I wasn't going to enter into this discussion, but Dave Wells' comment about
archaeology has me somewhat upset.
  No, Dave, archaeologists are not thieves and grave robbers. We strive to
find out about the human condition and life in past times. Most of us do not
set out to find human remains, but when they are discovered, we treat them
with the respect they are due. (Mind, I am speaking of current practices, not
work done in the 1920's and 1930's!) When a burial is found, the practice in
the Southwestern U.S. is to uncover the material carefully, study the bones to
find out who was he/she, and then rebury or repatriate the skeleton to the
correct group.
    An excellent example comes to mind. In Tucson, Arizona, the gas company
slammed into the presidio cemetary (18th century). The gas company had not
checked beforehand to find out if they were working in a sensitive area, which
I'm sure they knew it was since there are extant maps of the site. A CRM firm
came in and excavated the bodies of the soldiers, leaving the site open to the
public (which I found an extremely insensitive move as many of the descendants
of these soldiers still lived in Tucson). The local Presidio Descendants group
were given the remains, and they proceeded to put them into a tomb that could
be opened for later study of the material.
  If this group had been so offended by the way their ancestors had been
treated, why go to all the trouble of constructing an openable tomb? Clearly,
not all peoples feel the same way about their ancestors.
   Archaeologists need to be able to study skeletons and skeletal remains in
order to be able to reconstruct the past. If PC continues on its present
course, I am afraid that such study will end in my lifetime.
 
Anita Cohen-Williams; Reference Services; Hayden Library
Arizona State University, Tempe, AZ  85287-1006
PHONE: (602) 965-4579              FAX: (602) 965-9169
INTERNET: [log in to unmask] Owner: HISTARCH