Ethics in Archaeological Inquiry Paper
Instructions:
Ethics in archaeological inquiry are the building blocks of establishing strong relationships with local communities, showing proper respect for the past and are a guiding principle in how archaeologists conduct themselves in their investigations. However, ethics are not fixed. Different perspectives exist in different places and for different peoples; and often one perspective can conflict with another. This in many ways is why different organizations, such as the SAA and AAA, have established ethical codes of conduct in order to help navigate these, sometimes tricky waters, in our anthropological investigations.
For this assignment you will are presented with an archeological scenario. Based on this scenario you will write a 5-to-6-page (1300-1500) words ethics position paper that focuses on the ethical considerations from the perspective of one side of the situation. In your position paper you will consider the position and potential ethical arguments from the opposing side as well. Think about it as if you were writing this paper to prepare for a debate.
In the paper you will first pull out all the ethical questions that the scenario presents. In doing so you will reference various ethical codes of conduct as they relate to the questions that you are presenting. I recommend looking at the SAA and AAA ethical codes, but you are also free to look at others.
Once you have identified the ethical questions and considerations for discussion, you will argue the merits of one side, basing your thoughts on the similar case of the Kennewick Man and the ethical questions that arose during its excavation, analysis and eventual repatriation. During this part of your paper be sure to discuss the opposing viewpoint’s position, potential arguments and counterpoints to their position.
You must draw your information from a minimum of two academic articles. These can come from class readings or from additional research that you wish to conduct. Internet sources, i.e. non-academic websites etc., are not permitted.
Scenario:
In Northern British Columbia an excavation team has come across a human skeleton that tentatively dates to 9,000 years ago. If this date is accurate not only does it represent one of the oldest human skeleton found in the Americas but its northern location could represent the very earliest migrants.
The archaeological community is extremely excited about the incredible value of the information that this skeleton could provide, not only on early migration into the Americas, but this individual may also share almost equal ancestry to northern Asian populations or those elusive groups that lived for thousands of years on Beringia. Initially, the excavation and analysis has continued unimpeded, however, as knowledge of this discovery has spread several Indigenous groups have claimed ancestral connection to this individual and are demanding the immediate cessation of all analysis and the return of the remains for immediate reburial. While archaeologists state that they have honoured all claims to ancestral remains, there is no basis for this claim as there is no evidence that these groups were in this region 9,000 years ago. Further, the archaeologists argue that these remains represent an unparalleled opportunity for scientific investigation into not only migration into the Americas, but the relationship between Asia, Beringia and North America. The Indigenous groups state that archaeologists have been “honouring” science over the importance of Indigenous beliefs and culture, and that these remains must be returned to cease the continued diminishment and destruction of Indigenous peoples and their culture.
- Position #1: Take the position of the Indigenous groups who want the remains returned and reburied.
- Position #2: Take to position of the archaeologists who wish to analyze these remains
Points to Consider When Developing Your Paper
For this scenario, consider what outside information to bring in to the discussion. Various codes of ethics are obvious; remember that there are other codes than the SAA’s, which may turn out to be useful (RPA, WAC, AIA, AAA, etc. and do not forget things like the code of the American Association of Museums). One caveat: the codes should not be cited as if they were legal codes (e.g. “In paragraph 3, section II, of the RPA code . . .”). Rather, the codes are for the most part guidelines that are meant to invoke thoughtful action and not merely be prescriptions for ethical behavior.
Always consider the broad issue of stakeholders. There are multiple, competing, stakeholders in this scenario. You may wish to give preference to the interests of certain stakeholders over others; that’s fine, but you must explain and justify that choice. Remember: life is full of hard choices, and archaeologists have to make some. It is acceptable to acknowledge competing interests, even when you ultimately privilege one set over another. In fact, your argument will be more realistic and compelling if you explicitly acknowledge the multiple stakeholders than if you suggest that there is one simple answer.
Remember, ethical dilemmas are just that: dilemmas. If they were easy to answer, we would not need codes and debates and Ethics. You can expect that an appropriate solution to some scenarios will be unsatisfactory to some parties and/or will be imperfect. Acknowledge that honestly in your response, but clarify your decisions and choices. Ethics, after all, is about the reasons we have to guide the choices we make.
For the assignment include a title page with your name, assignment title, course information and an image that represents your paper. You will also need a works cited page at the end of your paper.