Biology Reference
In-Depth Information
put forth by Buikstra and Ubelaker (1994) . As a result, bioarchaeology has benefitted from
NAGPRA in two important ways: (1) many collections have now been systematically
studied, 17 and (2) importantly, there are now more collaborations between Native American
groups and bioarchaeologists encouraging mutual understanding and respect ( Buikstra,
2006c ). It remains to be seen what the effects of the 2010 regulations on culturally unidentifi-
able remains will have on the practice of bioarchaeology in the United States.
One consequence of NAGPRA may be that more U.S. trained scholars will seek research
opportunities abroad in countries without similar regulations, although a number of countries
do have comparable policies in place ( Larsen and Walker, 2005 ). However, this does not mean
that international bioarchaeological work is free fromother obstacles. Navigating the complex-
ities and logistics of living abroad temporarily and local regulations for excavation, analysis,
and/or transport permits must be considered. Further, Turner and Andrushko (2011) discuss
particular issues related to international work and collaboration. Questions arise concerning
how to properly communicate results with local communities and what politics are involved
with local collaborations. Differences in expectations between collaborating scientists from
different cultures must be contemplated, in addition to language barriers or other cultural
barriers that add complications towards full participation of international scholars in the scien-
tific process, including publication in American journals ( Turner and Andrushko, 2011 ).
Further, outsiders doing work in other countries must be respectful and grateful that they
have been made welcome to investigate the past in a country other than their own.
Forensic Anthropology
Forensic anthropology is a relatively new field, having been practiced in earnest for about
40 years. Early definitions emphasized the applied nature of the field, of using concepts and
techniques from physical anthropology to individuate human skeletal remains in medico-
legal contexts (e.g., Stewart, 1979 ; and see Komar and Buikstra, 2008 for a discussion of the
historical development of the field). However, given the evolution of the field over the
past two decades, Dirkmaat and colleagues (2008:47) recently proposed an updated defini-
tion that encompasses the many different aspects of forensic anthropological work, stating
that “[forensic anthropology is] the scientific discipline that focuses on the life, the death,
and the postlife history of a specific individual, as reflected primarily in their skeletal remains
and the physical and forensic context in which they are emplaced.”
This definition reflects several themes as outlined by Komar and Buikstra (2008) :(1)the
actual identification of remains is no longer the main theme of forensic anthropology as
analyses such as trauma analysis have become important as well; and (2) the archaeological
context of where the remains are found is also an object of study. Further, Komar and Buik-
stra (2008) state that there are two additional departures from the original definitions of the
field. The first is the humanitarian function that many forensic anthropological investiga-
tions have undertaken, as seen with the Argentine Forensic Anthropology Team founded
by Dr. Clyde Snow ( www.eaaf.org ) , other similar teams in Latin America, and nongovern-
mental organizations such as the International Committee of the Red Cross ( www.icrc.org ).
17 One drawback to this, however, has been the urgency with which this has been done, in many cases with
disregard for the archaeological contextual information ( Buikstra, 2006c ).
Search WWH ::




Custom Search