Ethics in Osteoarchaeology

While the term “ethic” has variable definitions by different au-thors, what they share in common is a sense that it provides asystem of accepted beliefs that control behavior, based on mor-als (Peters 2013). Ethics in archaeology and anthropology isan area that has been discussed progressively more over timein recent years (González-Ruibal 2018; Turner, Wagner, andCabana 2018). This piece explores thoughts on the need for andapplication of ethical guidelines in osteoarchaeology, how theycan be helpful and constructive, but also how there might bedifferences in opinion among populations in different parts ofthe world. As for all areas of science, we need a robust set ofethics for how we should study and interpret excavated skeletalmaterial to avoid fraudulent publications or misleading claimsfrom unsound methodology or fabricated data (D'Angelo 2012;Waddington 2016). However, the elements of ethics that applyto human osteoarchaeology go far beyond those of some otherbranches of the sciences, when the focus of that osteoarchaeo-logical research is the remains of our own species (Clegg 2020;Clough 2020; Squires, Errikson, and Márquez- Grant 2020).Regarding osteoarchaeology, ethical views associated withhuman remains are generally distinct from those held about thestudy of nonhuman animals. The perspective that the remainsof our own species are different and more important to us thanare the remains of those of other mammals is one that is foundin many different populations (see for example AAPA 2003;BABAO 2019).