Archaeological politics and public interest in paleoamerican studies: lessons from Gordon Creek Woman and Kennewick Man.
This paper discusses the Kennewick lawsuit as it relates to the intended purposes of NAGPRA. It also reflects upon comments made by Swedlund and Anderson (1999) in a recent American Antiquity Forum, which conceptually linked two ancient skeletons, Gordon Creek Woman and Kennewick Man. Their assertions indicate the need for clarifying specific issues and events pertaining to the case. We comment on how times have changed with the passage of NAGPRA, how differently these two skeletons have been treated by the media and the scientists interested in them, and show how discussions of biological affiliation have relevance. There is still much to be learned from Kennewick Man and Gordon Creek Woman. But attempts to bring the concept of race or racial typing into the picture show misunderstanding regarding the use of morphological data in tracing population historical relationships, not to mention obfuscating the scientific issues they raise.
Owsley
D W
DW
Department of Anthropology, National Museum of Natural History, Smithsonian Institution, Washington, DC.
Jantz
R L
RL
D044467:American Indian or Alaska Native / Q000208:ethnology / Q000235:genetics / Q000266:history* / Q000331:legislation & jurisprudence / Q000523:psychology; D001106:Archaeology / Q000941:ethics* / Q000266:history / Q000592:standards; D032984:Ethics, Research / Q000266:history; D049673:History, 20th Century; D049674:History, 21st Century; D049690:History, Ancient; D006801:Humans; D012106:Research / Q000266:history; D012107:Research Design; D012863:Skeleton; D014481:United States