Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-j824f Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-05T13:09:44.547Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Kennewick Man's Funeral: the Burying of Scientific Evidence

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  17 May 2016

Elizabeth Weiss*
Affiliation:
Canadian Museum of Civilization, Canada, webpage: http://www.anthrosciences.com)
*
Correspondence should be sent to 210 S. 1st St., Apt. 511, San Jose, CA 95113, USA (email: [email protected].
Get access

Abstract

Kennewick Man, an early Holocene (9,000 years old) skeleton found in Washington State in 1996, has been a lightening rod for political discussion. Due to his alleged Caucasoid features, Kennewick Man controversially called into question who first peopled the Americas. A projectile point lodged in his hip also catapulted him to celebrity status. Spared the quick (within ninety days after an inquiry) repatriation typically required under the 1990 federal Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA), Kennewick Man was fully examined by a team of scientists chosen by the government who were forbidden to discuss their findings. Although the team concluded that Kennewick Man has cranial features associated with both Caucasoids and modern Native Americans, he is considered mainly to resemble modern Japanese Ainu, Polynesians, and Southeast Asians, as are other early Amerindian finds. Despite the resolution of early controversies, Kennewick Man continues as a symbol of the ideology of repatriation. In this article, I review the evidence for my belief that, taken to an extreme, the demand to bury aboriginal skeletons, not only in America but also around the world, poses a potentially serious impediment to scientific enquiry.

Type
Articles
Copyright
Copyright © Association for Politics and the Life Sciences 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

American Association of Physical Anthropologists (2000a). “Comments on the ‘Draft Principles of Agreement Regarding the Disposition of Culturally Unidentifiable Human Remains’ submitted by the AAPA to the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act Review Committee.” Reproduced atwww.phyanth.org/positions/cuhr.htm.Google Scholar
American Association of Physical Anthropologists (2000b). “Statement by the American Association of Physical Anthropologists on the Secretary of the Interior's Letter of 21 September 2000 Regarding Cultural Affiliation of Kennewick Man.” October 20. Reproduced athttp://www.physanth.org/positions/kennewick.html.Google Scholar
Bradley, B. (1985). “Lithic Reduction Sequences: A Glossary and Discussion.” In Swanson, E.H. (ed.), Lithic Technology: Making and Using Stone Tools. The Hague: Mouton.Google Scholar
Chatters, J.C. (1997). “Encounter with an Ancestor.” Anthropology Newsletter 38(1):910.Google Scholar
Commonwealth Consolidated Acts (2003). “Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Heritage Act 1984.” Available athttp://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/cth/consol_act/aatsihpa1984549.Google Scholar
Dansie, A. and Tuohy, D. (1997). “What We Can and Can't Know about Great Basin Prehistory.” Anthropology Newsletter 38(1):11.Google Scholar
Gibbons, A. (1997). “Anthropologists 1, Army Corps 0.” Science 277:173.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haas, J., Buikstra, J.E., Ubelaker, D.H., and Aftandilian, D. (1994). Standards for Data Collection from Human Skeletal Remains. Fayetteville, AR: Arkansas Archaeological Survey.Google Scholar
Halpin, M.M. and Seguin, M. (1990). “Tsimshian Peoples: Southern Tsimshian, Coast Tsimshian, Nishga, and Gitksan.” In Suttles, W. (ed.), Handbook of North American Indians: Northwest Coast. Washington, DC: Smithsonian Institution.Google Scholar
Haynes, V.C. (1982). “Were Clovis Progenitors in Beringia?” In Hopkins, D.M. et al. (eds), Paleoecology of Beringia. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Hunt, M. (1999). The New Know-Nothings: The Political Foes of the Scientific Study of Human Nature. New Brunswick: Transaction.Google Scholar
Kalb, J. (2000). Adventures in the Bone Trade: The Race to Discover Human Ancestors in Ethiopia's Afar Depression. New York: Copernicus Books.Google Scholar
Klesert, A.L. and Powell, S. (1993). “A Perspective on Ethics and the Reburial Controversy.” American Antiquity 58:348–54.Google Scholar
MacKinnon, M. (2000). “Haida Remains Sent Back to B. C. for Second Burial.” The Globe and Mail, August 18, A5.Google Scholar
National Park Service (2003). “Kennewick Man.” Website of the Archeology and Ethnography Program, National Park Service, U.S. Department of the Interior (http://www.cr.nps.gov/aad/kennewick).Google Scholar
Powell, J. and Rose, J. (1999). Report on the Osteological Assessment of the “Kennewick Man” Skeleton (CENWWW.97.Kennewick). Report prepared for the National Park Service, U.S. Department of the Interior, Washington, DC. Available atwww.cr.nps.gov/aad/kennewick.Google Scholar
Preston, D. (1997). “The Lost Man.” The New Yorker (June 16)7078, 80–81.Google Scholar
Rose, J.C., Green, T.J., and Green, V.D. (1996). “NAGPRA Is Forever: Osteology and the Repatriation of Skeletons.” Annual Review of Anthropology 25:81103.Google Scholar
Schneider, A.L. (1998). “Kennewick Man Update.” Anthropology Newsletter 39(6):2224.Google Scholar
Shackley, M.S. (2001). “Plea for Help from California” [letter]. Posted at Friends of America's Past, www.friendsofpast.org/earliest-americans/california-nagpra.html.Google Scholar
Smith, D.G. et al. (2000). “Report on DNA Analysis of the Remains of ‘Kennewick Man’ from Columbia Park, Washington.” Report prepared for the National Park Service, U.S. Department of the Interior, Washington, DC. Available atwww.cr.nps.gov/aad/kennewick.Google Scholar
Ubelaker, D.H. and Grant, L.G. (1989). “Human Skeletal Remains: Preservation or Reburial?” Yearbook of Physical Anthropology 32:249–87.Google Scholar
Watzman, H. (2000). “Hebrew U. of Jerusalem Accedes to Religious Activists and Turns Over Ancient Bones for Reburial.” Chronicle of Higher Education (June 28).Google Scholar
Weiss, E. (1998). “Sexual Differences in Activity Patterns of a Central Californian Hunter-Gatherer Population.” California Anthropologist 25:17.Google Scholar
Weiss, E. (2001a). “Cross-Cultural Study of Humeri: Environmental Causes of Morphology.” Ph.D. diss., University of Arkansas, Fayetteville.Google Scholar
Weiss, E. (2001b). “Kennewick Man's Behavior: A CT Scan Analysis.” American Journal of Physical Anthropology Supplement 32:163(Abstract).Google Scholar