Re: John Stroebel's Post

John Stroebel (jstroebe@ULTRIX.RAMAPO.EDU)
Tue, 23 Aug 1994 04:51:31 -0400

no right, "I" being the key word. Anthropologists are, indeed, devided
over this issue. Some see burial as a sacred state, some as a future
catch of academic artifacts. The difference seems to be that one group
sees the human in his resting plase, some view an object.
And, indeed, Native Americans are devided on this issue. In case
you overlook the point, there is no one group of "Native Americans". It
is a collection of unique and distince cultures; nations; living (or
having lived) together in the Americas. However, I have not heard any one
nation speek out *against* reburial.
My apology was aimed toward any people on this list who hold that
N.A. remains be treated with dignity, and thus be returned to the
nations, and to the earth. It is sincere. I do not need your correction.

On Mon, 22 Aug 1994, David DeGusta wrote:

> >I have no right asking for "locations of Native
> >American burial remains." The resting places of the
> >ancestors of today's native people is a secret to be respected.
> I just thought I should point out that there are a
> number of opposing viewpoints to the one presented
> in John Stroebel's apologetic post. At the least, it
> should be recognized that "locations of Native American
> burial remains" and "resting places of the ancestors of
> today's native people" are not the same thing.
> The "reburial" issue is quite controversial.
> Anthropologists are by no means unified on what to
> do about it. Nor, for that matter, do "native people"
> speak with a single voice on the topic.
> David DeGusta