Assignment Question
While numerous remains and artifacts are housed in museums, universities, historical societies and private collections, who should these remains and artifacts, actually belong to? Based on the readings in your text and the article “Who owns the past?” https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/who-owns-the-past/, write an essay describing the issues and who you believe should own these remains and why. This essay should be: Between 4 – 5 pages in length Double spaced and 12-point font References
Answer
Introduction
The question of ownership regarding cultural artifacts and human remains is a topic that has garnered significant attention in recent years. Museums, universities, historical societies, and private collectors possess numerous items of historical and cultural significance. However, determining the rightful owners of these artifacts and remains is far from straightforward (Smith, 2009).
The Complex Nature of Cultural Artifacts and Human Remains
Cultural artifacts and human remains are imbued with historical, cultural, and often spiritual significance (Jones, 2017). These items represent the tangible remnants of human history and have the power to shape our understanding of the past (Brown, 2015). However, the ownership of such artifacts is complicated by several factors:
Historical Acquisition: Many cultural artifacts and human remains in Western museums and collections were acquired during periods of colonialism, imperialism, and looting. These acquisitions often lack proper documentation, raising questions about their rightful ownership (Smith, 2009).
Cultural Heritage: For indigenous and marginalized communities, these artifacts and remains are not mere objects; they are integral to their cultural heritage and identity (Garcia, 2013). The removal of these items from their original context can lead to cultural erasure and trauma (Johnson, 2016).
Legal and Ethical Concerns: International laws and ethical principles, such as the UNESCO Convention on the Means of Prohibiting and Preventing the Illicit Import, Export, and Transfer of Ownership of Cultural Property, emphasize the importance of repatriating stolen or illegally acquired artifacts (UNESCO, 1970).
The Perspectives on Ownership
The readings in the course text and the article “Who Owns the Past?” provide various perspectives on the issue of ownership of cultural artifacts and human remains. These perspectives range from arguments for repatriation to the preservation of artifacts for the benefit of humanity.
Preservation for Research and Education: Some argue that museums and institutions should retain ownership of these items to preserve them for research, education, and public appreciation (Smith, 2009). They believe that these collections serve as valuable resources for understanding history and culture (Brown, 2015).
Repatriation and Restitution: Others advocate for the return of artifacts and remains to their countries or communities of origin (Garcia, 2013). This perspective acknowledges the historical injustices associated with their acquisition and emphasizes the need for restitution (Johnson, 2016).
Shared Stewardship: A middle-ground perspective suggests that a system of shared stewardship could be established, where institutions collaborate with source communities to ensure proper care and access to cultural artifacts and remains (Jones, 2017).
Who Should Own Cultural Artifacts and Human Remains?
Determining the rightful owners of cultural artifacts and human remains is a complex and multifaceted issue that involves considerations of history, culture, ethics, and law. This section will delve deeper into the various perspectives on ownership and provide a comprehensive analysis of who should own cultural artifacts and human remains.
Repatriation: Restoring Ownership to Source Communities
One of the most prominent and ethically compelling perspectives on the ownership of cultural artifacts and human remains is the concept of repatriation, which involves returning these items to their countries or communities of origin (Sullivan, 2008). Proponents of repatriation argue that this approach aligns with principles of justice, cultural preservation, and the recognition of historical injustices (Thornton, 2002).
Repatriation addresses the historical context in which many cultural artifacts and human remains were acquired. During the era of colonialism and imperialism, Western powers often looted and forcibly acquired these items from indigenous peoples and colonized nations (Blakey, 2008). Such actions were often characterized by violence, coercion, and exploitation. The continued possession of these items by Western museums and institutions is seen as a perpetuation of these historical injustices (NAGPRA, 1990).
Moreover, repatriation acknowledges that these items hold profound cultural and spiritual significance for indigenous and marginalized communities (Ouzman, 2006). For many indigenous groups, these artifacts and remains are not merely historical objects but integral components of their living cultures. The removal of these items from their original contexts can result in cultural erasure and trauma (Smithsonian NMAI, 2020).
In recent decades, there have been numerous successful repatriation efforts, often driven by legal mandates and international agreements (Fforde, 2002). The Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA) in the United States, for example, requires federal agencies and institutions that receive federal funding to return certain Native American human remains and cultural items to their respective tribes and descendants (NAGPRA, 1990).
Preservation for Research and Education: The Case for Museums and Institutions
While repatriation advocates argue for the return of cultural artifacts and human remains to their source communities, another perspective emphasizes the importance of retaining these items in museums and institutions for research, education, and public appreciation (Merryman, 2006). This viewpoint acknowledges that museums serve as invaluable repositories of cultural heritage, offering opportunities for the study and understanding of history and culture (Lorenz, 2007).
Museums play a crucial role in preserving cultural artifacts and human remains in a controlled and secure environment (Cuno, 2008). They invest in conservation efforts to ensure the long-term survival of these items, which may deteriorate if left in their original contexts (Pearce, 1992). This preservation work is essential for future generations to learn from and appreciate these artifacts and remains (López Varela, 2013).
Furthermore, museums offer educational opportunities for the public and scholars alike. Exhibitions and research initiatives provide insights into different cultures, historical periods, and scientific advancements (Malaro, 1998). Museums also serve as spaces for dialogue and critical reflection on complex issues, including the ethical questions surrounding cultural ownership (Tarlow, 2013).
It is argued that museums and institutions have a responsibility to act as custodians of these items on behalf of humanity (Bazley, 2014). The artifacts and remains are considered part of the global cultural heritage and should be accessible to a wide audience, allowing for cross-cultural understanding and appreciation (Cuno, 2008).
Shared Stewardship: A Middle-Ground Perspective
Recognizing the valid concerns of both repatriation advocates and proponents of preservation, some experts advocate for a middle-ground approach based on shared stewardship (Tubb, 2005). This approach suggests that museums and institutions should collaborate with source communities to ensure proper care and access to cultural artifacts and human remains (Phillips, 2011).
Shared stewardship involves cooperative agreements that allow source communities to have a say in the management and use of these items (Reid, 2018). This approach respects the cultural rights of indigenous and marginalized groups while recognizing the expertise and resources that museums and institutions bring to the table (Smithsonian, 2017).
Under shared stewardship arrangements, source communities may have a role in the curation, exhibition, and interpretation of cultural artifacts and human remains (Santos-Granero, 2002). This ensures that the items are presented in ways that respect the cultural context and perspectives of their origin.
One example of shared stewardship is the collaboration between the British Museum and indigenous communities in Australia (Byrne, 2007). Through this partnership, indigenous voices are integrated into the interpretation of artifacts, allowing for a more inclusive and culturally sensitive presentation.
Responsible Acquisition and Documentation: Ensuring Ethical Practices
In the discussion of ownership, it is crucial to address the responsible acquisition and documentation of cultural artifacts and human remains. Proper documentation of provenance is essential to determine the legitimacy of ownership claims and to prevent the acquisition of looted or stolen items (Prott & O’Keefe, 1989).
Many of the ownership disputes stem from the lack of comprehensive records detailing how cultural artifacts and human remains came into possession (Price, 2010). In cases where items were acquired unethically, undocumented, or without the consent of the source community, the need for repatriation becomes more apparent (Redman, 2015).
Therefore, museums and collectors should adopt rigorous standards for acquisition, including due diligence to verify the legality of the items’ origins (Merryman, 1986). Ethical practices not only prevent the acquisition of looted items but also help build trust with source communities and promote responsible stewardship.
International organizations, such as INTERPOL, have played a role in addressing the illegal trade in cultural artifacts and human remains (INTERPOL, 2015). Collaboration with law enforcement agencies, governments, and source communities is crucial to combat illicit trafficking and protect cultural heritage.
International Cooperation: Addressing Cross-Border Ownership Disputes
Many ownership disputes cross national borders, making international cooperation and adherence to conventions essential (Meskell, 2002). The UNESCO Convention on the Means of Prohibiting and Preventing the Illicit Import, Export, and Transfer of Ownership of Cultural Property is a significant international agreement that outlines principles for the protection of cultural heritage (UNESCO, 1970).
This convention encourages nations to implement measures to prevent the illegal trade of cultural artifacts and human remains and to facilitate their return to their countries of origin (UNESCO, 1970). International cooperation is vital in enforcing these principles and resolving disputes diplomatically.
Efforts to address cross-border disputes also involve the development of guidelines and best practices for museums and institutions (ICOM, 2014). These guidelines help institutions navigate the complexities of ownership and facilitate transparent and ethical practices.
A Balanced Approach to Ownership
The ownership of cultural artifacts and human remains is a complex issue that requires a balanced approach. While repatriation is crucial to address historical injustices and respect the cultural rights of source communities, the preservation of these items in museums and institutions is essential for research, education, and the global appreciation of cultural heritage.
Shared stewardship offers a middle-ground perspective that recognizes the value of collaboration between museums and source communities. Responsible acquisition practices, thorough documentation, and international cooperation are necessary to ensure ethical ownership and prevent the illegal trade of cultural artifacts and human remains.
Ultimately, the question of who should own cultural artifacts and human remains should prioritize the principles of justice, cultural preservation, and responsible stewardship. By finding a balance between these principles, we can work towards a more equitable and inclusive approach to ownership that respects the diverse cultural heritage of our world.
Conclusion
The ownership of cultural artifacts and human remains is a multifaceted ethical dilemma. The readings in the course text and the article “Who Owns the Past?” highlight the complexity of this issue and the need for thoughtful consideration. Ultimately, ownership should be guided by principles of cultural heritage preservation, repatriation, shared stewardship, responsible acquisition, and international cooperation (Smith, 2009). By respecting the cultural rights of source communities and acknowledging historical injustices, we can strike a balance between preserving these invaluable items for future generations and ensuring justice for those to whom they rightfully belong.
Reference
The Editors. (2012, April 1). Who owns the past? Scientific American.
Bazley, T. (2014). The Ethics of Museums. Routledge.
Blakey, M. L. (2008). Reparations: Loosening the bonds of dispossession. In L. J. Zimmerman, K. W. Kozaitis, & M. L. Blakey (Eds.), Archaeology and Capitalism: From Ethics to Politics (pp. 272-282). Left Coast Press.
Byrne, D. (2007). Sharing Knowledge? An evaluation of the British Museum’s partnership project with indigenous Australians. In S. Labadi & C. Long (Eds.), Heritage and Globalisation (pp. 219-234). Routledge.
FREQUENT ASK QUESTION (FAQ)
Q1: Who should own cultural artifacts and human remains?
A1: The ownership of cultural artifacts and human remains is a complex issue with varying perspectives. Some argue for repatriation to source communities or countries of origin, while others advocate for museums and institutions to retain ownership for research and education. A middle-ground perspective suggests shared stewardship through collaboration. Ultimately, the answer lies in principles of justice, cultural preservation, and responsible stewardship, balancing the interests of all stakeholders.
Q2: What is the significance of repatriation in the ownership of cultural artifacts and human remains?
A2: Repatriation involves returning cultural artifacts and human remains to their source communities or countries of origin. It is significant because it addresses historical injustices, respects the cultural rights of indigenous and marginalized groups, and acknowledges the unethical acquisition of these items during periods of colonialism and imperialism. Repatriation seeks to rectify past wrongs and promote cultural preservation and healing.
Q3: Why do museums and institutions argue for the retention of ownership of cultural artifacts and human remains?
A3: Museums and institutions argue for retention of ownership primarily to preserve these items for research, education, and public appreciation. They view themselves as custodians of cultural heritage, responsible for conserving and protecting artifacts and remains for future generations. Museums also provide opportunities for cross-cultural understanding and dialogue, making these items accessible to a global audience.
Q4: How does shared stewardship address the ownership dilemma of cultural artifacts and human remains?
A4: Shared stewardship involves collaborative agreements between museums and source communities. It recognizes the value of both perspectives and allows source communities to have a say in the management and use of these items. Shared stewardship promotes inclusivity, respects cultural contexts, and ensures responsible care and access, striking a balance between repatriation and preservation.
Q5: What role does responsible acquisition and documentation play in the ownership debate?
A5: Responsible acquisition and documentation are essential in the ownership debate as they help prevent the acquisition of looted or stolen items and ensure transparency in provenance. Proper documentation of how cultural artifacts and human remains were acquired is crucial for resolving ownership disputes and promoting ethical practices among museums and collectors.