Letters Illustrating A Double Standard Two articles in the Spring 2016 of American Archaeology clearly illustrate the hypocrisy concerning stewardship of Native American archaeological resources. The News article “Scientists Lose Right to Study Ancient Human Remains” is a testimony to the ability of Native American groups and their supporters, under the aegis of NAGPRA, to thwart important scientific information by claiming a direct, linear relationship, however dubious, with cultural groups that are separated from them by thousands of years. This tragic loss further erodes the potential for non-Native Americans to develop a deeper respect for, and interest in, Native American culture. This act, which has resulted in public institutions repatriating numerous Native American artifacts through NAGPRA claims, further deprives future generations—native and non-native—of the ability to be awed and inspired by Native American art, history, and culture. The second article, the feature “Artifacts for Sale,” was equally disturbing and illustrates the double standard when it comes to protecting and respecting Native American human and cultural remains. I find it remarkable that the looting by Native Alaskans of their own cemeteries and ancient villages in search of objects that they might sell is tolerated.The demand for reburial of the California skeletons without scientific study is totally incomprehensible given that, at the same time, native graves are looted in Alaska. I strongly suspect that if the outrageous looting in Western Alaska was being done by non-Native Americans that there would be significant and punitive action taken. NAGPRA is a well-intended but poorly crafted piece of legislation. As it empties public institutions of the objects that would fascinate, educate, and engender interest and respect for Native American culture it also fails to protect sites, such as those in Alaska, from human rapaciousness. It has served to impoverish rather than protect. Douglas Dawson Chicago, Illinois
American Archaeology welcomes your letters. Write to us at 1717 Girard Blvd. NE, Albuquerque, NM 87106, or send us e-mail at tacmag@nm.net. We reserve the right to edit and publish letters in the magazine’s Letters department as space permits. Please include your name, address, and telephone number with all correspondence, including e-mail messages.
american archaeology
Editor’s Corner Whatever one’s opinion of the causes and effects of modern climate change, there’s no denying that, in the past, Mother Nature has indeed changed her ways. Science tells us that the Pleistocene eventually gave way to the Holocene some 10,000 years ago, ending the ice age. It also tells us that there have been times when years of abundant rain were followed by years of drought. People dealt with these mysterious changes however they could. Our feature “A Time Of Desperation” (see page 12) is an example of ancient climate change, and the poignant attempts to resolve the devastating threat it posed. Evidence found in caves in the Maya region indicates that there was a series of droughts from the seventh through the 10th centuries a.d. The latest of those droughts could have been a factor in the Maya collapse. The Maya implored their gods to end the drought by placing offerings of pottery and food in the caves, which were thought to be special places. They believed their rain god, Chac, resided in caves, and that the mist that emerged from the entrances of caves would rise into the sky and transform into rain drops. But the gods were unappeased by these offerings and the drought continued. As their desperation increased, the Maya were compelled to “up the ante,” as one archaeologist says. Believing that people were made of maize, they resorted to offering another type of food to the gods: themselves. As we know, the collapse was not the end of the Maya. They persist to this day. But their magnificent culture does not.
5
