Hi Tonia,
Thanks for the feedback. First, let me respond by saying that I agree
totally with everything you say. Ethics and community support for the
project is a prime consideration, and we have been at pains to identify and
notify/involve communities of interest.
In relation to the destructive nature of archaeological investigation,
burials that are re-covered (either simply backfilled or through reinterment
following rescue) are at risk of changed rates of deterioration, which is
why only a small sample of unmarked graves (<1%) is proposed to be
investigated.
The in-situ conservation I was referring to is of the passive variety,
really involving only preservation, along with modification of present
landscaping and tourism management practices - which is having unknown
(likely negative) impacts on the burials generally. No active stabilization
or consolidation of remains is suggested - sorry if I gave that impression.
What is being proposed is really a baseline study designed to give us data
relating to significance/condition of the burial ground and information it
may contain, so that we can get on with making important decisions that will
affect the place. We are caught in a bit of a bind, because tourism
pressures means that we can't simply do nothing, and in any case doing
nothing is a policy issue, and we can't formulate policy without
understanding significance, and we can't understand significance without
examining the evidence. And so it goes.
I really do appreciate your sage words, and look forward to anything further
you may wish to add.
Greg Jackman
-----Original Message-----
From: Tonia Deetz [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
Sent: Friday, January 30, 2004 8:27 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: archaeology in historic burial grounds
Greg,
If I can address some of your questions, with the statement first that the
excavation of human remains in the US is a highly debated topic.
I have worked on some important historic burial projects and I believe that
if you are truly justified ethically, research wise and legally in the
examination of human remains that you should pursue that to its fullest
extent from
the start.
By simply opening up the burials you are changing the environment in which
they exist and most likely accelerating the natural destruction of the
remains
and any data in them. To take a look without gaining critical and sensitve
information, you risk loosing anything you may want to explore later,
therefore
negating your purpose for the excavation.
I would also say that to conserve the bones without removal is questionable,
as the process of conservation eliminates the elements from many diagnostic
tests you may need for your research. We usually have certain bones left
untreated to keep them more viable for certain tests. Stabilizing bones for
future
excavation is not really practical.
If you have a good solid reason for the project, do it all in one series of
steps, not a little now and then something else later.
Anyway, that is my opinion on the matter, hope that helps.
Tonia Deetz Rock
|