First of all, I want to light the
@Teocraso signal, because he is an anthropologist and an indigenous person and so his perspective will be valuable to this topic.
This is a fascinating topic, and although it is a theoretical it is intimately connected with current issues in Canadian archaeology.
Now a few months back, I attended the Canadian Archaeological Association's annual conference, in Winnipeg, Manitoba. One of the main focuses of the event was on the interactions between the archaeological field and living indigenous communities. These relationships have, traditionally, not been very good. Archaeology in Canada has always been highly informed by colonialism, and by colonial-influenced mindsets and perspectives. The history of archaeology in Canada is full of examples of archaeologists acting in patronizing, offensive, or otherwise imperialistic ways towards the indigenous. Canadian museums are still full of the remains and artifacts of indigenous ancestors, in many cases outright stolen from indigenous burial sites. Understandably then, many indigenous people still have a low level of trust for archaeologists. Archaeology today in Canada is very invested in trying to repair that relationship, because our research can no longer ethically proceed without the consent and participation of indigenous peoples.
Now, at the CAA conference I heard from many indigenous archaeologists, community leaders, museum administrators, and other individuals and their perspectives on this problem today. What indigenous peoples want from archaeology varies from person to person and community to community. Some of the general standouts were: Most of them want archaeological research on their ancestors to be done with respect for indigenous rituals and beliefs. Some of them want archaeologists to participate in and affirm indigenous spiritual traditions and rituals as part of their research. Most wanted archaeology to support indigenous sovereignty and the process of decolonization in Canada. Many also felt that indigenous ownership of remains and artifacts must be restored.
Speaking personally, these are fraught grounds and offers many potential conflicts for the Canadian archaeologist. What do you do when you feel you cannot affirm indigenous spirituality for reasons of scientific neutrality or personal belief? (I have a similar problem with so-called "biblical" archaeology in the Levant). What do you do when an indigenous group claims ownership of remains or artifacts that you as an archaeologist are pretty sure pre-dates their presence in a given region? How do you balance the archaeological desire for data with the legitimate indigenous desire for ownership of remains and artifacts? There are many circles to square in this problem, and the archaeologist can be pulled in many directions by politics, their institutions, financial and academic career interests, and above all indigenous communities whose ancestors these are.
Now I am not enough of an expert on heritage laws in Canada to comment precisely on what legally would ensue in this scenario. However speaking as if I were the archaeologist in this situation: I can tell you what I wouldn't do. I would strive to
not act like an arrogant white jackass, to not be dismissive of the indigenous community or their beliefs or concerns. I would try to carry out my research in cooperation with them. The key idea here is
a negotiated process. Research, on an ethical and moral level, must be done in partnership with the indigenous community that lives on this land and who claim this individual as their ancestor. I would try my best to stop and listen to what they have to say about all this, and try my utmost to do my research in a respectful way which includes them and acknowledges their rights, their ownership, and most importantly their dignity.
I suspect, however, that indigenous communities would be quite delighted with the finding of a pre-modern hominin of that age in North America, and with the potential that anatomically modern humans interbred with North American hominids as they did with the Neanderthals and Denisovans. There has long been controversy between archaeologists and the indigenous in regards to the peopling of the Americans. Many indigenous are uncomfortable or wary of the idea that they originated elsewhere, seeing in it a patronizing settler attempt to delegitimize their ownership of and connection to the land. They generally say rather that their peoples have always dwelt upon Turtle Island. Pre-AMH hominids in the Americas would strengthen that traditional claim, I think.
A critical question archaeologists often ponder is: Who owns the past? Who has the right to claim the past and its archaeological remains as their symbol of legitimacy, authority, or status? Who gets decide who gets access and who doesn't? Which claim shall take precedence? Now there are valid claims and invalid claims, stronger claims and weaker claims, but I think in general we
all own the past in some sense, and this means that it must be shared. This means that research into the past must always be a negotiation. It must always be about listening to others with genuine and earnest intent to hear them. We as archaeologists try to hear the voices of those long dead, and we must not forget to listen to the voices of those living today.
