During the military buildup of the late 1930s, thousands of graves were
"moved" during the acquisition of required lands and construction
activities.  However, some cemeteries stayed intact and the family members
were allowed to enter the installation for visits and maintenance.  In some
cases, burials continued to occur.  The same goes for cemeteries located in
the way of reservoir projects.  Typically the cemeteries were dedicated and
plotted.  I used the "moved" notation because many graves were contracted to
be moved but the contractor only moved the grave marker.  in the cases where
a grave was unmarked and no trace was notable, nothing was moved.  Moving
generally consisted of a "steam shovel" where as much of the coffin was
scooped up as possible, dumped in a second box, and transported to the new
location.  Gravestones may or may not accompany the remains and could be
placed on the wrong individual at the new site.  We have seen fragmented
remains and coffin hardware on a great many "moved" cemeteries.
----- Original Message -----
From: <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Friday, July 20, 2001 10:29 AM
Subject: Historic Graves and Native American Calling


> HISTARCHers:
>
> Gaye Norton's query about historic graves reminded me of something I've
> been meaning to ask the list for some time. (Sorry Gaye, this doesn't
> answer your question!).
>
> First some background. I occassionally am able to listen to little bits
and
> pieces of a radio talk show on National Public Radio (in the United
States,
> for the benefit of our European and Australian members), called "Native
> American Calling." On a show about a month ago, the topic was the consent
> of a tribal government to a developer to build a golf course. In the
course
> of getting the appropriate cultural resource compliance, Native American
> graves were discovered. The show, I believe, was discussing the
probability
> that the tribal government was going to allow the graves to be moved in
> order to allow the development to continue.
>
> As can be imagined, most of the Native American callers were indignant.
One
> caller in particular hit a sore point for me, as an archeologist. She said
> something to the effect of "They wouldn't put a golf course over Arlington
> Cemetery, would they?" As usual, "they" was not defined, but her
> implication was that the sanctity most Americans hold for the premier
> cemetery dedicated to honoring the nation's soldiers was somehow
comparable
> to the sanctity most Native Americans hold for any Native American
remains.
>
> Now, as an American of European descent, I continually have to remind
> myself that my perceptions of degree of significance (that is, Arlington
> cemetery has greater sanctity than a small town church cemetery) is not
the
> same as for many Native American groups. We in the western part of the
> country are continually reminded by Native Americans that everything is
> sacred, and that there is no higher and lower degree of significance. (We
> Euroamericans have a hierachical society; most Native American groups do
> not, so hierachies may be harder for some of them to think about?). Its a
> hard difference in value systems for the folks trying to make decisions
> about what to save and what to mitigate or let go, and its very hard to
get
> around.
>
> Now, for my question. How many of you know of examples of moving historic
> Euroamerican cemeteries to make way for development? The underlying
> implication by the caller was that Euroamericans would not do this to
their
> own cemeteries, only to Native American graves. I know that is not true,
> but I don't have case studies. I am particularly interested in cases that
> are not potters fields, but are cemeteries containing headstones and
> Euroamerican people with living, known descendents.
>
> Thanks for any enlightenment!
>
>
> Cathy Spude
> [log in to unmask]
>
> National Park Service
> Santa Fe, New Mexico
>
> As usual, the opinions expressed here may not be those of my employer.
>