Archaeologica.org

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/6983300.stm

The remains of the girl, who was 15 when she died, were found in an icy pit on top of a volcano in the Andes, along with a younger boy and girl.

Researchers believe they were sacrificed by the Incas 500 years ago.

The three were discovered at a height of 6,700m (22,000ft) on Mount Llullaillaco, a volcano in north-west Argentina on the border with Chile.

I'm not sure how they know she was a maiden.

close inspection????

Right Clubs

But the exhibition has angered several indigenous groups who campaigned to stop the mummy from going on display.

Miguel Suarez from the Calchaquies valley tribes in and around Salta told the Associated Press news agency that the exhibit was "a great mistake", adding that he hoped visitors would show respect for the dead.

Since this girl is only 500 yrs. old, I think these Indians have a much stronger case regarding their burial customs than the North American tribes do in the case of Paleoindians like Kennewick man. But I get the impression that their are no laws in their favor in South America.

Maybe they called her a "maiden" because only virgins were considered pure enough for sacrifice. In order for her to be a proper sacrifice to a god she had to be free from any impurities.

Beagle wrote:http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/6983300.stm

The remains of the girl, who was 15 when she died, were found in an icy pit on top of a volcano in the Andes, along with a younger boy and girl.

Researchers believe they were sacrificed by the Incas 500 years ago.

The three were discovered at a height of 6,700m (22,000ft) on Mount Llullaillaco, a volcano in north-west Argentina on the border with Chile.

I'm not sure how they know she was a maiden.

Bill Maher did a bit about that idea some years ago.

Something like "sure, they sacrificed the virgins but no one was dumb enough to sacrifice the sluts....."

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news ... index.html

This mummy is now on display. National Geographic has a photo gallery of the Incan girl. 6 pictures.

I don't like to look at dead people.
I don't like buried people be put on display.
I think dead people should basically be left alone. Perhaps investigated scientifically, very carefully, but then restored to their peace. Not put on display. Like in a freak show.

I don't like juggling with corpses (human or otherwise) at all. I think they deserve respect. And peace.
That's why I'll make damn sure that 'they' will never 'juggle' with my remains: there won't be any to juggle around. Cremation.

Agreed RS.

Rokcet Scientist wrote:I don't like to look at dead people.
I don't like buried people be put on display.
I think dead people should basically be left alone. Perhaps investigated scientifically, very carefully, but then restored to their peace. Not put on display. Like in a freak show.

I don't like juggling with corpses (human or otherwise) at all. I think they deserve respect. And peace.
That's why I'll make damn sure that 'they' will never 'juggle' with my remains: there won't be any to juggle around. Cremation.

What about skeletons RS? Or individual bones? I just want to know so that I can post a warning with links. Something like "Images may be disturbing" (IMBD) That one's rather close to IMDB - the movie database, so that could be to confusing. Never fear, we'll come up with something.

Beagle wrote:

Rokcet Scientist wrote:I don't like to look at dead people.
I don't like buried people be put on display.
I think dead people should basically be left alone. Perhaps investigated scientifically, very carefully, but then restored to their peace. Not put on display. Like in a freak show.

I don't like juggling with corpses (human or otherwise) at all. I think they deserve respect. And peace.
That's why I'll make damn sure that 'they' will never 'juggle' with my remains: there won't be any to juggle around. Cremation.

What about skeletons RS? Or individual bones? I just want to know so that I can post a warning with links. Something like "Images may be disturbing" (IMBD) That one's rather close to IMDB - the movie database, so that could be to confusing. Never fear, we'll come up with something.

Last time I looked skeletons and bones were dead people too, Beag.
I've got no problem with scientific research – IF respectful – provided the items are restored, when the research has been finished, to the condition they were found in, as much as possible. 'Respect' is the key word here for me.
Putting them on display is not respectful, imo. There is no scientific goal served by putting them on display. Just peoples' sick, perverted curiosity.

The skeleton of "Lucy", the first A. Afarensis found, is touring the US right now. Do you have objections to that?

You've put your finger on a strange viewpoint there Beag, for me at least, as such early skeletons don't evoke the objections that I have for mummies on display etc.

Just peoples' sick, perverted curiosity.

Um...guilty as charged.

Beagle wrote:
The skeleton of "Lucy", the first A. Afarensis found, is touring the US right now.

Like a regular freak show.

Do you have objections to that?

No.
Because Lucy didn't sapiens sapiens.
But it looks more and more like HE did.

Because Lucy didn't sapiens sapiens.
But it looks more and more like HE did.

Well, that's true of course. Lucy was australopithecus (southern ape), and Erectus is a member of the Homo genus. So I guess we're just talking about humans.

OK.