Anthropological and archaeological research has taken full advantage of technological progress in the past decades, and human remains have been able to answer many more questions about the origin of our species than science has ever been able to provide before. While exploring human past is an important scientific area, biological anthropology and archeology have not been devoid of ethical controversies. The motivations, methods and rights of the scientists over the remains have been often questioned by critics and opponents who have different views regarding the ways in which these artifacts should be treated. Spiritual beliefs and cultural practices regarding human remains are extremely powerful and continue to guide the actions and attitudes of the groups who have a claim on the remains discovered by scientists. While ethical dilemmas and conflicts are unavoidable in these cases, finding a middle ground between cultural practices and scientific research is paramount in order for both these areas of human experience to be equally protected.
Scientific research is conducted for the ultimate benefit of humanity, but particular groups can benefit even more by getting to understand their past better, and perhaps, reinforcing particular cultural, spiritual or traditional practices. However, archeological and anthropological research is not always welcomed by the communities, particularly when this comes in conflict with the same beliefs, or when the scientists are distrusted. In her article, Kathleen Kawelu discusses the conflicts between Hawaiians and archaeologists of the human remains that belong to the community. The problem arises from the very nature of research. As Kawelu shows, “the perception that archaeology is unnecessary for understanding Hawaiian culture is grounded in the confidence of cultural knowledge, but kuleana (responsibility, right) is a factor as well”(37). Furthermore, for native Hawaiians, archeologists seem nosy and rude, for unearthing and conducting investigations over bodily remains that should not be disturbed. More open-minded Hawaiian natives, who believe that archaeology can benefit the communities, still believe that Hawaiian archaeologists are less threatening, because they understand the importance of the remains and would show more respect in handling them, also bringing a spiritual dimension to the field (43). However, in practice, many archaeologists are completely disconnected from the Hawaiian culture, and the lack of knowledge on Hawaiian culture affects credibility and their relationship with the community. Furthermore, archaeologists are also involved in the capitalist aspect of problem, because they are requested by the law to assists construction companies by evaluating the locations and the discovered remains. This often creates suspicion and ethical dilemmas because, while archaeologists should remain unbiased, there is always the chance of a subjective report.
The ethical aspects regarding the treatment of human remains are also tackled by Kim and Steadman. Their analysis of the NAGPRA legislation which is meant to protect the rights of Native Americans and Native Hawaiians to their ancestors’ remains, and the consequences of its implementation, is meant to provide a case study for the possible resolution for the Korean context. Much like in Kawelu’s article, the authors explain that the only possible solution to the conflicts is “to actively consult Native Americans concerning what questions they find important about the past and to involve them directly in archaeological projects” (58). Such level of commitment and thoughtfulness in regards to the Native culture is also emphasized Kawelu’s work, according to whom, Native Hawaiians would like archeologists to prove more awareness on the spiritual and cultural concerns. More Native Hawaiians practicing archaeology is also a type of bridge which is meant to link Natives and the archaeological communities, and to try to find a middle ground. The authors show that the Korean arena is very conflicted regarding the study of human remains, because the filial piety which is deeply engrained in the people’s spirituality, and the sense of responsibility towards the remains, determine many Koreans to reject research, particularly when they hold traditional beliefs.
The problems faced by the two communities in their path towards a mutually satisfactory option are very similar. Thus, there is a likeness between the issues that are raised by the opponents to anthropological research in Korea, and those in the Hawaii. In both cultures, the idea of responsibility towards the ancestors’ remains is very strong, and determines many people to reject any kind of research which would disturb the remains. Furthermore, in each community, the capitalist threat is part of the problem. While Hawaiians face the relocation of their burial grounds due to development projects, Koreans fear that the development of archaeological research will turn the human remains into opportunities for profit. However, for both communities, archeological research, when conducted with care and respect, can be beneficial by helping to recover lost links to the past, and to reconnect with the past.
While legislation which protects the rights of the Native peoples over their remains is a must in a democratic society, archeological research on human remains is also vital in learning about the past. Unlike written records, which, when available, can give clues on how people lived in the past, what they believed and how they interacted, human remains can allow researchers to understand how people evolved, and how they changed from one period to the other. The physical adaptations to environmental conditions, the evolution of the human brain, and the changes which have occurred in human anatomy from the time when the studied individuals lived, are only few of the types of information which can be learnt from the investigation of human remains. Furthermore, these artifacts can tell a great number of things about the peoples of the past, their health, life expectation, living standards and other aspects of their lives, which would remain a mystery in lack of such physical evidence. Therefore, archaeology is essential in uncovering important pieces about the past which can help scientists to complete the puzzle of human evolution.
The archaeology of the places discussed in the article is important first and foremost for the communities to whom the remains belong, because it is their own past that the archeologists are trying to uncover. While the discoveries may disturb the narratives and myths of these people, knowledge has always been a way of empowering vulnerable communities. By restoring, or strengthening the people’s sense of identity and cultural pride, the study of human remains is first and foremost, in the benefit of their best interest. Furthermore, the archaeologies of the places studied here is also beneficial to the entire world, because by articulating the physical similarities and differences between different groups of people, it helps to establish their rightful place among the world’s nations, and to explain their particular trajectory through time and space, and how the environment and historical context has shaped them and made them whom they are today.
The archeology described in Kawelu’ article can educate people on who they ancestors were and can thus enrich peoples’ historical and cultural knowledge Archeology can also educate people on the value of scientific research and remove the fears and concerns associated with the inquiries into the past. For example, Hawaiians refuse to allow archaeologists to disturb the remains on spiritual grounds, thus choosing to remain in the dark regarding their own past, rather than allowing researchers to disturb their burial grounds, and the remains themselves. However, by providing information , which helps the communities to understand their present and to envision to future, based on the knowledge of the past, archeology educates people on the positive role of science in the preservation of tradition, spirituality and culture. Even though science may appear to oppose tradition and spirituality due to the westernized values it promotes, such as atheism or materialism, it can also be used positively in order to refresh and to sparkle the renewed interest of the youth in their own culture, or to validate certain practices by offering a scientific explanation them.
Works Cited
Kawelu, Kathleen. “In Their Own Voices: Contemporary Native Hawaiian and Archeological Narratives about Hawaiian Archaeology”. The Contemporary Pacific 26.1(2014): 31-62.
Kim, Jieun and Steadman, Dawnie. “A Review of Codes of Ethics in the United States and Ethical Dilemmas Surrounding the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA)”. Korean Journal of Physical Anthropology 27(2): 47-63.
