Archeology usually carries the possibility of controversy because it digs up the truth that is buried not just under the surface of the earth but occasionally, also under layers of myths and false impressions. The controversies in many cases arise due to the way history is written by specific groups of historians bent on twisting facts and presenting them in a way that suit the vested interests they represent. The other major area of controversy in archeology is the cultural sensitivity of a specific group of people against digging up the graves of their ancestors in areas they consider scared.
Archeologists are also likely to face opposition while digging up old battlefields such as the locations of trench warfare such as those that took place in Belgium and France during World War I (Ethics and archaeology. March, 28. 2002). The ethical issues related to the Native American burial grounds across much of North America are some of the most complex in archeology, both in terms of history and cultural assertion of today’s Native Americans. Striking a balance between the need for better affirmative action requiring deeper study of the remains of long dead Native Americans and appreciating the spiritual and cultural sensitivities their descendents today, is an enormous challenge for archeologists.
The United States is one of those few countries where archeological excavations and studies are facing some of the toughest hurdles put forth by those favoring the complete wind-up of all archeological activity in Native American burial sites. The argument on the other side, led by eminent archeologists like, Clement W. Meighan is that archeology itself is in danger of becoming extinct in the US if the study of thousands of years old human remains are prohibited entirely (Pettifor, E. 1995). This is essentially an ethical dilemma in archeology, dealing with ancient human remains that are claimed by groups of Native Americans, the oldest inhabitants of the land.
Basic differences in mainstream American and Native American points of view
Like many other indigenous peoples in different parts of the world, the Native Americans are also a deeply spiritual people and live in close harmony with nature. Today, they are reasserting their cultural rights after a catastrophic and long drawn struggle for survival stretching centuries, in the wake of large scale migration from Europe to all corners of the New World. However, Native American culture is yet to be properly understood by the mainstream American society including archeologists and that is the cause of the dilemma facing archeology in the US.
Native American culture is based on their spiritual beliefs to a large extent which is something that mainstream America have struggled to come to terms with. Contemporary American psyche makes a clear distinction between religion and spiritualism on the one hand and the study of science and matter on the other. For Native Americans, the burial site of their ancestors should not be disturbed howsoever old it is; they believe that the spirits of the buried ancestors are a part of the ecosystem of the burial site and disturbing their graves could lead to serious misfortune (Pettifor, E. 1995). Contemporary archeologists believe that any grave that is hundreds or thousands of years old could be dug up for studies to ascertain prehistory.
Indigenous spiritual beliefs must be understood and appreciated
It would be a mistake to simply dismiss Native American spiritual beliefs as mysticism, and having no scientific basis unless there is clinching evidence to contradict their claims (Pettifor, E. 1995). After all, they are the indigenous people of this land and many of their traditions are steeped in history known to them. Merely pointing out a perspective on the basis of historical accounts that completely ignore the Native American version of their history will be as erroneous as it will be insensitive and unethical.
Therefore, instead of propagating a hostile and adversarial approach as Clement W. Meighan suggests, it is necessary to adopt ethics as a tool to deal with the dilemmas rather than ignore it to drive an agenda at odds with Native American traditions. The prehistory of the Americas in general and that of the United States in particular, is essentially the history of the indigenous people of this land. While contemporary archeologists like Meighan have the liberty to presume otherwise till they see sufficient empirical evidence, they would be wrong to presume that their view is based on truth, and should therefore prevail over those of the indigenous people.
Ways to deal with ethical dilemmas in archeology
The SSFC (Social Science Federation of Canada) has adopted a policy that is not just rational but also pragmatic in addressing issues of ethical dilemma in archeology as well as other social sciences. They identified the major factors that cause the ethical dilemmas [Pettifor, E. 1995. Ethical Decision Making for Practicing Social Scientists (Cannie Stark-Adamec and Jean Pettifor, 1995)]
o Conflicting interests of different stakeholders
o Conflict of principles
o Complex nature of stake holders and challenges they face
o Neglect of ethics, poor knowledge and foresight
The SSFC has adopted certain approaches toward finding durable solutions to vexed issues of ethical dilemmas in archeology. Such solutions cover identification of:
o Ethically relevant issues, principles, standards, rules and practices
o Stakeholders affected by institutional decisions and their interests
o Alternative courses of action
o Personal values, biases, beliefs or self-interest that may influence archeological decision-making
The SSFC approach does appear to be the right way to move forward on the issue of dealing with the remains of the ancestors of Native Americans. While there is clearly a need to adopt a much more inclusive approach than what has been seen so far, it is also true that the issue does touch raw nerves among Native Americans. For them it is not just a question of preserving the remains of their ancestors who lie buried since hundreds and in many cases, thousands of years; it is also as much, their culture which they feel is threatened by archeologists going around digging up the bones of their ancestors. Using the SSFC approach, all stakeholders, especially the indigenous peoples and the archeologists, can definitely find ways to work out a solution which can only evolve over a period of time (Pettifor, E. 1995).
References
1. March, 28. 2002. Can you dig it? The Economist. Retrieved from http://www.economist.com/node/1056932
2. Pettifor, E. 1995. The Reburial Controversy: A General Overview and Exploration of a Method for Resolution of the Ethical Dilemma. Retrieved from http://www.wynja.com/arch/reburial.html
Archeologists are also likely to face opposition while digging up old battlefields such as the locations of trench warfare such as those that took place in Belgium and France during World War I (Ethics and archaeology. March, 28. 2002). The ethical issues related to the Native American burial grounds across much of North America are some of the most complex in archeology, both in terms of history and cultural assertion of today’s Native Americans. Striking a balance between the need for better affirmative action requiring deeper study of the remains of long dead Native Americans and appreciating the spiritual and cultural sensitivities their descendents today, is an enormous challenge for archeologists.
The United States is one of those few countries where archeological excavations and studies are facing some of the toughest hurdles put forth by those favoring the complete wind-up of all archeological activity in Native American burial sites. The argument on the other side, led by eminent archeologists like, Clement W. Meighan is that archeology itself is in danger of becoming extinct in the US if the study of thousands of years old human remains are prohibited entirely (Pettifor, E. 1995). This is essentially an ethical dilemma in archeology, dealing with ancient human remains that are claimed by groups of Native Americans, the oldest inhabitants of the land.
Basic differences in mainstream American and Native American points of view
Like many other indigenous peoples in different parts of the world, the Native Americans are also a deeply spiritual people and live in close harmony with nature. Today, they are reasserting their cultural rights after a catastrophic and long drawn struggle for survival stretching centuries, in the wake of large scale migration from Europe to all corners of the New World. However, Native American culture is yet to be properly understood by the mainstream American society including archeologists and that is the cause of the dilemma facing archeology in the US.
Native American culture is based on their spiritual beliefs to a large extent which is something that mainstream America have struggled to come to terms with. Contemporary American psyche makes a clear distinction between religion and spiritualism on the one hand and the study of science and matter on the other. For Native Americans, the burial site of their ancestors should not be disturbed howsoever old it is; they believe that the spirits of the buried ancestors are a part of the ecosystem of the burial site and disturbing their graves could lead to serious misfortune (Pettifor, E. 1995). Contemporary archeologists believe that any grave that is hundreds or thousands of years old could be dug up for studies to ascertain prehistory.
Indigenous spiritual beliefs must be understood and appreciated
It would be a mistake to simply dismiss Native American spiritual beliefs as mysticism, and having no scientific basis unless there is clinching evidence to contradict their claims (Pettifor, E. 1995). After all, they are the indigenous people of this land and many of their traditions are steeped in history known to them. Merely pointing out a perspective on the basis of historical accounts that completely ignore the Native American version of their history will be as erroneous as it will be insensitive and unethical.
Therefore, instead of propagating a hostile and adversarial approach as Clement W. Meighan suggests, it is necessary to adopt ethics as a tool to deal with the dilemmas rather than ignore it to drive an agenda at odds with Native American traditions. The prehistory of the Americas in general and that of the United States in particular, is essentially the history of the indigenous people of this land. While contemporary archeologists like Meighan have the liberty to presume otherwise till they see sufficient empirical evidence, they would be wrong to presume that their view is based on truth, and should therefore prevail over those of the indigenous people.
Ways to deal with ethical dilemmas in archeology
The SSFC (Social Science Federation of Canada) has adopted a policy that is not just rational but also pragmatic in addressing issues of ethical dilemma in archeology as well as other social sciences. They identified the major factors that cause the ethical dilemmas [Pettifor, E. 1995. Ethical Decision Making for Practicing Social Scientists (Cannie Stark-Adamec and Jean Pettifor, 1995)]
o Conflicting interests of different stakeholders
o Conflict of principles
o Complex nature of stake holders and challenges they face
o Neglect of ethics, poor knowledge and foresight
The SSFC has adopted certain approaches toward finding durable solutions to vexed issues of ethical dilemmas in archeology. Such solutions cover identification of:
o Ethically relevant issues, principles, standards, rules and practices
o Stakeholders affected by institutional decisions and their interests
o Alternative courses of action
o Personal values, biases, beliefs or self-interest that may influence archeological decision-making
The SSFC approach does appear to be the right way to move forward on the issue of dealing with the remains of the ancestors of Native Americans. While there is clearly a need to adopt a much more inclusive approach than what has been seen so far, it is also true that the issue does touch raw nerves among Native Americans. For them it is not just a question of preserving the remains of their ancestors who lie buried since hundreds and in many cases, thousands of years; it is also as much, their culture which they feel is threatened by archeologists going around digging up the bones of their ancestors. Using the SSFC approach, all stakeholders, especially the indigenous peoples and the archeologists, can definitely find ways to work out a solution which can only evolve over a period of time (Pettifor, E. 1995).
References
1. March, 28. 2002. Can you dig it? The Economist. Retrieved from http://www.economist.com/node/1056932
2. Pettifor, E. 1995. The Reburial Controversy: A General Overview and Exploration of a Method for Resolution of the Ethical Dilemma. Retrieved from http://www.wynja.com/arch/reburial.html
No comments:
Post a Comment
Comments using using abusive language would be deleted