Wendy Botting asks the really pertinent question in this debate:  Why
aren't the remains of an ancient Egyptian treated in the same manner as the
remains of a Native American by all professionals in our field?
 
It seems to me we are looking at different historical/political relations
with ancient Egyptians and with ancient Aboriginal people.  We have a
methodology in Australian heritage management of assessing the significance
of things or places as historic or social  (plus a few more criteria), and
the difference is that 'social' significance applies to contemporary
perception; 'historic' significance to perception in or of the past.  These
categories define the difference between long-dead Egyptians and
Aborigines.  The former are of historic interest or significance in our
western culture (though it might just be different in Egypt - are they at
all sensitive about mummies there?).  The latter are of significance right
now, for political reasons of ethnic identity and legal recognition, to a
certain community, viz their descendents.
 
In short, the larger moral issue of how we treat the bodies of the dead, in
whatever culture including our own, is essentially determined by the pulls
and pushes of power, ie politics.
 
Linda Young
[log in to unmask]