Statistics from Altmetric.com
If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.
The Viewpoint article expressed the feelings of unease often encountered at the display of human corpses in museums, whether relating to prehistoric or recent times. The reasons frequently stem from what is seen as a lack of respect for the remains of another human being. In this instance, the underlying concerns are that the corpses are displayed naked, along with lack of consent from anyone with an interest in them. While these are legitimate queries, ethical interests extend further afield to include whether the corpses are identifiable, are prehistoric or recent, and the existence of living descendants. Additional interests include the uses to which corpses are put, namely, research, teaching and/or public displays.
In recent years, it has become commonplace to hear of human remains that had been held for many years by universities or museums being repatriated to indigenous people groups in America, Australia and New Zealand for subsequent reburial.1 ,2 However, the debate regarding the ethical uses to which dead bodies may be put has taken a surprising turn in recent years with the extremely popular, highly publicised, public displays of dissected and plastinated whole body cadavers.3
Over the years, most people have had few misgivings looking at the remains of prehistoric individuals, or Egyptian mummies.i Attitudes towards viewing mummies have been shaped by the perception that prehistoric remains are located outside our immediate social relationships, and so, have often been considered as anatomical objects rather than the remains of people-now-dead. In other words, their anonymity appears to protect both the corpses …
↵iA recent opinion survey for English Heritage shows that nine tenths of the public are comfortable with displays of human skeletal material, albeit at differing levels, and of remains of differing ages.4
Contributors Both authors contributed equally to the writing of this manuscript.
Competing interests None.
Provenance and peer review Commissioned; internally peer reviewed
Read the full text or download the PDF:
Other content recommended for you
- In what ways can human skeletal remains be used to understand health and disease from the past?
- To see for myself: informed consent and the culture of openness
- Anatomy’s dark past
- Commercial tobacco and indigenous peoples: a stock take on Framework Convention on Tobacco Control progress
- Stored human tissue: an ethical perspective on the fate of anonymous, archival material
- Why does it matter how we regulate the use of human body parts?
- Anatomy Art: Fascination beneath the Surface
- An urgent call to collect data related to COVID-19 and Indigenous populations globally
- James Bernard Bourke
- Indigenous and non-Indigenous people experiencing homelessness and mental illness in two Canadian cities: A retrospective analysis and implications for culturally informed action