REPORT ON THE BABAO QUESTIONNAIRES (2008-9)
Mary Lewis (with Jane Hughes)
There were a total of 86 responses to the questionnaire, representing 21% of the current members
(n=412). Twenty-one (24%) of these responses were obtained during the 2009 survey. The responses to
each question are provided in the Appendix. What follows is a summary of these results and the various
comments give to the questions.
The majority of the respondents have been analysing human remains for 5-10 years (41%), with 12% having
over 20 years of experience. Work has been carried out on remains of all periods, but only 2% of the
respondents have worked on preserved bodies and 44% on skeletons under 100 years old. 64% of the
respondents have worked on remains from overseas, including Europe, Africa, Asia, Central and North
America.
The majority of respondents believed that remains of unknown identity should not be reburied, not matter
their date (QA1), or that they should be reburied when scientist felt it appropriate. However, 15% felt that
remains under 100 years old should be reburied after a set time. Where ‘other’ was stated, respondents
felt that remains should be reburied if there were known descendants who wished it (perhaps a
misunderstanding of the question i.e. unknown identity)?
Where the identity of the remains were known (QA2), the majority (27%) believed that remains should be
reburied after a set period of time, with 22% believing burial should happen immediately and 17% when
the scientists felt it appropriate. ‘Other’ was returned in 20% of answers, here, it was believed that reburial
should occur in consultation with the descendants, as long as they can prove direct links to the remains, but
that this should be done on a case by case basis.
When it came to who should decide when remains should be reburied (QA3), the overwhelming majority
felt that the descendants (92%) and the scientists (90%) should be involved, followed by the Institution
holding the remains (64%). One respondent commented that the inclusion of faith groups and descendants
should be limited, although they had a right to express themselves.
The vast majority felt that medical remains, over 100 years should not be reburied (79%). However, others
(17%) commented that they could be reburied if they were no longer of value for teaching and research,
but also that the decision to rebury should depend on how the material got into the collection. One
respondent stated that remains should never be reburied as there were still too many questions we could
not answer. When asked who should decide whether burial of these remains should take place (QB2), the
majority again indicated that the descendants (79%), institution holding the collection (71%) and scientists
(88%) should be involved. Museum curators, and the local coroner were also listed.
When asked under which circumstances remains held from overseas should be repatriated (QC1), it was
felt that this should occur when the indigenous population (64%) or overseas government (59%) requested
it. 48% felt that this should only happen when Scientists no longer had use for the remains. Among the
additional comments, the overwhelming view was that consultation was necessary, and that the
circumstances behind the remains needed to be investigated. One respondent stated that remains from
abroad that were very old should not be returned. It was less clear who should be involved in the decision
to rebury the remains (QC2), but again the general feeling was that consultation between all interested
groups was essential.
Most respondents found it hard to just tick one box when deciding who should have the ultimate say to
return the remains. But the small majority (26%) felt the decision lay with the institution holding the
remains. Again, one choice was deemed not appropriate as the respondents felt that consultation was
needed.
When it came to the display of human remains, the overwhelming majority felt it appropriate that remains
should be displayed in galleries and museums (QD1), but an exception was often made for preserved soft
tissue from other countries. Here, many commented that it depended on their scientific value, but that
they should be returned to the home community or destroyed in other circumstances. That remains should
be displayed in other venues (i.e. Birmingham NEC etc.) was less well received (QD2). C. 45% answered yes
for all. But most felt that it depended on the nature of the exhibit, and that should occur only when it had
educational value. Not just for entertainment. Many (c. 20%) were ‘not sure’.
Finally, most of the respondents (80%) had used human remains within the last 6 months, and mostly for
research purposes (80%), while only 46% had published their results, and 49% had sent copies to the
curator of the remains. 34% had yet to publish their research, but most indicated that they would send
copies to the holder (39%).
Nineteen members (22% respondents) provided additional comments. I have included a representative
sample here:
“Collections have been painstakingly assembled and are valuable sources of knowledge and learning. On
the whole items in them should be preserved for that purpose and for future generations. On this basis
reburial and repatriation should usually be resisted. The items should always be treated with respect and
should never be used outside of an educational or scientific purpose.”
“I think that the display of human remains should be undertaken and the educational, scientific and cultural
value of doing so has been well documented recently - Wellcome Institute skeletons of London exhibition, as
well as London Bodies, Museum of London and at Hunterian Museum. We shouldn't lose sight of the fact
that understanding heightened through education is likely to lead to greater respect for the culture and
heritage under question. But we have a responsibility to make sure that any displays are intended for these
aims and are not glamorised or seen purely as a form of entertainment. The retention of human remains
for scientific research is extremely important but again needs to be well-grounded and does need
consideration and respect of genuine descendants and affiliated cultural/religious groups especially when
from another country. But dialogue and communication across all parties should be encouraged rather
than blanket or generalised statements of practice. “
“This is a limited survey given the scope of the answers possible to these questions; much depends on
context – i.e. can an indigenous group demonstrate the remains are from their group. What are the specific
research questions for this survey?”
“The issue of the display and holding of human remains is complex. The association needs to spend time on
educating the public about what we as professionals do when we conduct our research. We should build on
the interest that is evident from the large viewing audience of programmes such as Time Team etc. The
situation in regards to repatriation is difficult; there is a strong groundswell of feeling in many countries that
this is the right thing to do. We should I think be engaging with groups, by for example, attending
conferences that they are likely to be at and trying to explain what we do and how this can inform them as
well as both the scientific and wider community. This is not an easy option as there is a lot of misconception
2
surrounding repatriation. We should also we working to find acceptable alternatives to repatriation even if
this means not using remains for a time or giving control over access to the indigenous groups.”
“In the UK, the vast majority of excavated human skeletons are of medieval date (or more recent) and
therefore were nominally Christian. The Christian religion teaches that the human skeleton or other remains
have no physical significance - a person's 'soul' loses its connection with the body at the time of death. As
practitioners of research on human remains we are privileged to be able to perform such work. In
recognition that the human remains are of persons very much like ourselves we treat them with appropriate
care, decency and respect. However, in future it will be recognised that most people’s attitudes to human
remains is sentimental. Future generations will be surprised that we treated them with such regard. In a
way they are no more significant than the seashell on the beach - relics of a long-dead organism-except that
they can teach us much more than can mollusc shells. Similarly, within a generation or two, the indigenous
people of Australia, New Zealand and North America, say, will be angered that we were all complicit in
repatriation (i.e., reburial or cremation) of destroying se much of their history, culture and evolutionary
evidence.”
2 In terms of curation of human remains by UK museums the final arbiters of policy ought to be the general
public. After all it is their taxes that pay for curation and research on human remains. Survey after survey
has revealed that the public in general are comfortable with excavation and research on human skeletal
remains. There is also a consistent majority in favour of the display of human remains in museums. One
ought to heed such views rather than those of vociferous, often anti-science, minority pressure groups who
claim the moral high ground and seek to impose their views on the majority.”
“General: I think the circumstances of the commercial sector could have been considered/consulted more.
Time and money are always an issue, and the human bone is nearly always a small part of a much more
substantial project. Publication:
All results from our analysis will exist as grey literature, and there is currently a move towards the internet
publication of excavation results. Most of our sites are published either in a journal or a stand alone
publication, and anywhere in between. We are obliged by the county archaeologists to publish our results
within a certain time frame, depending on the size of the project. This is also linked to planning permission
etc and has the potential to hold up development, so there is always a sense of urgency. Unfortunately local
journals are increasingly reluctant to publish any archaeological site results, which could easily hamper
efforts to get material into the public domain, something that should also be considered. Finally: I feel that
there is no better way of learning about human bone, and training to be an osteologist than to handle the
real thing.”
“I am saddened by how osteologists and physical anthropologists have failed to explain what we do and
WHY, clearly, to the public. We are portrayed as dippy, high-heeled crime fighters who blaze thru IDs, solve
the crime and all before the end credits; or we look like ghouls examining ancient murder scenes; or we
simply look like arrogant nerds. There is simply no way that our current techniques can glean “all we’ll ever
need to know” from human remains, nor should we callously decide one set is “viable” and another set is
not. The very fragmentary nature of some remains leaves them able to test certain aspects of skeletal
biology, for example fragments are already broken so destructive sampling is less of an issue. It’s also very
instructive to demonstrate to new students what remains often look like, as opposed to the shiny, perfect
lab specimens they may have dealt with in the past. Finally, I feel that the living have more importance
and more “rights” than the dead. Especially if we are going on about “what if it’s your grandmother, father,
child” type ethical questions. Your own child is not “yours”, and if she has been killed her body is “evidence”.
If she has died in war she is a “soldier” and will be buried with other military. It’s not like we can keep them
3
in the back bedroom—they are buried because remains with flesh go bad. The dead aren’t ours, anymore
than our children are “ours” when alive. It is time to take back our image from “Bones” and popular
“science” shows, and justify, in plain language, what we do and how it might benefit the living.”
4
APPENDIX
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
British Association for Biological Anthropology and Osteoarchaeology
The retention and display of human remains - a survey of BABAO members
About you
Name (optional)
Current occupation
Are you a member of BABAO?
If a student, which course are you registered for?
How long have you been working with human remains?
Have you worked with:
British human remains from these periods?
13
Prehistoric – skeletons
□
Prehistoric – bog bodies
□
Romano-British skeletons
□
Medieval skeletons
□
Skeletons 100-200 years old
□
Skeletons or preserved remains less than 100 years old
□
Remains from other countries
□
Which countries
_______________________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________
14
A. Human remains from UK archaeological sites
A1. For human remains where personal identity is unknown, do you feel it would be best if they were reburied: Please tick
Immediately after
excavation
without any study
As soon as possible after
basic analysis has taken
place e.g. within 6 months
After a limited set
period of time e.g. 10
years
When scientists feel
that there is nothing
more to learn from the
remains
Not reburied
Other
Prehistoric –
skeletons
Prehistoric – bog
bodies
Romano British
skeletons
15
Medieval skeletons
Skeletons 100-200
years old
A2. Should remains more than 100 years old of known personal identify be reburied if descendants request it? Please tick
Immediately after
excavation
without study
As soon as possible after
basic analysis has taken
place e.g. within 6 months
After a limited set
period of time e.g. 10
years
When scientists feel
that there is nothing
more to learn from the
remains
Not reburied
Other
16
A3. In England, where burials fall under their jurisdiction the Ministry of Justice determines whether
remains will be reburied. Who else do you think should be involved in any decision to rebury excavated
human remains? Please tick all that you think apply
Descendants (where known)
□
Site owner
□
Governing body of institution holding the remains
□
Osteoarchaeologists or other scientists
□
Local residents
□
Members of Local Government
□
Church of England representatives (for Christian burials)
□
Spiritual or faith group representatives with valid links with the remains (for burials of extant non C-of-E
faiths)
□
Other interested parties (please state)
□
_______________________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________
B Human remains in UK medical collections
B1. Do you think that human remains from medical collections that are older than 100 years should be
buried?
Yes
□
No
□
Not sure
□
Other (please state)
□
_______________________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________
17
B2. Who do you think should be involved in any decision to bury human remains from medical collections
that are older than 100 years? Please tick all that you think apply
Descendants (if known)
□
□
Governing body of the collection
Osteoarchaeologists or other scientists
□
Members of Local Government
□
□
Church of England representatives
Spiritual or faith group representatives
□
□
General public
Other interested parties (please state)
□
_______________________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________
18
C Human remains from overseas held in UK institutions
C1. Under which, if any, of the following circumstances should remains of overseas origin held in UK
museums or other institutions be repatriated? Please tick all that you think apply
At the request of representatives of an indigenous community
□
group in the country the remains originate from
At the request of the government or other official organisation
□
in the country the remains originate from
If the governing body of the organisation holding the collection
□
decides to return the remains
If the disposal policy of the organisation holding the collection
□
allows for the return of the remains
□
When scientists feel that there is nothing more to learn from the
remains
Remains should not be repatriated
□
Other, please state
□
_______________________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________
C2. Who do you think should be involved in any decision to return human remains from other countries?
Please tick all that you think apply
□
Descendants (where known)
Indigenous community groups or their representatives in the country
□
the remains are from
Government or official organisation in the country the remains are from □
19
General populace of the country the remains are from
□
□
Governing body of the collection
Government or official organisation from the country the remains are
□
held in
General populace of the country the remains are held in
□
Osteoarchaeologists or other scientists
□
Other interested parties (please state)
□
_______________________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________
20
C3. Who do you think should ultimately make the decision to return human remains from other
countries? Please tick one
□
Descendants (where known)
Indigenous community groups or their representatives in the country
□
the remains are from
Government or official organisation in the country the remains are from □
□
General populace of the country the remains are from
□
Governing body of the collection
Government or official organisation from the country the remains are
□
held in
General populace of the country the remains are held in
□
Osteoarchaeologists or other scientists
□
Other interested parties (please state)
□
_______________________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________
D Display of human remains
D1. Do you think that it is appropriate to include the following in museums or gallery displays? Please
tick
UK remains:
Yes
No
Not sure
Other (please state)
Prehistoric – skeletons
Prehistoric bog bodies
21
Romano-British skeletons
Medieval skeletons
Skeletons 100-200 years old
Remains from other countries:
Skeletal material
Preserved soft tissue
Material culture objects made with
human remains
22
D2. Do you think that it is appropriate to display the following in public venues other than
museums and galleries e.g. at exhibition centres such as Olympia or Birmingham NEC? Please tick
UK remains:
Yes
No
Not sure
Other (please state)
Prehistoric – skeletons
Prehistoric bog bodies
Romano-British skeletons
Medieval skeletons
Skeletons 100-200 years old
Remains from other countries:
Skeletal material
Preserved soft tissue
Material culture objects made with
human remains
E Use of collections
E1. Have you used a collection of human remains, whether in a museum, archaeology service/unit
or other institution such as English Heritage?
In the last six months
□
In the last 12 months
□
23
Within the last 2 years
□
Within the last 2 – 5 years
□
Longer than 5 years ago □
□
Never used
E2. What was the purpose of that use? Please tick all that apply
Study as part of a degree course
□
Personal study
□
Research
□
Teaching
□
E3. Did you publish the results of your research?
Yes
No
Not sure
Other, please state
If so, did you send a copy of the publication(s) to the institution that held the remains
Yes
No
Not sure
Other, please state
If not, please name the publication(s) below or provide a publications list indicating which collections
were used for the publication.
If you would like to make any comments on this survey please use the space below.
24