# When does grave robbing become archeology? **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [December 11, 2009, 3:56am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-does-grave-robbing-become-archeology/520824 "2009-12-11T03:56:09Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 5\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![GreasyJack](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/df705f/32.png) [@GreasyJack](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GreasyJack)\ **Post date:** [December 11, 2009, 8:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-does-grave-robbing-become-archeology/520824/21 "2009-12-11T20:33:02Z")
> [@Diceman](#): > > The real answer (as opposed to the other answer just given) is because for many years Native American graves were not given the protections that other graves were given. You can’t just go and dig up a cemetery without a good reason, but until reletively recently you could go dig up an old Native American grave just for the hell of it. > > Also, many Native American tribes (most?) were not in the habit of marking their graves, so it’s very common to accidentally find NA graves that nobody knew about. In contrast, mainstream American culture tends to bury people in defined locations, and mark the graves, so it’s pretty obvious where you can and can’t dig. Basically, the laws protecting NA graves exist because they were needed. I’ll grant that that is the historical background to the political pushes for NAGPRA, but I’m not talking about just any old person digging up someone for the heck of it-- in this day and age (and when NAGPRA was passed in 1990), that is illegal regardless of who’s remains they are. What I’m talking about is removing or disturbing a grave for some sort of research purpose. If you’re an archeologist, it’s a relatively simple thing to get permission to examine or excavate the remains of a Euro-American, African-American, Chinese-American, etc. provided there are no living decedents to raise a stink (and there are plenty of unmarked graves containing these groups out there). The only time there are special hurtles to jump through (usually impossible hurtles) are with Native Americans or Prehistoric Americans. That says to me that there is a reason for a Native American specific grave protection law other than saying that usually other groups are buried in cemeteries, because this is certainly not universally true. I don’t think it is a particularly controversial claim to say that the remains of distant ancestors are of particular importance to many Native American groups and that this is what necessitates an act specifically protecting them. ---
**Author:** ![Ol\_Gaffer](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/8e8cbc/32.png) [@Ol\_Gaffer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ol_Gaffer)\ **Post date:** [December 11, 2009, 9:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-does-grave-robbing-become-archeology/520824/22 "2009-12-11T21:13:26Z")
> [@Diceman](#): > > The real answer (as opposed to the other answer just given) is because for many years Native American graves were not given the protections that other graves were given. You can’t just go and dig up a cemetery without a good reason, but until reletively recently you could go dig up an old Native American grave just for the hell of it. > > Also, many Native American tribes (most?) were not in the habit of marking their graves, so it’s very common to accidentally find NA graves that nobody knew about. In contrast, mainstream American culture tends to bury people in defined locations, and mark the graves, so it’s pretty obvious where you can and can’t dig. Basically, the laws protecting NA graves exist because they were needed. Agree completely. Burial excavation and the subsequent buying/selling/trading/collecting of the associated burial goods has a long, long history in the U.S. Hell, Thomas Jefferson himself documented his excavation of a “Mound-builder” mound at Monticello in _Notes on the State of Virginia_. ---
**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\ **Post date:** [December 11, 2009, 9:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-does-grave-robbing-become-archeology/520824/23 "2009-12-11T21:25:07Z")
I want my ashes thrown in Miguel Ferrer’s face. He knows why. ---
**Author:** ![Toxylon](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/f05b48/32.png) [@Toxylon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Toxylon)\ **Post date:** [December 13, 2009, 12:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-does-grave-robbing-become-archeology/520824/24 "2009-12-13T12:51:18Z")
Ancient graves are an immensely important source of information regarding past societies, offering a multitude of data applying to big questions like how things came to be the way they are. It simply maddens me that certain groups prevent science from progressing based on vague references to kinship or whatever, which scarcely apply when dealing with corpses 1000’s years old. Cultural evolution ensures that even the ancient people you’re directly descended from weren’t the same folks as you are, in any meaningful way. But where’s the cut-off line? Personally, I’d say any grave one can’t put a name on is fair game, regardless of age. No-one should get hurt by scientists going in. ---
**Author:** ![ralph124c](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/8797f3/32.png) [@ralph124c](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ralph124c)\ **Post date:** [December 13, 2009, 2:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-does-grave-robbing-become-archeology/520824/25 "2009-12-13T14:24:58Z")
> [@garygnu](#): > > I want my burial site to be a well-labeled time capsule for archaeologists in the far distant future. I thought it interesting that smallpox spores can survive, in a sealed coffin, for several hundred years! Grave robbers beware! [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-does-grave-robbing-become-archeology/520824.md?page=1)