Kennewick Man made the March 13, 2006 cover of TIME. How fairly did they represent the Native American perspective on the controversy?
For in-depth background on the Kennewick controversy see Skeletons in the Closet
The face of Kennewick Man--or a stylized version of it--graces the cover of TIME Magazine March 13, 2006. Given the biased and shoddy reporting that marked Time's 2002 "expose" of Indian Casinos, I was curious to see how they handled the Kennewick Man controversy in their two articles Who Were the First Americans? and Who Should Own the Bones?
At least these articles do not perpetuate the myth that Native Americans sought to block discovery of Kennewick's possible Caucasian ancestry. However, they do perpetuate the myth that Native Americans and NAGPRA stand in the way of scientific discovery.
There were several points the writers could have included to gain a different perspective, but apparently chose not to.
TIME'S OMISSIONS
TIME quotes Rochanne Downes, identified as the coordinator for the Great Basin Inter-Tribal NAGPRA Coalition. "Well we know where we came from. Our people were made from mud, and then the tribes were sent out."
That quaint remark puts this on a level with the Intelligent Design debate--Indian Creationist Theory v science. While the writer points out that "...not all Indians believe in the ancient-clay idea..." He could have added another perspective to this piece by quoting Glen Howard Pinkham of the Yakama Tribal Council.
Pinkham was part of a delegation that came to hear
Doug Owsley of the Smithsonian reveal results of recent Kennewick studies. (They were not invited or even officially informed about the session.) In an interview with the Tri-City Herald (text and video available) Pinkham proposed that the archaeologists employed by the Yakama nation--yes they do employ archaeologists-- and Owsley's team discuss methods for working together in the future. As of this writing, I have heard of no reply from Owsley.
Time could also have mentioned cases like
Buhl Woman , the 11,000-year-old skeleton discovered in Idaho, where scientists worked in consultation with Shoshone-Bannock Tribes. According to a 1998 article in Archaeology, this skeleton, discovered before Kennewick, was "...one of the best preserved and most thoroughly studied" before re-burial in 1991.
RELIGION or REASON
Linking this controversy to other cultures' creation theories removes it from its proper context and insinuates a culture using religious beliefs to halt scientific research. A more accurate context is cultural mores on treatment of the dead.
Our society has laws against the abuse of corpses as well as desecration of cemeteries.
Studies showed that Kennewick Man had been buried, probably ritually, on his side in the fetal position. Our society feels removed from ancient remains (especially of other cultures) and sees no problem with placing "mummies" in glass cases for all to view. But for the Yakama and many other Aboriginal cultures, time does not equal distance from ancestors. Had the Yakama taken possession of these remains, they could have ensured that studies were done in a manner that respected their culture and that the remains be re-buried within a decent amount of time rather than held in indefinite storage like so many Native remains of the past.
TIME put Kennewick Man on their cover, but they did him no honor.
Read more on NAGPRA under Museum/History Studies at the Suite
