4th April 2009, 10:06 AM
Interesting story, but a bit of an extreme example as to why all remains should be kept-even those that are from Christian burial grounds in this country :face-confused:.
Using the excuse, that unless a person can prove a genetic link with an excavated body, that they then have no connection, puts all the onus of reburial on people who favour such an approach and not on the people who removed them from the ground.
It is almost a 'finders-keepers' attitude, 'does any one living have any claim to these bodies?,nope! so we can keep them and do what we like'.
A couple of years ago, I was on a project which turned up some bodies inside a Church,the remains were kept on-site and reburied straight away (the Vicar said a service) on backfilling of the footings trench. Using the above arguement this shoudn't have happened, and the bodies would now be residing in boxes somewhere.
The debate over reburial or retention is one that needs opening up to the whole population, and should not be confined to small interest groups to debate.
Using the excuse, that unless a person can prove a genetic link with an excavated body, that they then have no connection, puts all the onus of reburial on people who favour such an approach and not on the people who removed them from the ground.
It is almost a 'finders-keepers' attitude, 'does any one living have any claim to these bodies?,nope! so we can keep them and do what we like'.
A couple of years ago, I was on a project which turned up some bodies inside a Church,the remains were kept on-site and reburied straight away (the Vicar said a service) on backfilling of the footings trench. Using the above arguement this shoudn't have happened, and the bodies would now be residing in boxes somewhere.
The debate over reburial or retention is one that needs opening up to the whole population, and should not be confined to small interest groups to debate.