RESCUING THE HUMAN BODY

SATURDAY 27TH FEBRUARY 1999

This year's Open Meeting, Rescuing the Human Body, was held as usual after February's Annual General meeting at the Museum of London. Exploring subjects relating to the moral and ethical issues of excavating human remains, the subject matter was particularly topical in view of the Museum's 'London Bodies" exhibition (for a report see RN 77) which had recently finished a successful run. Jez Reeve, Jayne Webster/Nigel Sunderland and Hedley Swain all gave papers, with Kenneth Aitchison agreeing to read Richard Wellander's contribution after he had been unavoidably detained. As always the presentations were followed by a lively and interesting debate which lasted until our allotted time in the lecture hall was UP.

A GROWING PROBLEM
Jez Reeve spoke first. Drawing on her experience of directing the 1984 Christ Church, Spitalfields excavations and her role in English Heritage, she gave an insight into the problems facing London's planners as a result of the sheer number of people buried in the City. With space in the City rapidly running out, despite 70% of people opting for cremation, and many development areas including old burial grounds, it is clear that wholesale clearance of post-medieval graves is likely to continue. Although there will always be a presumption against disturbance within the planning process, archaeological excavation of burials will always be necessary. The excavation of the crypt at Christ Church has shown that, using well thought out research aims and methodology, the excavation of post- medieval burials can add greatly to our understanding and knowledge of the post-medieval populations. However, as Jez Reeve made clear, one of the major issues in any excavation of this kind is respect for the dead; despite their value for the study of past populations, human remains should not be treated as just another category of environmental material.

Richard Wellander's paper also dealt with the archaeological excavation of human remains. His contribution gave an example of how an organisation, in this case Historic Scotland, had responded to the need for a set of procedures concerning the excavation of human remains. The need is all the greater in Scotland where the law makes no distinction between consecrated and unconsecrated remains.

ATTITUDES
Focusing on the moral issues Jayne Webster and Nigel Sunderland described a joint project between the School of Archaeological Studies and the Department of Museum Studies at Leicester University, which had been set up to explore current attitudes towards the excavation of the dead and our sense of ancestry. Having defined what current attitudes are, the aim of the project is to produce a set of standards and guidelines for the excavation and study of human remains. Although many museums have codes of practice for ethnographic display, most archaeologists treat bone assemblages as any other collection of archaeological material. Guidelines that do exist are solely concerned with procedures for recording the bone, and some of our key heritage bodies do not perceive the lack of ethical guidelines as a problem. Jayne Webster and Nigel Sunderland noted that the ethical and moral issues concerning the excavation of human remains are being increasingly voiced. This, they argued, is partly because society is becoming more multi-cultural. Excavation of the dead is a religious issue for some groups, whilst indigenous groups, in Australia and America, for example, are expressing world wide concern. All this is making us more aware of ethical issues and going some way to creating an unease about the dead. Nigel Sunderland had looked at different people's perception of ancestry in England today. Most people draw the line at the recent dead, although various factors, such as the development of DNA, are edging our sense of ancestry backwards. The named dead and the presence of a standing church, and the difference between the dead buried in consecrated ground and those buried in unconsecrated ground are all factors governing our views on ancestry. Jayne Webster concluded the paper by outlining the key areas where guidance is needed:- public access, biological hazards, soft tissue preservation, storage and re- burial.

LONDON BODIES
The final paper was given by Hedley Swain who talked about the Museum of London's recent exhibition, "London Bodies". It is clear that there is a vast interest in skeletons and that those being studied at the Museum are an important scientific resource that could be put on public display. From the start the Museum sought to strike a careful balance between publicity and respect. At the press launch it was explained why the Museum has care of the skeletons and that excavation and study have to be done within the legal framework laid down by the Burial Act. The bones were handled only by the osteologists, and all photographs were supervised. The exhibition exceeded all targets in terms of visitor numbers and, although only a small number was surveyed, only one of the 62 negative comments was related to the ethics of the exhibition. Indeed, one visitor had hoped to find the exhibition more "shocking" and another complained that there were too few skeletons on display. Whilst stressing the need for respect in the treatment of the dead, Hedley Swain thought that most of us live in a society that does not take the idea of ancestors too seriously, especially in London which has a more transient population. He pointed instead to one of the prime concerns of archaeological research - the need to get the results out to the public as quickly as possible.

DISCUSSION
There then followed the usual discussion, with themes ranging from the problems of re-burial, especially where bones become part of teaching collections, to the differing perceptions of ancestry and the fact that an emphasis on the development of "brownfield" sites will lead to more disinterment. These papers and the ensuing discussion seemed to indicate that in the opinion of most members of the general public and most members of the archaeological profession there is no ethical or moral problem with the excavation or display of the historic dead as long as the remains are treated with respect and ultimately re-buried. Jayne Webster and Nigel Sunderland did, however, show that issues of ancestry and ethnicity are beginning to have an impact on the way in which we think and there are signs of unease in our attitudes to the treatment of the dead as research tools and exhibits. The popular success of the "London Bodies" exhibition suggests that this unease is at present centred within the museum and archaeological professions and, although the main archaeological bodies do not at present see the need for more than technological guidelines, the call by Jayne Webster and Nigel Sunderland for a moral and ethical framework for the excavation of human remains is becoming increasingly insistent. This is particularly relevant in view of the use of competitive tender for most archaeological sites and the increasing number of developments which will require the removal of human remains.

Hester Cooper-Reade