From specimen to person: determining provenance and identity for Aboriginal human remains held in museums

Abstract

Repatriation is the practice of returning human remains, objects, and artefacts to their place of origin. My research focus is on the repatriation of Aboriginal human remains to descendant communities from museums and other collecting institutions. The repatriation of well-provenanced human remains has, to a large extent, been a relatively smooth process in Australia over recent years. Issues arise, however, when there is little or no information indicating where the human remains were originally placed after death. Intentionally or unintentionally their provenance – that is their place of origin – has been erased. There are two key approaches to determine the provenance of these Aboriginal human remains. The first is the Western scientific approach, which includes such techniques as DNA analysis, isotype analysis, osteological analysis, residue analysis and soil testing. The second approach uses Aboriginal Traditional Knowledge, which includes oral traditions, spiritual connection and burial details. Although all of these techniques have, in the right circumstances, the capacity to aid in the provenancing of human remains, not all are considered appropriate by the key stakeholders. On the one hand Aboriginal communities, for instance, have highlighted cultural concerns they hold in regard to scientific testing. These issues include the destructive nature of some techniques and ethical concerns relating to the collection and retention of modern-day samples from living descendants for comparative purposes. Some Western scientific specialists, alternatively, are hesitant to acknowledge spiritual connection and oral tradition as sufficient ‘evidence’ for the purposes of provenancing Aboriginal human remains. Conflict between, and sometimes within, stakeholder groups stem from the different knowledge frameworks from which each is situated. The foundations of Western scientific knowledge and Traditional Knowledge are different, although some similarities and overlaps do exist. Using an Indigenous Archaeologies methodology, I conducted interviews with a range of stakeholders in the repatriation space and undertook participant observation of the repatriation process used in the Queensland Museum in Brisbane, Australia. My results indicate that there is a surprising degree of overlap between all stakeholder groups especially regarding an overarching respect for the dead, the importance of ensuring that provenancing and repatriation is community-led, and a desire to reinstate identity for the dead. However, there are some differences, the most significant of which lies in the lack of acknowledgement and acceptance of Traditional Knowledge methods – including communication with spirit – to provenance ancestral remains by non-Indigenous stakeholders. Similarly non-Indigenous stakeholders are hesitant to acknowledge Traditional Knowledge as a valid form of evidence. My research aims to push beyond these differences and determine if there are culturally and ethically acceptable methods available to determine the provenance of Aboriginal human remains currently held in collecting institutions. The repatriation process reconnects deceased and living relatives through the recognition of ongoing cultural connections and offers positive reconciliatory benefits to modern Aboriginal communities. Repatriation, done in an ethical manner, can shift power away from Western science, and reaffirm Aboriginal cultural and spiritual knowledge systems.