Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-p9bg8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-25T07:49:02.885Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The body of the martyr. Between an archival exercise and the recovery of his suffering. The need for a recovery of humanity in osteoarchaeology

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 November 2016

Alexandra Ion
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This paper addresses the limits of the methods and questions asked by osteoarchaeologists when dealing with human remains. Osteoarchaeologists seem to take for granted that through the study of such remains they can say something relevant about a past individual's identity, something about the nature of their being. Since the early 1990s various voices have questioned these assumptions, also claiming that the study and display of human remains are unethical. It is my intention to rethink the topic of ethics in osteoarchaeology by shifting the focus to the research questions and methods we employ – what kind of evidence are we looking for and what kinds of relationship are we establishing with those earlier lives? By taking as a starting point the analysis of the remains of the Greek Catholic Bishop Vasile Aftenie, killed during the Communist regime, I explore the view practitioners take as the legitimate way of framing the relationship between past and present and the transformation of bones into scientific objects. In the end I propose that such a re-evaluation, alongside an opening of our discipline towards anthropology, can contribute to a recovery of humanity as part of the academic discourse, which should be the key element in any ethical discussion.

Keywords

bodyosteoarchaeologydeathmethodethicshumanity
Type
Discussion
Information
Archaeological Dialogues , Volume 23 , Issue 2 , December 2016 , pp. 158 - 174
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2016 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Anson, T.J., and Trimble, M., 2008: The role of the biological anthropologist in mass-grave investigations, in Oxenham, M. (ed.), Forensic approaches to death, disaster and abuse, Samford Valley, Queensland, 55–62.Google Scholar
Arhieparhia de Alba Iulia şi Făgăraş 2010: Comunicat privind recunoaşterea osemintelor Episcopului Vasile Aftenie, 12 May 2010, at www.bru.ro/blaj/comunicat-privind-recunoasterea-osemintelor-episcopului-vasile-aftenie, accesed 15 May 2013.Google Scholar
Biografie PS Aftenie, n.d.: www.vicariatbucuresti.ro/biografie-ps-aftenie, accessed 10 April 2013.Google Scholar
Boyle, A., 1999: A grave disturbance. Archaeological perceptions of the recently dead, in Downes, J. and Pollard, T. (eds), The loved body's corruption. Archaeological contributions to the study of human mortality, Glasgow, 187–99.Google Scholar
Browne, T., 1835 (1642): Sir Thomas Browne's works. Religio medici. pseudodoxia epidemica, Book 2 (ed. Wilkin, S.), London.Google Scholar
Buchli, V., and Lucas, G. (eds), 2001: Archaeologies of the contemporary past, London and New York.Google Scholar
Cashell, K., 2007: Ex post facto. Peirce and the living signs of the dead. Transactions of the Charles Peirce Society 43 (2), 345–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cassman, V., Odegaard, N. and Powell, J. (eds), 2008: Human remains. Guide for museums and academic institutions, Lanham, MD.Google Scholar
Ciocan, C., 2013: Întruchipari. Studiu de fenomenologie a corporalității, Bucharest.Google Scholar
Corlățan, M., 2010: Episcopul catolic hâtru cu destin de martir, at www.evz.ro/detalii/stiri/episcopul-catolic-hatru-cu-destin-de-martir894903.html#ixzz2W5TPENOI, accesed 16 June 2013.Google Scholar
Cox, M.P., Flavel, A., Hanson, I., Laver, J. and Wessling, R., 2008: The scientific investigation of mass graves. Towards protocols and standard operating procedures, Cambridge.Google Scholar
Crossland, Z., 2009: Of clues and signs. The dead body and its evidential traces. American anthropologist 111 (1), 69–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Crossland, Z., 2013: Evidential regimes of forensic archaeology. Annual revue of anthropology 42, 121–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Crossland, Z., and Joyce, R.A. (eds), 2015: Disturbing bodies. Perspectives on forensic anthropology, Santa Fe.Google Scholar
Crouch, K. 2015: Excavation and emotion. Archaeological encounters with the dead, at http://deadmaidens.com/2015/08/03/excavation-emotion/#more-1102.Google Scholar
Domanska, E., 2005: Toward the archaeontology of the dead body (tr. M. Zapedowska), Rethinking history 9 (4), 389–413.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dragoman, A., Oanţă-Marghitu, S., Palincaş, N. and Vasilescu, T., 2012: Raport arheologic privind exhumarea episcopului greco-catolic Vasile Aftenie (1899–1950), Cimitirul Bellu catolic, Bucureşti, in PS Sa Mihai Frăţilă (ed.), Episcopul greco-catolic Vasile Aftenie (1899–1950). 60 de ani de la trecerea în eternitate. Rapoartele asupra deshumării osemintelor sale, 12–14 mai 2010, Târgu-Lăpuş, 55–76.Google Scholar
Fforde, C., Hubert, J. and Turnbull, P., 2004: The dead and their possessions. Repatriation in principle, policy and practice, London.Google Scholar
Funari, P., Zarankin, A. and Salerno, M. (eds), 2009: Memories from darkness. Archaeology of repression and resistance in Latin America, New York.Google Scholar
Ginzburg, C., 1980: Morelli, Freud and Sherlock Holmes. Clues and scientific method, History workshop 9, 5–36.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
González-Ruibal, A., 2012: From the battlefield to the labour camp. Archaeology of civil war and dictatorship in Spain, Antiquity 86 (332), 456–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gonzalez-Ruibal, A., and Moshenska, G. (eds), 2015: Ethics and the archaeology of violence, New York.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hamilakis, Y., 2014: Archaeology and the senses. Human experience, memory, and affect, Cambridge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hamilakis, Y., Pluciennik, M. and Tarlow, S. (eds), 2002: Thinking through the body. Archaeologies of corporeality, London.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hanson, I., 2008: Forensic archaeology. Approaches to international investigations, in Oxenham, M. (ed.), Forensic approaches to death, disaster and abuse, Samford Valley, Queensland, 17–28.Google Scholar
Heidegger, M., 2002 (1936): On the origin of the work of art, in Heidegger, M., Off the beaten track (ed. and tr. Young, J. and Haynes, K.), Cambridge, 1–56.Google Scholar
Institutul de Investigare a Crimelor Comunismului în România, Direcţia generală investigaţii, 2006: Raport de activitate (mai–decembrie 2006), at www.crimelecomunismului.ro/pdf/ro/rapoarte/raport_de_activitate_2006.pdf, accessed 15 May 2013.Google Scholar
Jenkins, T., 2010: Contesting human remains in museum collections. The crisis of cultural authority, New York.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Joyce, R.A., 2005: Archaeology of the body, Annual review of anthropology 34, 139–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Karlsson, H., 2013: A new ethical path for archaeology? Norwegian archaeological review 46 (2), 227–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kohl, P.L., Kozelsky, M. and Ben-Yehuda, N. (eds) 2008: Selective remembrances. Archaeology in the construction, commemoration, and consecration of national pasts, Chicago.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Krmpotich, C., Fontein, J. and Harries, J., 2010: The substance of bones. The emotive materiality and affective presence of human remains, Journal of material culture 15 (4), 371–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
LaCapra, D., 1999: Trauma, absence, loss, Critical inquiry 25 (4), 696–727.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leighton, M., 2010: Personifying objects/objectifying people. Handling questions of mortality and materiality through the archaeological body, Ethnos 75 (1), 78–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marila, M., 2009: Human remains as quasi-objects. Draft published in Kontaktstencil 47, at www.academia.edu/1480079/Human_remains_as_quasi-objects.Google Scholar
Martin, D., and Andreson, C.P. (eds), 2014: Bioarchaeological and forensic perspectives on violence. How violent death is interpreted from skeletal remains, Cambridge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Muraru, A., Budeancă, C. and Bumbeş, M., 2007: Misterul unei execuţii sumare a Securităţii din 1950, dezlegat de Institutul de Investigare a Crimelor Comunismului în România. ‘Eroul necunoscut’, asa cum era ştiut Iosif Orşa în zonă, a fost exhumat de IICCR. Proba incontestabilă a execuţiei. Un glonţ de calibrul 7,62 mm găsit între rămăsiţele pământeşti, at www.iiccr.ro/pdf/ro/investigatii_speciale/iosif_orsa.pdf, accessed 18 May 2013.Google Scholar
Nora, P., 1989: Between memory and history. Les lieux de mémoire (tr. Marc Roudebush), Representations 26, 7–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Paine, C., 2013: Religious objects in museums. Private lives and public duties, London.Google Scholar
Petrov, G., 2009a: Raport privind acţiunea de căutare şi deshumare a unor victime ale Securităţii în hotarul satului Nepos, com. Feldru, jud. Bistriţa-Năsăud, at www.iiccr.ro/pdf/ro/rapoarte/raport_nepos.pdf, accessed 15 May 2013.Google Scholar
Petrov, G., 2009b: Raport privind deshumarea osemintelor lui Vitan Petru în hotarul satului Băiesti, com. Pui, jud. Hunedoara, at www.iiccr.ro/pdf/ro/rapoarte/raport_baiesti.pdf, accessed 15 May 2013.Google Scholar
PS Sa Mihai Frăţilă (ed.), 2010: Episcopul greco-catolic Vasile Aftenie (1899–1950). 60 de ani de la trecerea în eternitate. Rapoartele asupra deshumării osemintelor sale, 12–14 mai 2010, Târgu-Lăpuş.Google Scholar
Rebay-Salisbury, K., Sorensen, M.L.S. and Hughes, J. (eds), 2010: Body parts and bodies whole. Changing relations and meanings, Oxford.Google Scholar
Renshaw, L., 2010: The scientific and affective identification of Republican civilian victims from the Spanish Civil War, Journal of material culture 15 (4), 449–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ricoeur, P., 1969: Le conflit des interprétations. Essais d'herméneutique, Paris.Google Scholar
Ricoeur, P., 2006: Memory, history, forgetting, Chicago.Google Scholar
Robb, J., and Harris, O.J.T. (eds), 2013: The body in history. Europe from the Palaeolithic to the Future. Cambridge.Google Scholar
Roberts, C., 2006: A view from afar. Bioarchaeology in Britain, in Buikstra, J. and Beck, L.A. (eds), Bioarchaeology. The contextual analysis of human remains, London, 417–40.Google Scholar
Sayer, D., 2010: Ethics and burial archaeology, London (Debates in Archaeology).Google Scholar
Scarre, G., 2003: Archaeology and respect for the dead, Journal of applied philosophy 20, 237–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Scarre, G., 2006: Can archaeology harm the dead?, in Scarre, C. and Scarre, G. (eds), The ethics of archaeology. Philosophical perspectives on archaeological practice, Cambridge, 181–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sofaer, J.R., 2006: The body as material culture. A theoretical osteoarchaeology, Cambridge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sofaer, J.R., 2012: Touching the body. The living and the dead in osteoarchaeology and the performance art of Marina Abramović, Norwegian archaeological review 45 (2), 1–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Soficaru, A., and Ion, A., 2012: Analiza antropologică privind osemintele umane descoperite în groapa mormântului ‘V.A. 1950 (Episcop Vasile Aftenie 1899–1950)’, cimitirul Bellu Catolic, in PS Sa Mihai Frăţilă (ed.), Episcopul greco-catolic Vasile Aftenie (1899–1950). 60 de ani de la trecerea în eternitate. Rapoartele asupra deshumării osemintelor sale, 12–14 mai 2010, Târgu-Lăpus, 29–54.Google Scholar
Svestad, A., 2013: What happened in Neiden? On the question of reburial ethics, Norwegian archaeological review 46 (2), 194–222.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tarlow, S., 2006: Archaeological ethics and the people of the past, in Scarre, C. and Scarre, G. (eds), The ethics of archaeology. Philosophical perspectives on archaeological practice, Cambridge, 199–218.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Verdery, K., 2000: The political lives of dead bodies. Reburial and postsocialist change, New York (The Harriman Lectures).Google Scholar
Wright, R., Hanson, I. and Sterenberg, J. 2005: The archaeology of mass graves, in Hunter, J. and Cox, M. (eds), Advances in forensic archaeology, London, 137–58.Google Scholar