OVERVIEW: ETHICAL DILEMMAS IN NORTH AMERICAN ARCHAEOLOGY - EMICS AND ETICS ("OURS" AND "THEIRS"?) - AND CRM? (MODULE 18)

(Click here to go directly to the lecture notes module above)

(Click here to go directly to the syllabus daily topics schedule for this lesson)

*   *   *   *   *   *   *

Discussion 1 - Archaeological resources today? - While throughout the semester class numerous examples are presented indicating the current situation at various sites in North America, in this part of the class, we try to take a look at the broader picture and ask, nWhat is the current status of the archaeological resource base?" nWhere are archaeological resources most threatened?" nWhat is the nature of the threat?" nWhat is the source of the threat?" nHow destructive has this threat been?" nWho perceives the reality of the threat?" Finally, nWhat measures have been/are being taken to address such threats?"  In dealing with these questions the importance of Cultural Resource Management (CRM) is reaffirmed.  nConservation" is presented both as an ethical ideal, but also as something that is practical.  Legislative recognition of this is presented in the form of preservation laws such as in the Archaeological Resources Protection Act (ARPA) and in the National Historic Preservation Act.

Discussion 2 - When we say nwe are stewards . . . of the legacies of ancient people" who does the nwe" imply?   For most of the history of archaeology in the United States nwe" refers to the archaeologists.  Native peoples, mistrustful of the motives, agenda, and from their perspective,  impersonal and disrespectful practices, have successfully lobbied the United States government and brought about legislative mandates establishing that, with respect to human remains and sacred objects, the nwe" referred to above is, in fact, nthem" (the Native American Indian people).  This legislation is expressed in the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA).

Discussion 1 - Who are the concerned parties and what are their concerns (i.e. "vested interests")?  We discuss the following varied constituencies: (1) archaeologists and "the archaeological community," (2) Native American peoples, (3) the general mainstream public, (4) governments (from local to national—and maybe even—international and transnational), (5) collectors (private, institutional and "public."  How have the interested parties listed above interacted?  What has been the nature of disputes involving archaeology?  What approaches have been taken to resolve such disputes?  What measures can be taken to avoid such future disputes?

Some of the above considerations beg that we—anthropologists and archaeologists—do more introspective cultural anthropology.  This should involve considering the "Culture of anthropologists and archaeologists" (i.e., how the "culture of archaeologists" interacts with the non-archaeologists from within and beyond the discipline; the emics of archaeologists vis-ž-vis their intra-disciplinary relationships; how archaeologists' etic understandings of the significance of their data affects the ways others perceive of them (in particular how the archaeological approach is ethically perceived by others such as Native Americans).  We should also be aware of the nculture of educators," the nculture of museologists," and, the nculture of private collectors."  How do native peoples perceive their archaeological record (i.e. the nemics of indigenous material culture") and are there ways we might foster the development of a mutual agenda with those of archaeologists?

Discussion 2 - Lessons from the archaeological experience of Mexico - Without wanting to nwhitewash" the fact of there having been a history of brutal confrontation and conquest by the Spanish plus the fact that Mexico has its own history of struggle and repression of its indigenous peoples since the Conquest, there exist striking differences between the Mexican and North American (United States) experiences vis-ž-vis how archaeology and archaeologists are perceived by native peoples in Mexico.  Most importantly, Mexico appears to have embraced its native heritage in ways different from the U.S.  Mexican nationals, regardless of their personal ancestry (whether their grandparents were Nahuatl, German, French, Spanish, Maya, or whatever), tend to regard the Indian heritage as ntheirs".  This is evident when one watches busloads of school children being taken through the Museo Nacional de AntropologÁa in Mexico City.  The message is that nMexico is great" because of what the ancient Maya, Zapotec, Totonac, Teotihuacano, and Aztec people did -as part of ntheir" history - ntheir" heritage!  This is quite different from watching most Americans walking through a museum or archaeological interpretive center where people might marvel, but it as at ntheir" accomplishment, not nours."  As one who ncut his teeth" archaeologically in Mexico before coming to the United States, I cannot help but find the Mexican example invigorating!  I try in this class to present this as an attitudinal mind set that nwe" (all of us) might aspire to!

Discussion - In this section, the profound legacy of ancient Native American peoples to the rest of the world is reviewed and reaffirmed.  Where would nwe" (the contemporary world) be without maize, the potato, chocolate, vanilla, turkeys?  In the popular book, Indian Givers by Jack Weatherford we even find evidence that Benjamin Franklin's understanding of the Iroquois system of governance was inspirational in the development of the bicameral system eventually enshrined in the United States Constitution and emulated world-wide!  Students are encouraged to take a profound look at how the world is a better place because of what we have learned from the Native American experience; that we stand to learn more through active engagement with them in trying to more greatly understand the happenings of their past.

Discussion - Throughout the semester examples are presented documenting ethically-questionable archaeological practices - often in the form of insensitivity to Native American concerns.  Private collecting, looting, and the general destruction of the archaeological record are also discussed at points throughout the class.  In this section there is an opportunity to nbring home" these concepts and relate them to the specifics of nour" (archaeologists in the United States at least) codes of ethics and conduct, as explicitly presented in the Society for American Archaeology Eight Principles of Archeological Practice and the Register of Professional Archaeologists (ROPA) Code of Ethics and Standards of Research Performance.

(Click here to go to a full list of MATRIX Principles as applied to other modules for this class)
(Click here to go to the Cross-tabulation of North American Archaeology Course Modules, Module Overviews and SAA Seven Principles)

Essay questions related to this module can be found by clicking the following numbers (64, 65, 66), or by searching in the Essay Bank.

*   *   *   *   *   *   *