Kennewick Man

[Minimalist]

arizona is just crawling with reservations.

And casinos.... and if you don't think gambling money is behind a lot of this attention they get from politicians, you aren't paying attention!


Except for the Navajo who have so far resisted the temptation. The rest of them kind of look like Sicilian Indians.

[Der Lange]

There has not been a great deal of anthropological study or other work done with the Ainu, because Japan is generally excessively hostile to its aboriginal people and actively discourages any external contact with or interest in them.

That's something of a reminder for us in the United States. For a long time, of course, the European people here persecuted the Native Americans, and only after we had destroyed their cultures, taken their land, and reduced their numbers did we decide to treat them with condescending romanticism. Even today, when perhaps a more realistic and respectful national perspective has developed, Native Americans are treated with distant "other" attitudes. The conflict over respect for their surviving customs and principles when it comes to archaeological studies, relics and artifacts is a trying challenge.

I would not particularly like anyone digging up my grandfather's grave - or his grandfather's either - to see how his bones could tell the story of immigration, hardship and a life in the notheastern Canadian hard rock mines. When I think about the native peoples' complaints and demands in the practice of archaeology, I try to remember what it feels like to me.

The case of Kennewick Man brought all of the conflicts into a strong focus. I think generally the right decision was reached, but also feel that the Native Americans made some very very important points in their side of the case and that we disdain them at the risk of heartlessness and disrespect.

As for that very beautiful skull, it reeks of enigma. Who else here would love to see one of the forensic sculptors attempt to reconstruct a face around it?

[Leona Conner]

[quote]I would not particularly like anyone digging up my grandfather's grave - or his grandfather's either -[/quote]

I agree with you there, but 2000 years or better from now, I'm not sure. As for my bones, by then they can do what they want.

[quote]As for that very beautiful skull, it reeks of enigma. Who else here would love to see one of the forensic sculptors attempt to reconstruct a face around it?[/quote]

Oh yes, please. It would be fascinanting to see what he might have looked it.

[stan]

It's been done, but I really think forensic reconstructions are
misleading. The details such as the shape of the nose and lips, and the eyelids are really speculative.

[Der Lange]

Patrick Stewart lived back then?

Wow!

[stan]

Time travel....



To the novice, the structural evidence that suggests "race" or ethnicity
might be things like eyelid structure, nostrils and nose shapes, and
mouth shapes. These are precisely the things that are speculative in such
a reconstruction, imho.

[Guest]

Patrick Stewart lived back then?

first thing i thought of though it was capt. picard that came to mind.

I would not particularly like anyone digging up my grandfather's grave - or his grandfather's either - to see how his bones could tell the story of immigration, hardship and a life in the notheastern Canadian hard rock mines.

considering there are more than enough graves to satisfy inquiry, you shouldn't have to worry about that. here is one grave and exceptions would have to be made to get the information needed.

[Minimalist]

I know that both you guys are kidding but one of the sites I checked out had also made the Patrick Stewart connection. I wonder if I can sort it out of my "history" file?

[Minimalist]

Here you go.


http://www.harbornet.com/folks/theedric ... nnewic.htm

[Minimalist]

The case of Kennewick Man brought all of the conflicts into a strong focus. I think generally the right decision was reached, but also feel that the Native Americans made some very very important points in their side of the case and that we disdain them at the risk of heartlessness and disrespect.

I don't think the modern American Indian's claim to all bones found is totally without a degree of self-interest. They have a stake in making sure that modern theories of "other" early settlers are suppressed. What is ironic, given the way the various tribes moved around and warred on one another, is that they could easily end up claiming a desire to bury the bones of someone who their ancestors might have killed in a raid.

Personally, I see nothing wrong with taking a few measurements and maybe a DNA sample before re-interring the bones but, that's just me. I'm notoriously unsentimental about such things.

[Der Lange]

M, your cynicism is showing. Please hike up your slip and pull down the skirt.

Native American "warfare" was usually quite different from that we prosecute today, or pursued in Europe or before the Dark Ages. Not that many people were killed in most native American encounters, and those who were frequently were given proper ritual funerals. For example, "counting coup," one of the Plains Indian practices, rarely involved killing the enemy - it involved touching the enemy who might have died if that was the intent.

The dead of wars usually had the chance to enter the afterlife in accordance with tribal customs.

Finding a body buried on the open plain isolated from the communal practices would have been rare at the time and rarer still today.

[Minimalist]

D/L,

Come on, they make no claim that any specific tribe 'owns' the remains. The assumption, apparently dubious as archaeology and anthropology make progress understanding the settling of the New World, is that since "EVERYBODY" knows that they were the first inhabitants then any bones found MUST belong to them. EVERYBODY used to believe the world was flat, too.

You're damn right....I'm cynical.