other that passed away long and not so long ago. Kennewick man being one of the hottest topics of the media during the mid-nineties has proved to be one of the most trying ethical dilemmas of our time. An ethical dilemma as described by Kelley Ross Ph. D is a “conflict between the rightness or wrongness of the actions and the goodness or badness of the consequences of those actions” (www.friesien.com). In the case of the Kennewick man the coalition of the tribes are trying to do what is best for their culture and belief by having the Kennewick man buried and the scientists who want to study this strange humanoid that has shown up on the banks of the Columbia River and are acting how they believe this should be handled, with careful study and the need to find the knowledge that this skeleton can provide about America nine millennia ago; and here is the problem that has been floating around this case for little over a decade.
Robbins Burling, David F. Armstrong, Ben G. Blount, Catherine A. Callaghan, Mary Lecron Foster, Barbara J. King, Sue Taylor Parker, Osamu Sakura, William C. Stokoe, Ron Wallace, Joel Wallman, A. Whiten, Sherman Wilcox and Thomas Wynn. Current Anthropology, Vol. 34, No. 1 (Feb., 1993), pp. 25-53
Oral history teaches the Navajo be aware of changes in the land and to protect Navajo synecdoche by avoiding ominous threats like rodents (35). But more significantly, oral history, as taught by the elders, requires the Navajo to respect their ceremonial dances, winter shoe games, and spiritual artifacts by refusing to sell their culture for capital (39). Navajo leaders used this 1993 illness to evaluate ignored cultural values and use ceremonies to strengthen “familiar ties and relationships” (40). By neglecting their traditions, the Navajo were bringing destruction upon themselves. Elders also sharply pointed out that “physical changes in the land reflect a break down in the proper relationship between Navajo and mother Earth” (39). The destruction of the Navajo exists in the uranium mining pits, road and water projects and dumping sites, unless prescribed healing ceremonies and future obedience can redeem their relationship with the land and the Holy People.
...oo late. What was lost of the Native American culture and beliefs can never be fully recovered.
In the 30 years after the Civil War, although government policy towards Native Americans intended to shift from forced separation to integration into American society, attempts to "Americanize" Indians only hastened the death of their culture and presence in the America. The intent in the policy, after the end of aggression, was to integrate Native Americans into American society. Many attempts at this were made, ranging from offering citizenship to granting lands to Indians. All of these attempts were in vain, however, because the result of this policies is much the same as would be the result of continued agression.
Native Americans have faced increasing encroachment by European and Euro-American settlers since the discovery of the Americas by Europeans in 1492. Beginning with the Caribs, mistakenly labeled as Indians by Christopher Columbus, continuing with the ‘Indian Wars’ waged by the U.S. government against such tribes as the Lakota and Apache, and lasting until today, native peoples have had to adjust and adapt constantly to survive. Native peoples have had to use and balance their ‘historical agency,’ or the ability of a people to affect the world around them throughout history, against the ‘structural forces’ set up by outsiders and foreign governments, which seek to limit their impact on the world. Both Andrew Fisher and Jeffrey Ostler have written about native groups, the Columbia River Indians and the Lakota, respectively, which have balanced historical agency against external structural forces over time. According to Fisher and Ostler, both the Lakota and the Columbia River Indians have used legal and illegal means to promote their historical agency. Both have a central cultural issue at the heart of their struggle against external structural forces. Ultimately, however, both groups have used the struggle between their historical agency and external structural forces to forge an identity that allowed them to adapt and survive into the twenty-first century.
The Native American Grave Protection and Repatriation Act was signed into law on November 1990 by President George Bush. This legislation is the result of decades of effort by American Indians to protect the burial sites of their ancestors against grave desecration and to recover the remains of ancestors and sacred cultural objects in the possession or under the control of federal agencies and museums. In November 1993, museums holding certain Native American artifacts were required to prepare written summaries of their collections for distribution to culturally affiliated tribes. In November 1995, museums were required to prepare detailed inventories of their Native American collection. This act is historically significant because it represents a fundamental change in social attitudes toward Native people by museum curators, the scientific community, and Congress. Congress attempted to strike a balance between the interest in scientific examination of skeletal remains and the recognition that Native Americans have a religious and spiritual reverence for the remains of their ancestors (4).
“This is my lab and what we do is study bones,” states Kari Bruwelheide in her video entitled “30,000 Skeletons”. Of the three resources that we were provided, “Puzzles of the Chesapeake” by Sally Walker, “Forensic Anthropology” by an unknown author, and “30,000 Skeletons” by Smithsonian Education presented by Kari Bruwelheide, the resource “30,000 Skeletons” is by far the best at explaining the role of an anthropologist. It is unbeatable because it is a video rather than just written words, and Kari Bruwelheide has personal experience in being a forensic anthropologist. A forensic anthropologist is a scientist that studies human remains, or in another word, skeletons, to try to find out information about the past.
McMaster, Gerald, and Trafzor, Clifford E. eds. Native universe Voices of Indian America. Washington D.C.: National Geographic Society, 2008. Print
Contrary to popular belief, discrimination of Native Americans in America still widely exist in the 21st century! So you may ask, why? Well, to answer that one question, I will give you 3 of the countless reasons why this unfortunate group of people are punished so harshly for little good reason. So now, let’s get into it, shall we!
First, as a religious traditional myth, the Native American belief that they are born out of the earth in their homeland, has not been broken by “fact” in the form of scientific hypothesis. This is because there continues to be much disagreement in the scientific community about the exact period, difference in DNA, and the exact route taken for migration. Although much of this disagreement is really just “fine tuning” of the Land Bridge Theory, the zealous Native American can interpret this disagreement as a refutation thus, fulfilling Tillich’s explanation as a justifiable literal