Re: native american burial grounds desecration
Beirdd

Fri Mar 22 21:01:24 2002
To me, this sort of thing gets me thinking about a sacrilege that has gone on for a long time now in a tacitly accepted manner. Where Native American graves are fairly well protected in most areas, or at least engender a protest such as this one when they are threatened, there is no such protection for the graves of non-NAs on U.S. soil.*p*As I learned during two archaeological surveys in recent years, when an otherwise unmarked grave is partially uncovered, a quick determination is made as to its cultural origin. If it is a Native American burial, the archaeologists generally practice two options after covering the remains over again. The first is to report the find, which usually puts an end to their work in the survey area. This is usually done when an actual burial ground is suspected. The second is to return the particular spot to its previously anonymous condition, and move on with their work. This is often done when finding individual, isolated burials.*p*This is all well and good, I suppose. The problem I, and others, have is that if the burial is determined to be over 100 or so years old (and there's no set time limit) to eliminate the need for a a police investigation, then any "Anglo" or even African remains may be removed and catalogued like anything else.*p*Is the problem limited to this? Not at all, since I'd prefer my ancestors being "interred" in a museum or classroom rather than the commercial alternative.*p*When a developer comes upon bones things get interesting. An honest one will call in the archaeologists who will make a determination of the site's cultural identity. If the burial is NA, the developer has probably just lost a lot of money, since he will be forced to abandon building plans on the site. Sometimes the NA groups permit a translation of remains; sometimes they insist that the remains remain. It's all up to them. Again, I can understand this.*p*However, if the determination is made that the reamins are not NA, then the bulldozers can start right up again and plow those suckers under. No one ever heard of a house being haunted by the denizens of a colonial graveyard in its basement, after all!*p*I have it on the authority of several friends in the home building business that this sort of thing happens often in areas of colonial habitation. Most retired farms turning into developments give up Anglo graveyards to the diggers. When bones come to the surface, everyone holds their breath and lets it out when the "Not-NA" seal of approval is given. Then they go back to digging.*p*Just a few weeks ago, there was a brief local scandal when someone realized that a town council purposely delayed a decision about a family graveyard in Goshen, NY long enough for the developer to plow the stones under (this one was even marked). As the papers described, the area was "torn up and mulched" in order to eliminate the eventual discovery of anything that might be deemed offensive by future residents. I haven't heard a whisper about this since.*p*By the way, much of my archaeological experience was part of a project to find a long-lost slave cemetary. We did find the place in someone's front lawn (they always wondered why that piece of land was so rocky). I know I'm prejudiced about this, but I think that *that's* the sort of effort that needs to be made to show repect for *all* of those who have walked the land and are now it its embrace.*p*--Beirdd
native american burial grounds desecration
Red Turtle
1051
 Tue - Mar 19 - 11:19am



24.58.231.51