Inventorying, Reporting, and Communicating Human Osteological Findings from Highland Creek, KY
Grade Level at Time of Presentation
Senior
Major
Anthropology
Minor
History
Institution
University of Louisville
KY House District #
37
KY Senate District #
37
Faculty Advisor/ Mentor
Kathryn E. Marklein, PhD
Department
Department of Anthropology
Abstract
The Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA) of 1990 was a direct response to years of blatant desecration to Native American burial sites and sacred spaces. NAGPRA mandates that museums, universities, and public institutions inventory and report all Native American remains and burial artifacts within their collections, and stipulates that no invasive study be undertaken on NAGPRA remains without tribal consent. The seeming inability to engage in extensive study has led to a shortage of anthropologists, specifically archaeologists and bioarchaeologists, electing to work with indigenous remains. With the legal limitations inherent to NAGPRA, there is continuous debate as to whether this legislation is a hindrance to osteological (bioarchaeological) research, or whether it encourages an ethical baseline to our scientific research. This study set out to examine human skeletal remains excavated from Highland Creek, Kentucky by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers in 1997 and currently curated at the Center for Archaeology and Cultural Heritage at the University of Louisville. Previous examination of remains from individual and commingled contexts identified 214 skeletal elements. For this study, more comprehensive macroscopic, non-destructive methods were employed to both estimate age, sex, and minimum number of individuals (MNI) and provide preliminary palaeopathological data for inventory purposes. Complete and fragmentary skeletal elements from the site were inventoried in newly designed NAGPRA documentation forms that were designed to communicate osteological findings and inventories to tribes in a culturally sensitive manner. Results showed that current MNI counts, utilizing this new recording system, differed from the original report, highlighting the need for more thorough macroscopic analysis and accuracy in NAGPRA reporting and consultation. Without diluting scientific results, immediate, actionable changes to NAGPRA procedures within our lab demonstrate that respectful methods do not hinder but enhance our research and relationships with past and present indigenous peoples and cultures.
Inventorying, Reporting, and Communicating Human Osteological Findings from Highland Creek, KY
The Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA) of 1990 was a direct response to years of blatant desecration to Native American burial sites and sacred spaces. NAGPRA mandates that museums, universities, and public institutions inventory and report all Native American remains and burial artifacts within their collections, and stipulates that no invasive study be undertaken on NAGPRA remains without tribal consent. The seeming inability to engage in extensive study has led to a shortage of anthropologists, specifically archaeologists and bioarchaeologists, electing to work with indigenous remains. With the legal limitations inherent to NAGPRA, there is continuous debate as to whether this legislation is a hindrance to osteological (bioarchaeological) research, or whether it encourages an ethical baseline to our scientific research. This study set out to examine human skeletal remains excavated from Highland Creek, Kentucky by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers in 1997 and currently curated at the Center for Archaeology and Cultural Heritage at the University of Louisville. Previous examination of remains from individual and commingled contexts identified 214 skeletal elements. For this study, more comprehensive macroscopic, non-destructive methods were employed to both estimate age, sex, and minimum number of individuals (MNI) and provide preliminary palaeopathological data for inventory purposes. Complete and fragmentary skeletal elements from the site were inventoried in newly designed NAGPRA documentation forms that were designed to communicate osteological findings and inventories to tribes in a culturally sensitive manner. Results showed that current MNI counts, utilizing this new recording system, differed from the original report, highlighting the need for more thorough macroscopic analysis and accuracy in NAGPRA reporting and consultation. Without diluting scientific results, immediate, actionable changes to NAGPRA procedures within our lab demonstrate that respectful methods do not hinder but enhance our research and relationships with past and present indigenous peoples and cultures.