Views provided by UsageCounts
Presented at: 28th Annual Meeting of the European Association of Archaeologists (EAA), Budapeste, Hungria, 31 Agosto a 3 September European Association of Archaeologists (EAA) (Budapest, Hungria) The initial creation of documented human skeletal collections in the United States is intimately tied to the development of anatomy and physical anthropology. This paper offers a view on the history and research undertaken on these collections, discussing the current ethical concerns that may shape/transform the profile and use of anatomical collections. In the 19th and early 20th centuries, physical anthropology studied skeletal variation, with an emphasis on racial classification. To observe the wide range of human anatomical diversity, dissection of human bodies was needed. However, in the late 18th and early 19th century due to the increasing numbers of medical schools and dire need for teaching/practicing material, despite its illegality, grave-robbing was relied upon for access to human remains. Facing illegality and populace uprisings, in 1831, the first Anatomy Act was passed in Massachusetts. This legislation legalized access to the bodies of unclaimed individuals for anatomization, deterring grave-robbing. Other states followed suit in passing anatomy acts. These laws would ultimately allow anatomists and physical anthropologists to legally amass documented human skeletal collections from dissected bodies. Despite this legal frame of permissiveness, in recent years ethical concerns associated with the composition of anatomical collections are growing.These include the absence of consent, aligned with replication, in death, of structural violence individuals in these collections experienced during their lifetimes. One consequence has been the request for repatriation and reburial of many remains. Another is the calls for scientists to seek descendants’ consent before researching skeletons from ancestors or members of their community. Guidelines will be discussed on how to ethically engage with anatomical collections.
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 0 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Average | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Average | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Average |
| views | 16 |

Views provided by UsageCounts