Introduction
Human remains provide important archeological information about the past generations that may be critical to the current and future generations, and that may not be provided by any other historical method. First, it enable archaeologists to study about past diseases and how past populations adapted to their environment especially in terms of morbidity. Secondly, they are able to understand how demographic profiles have changed over time through analyzing sex and profiles of the past populations (Powell, Odegaard and Cassman 2). Finally, archaeologists are able analyze the culture and social customs of the past generations through analyzing teeth, bones development and other body structures to understand their dietary practices. Such information can only be collected through excavating skeletons and bones of the dead people. However, a debate has been going-on on whether we should excavate human remains in order to collect information about past populations and whether the excavated remains should be reburied and returned. This study will focus on the two sides of the arguments in order to come up with a conclusion about excavating human remains.
Proponents’ views
Human remains need to be excavated since it is inevitable to collect some important information on the past generations without really doing so. However, the researchers must always follow the appropriate procedures to ensure those remains are only excavated where necessary and the entire process is conducted in a dignified and respectable manner knowing that those are human beings. First, researchers must seek permission from the appropriate communities, groups or agencies when they are preparing for human remains excavation. This will ensure there is a good partnership and “blessings” from the people who act as the custodians of those human remains. It will also ensure the researchers receive the necessary support and guidance from the local communities who may have crucial information regarding their burial sites. For example, local elders may provide information on how the burial site is organized, where do they bury each gender, the exact location of the remains among other relevant information. These consultations will also ensure the excavation process is conducted with minimal side effects to the surrounding communities as well as the environment. It also improves the precision and efficiency of the excavators, and hence the validity of the results obtained at the end of the process. The results that researchers obtain after the whole exercise must be published and disseminated using the laid down procedures in order to ensure human remains excavation is of benefits to the current and future generations (Sládek, Galeta and Sosna 16). Archaeologists and other researchers must look for ways to preserve and protect burial sites in order to ensure they achieve their research goals without necessarily interfering with the peace of the dead.
Opponents’ views
In many communities, it is a taboo to disturb the dead since they believe that in doing so, their spirits may come back to haunt those who are alive. Therefore, they do not allow anyone to come and destroy their burial grounds unless under unavoidable circumstances under which some other rituals must be performed (Robb et al. 39). The opponents of these activities argue that archaeological excavation mainly involves destruction of the burial sites in order to remove human remains. Secondly, they admit that although the process is important to the present and future generations, violation of ethical principle when handling the remains of the dead is common hence necessitating the need to stop it. Over the years, researchers have not observed human decency when they are handling human remains or fail seek permission from the appropriate authorities before beginning their process. There are cases where human remains were left unburied on the burial sites, buried on shallow graves or a one mass grave after their excavation. This contrary to human decency rule that requires all human beings, dead or alive, to be treated with respect and dignity they deserve. Therefore, the inability of the excavators to follow and adhere to procedures established by different human remains excavation authorities defeat the benefits of the entire process.
Burying the remains
There is also a division among scholars on whether excavated remains should be buried or not. According to many Christians, human remains ought to be reburied after excavations since they have some spiritual attachment to the eternity of a person. They argue that human remains can be exhumed if there is any good reason to do so. However, those remains should be buried as soon as possible in a dignified and proper manner knowing that they were once human beings who deserve respect. Some communities believe that their ancestors are always present in their present ceremonies and frequently call them to help them in the present difficult situations. For example, some Indian communities believe that the human remains of their ancestors should always remain buried since they affect and control their present lives (Giesen 3). On the other hand, most non-Christians scholars argue that human remains ought not to be reburied after excavation. Instead, they ought to be stored in a museum for people to see them. They purport that preserving human remains in a museum will also allow researchers to use them in the subsequent studies (Hawley 275). In addition, preserving human remains in the museum also solve the problem of locating the original burial site that may have been destroyed during excavation process or due to other human development projects.
Conclusion
Excavating human remains sometime is almost inevitable due to the value they may offer to the current and future generations. However, researchers must follow the right procedures before, during and after the excavation in order to ensure the dead are treated with respect and dignity they deserve since they are human beings. For example, before preparing to dig human remains, archaeologists must seek permission from different agencies and groups who have authority to protect and preserve them. Secondly, decision whether to preserve human remains in a museum or rebury them ought to be reached after conducting a wider consultation that involves archaeologists, local community representatives, academicians, faith-based organizations, museum professionals among other important stakeholders. This will ensure that no party is aggrieved by the decision and interests of all groups are put into consideration while making the final decisions. Moreover, it is not appropriate at all times to excavate human remains despite the necessity of the past information to the present and future generations. Sometime the cost of the process may exceed its benefits, forcing the regulatory authority not to allow the researchers to continue with the excavation process. These costs may include soil erosion, cultural heritage destructions, disturbing the surrounding communities, environmental pollutions among other forms of destructions. Therefore, the regulatory authority ought to consider case-by-case in order to assess the possible outcomes of the entire process.
Work cited
Giesen, Myra. Curating Human Remains: Caring for the Dead in the United Kingdom. In: Heritage Matters. Woodbridge: Boydell & Brewer, 2013.
Hawley, Joshua D. “The Intellectual Origins of (Modem) Substantive Due Process.” Texas Law Review 93.2(2014):275-350.
Powell, Joseph F., Odegaard, Nancy and Cassman, Vicki. Human Remains : Guide for Museums and Academic Institutions. Lanham: AltaMira Press, 2007.
Robb, John, Elster, Ernestine S., Isetti, Eugenia, Knüsel, Christopher J., Tafuri, Mary Anne and Traverso, Antonella. “Cleaning the dead: Neolithic ritual processing of human bone at Scaloria Cave, Italy.” Antiquity, 89.343(2015):39-54.
Sládek, Vladimír, Galeta, Patrik and Sosna, Daniel. “Measuring human remains in the field: Grid technique, total station, or MicroScribe?” In Forensic Science International 221.1(2012):16-22.
