Exhumed Bones, Digging Out Mass Graves .... Cox, M and Hunter, J. 2005. ... Taphonomy: Method, Theory, and Archaeological Perspectives, William D.
Exhumed Bones, Digging Out Mass Graves -Roopashree S Talanki I believe the Latin phrase “Mortui vivos docent” (the dead teach the living) can be applied in different fields. The past teaches us all kinds of lessons. The perception of underground hidden treasures and the mysteries they possess has always intrigued the public and the popular culture and the media has only added to this inquisitiveness, you may have seen movies like Indiana Jones, The Mummy etc., which showcases the life of an archaeologist as adventurous and exciting like fighting the Nazis, or a 3,000-year-old cursed Mummy. The reality of archaeology is that it is much more tedious, from finding the sites to getting a permit to planning the excavation to the excavation process, analysis and publishing the results. Generally, Archaeology is a subfield of Anthropology except in the U.K, India, and few other countries where they are treated as two separate fields. Anthropology is a study of the various aspects of humans and their societies in the past and the present, both do share some common ground in their research and are co-dependent. As you may know, that Forensic Anthropology is subfield within the branch of Anthropology called Biological Anthropology (earlier known as Physical Anthropology). Within Forensic Anthropology, there are two separate fields i.e., Forensic Archaeology and Forensic Taphonomy. Archaeology is one such field where the bygone man teaches us about his way of life, his food habits, his rituals and other practices, his health and nutrition and his artistic abilities. It is a field where we reconstruct the past using the material remains (i.e., pottery, foundations of long-gone structures, jewellery, burials, human and animal skeletal remains etc.,) left behind and uncovered through excavation. It has a multidisciplinary approach to the studying the various artifacts found. In Forensic archaeology, we utilise traditional archaeological methods and techniques to help us in the medico-legal investigations. Forensic archaeologists also perform the meticulous task of recovery of human remains and other evidences at the crime scenes. Besides the traditional use of archaeology in forensic death investigation i.e., the use of excavation techniques and documentation of context, archaeologists have skills regarding stratigraphy and soils, collection and conversation of artifacts and areas of special interest like Taphonomy, the use of geophysics to locate burials. Forensic archaeology also helps in reconstruction of consistent assumptions of human behaviour at the crime scenes and between the victim and the perpetrator. The use of forensic archaeology in homicides and criminal cases is associated with locating the burials, recovery of the evidence and interpreting these evidences. In human right cases, forensic archaeology is used in the search, excavation and recovery of remains associated with brutalities like mass fatality incidents, genocide, ethnic cleansing and the like. The difference between forensic archaeology and traditional archaeology is that in one the scene is more complex with the presence of law enforcement personnel, coroners, and media. Though the archaeological techniques used would take longer than other modes of recovery, it is essential in the end as mentioned in the previous paragraph, it would provide evidence to reconstruct the scene before the excavation. At the ancient sites, significant layers are usually completely buried, and in forensic scenes, the relevant layer generally includes the visible ground surface. Forensic evidence is wider and more subtle (silent witnesses like, hair, nail fragment, bodily fluids etc.,) than the artifacts recovered in ancient sites. The possibility of the presence of
biohazardous (or grenades, syringes etc.,.) material is more at forensic scenes. The concept of chain of custody is absent in traditional archaeology. One might wonder, what is the use of archaeologists in forensic cases? Archaeologists can provide knowledge and aid in a) b) c) d) e) f)
Locating buried or hidden “clandestine” remains Recovery of remains and artifacts scattered over the ground surface Excavating buried remains and artifacts Preventing post-mortem damage to the skeletal evidence Understand the post-mortem forces that may disturb the grave after it is buried Documentation of important environmental data that could be used later for the analysis of the remains or other specialists.
Search and Location of human remains Buried human remains are generally found either by accident or by identification of surface signs through a deliberate search. Forensic search is performed to locate the elements in question, but to also eliminate the areas for investigations, so that investigation can be focused elsewhere. The archaeologist could suggest different methods most appropriate to a site (example: forest areas, terrain, etc.). Search methods are usually divided into two common groups: 1. Nonintrusive or traditional 2. Intrusive Nonintrusive or traditional methods do not disrupt the ground or the soil and involves a systematic search of large surface area and includes methods such as line search, using cadaver dogs and geophysical tools such as metal detectors and ground penetrating radar (GRP). Aerial photography can also be used to locate indicators of buried human remains in cases of vast areas or hostile locations or when the terrain is inaccessible. Intrusive methods involve use of probes, shovels for digging, excavating with trowels and using a backhoe. The drawback of these techniques is, damage to forensic evidence and loss of context and associated evidence. During the search, number of clues may indicate the presence of human remains. These are known as surface indicators and they reflect the physical and chemical changes to the surface. Some of them are: i.
ii.
iii. iv. v.
Disturbed soil with different texture and colour from the adjacent soil- soil in the pit is enriched by the decomposition of the body and the aeriation of the soil during the inhumation process which results in a darkened or stained soil. Depressions-as a result from settling and compaction of the burial pit over time. There may be a secondary slump near the centre of the pit of the depressing which may be the result of the collapse of the thoracic cavity. Mounds of soils, rocks, vegetation or trash Areas of burning Discrete area with unusual plant growth (weed pioneers colonize the newly disturbed soil)
vi. vii.
Partially buried clothing, tarps or carpets Exposed artifacts or bones.
Archaeological Recovery of the human remains Archaeological recovery is much more than digging up the remains with shovels, a controlled recovery of the remains is planned to increase the acquisition of information and evidence that will be helpful to the case. A careful documentation of observation, measurement, mapping and photography, is kept, since archaeology is a destructive process in nature. Archaeologists are usually required to be flexible, since not all crimes are the same. The recovery of remains can either be from surface or from clandestine grave. A good archaeological recovery will: a. Demarcate the stratigraphy of the site: Soils are subdivided into stratigraphic layers which can be identified by their colour, texture, grain size and composition. An archaeologist can determine the original layering and can help in reconstructing the series of events that disturbed it. Special disturbances, like animal activity, construction, uprooted tree etc., are called features. b. Recovering all the evidences: Small bones and teeth are sometimes left behind by an untrained eye even during cleaning which cling to dirt and debris which makes the recovery process more challenging. Usually, soil and other debris are sieved through a 1/4’’ wire mesh. c. Document the provenience of all evidence: Provenience refers to the coordinate location of an item’s 3-dimensional space, reflecting its latitude (north-south location), longitude (east-west location) and vertical position (depth or elevation), as measured in meters and centimetres. d. Determining the evidence: An item that is still in the same position since its deposition is said to be in situ. Forces that move the items out of a position (e.g., animal activity, human activity, natural forces) must be explained and understood. e. Limit the post-mortem damage to the remains: Uncontrolled methods of excavation or excavation by inexperienced personnel with shovels can damage and fragment the fragile bones. The later identification process by the anthropologist can be made less difficult, if the excavation is conducted carefully with small tools like trowels, spoons, wooden picks. Stages of recovery and excavation Some of the steps involved in the recovery of buried or scattered are as follows: a) Establish a datum and construct a reference grid: Evaluate any limitations on recovery (e.g., landscape, weather, personnel and equipment needed, time etc.,) and plan adaptation of the archaeological methods of recovery. A datum is a fixed point near the scene from which all measurements of level and contour are taken (example: large tree, corner of a building etc.,). It is reference point used for vertical and horizontal measurement. Datum is used for mapping surface levels and evidence in the recovery area. A subdatum is a post placed near the remains at a known distance from the datum; line running from east-west, or north-south are known as baselines. A reference gird is constructed from the subdatum or baseline and over the site, using stakes, surveyor’s chaining pins, and strings. This serves to coordinate all subsequent collection and
b)
c)
d)
e)
excavation activities. This is subdivided into square units measuring 1 meter to a side and numbered in a systematic manner (Nawrocki, 1996). Identifying and examining the Burial cut: Using rakes and trowels, all loose debris (leaves, sticks, trash) and vegetation from the surface is removed. Once removed, the scattered evidence can be recovered and the edges of the any features is defined (Nawrocki, 1996) . Excavating the burial feature: The disturbed soil covering the remains is systematically removed and screened. Excavation is done with trowels, spoons, wooden picks and sometimes shovels are used. Bones and artifacts are left in place until everything has been exposed to preserve the posture of the body and the relationship of any associated evidence such as wrapping around the remains, containers or any other materials (Nawrocki, 1996). Collection of remains: Bones and artifacts are collected in an organised fashion and bagged. Provenience information is recorded directly on the sack as well as in a master log listing all evidence as it is encountered (Nawrocki, 1996). Final clean up: After the primary evidence has been recovered, soil beneath the remains is to be scraped down with trowels and flat-edges shovels and screened to recover any remaining items. A metal detector may be used to sweep for hidden objects (Nawrocki, 1996).
Mass graves: Normally, burial of human remains is a common cultural means of disposal. Human burials can also result from natural factors like animal caching, sheet wash, leaf fall or various mass phenomena like avalanche, earthquakes, floods, slides etc. Manmade mass burials occur under extraordinary circumstances, when they are deemed necessary for humanitarian or sanitation purpose. Burial is a common ground, extra-legal advantage to cover up both human rights abuses and war crimes (Haglund, 2002). These victims in contemporary clashes, to some extent, are not fighters, but civilians. Conflicts fuelling these killings range broadly including declared war between nations, nondeclared border clashes, struggles between ethnic or political entities within a country, or dirty wars of repression. These type of mass graves is not a new phenomenon, but since past few decades their forensic interest has been on the rise, starting with Argentina, Guatemala, Iraqi Kurdistan, Ukraine, and El Salvador (Haglund, 2002). There is no definite understanding on the minimum number of individuals (MNI) that comprise a mass grave. One definition of mass grave is that it is a grave containing two or more bodies that are in contact with each other (Mant, 1987). The definition given by the UN Special Rapporteur infers that a mass grave as a location where three or more victims of extra-judicial, summary, or uninformed executions, not having died in combat or armed confrontation. However, this definition serves the Tribunal’s legal concerns regarding how the victims died. Another definition suggests mass grave contains at least half dozen individuals (Skinner, 1987). A mass grave involves remains in contact with each other, this contact creates a unique grave environment in which the rate and character of decomposition are different from the patterns in graves containing a single individual (Haglund, 2002). There are multiple reasons for exhumation and investigation of contemporary mass graves: 1.
In the human rights context, is to collect account and physical evidence that will aid in establishing accountability for those people involved in this conflict and bring them to justice.
2. In the process of evidence collection to identify the victims for repatriation. 3. Investigative process creates a trail of documents that should stand up to historical revisionists. 4. To expose the atrocities to world opinion and establish an international standard to prevent such crimes in the future. 5. Incentive for investigation of mass grave involves a basic dignity for the victims and for human life. A detailed anatomy, concepts and terminology of mass graves will be given during the workshop. A few case studies involving mass graves and exhumation will be presented. Suggested reading: • • •
•
•
•
•
•
• •
Cox, M and Hunter, J. 2005. “Forensic Archaeology Advances in Theory and Practice”. Routledge. Heron, C. Hunter, J. Martin, A. 2015. Studies in Crime: An Introduction to Forensic Archaeology. Routledge. Haglund, W. H. 2001. Archaeology and Forensic Death investigations. Historical Archaeology, Vol. 35, No. 1, Archaeologists as Forensic Investigators: Defining the Role, pp 26-34 Cristina Cattaneo, Daniele Gibelli, Dominic Salsarola. 03 Aug 2016, Forensic Anthropology and Archaeology from: Handbook of Forensic Anthropology and Archaeology. Routledge. Peterson, K. 2008. The Use of Forensic Archaeology to Investigate Genocide. A senior project submitted in Partial fulfilment of the requirement for the Degree of Bachelor of science in Archaeological Studies. University of Wisconsin- La Crosse. Stephen P. Nawrocki. 1996. An outline of Forensic Archeology. University of Indianapolis Archeology & Forensics Laboratory Natasha, P and Sibun, L. 2013. Forensic Archaeology. The Oxford Handbook of the Archaeology of the Cotemporary Word, Graves-Brown, P and Harrison, R. (eds). Oxford University Press, Oxford. William D. Haglund. 2002 Recent Mass Graves, An Introduction. Advances in Forensic Taphonomy: Method, Theory, and Archaeological Perspectives, William D. Haglund, Marcella H. Sorg (eds). CRC Press. Genocide: Worse Than War (Documentary) Ghosts of Rwanda (Documentary)
