Man Charged With Trying to Sell 200-year-old Hawaiian Skull on eBay

[NewsBot]

{br}Sale of Hawaiian skull draws federal charge (http://www.allheadlinenews.com/cgi-bin/news/news.cgi?id=4378908534){br}honoluluadvertiser.com - Sep 9 2004 15:48:13 GMT{br}{br}This article was posted automatically. Comments are welcome!

[adrian]

From KHNL News 8's web site (http://www.khnl.com/Global/story.asp?S=2279349)


LOS ANGELES (AP) - A California man was charged today with breaking a federal law by trying to sell the skull of a Hawaiian native born 200 years ago.

According to the criminal complaint, Jerry David Hasson is accused of violating the Archaeological Resources Protection Act Authorities contend he put the skeletal remains on sale on eBay in February, claiming the warrior died on Maui in the 1790's.

On the site, Hasson claimed he found the skull and other remains at a guarded excavation location on Kaanapali Beach in 1969.

After the skull was placed on eBay, a member of the Native Hawaiian group Hui Malama I Na Kupuna O Hawaii Nei warned Hasson that selling the skull was a violation of federal law.

Prosecutors say Hasson was advised to terminate the sale and turn the skull over to the group for ceremonial reburial.

Hasson was caught when an undercover agent with the Bureau of Indian Affairs arranged to buy the skull.

[Ailina]

From KHNL News 8's web site (http://www.khnl.com/Global/story.asp?S=2279349)
Ugh. That's horrible. Exploitation at its worst.

[Albert]

I think the most peculiar thing is, who on earth would want to buy it??!!

[Ailina]

I think the most peculiar thing is, who on earth would want to buy it??!!
To be honest, if I had no morals, and if I were a millionaire, I'd buy it. I appreciate "pieces of history" like that (no pun intended). And it's symbolic to me. From what I understand, the ancient Hawaiians kept the bones of their ancestors for mana. If it were within my value system, I could see keeping the bones of my ancestors for sentimental reasons.

But I'm not Hawaiian, and to me, cremation is a more loving and humane gesture. And I'm sure most potential buyers of that particular skull saw it as novelty. Less than honorable motivations, I assume.

[adrian]

And your wondering why Hawaiians are so angry when something bad happens to them.

Hawaiians have to preserve their heritage, as they're kind is dying with all of the other races taking over Hawaii.

I'd be pissed too, if someone was selling a part of my ancestor's body.

[Miulang]

This same struggle occurs everywhere in the world. Wherever there are indigenous people whose cultures have existed for centuries, there will always be "collectors" who find that owning the bones of another person from that culture to be "cool". Up here in Wakinekona, the Native Americans are duking it out with the feds now over some bones that are called "Kennewick Man" because they represent some of the oldest human bones found in this area. The feds want to put it in some museum; the natives just want to rebury the bones.

The people who buy these human artifacts are just as guilty as the ones who are trying to sell them; neither side has the sensitivity to acknowledge that these bones belonged to someone's relatives. They are just commodities to be sold to the highest bidder.

Kimo said once that most of the best Hawaiian artifacts can no longer be located in Hawaii. The best Haida totem poles no longer are located in the Queen Charlotte Islands, the list goes on and on...

Miulang :(

[Ailina]

Kimo said once that most of the best Hawaiian artifacts can no longer be located in Hawaii.
That is a terrible tragedy. I hope in the future, there's a concerted effort to locate artifacts and bring them back to Hawai'i, where they belong. A little pressure and a lot of publicity might convince some of the "holders" to relinquish.

[Albert]

"That is a terrible tragedy. I hope in the future, there's a concerted effort to locate artifacts and bring them back to Hawai'i, where they belong."

This reminds me of the "Elgin Marbles", the frieze from the Greek Parthenon which have been in the British Museum for a very long time. They are much safer there than they would have been in Greece. And such things belong to all humankind, not just to those at the place of origin.

Should the Louvre return "Mona Lisa" to Italy because it was painted there?

What's the point of sticking "artifacts" back in a cave on the Big Island when if they were in the Bishop Museum they might do a much better job of educating young local people about their heritage?

[Miulang]

What's the point of sticking "artifacts" back in a cave on the Big Island when if they were in the Bishop Museum they might do a much better job of educating young local people about their heritage?

Nonhuman artifacts are one thing; human bones are another. Would you want granny's bones displayed in some museum? Many cultures within the last century or so actually did start producing "commercial artifacts" which had little religious or other significant meaning except to be used in trade. There's nothing wrong with museums owning these kinds of things, because these still can teach people about a culture. But for collectors to keep icons of religious significance or human remains is not respecting the cultures from which the artifacts came.

Miulang