RIGHTS-AUSTRALIA: Aborigines Insist on Ancestors’ Repatriation

By Stephen de Tarczynski Reprint | | Print |

Stephen de Tarczynski

MELBOURNE, Sep 18 2007 (IPS) - Successful negotiations with the renowned Natural History Museum (NHM) in London, for the repatriation of human remains against claims made by indigenous Australian communities, have extended the hope that more institutions will follow suit.

”It’s our cultural belief that the remains have got to return back to the country… our beliefs are that the old people, their spirits won’t lay to rest until their remains are back in country. And we have an obligation to ensure that happens,” says Greg Brown, a member of the Tasmanian Aboriginal Centre (TAC) delegation which clinched an agreement with NMH in April to repatriate the remains of 17 Tasmanian aborigines.

The remains held by the NMH – thought to date to the 19th century – included bones, teeth and hair. Their repatriation ended a 20 year struggle with the NMH and facilitated the return of the remains of six Torres Strait Islanders in June.

The remains of five people were returned by Glasgow Museum – identified as being from Mer Island – while London’s University College returned the remains of another Torres Strait Islander. These institutions took possession of the remains in the 1890s.

Jesse Sagaukaz from the Torres Strait Regional Authority says that for Torres Strait Islanders – who refer to the returnees as “historical ancestors” rather than “remains” – it is very important that their ancestors are returned. “It’s like a part of Torres Strait was taken from Torres Strait,” says Sagaukaz.

He explains that the spirits of these historical ancestors were not at rest while they were being held overseas. “If a part of your family, which was also very much a part of the land, was taken from you, their spirits are taken also…Both in the spiritual and cultural respects it is very important to lay them down on their home soil. It’s very important. They have to be returned back to their people,” Sagaukaz told IPS.

Revered British institutions such as Oxford and Cambridge universities and National Museums Scotland (NMS) still hold Tasmanian aboriginal remains, as does Chicago’s National Field Museum. Vienna’s Museum of Natural History also holds aboriginal remains.

Brown says that the TAC continues to lobby for the return of aboriginal remains from Oxford, Cambridge and NMS. “We’ve been encouraged by (National Museums) Scotland, particularly. But it will be a hard slog with Cambridge and I think eventually we’ll get the remains back from Oxford,” says Brown.

TAC representatives met with the NMS Director of Collections, Jane Carmichael, in May to discuss the repatriation of seven skulls of Australian aborigines.

In a response to enquiries made by IPS, a spokesperson for National Museums Scotland says that the TAC request for the return of remains was still under consideration by the museum’s Board of Trustees.

“NMS has taken due note of the recent changes in British legislation and practice affecting this sensitive area,” the spokesperson says.

Britain’s Department for Culture, Media and Sport released a publication in 2005 titled ‘Guidance for the Care of Human Remains in Museums’. The document supports the Human Tissue Act (2004), which for the first time allowed nine British museums to move human remains under 1,000 years old.

But while the measures are now in place to repatriate remains, these institutions continue to hold onto them.

Oxford – believed to possess four hair samples of aborigines – told IPS that there was “no one available for interview’’. Instead, Oxford released a statement which says: “The University recognises both the sensitive nature of some of the items and the concerns over cultural heritage which often lie behind requests for repatriation.”

Whether Oxford deems hair to constitute human remains or not, the university will be able to consider a repatriation claim from the TAC once the Australian government confirms that the TAC is “the appropriate community representative to negotiate about the return of the Tasmanian human remains.”

Representatives of Tasmania’s aboriginal community met with University of Cambridge officials early this month to discuss repatriation possibilities.

A spokesman for Cambridge says that the university has been working to implement the recommendations contained in the ‘Guidance for the Care of Human Remains in Museums’ alongside its own regulations.

The Cambridge spokesman says that the human remains collections held by the university are among the most important in the world. Cambridge reportedly holds four Aboriginal skulls and two jawbones, although these are not confirmed.

“These collections have made major contributions to our current understanding of human diversity and evolution, as well as to forensic science and the knowledge about health and life in the past,” says the spokesman, adding that there is a wealth of information still to be gained from them.

In May, Cambridge researchers used DNA tests on aboriginal remains which they say “almost confirms that all modern humans have a common ancestry”.

The results supported the ‘Out of Africa’ theory, which says that all modern humans originated in Africa, spreading throughout Eurasia and replacing other early humans rather than interbreeding with them.

Brown acknowledges that the TAC has one perspective while the institutions have another. However, he discounts science as a valid reason why the remains should remain with the institutions. “We do understand that they have a view on it, but our obligation is to have the remains returned. We don’t see how their arguments about scientific value stack up,” says Brown, who argues that the same information can be acquired through other means.

While Brown says that he would like the remains returned immediately, the TAC acknowledges the complexities of the situation. “The remains have been held in institutions for a long time but we’ll continue the fight to get the remains back. It doesn’t matter how long it will take, we won’t give up.’’

Indigenous Peoples- Special IPS Coverage https://www.ipsnews.net/new_focus/indigenous_peoples/index.asp