Material culture (lithic industry in this case) commonly associated with the "later Ancients" (e.g. Neanderthals) is called "Mousterian" and was widespread in Middle East and Europe between 250-200 Ka and 30 Ka. It is based on flake technology and consists of mainly scrapers, denticulates and points, which are often made in "levalois" technique. It doesn't include any bone tools (bone points are typical Aurignacian tool). There is a striking (cognitive) difference between Chatelperonronian and Aurignacian on one side (which use blade technology) and Mousterian on the other.
Since Chatelperronan material culture was found together with Neanderthal burials (cave Sant-Cesaire) it is now widely thought that Chatelperronian industry is handiwork of Ancients.
However, this transittion in technology is not evident in other aspects of material culture. Chatelperronian sites have same nest-like organisation of space as Mousterian and are in striking contrast to the Aurignacien campsites (with huts, structures etc.). It is possible that the reason behind Mousterian-Chatelperronian technological (and cognitive?) transition is imitation rather than invention.
Your right to undisturbed grave is granted by law -- if not by moral standards of people who might disturb it, of course (in my experience most people deal with human remains graves... with respect and fear).
But I am talking here mainly about burial places that were lost, forgotten and buried under modern sediments -- burials under modern playgrounds, streets, buildings... When they are eventually discovered (usually during earthworks of some kind) and excavated, local indigenous groups claim right to human remains found there and deny archaeologists right to study and display them in museums. Main motivation of indigenous groups is -- at least in my opinion -- is to assert their right to create their own history and not being forced with White/Western/European/Official one.
On the other hand, descendants of "white Europeans" are usually the one who are in position to write "official" (or White/Western/European/Official) version of history, so there are usually very few claims for human remains of European settlers.
But if grave of your grand-grand-grand father would be eventually found, you have right to prevent him to became an object of scientific study and rebury him.
Well, I am an archaeologist... and every-time I excavate a grave I deal with serious moral problems.
But archaeology today (real one, not fancy stories like this one) is mainly about saving graves from bulldozers. The only dilemma we face in reality is weather ancient ground will be excavated by archaeologist (which treat and study human remains with respect and share the knowledge) or destroyed by capital driven bulldozers, preparing ground for new shopping mall.
Slashdot Mirror
Material culture (lithic industry in this case) commonly associated with the "later Ancients" (e.g. Neanderthals) is called "Mousterian" and was widespread in Middle East and Europe between 250-200 Ka and 30 Ka. It is based on flake technology and consists of mainly scrapers, denticulates and points, which are often made in "levalois" technique. It doesn't include any bone tools (bone points are typical Aurignacian tool). There is a striking (cognitive) difference between Chatelperonronian and Aurignacian on one side (which use blade technology) and Mousterian on the other. Since Chatelperronan material culture was found together with Neanderthal burials (cave Sant-Cesaire) it is now widely thought that Chatelperronian industry is handiwork of Ancients. However, this transittion in technology is not evident in other aspects of material culture. Chatelperronian sites have same nest-like organisation of space as Mousterian and are in striking contrast to the Aurignacien campsites (with huts, structures etc.). It is possible that the reason behind Mousterian-Chatelperronian technological (and cognitive?) transition is imitation rather than invention.
Your right to undisturbed grave is granted by law -- if not by moral standards of people who might disturb it, of course (in my experience most people deal with human remains graves ... with respect and fear).
But I am talking here mainly about burial places that were lost, forgotten and buried under modern sediments -- burials under modern playgrounds, streets, buildings... When they are eventually discovered (usually during earthworks of some kind) and excavated, local indigenous groups claim right to human remains found there and deny archaeologists right to study and display them in museums. Main motivation of indigenous groups is -- at least in my opinion -- is to assert their right to create their own history and not being forced with White/Western/European/Official one.
On the other hand, descendants of "white Europeans" are usually the one who are in position to write "official" (or White/Western/European/Official) version of history, so there are usually very few claims for human remains of European settlers.
But if grave of your grand-grand-grand father would be eventually found, you have right to prevent him to became an object of scientific study and rebury him.
Well, I am an archaeologist ... and every-time I excavate a grave I deal with serious moral problems.
But archaeology today (real one, not fancy stories like this one) is mainly about saving graves from bulldozers. The only dilemma we face in reality is weather ancient ground will be excavated by archaeologist (which treat and study human remains with respect and share the knowledge) or destroyed by capital driven bulldozers, preparing ground for new shopping mall.
However, I do believe that right of indigenous societies to leave their dead undisturbed -- which in consequence means that they have right to their own past, not "scientific" one -- should be respected.