The restitution debate and return of human remains: implications for bioarchaeological research and cultural ethics in Africa

Painting personhood: Red pigment practices in southern Peru

Present-day bioarchaeology of human remains has a complex, normative foundations, and this results in a nearly paradigmatic shift in research conducted in that discipline of science. This article first introduces the manifold non-scientific significance of human remains and mortuary sites and the essentials of bioarchaeological research as well. It subsequently examines the concept of research freedom in the context of international and domestic regulations. Each state regulates bioarchaeological research distinctly. The article outlines a diplomatic pathway for undertaking research abroad. We then examine (de)colonial, indigenous, religious, and political contexts in which extra-legal regulations on the study of human remains also gain validity. This leads to a normative pluralism, the sources and justification of which we analyse and examplify. Such a pluralism unveils the deficits of positive legal regulation in the various contexts of discussed research. Our article is to support researchers in dealing with normative challenges – legal and extralegal – when it comes to undertaking research on human remains.

We present a review of the history of human bioarchaeological research in Cyprus through the examination of published literature. We survey and discuss past and current trends, indicate gaps, highlight developments within recent years, propose future directions and provide an up-to-date literature review. While scholarly studies of ancient Cypriot human remains had already begun to emerge towards the end of the 19th century, continuing intermittently throughout the 1900s, significant changes took place during the 1980s. This later flourishing of human bioarchaeology in Cyprus, in contrast to conventional archaeological research, which had been making significant contributions to the investigation of ancient Cyprus since the early 20th century, is aligned with international developments. During the last two decades of the 20th century, human bioarchaeology in Cyprus sees a significant development towards a more scientific orientation in contrast to previous years. To date, 201 publications on Cypriot archaeological human remains have been found in journals, bulletins, books, monographs, proceedings and postgraduate research theses. The 1980s mark the beginning of a new era within human bioarchaeology in Cyprus. The number of problem-oriented human bioarchaeological studies focusing on archaeological questions as well as the number of studies drawing on scientific techniques beyond the standard morphological and metric approaches have increased significantly within the last decades. The number of researchers focusing on human bioarchaeology in Cyprus has also increased. Recent years have seen state-of-the-art approaches increasingly applied to the investigation and analysis of human remains, taking place within an interdisciplinary archaeological framework. These developments and the introduction of further cutting-edge methods and techniques are contributing towards key interpretations about the ancient inhabitants of the island and their lifeways.

In a recent article, Pobst refers to bioarchaeologists as “grave‐robbing scientists,” a phrase that negatively and inaccurately describes such researchers. This paper provides an overview of the history of the collection of human skeletal remains by anthropologists and others, which has resulted in misconceptions about current practices in the field, and of the important changes that have been made in recent decades to ensure that bioarchaeological research is done ethically. Recent Black Death research is emphasized as an example of bioarchaeology that conforms to the ethical standards of numerous organizations and avoids the exploitative use of human remains against the wishes of descendant populations.

Innovative and challenging study that provides fresh insights on the anthropology of death and postcolonial politics. In 1898, just before she was hanged for rebelling against colonial rule, Charwe Nyakasikana, spirit medium of the legendary ancestor Ambuya Nehanda, famously prophesised that "my bones will rise again". A century later bones, bodies and human remains have come to occupy an increasingly complex place in Zimbabwe's postcolonial milieu. From ancestral "bones" rising again in the struggle for independence, and later land, to resurfacing bones of unsettled wardead; and from the troubling decaying remains of post-independence gukurahundi massacres to the leaky, tortured bodies of recent election violence, human materials are intertwined in postcolonial politics in ways that go far beyond, yet necessarily implicate, contests over memory, commemoration and the representation of the past. In this book Joost Fontein examines the complexities of human remains in Zimbabwe's 'politics of the dead'. Challenging and innovative, he takes us beyond current scholarship on memory, commemoration and the changing significance of 'traditional' death practices, to examine the political implications of human remains as material substances, as duplicitous rumours, and as returning spirits. Linking the indeterminacy of human substances to the productive but precarious uncertainties of rumours and spirits, the book points to how the incompleteness of death is politically productive and ultimately derives from the problematic, entangled excessivities of human material and immaterial existence, and is deeply intertwined with the stylistics of postcolonial power and politics. Joost Fontein is Professor of Anthropology, University of Johannesburg. He was previously Director of the British Institute in Eastern Africa and Lecturer in Social Anthropology at the University of Edinburgh. His books include Remaking Mutirikwi: Landscape, Water and Belonging (James Currey, 2015), shortlisted for the African Studies Association 2016 Herskovits Prize. Southern Africa (South Africa, Namibia, Lesotho, Swaziland and Botswana): University of Johannesburg Press

Innovative and challenging study that provides fresh insights on the anthropology of death and postcolonial politics. In 1898, just before she was hanged for rebelling against colonial rule, Charwe Nyakasikana, spirit medium of the legendary ancestor Ambuya Nehanda, famously prophesised that "my bones will rise again". A century later bones, bodies and human remains have come to occupy an increasingly complex place in Zimbabwe's postcolonial milieu. From ancestral "bones" rising again in the struggle for independence, and later land, to resurfacing bones of unsettled wardead; and from the troubling decaying remains of post-independence gukurahundi massacres to the leaky, tortured bodies of recent election violence, human materials are intertwined in postcolonial politics in ways that go far beyond, yet necessarily implicate, contests over memory, commemoration and the representation of the past. In this book Joost Fontein examines the complexities of human remains in Zimbabwe's 'politics of the dead'. Challenging and innovative, he takes us beyond current scholarship on memory, commemoration and the changing significance of 'traditional' death practices, to examine the political implications of human remains as material substances, as duplicitous rumours, and as returning spirits. Linking the indeterminacy of human substances to the productive but precarious uncertainties of rumours and spirits, the book points to how the incompleteness of death is politically productive and ultimately derives from the problematic, entangled excessivities of human material and immaterial existence, and is deeply intertwined with the stylistics of postcolonial power and politics. Joost Fontein is Professor of Anthropology, University of Johannesburg. He was previously Director of the British Institute in Eastern Africa and Lecturer in Social Anthropology at the University of Edinburgh. His books include Remaking Mutirikwi: Landscape, Water and Belonging (James Currey, 2015), shortlisted for the African Studies Association 2016 Herskovits Prize. Southern Africa (South Africa, Namibia, Lesotho, Swaziland and Botswana): University of Johannesburg Press

Since the 1990s there has been an increase in bioarchaeological research in many parts of Southeast Asia by both locals and non-locals. Southeast Asian countries are characterised by varied social, cultural, and political histories, but there are also some broad similarities in terms of poor economic development that limits much local research, and strong nationalism and rigid bureaucratic procedures for research. All have implications for non-local and local bioarchaeological research. Despite the growth in bioarchaeological research, the ethics of the practice of bioarchaeology in this region remain relatively underexplored. This chapter presents some of the main ethical issues of research with human remains in the region focusing on the countries of Thailand, Myanmar, Cambodia, and the Philippines, from a non-local and local researcher viewpoint. We review a range of ethical issues, including the varied way different cultures respond to bioarchaeological work, local-non-local partnership in research, community archaeology, bioarchaeological methods including post-excavation management, and looting of archaeological sites. With the recent development of local expertise in bioarchaeology in the region, the repatriation of skeletal samples to Thailand, the increase in local training, and partnerships between local and non-local bioarchaeologists, there is much promise for the further development of local research in the field.

Background: Arguably, the ultimate ethical goal of conducting health research among humans is to provide them with better health opportunities. Because of growing perceptions that ongoing international collaborative health research between the Global North and Africa is neocolonial in nature, there is worry that this goal will not be easily met. Hence, there is a need to decolonize international collaborative health research in Africa. The current strategy of decolonizing international collaborative health research in Africa is the decolonization of health research ethics. Using Kwame Nkrumah’s analysis of neocolonialism in ‘Neocolonialism: the last stage of imperialism’, the aim of this paper is to examine the potential of the current strategy to meet the ultimate goal of decolonization. Methods: The analysis in this paper is based on Kwame Nkrumah’s perspective on neocolonialism and decolonization. Using the speculative and prescriptive approaches, the paper uses secondary sources to corroborate and demonstrate its argument. Results: The paper proposes the concept of maximin exploitation as a holistic conception of exploitation in health research to guide the discourse of decolonizing international collaborative health research. After revealing a growing consensus that international collaborative health research is neocolonial in nature and hence a need to decolonise it, the paper demonstrates that Nkrumah’s analysis of neocolonialism implies that the ultimate goal of decolonizing health research in Africa should be to mitigate and ultimately stop the exploitation of African peoples. Discussion: The paper shows that the current decolonizing strategy, is yet to demonstrate its ability to mitigation maximin exploitation in health research. Unless conscientiously pursued, the efforts based on this strategy risk failure to meet Nkrumah’s ultimate goal of decolonization, and arguably are becoming a subtle method for facilitating, and entrenching neocolonialism—the exploitation of African peoples. Conclusion: The mission of decolonizing health research ethics in Africa needs to clearly demonstrate the potential to mitigate and ultimately end maximin exploitation in health research, and be critical enough to avoid the risk of subconsciously facilitating neocolonialism.

The body has become a central focus of archaeological research as practitioners ask questions about the role of individual human beings, their engagement with things, and the effects of embodied actions in the past. The body can serve as a starting point for analyzing diversity in past populations in terms of sex, gender, status, ethnicity, ability, and other aspects of identity. Study of the human body allows practitioners to reconstruct how culture change affected portions of populations in different ways. Archaeologists draw on a wide range of social theories from allied disciplines that have explored gender, race, ability, and philosophical understandings of living in a body to explore how material remains of past populations can be used to provide temporal depth to questions about embodiment. Archaeologists employ a variety of materials to address embodiment, ranging from human skeletal remains, materials used as clothing and adornment, tools employed as extensions of the body, and objects and immobile features that structure embodied experiences. This diversity of materials facilitates examination of similarly diverse research questions, including phenomenological understandings of how the world is experienced through the body and the senses; how cultural practices modified bodies; how visual culture, including representations of bodies, create and change body ideologies; and how skeletal remains were shaped by daily life in the past. In recent years, archaeologists have begun to reflect on the ethical implications of archaeological research on human bodies and how this research can be conducted to include perspectives from descendant communities and the public regarding research questions and the presentation of results. Archaeologists also consider how their own experiences are shaped by working with human remains.

This chapter discusses ethical implications that arise from teaching with collections of human remains. Despite focusing on UK universities, many recommendations are also applicable to teaching in non-UK institutions, although it has to be acknowledged that ethical issues are variable across cultural and geographic borders and evolve through time. This chapter has arisen out of the need to provide a solid grounding for advancing research, through training future generations of human bioarchaeologists to deal with the realities of working with human remains in archaeological and related contexts. This is achieved through scrutinising current university teaching practices involving human remains, stressing the importance of using real human remains, supplemented with the use of casts and images, in teaching. The need for ethics training at all levels of teaching and research in universities and other institutions is also highlighted. In addition to evaluating ‘traditional’ teaching with human remains, this chapter covers ethical aspects of using digital and social media and aims to assist university staff to develop their own ethical guidelines and policies, including those related to public outreach and other forms of recruitment. It is important that such policies are developed, and that particular care is taken to make these specific to ethical issues surrounding human remains.

In this chapter, we trace the development of anthropological approaches to human skeletal remains in Greece, from their inception in the late nineteenth century to the proliferation of bioarchaeological studies in the 1990s to the present. The early work of European scholars in the region and the educational background of the first Greek scholars introduced nineteenth and early twentieth century European anthropology to Greece and shaped research and educational agendas until the 1970s. Beginning in the late 1930s and lasting well into the 1980s, the fundamental research of J.L. Angel was disseminated in the eastern Mediterranean, establishing the basis for bioarchaeology. Following political changes in the 1970s, institutional advancements in Greece accelerated. The study of human skeletal remains, originally anchored in the medical sciences, entered the curricula of other University departments such as biology, history and ethnology and archaeology. The presence of independent scholars, often supported by foreign schools of archaeology, has resulted in important contributions to bioarchaeological research in Greece. The management of human skeletal remains, inextricably linked to that of other archaeological finds, should advance through acknowledgment of the dual role of human skeletal remains in research and through the establishment and operation of open access research institutions for the study of these finds.

Indigenous peoples are increasingly making requests for the return of their ancestors’ human remains and ancient indigenous deoxyribonucleic acid. However, some museums and scientists have refused to repatriate indigenous human remains or have initiated protracted delays. There are successful examples of the return of ancient indigenous human remains however the focus of this book is an examination of the "hard" cases. The continued retention perpetuates cultural harm and is a continuing violation of the rights of indigenous peoples. Therefore this book develops a litigation Toolkit which can be used in such disputes and includes legal and quasi legal instruments from the following frameworks, cultural property, cultural heritage, cultural rights, collective heritage, intellectual property, Traditional Knowledge and human rights. The book draws on a process of recharacterisation. Recharacterisation is to be understood to mean the allocation of an indigenous peoples understanding and character of ancient indigenous human remains and ancient indigenous DNA, in order to counter the property narrative articulated by museums and scientists in disputes.

Talking with the dead from southern Mexico: Tracing bioarchaeological foundations and new perspectives in Oaxaca

2 - Ethical Issues for Animal Use in Toxicological Research in Africa

Previous articleNext article No AccessEthnicity and the Schools in GhanaPhilip J. FosterPhilip J. Foster Search for more articles by this author PDFPDF PLUS Add to favoritesDownload CitationTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints Share onFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditEmail SectionsMoreDetailsFiguresReferencesCited by Comparative Education Review Volume 6, Number 2Oct., 1962 Sponsored by the Comparative and International Education Society Article DOIhttps://doi.org/10.1086/444923 Views: 21Total views on this site Citations: 10Citations are reported from Crossref PDF download Crossref reports the following articles citing this article:Erwin H. Epstein Education as a Fault Line in Assessing Democratization: Ignoring the Globalizing Influence of Schools, (Sep 2021): 737–755.https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-66003-1_42George J. Sefa Dei Social difference and the politics of schooling in Africa: a Ghanaian case study, Compare: A Journal of Comparative and International Education 35, no.33 (Sep 2005): 227–245.https://doi.org/10.1080/03057920500212522George J. Sefa Dei The challenge of inclusive schooling in Africa: a Ghanaian case study, Comparative Education 41, no.33 (Jan 2007): 267–289.https://doi.org/10.1080/03050060500211641Kenneth King, Chris Martin The vocational school fallacy revisited: education, aspiration and work in Ghana 1959–2000, International Journal of Educational Development 22, no.11 (Jan 2002): 5–26.https://doi.org/10.1016/S0738-0593(00)00083-3 Thomas J. Davis and Azubike Kalu-Nwiwu Education, Ethnicity and National Integration in the History of Nigeria: Continuing Problems of Africa's Colonial Legacy, The Journal of Negro History 86, no.11 (Nov 2017): 1–11.https://doi.org/10.2307/1350175Donald L. Horowitz Patterns of Ethnic Separatism, Comparative Studies in Society and History 23, no.22 (Jun 2009): 165–195.https://doi.org/10.1017/S0010417500013268Philip Foster Education and Social Inequality in Sub-Saharan Africa, The Journal of Modern African Studies 18, no.22 (Nov 2008): 201–236.https://doi.org/10.1017/S0022278X00011319 John Singleton Education and Ethnicity, Comparative Education Review 21, no.2/32/3 (Oct 2015): 329–344.https://doi.org/10.1086/445946James Turner Universal Education and Nation-Building in Africa, Journal of Black Studies 2, no.11 (Sep 1971): 3–28.https://doi.org/10.1177/002193477100200101Erwin H. Epstein Education as a Fault Line in Assessing Democratisation: Ignoring the Globalising Influence of Schools, (): 613–630.https://doi.org/10.1007/1-4020-2960-8_38