That Washington Post series on arch-racist Ales Hrdlicka has really stung the Smithsonian. The Secretary of the Smithsonian has written an op-ed apologizing for its history.
Anthropologist Ales Hrdlicka served as the head of the Smithsonian’s physical anthropology division from 1903 to 1941, when the majority of the human remains in our collections were obtained. During Hrdlicka’s four decades at the institution, he oversaw the acquisition of hundreds of human brains and thousands of other remains. The overwhelming majority of these remains were taken without the consent of the deceased or their family members, and Hrdlicka took particular interest in the remains of Indigenous people and people of color to undergird his search for scientific evidence of white superiority.
It was abhorrent and dehumanizing work, and it was carried out under the Smithsonian’s name. As secretary of the Smithsonian, I condemn these past actions and apologize for the pain caused by Hrdlicka and others at the institution who acted unethically in the name of science, regardless of the era in which their actions occurred.
I recognize, too, that the Smithsonian is responsible both for the original work of Hrdlicka and others who subscribed to his beliefs, and for the failure to return the remains he collected to descendant communities in the decades since.
OK, that’s a good start, but so far it’s just words. Tell me what you are doing, because that’s where the excuses get weak. The material changes so far are that they have repatriated a few thousand remains, they have formed a task force, and they promise future policy changes.
Our forthcoming policy will finally recognize these remains not as objects to be studied but as human beings to be honored. It is a long-overdue shift, and I regret that human bodies were ever treated with such disrespect at our institution.
If I may suggest an alternative response: reverse the obligations. Assume every single piece of flesh or bone must be traced to their origins as quickly as possible and returned to their peoples; the priority is to get rid of all of it. If anything is to be retained, someone must be named as responsible for the objects, and must have a specific scientific plan for extracting information from them in the near future, and then returned. Right now, everything is backwards, where we just assume if someone has a bunch of bones in a barrel, well, it belongs to them, even if all they can say is a vague assurance that it’s in a “teaching collection.” I always wonder what they plan to teach with them.
If you want to claim something is scientifically valuable, the onus is on you to justify that claim.
…and Hrdlicka took particular interest in the remains of Indigenous people and people of color to undergird his search for scientific evidence of white superiority.
I notice he doesn’t say a word about what, specifically, was ever done with or to said remains pursuant to his “search for scientific evidence of white superiority.” Did Hrdlicka ever actually perform any sort of experiments or systematic examination of any of his collection? Or was the whole thing just a big loud bluff all along? “You’ll never be able to refute my theories, look at all the warehouses full of evidence I’m collecting! Do you have a warehouse full of skeletons to support your counter-claims? No? Then shut up and stop questioning my eminent scienciness!”
Perhaps this apology should have included an acknowledgement of the utter emptiness of Hrdlicka’s entire enterprise.
To whom would one return, say, a Neanderthal skull? Or the bones of “Lucy”?
Raging Bee #1
Hrdlicka was an anthropologist so I wonder how much experimentation someone in that field and in that era would have done even if they weren’t racist pieces of shit. He likely applied the latest research in the pseudoscience of phrenology to the remains, particularly the skulls, and used the “data” to reinforce his already racist beliefs.
There are no australopithecines or Neandertals to ask for the return of their relatives, so no problem. Those bones also lack a history of oppression by the people who collected their remains.
Here is a story
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minik_Wallace
.
Those [australopithecine or Neandertal] bones also lack a history of oppression by the people who collected their remains.
OTOH…why did they all become extinct?
They didn’t, they evolved.
@^ lol
Assume every single piece of flesh or bone must be traced to their origins as quickly as possible and returned to their peoples; the priority is to get rid of all of it.
H’mm, as someone married to a physical anthropologist who has worked in Illinois for close to 40 years: It’s not always possible to trace bones to their origin. Often times, there is no context, no provenance. A lot of the materials in the U of I’s collection were donated by private collectors who didn’t exactly document the source. The modern first nation populations can have conflicting claims, and even where remains can be traced to an ancestral group, the current populations don’t always want them.
It’s not like one can do destructive analyses (DNA, strontium) on bones and teeth any longer, so the tools available to determine ancestry are somewhat limited.
On a related note, the only public archaeology funded in this state is DoT related. If the state didn’t do surveys and recovery, you can bet everything you own that the remains would wind up in swap meets up and down the length of the Illinois and Mississippi rivers. Want to buy human bone worked into musical instruments? There are many looters who can hook you up. Is that preferrable?