The tribes have been fighting this from the day he was found - and they got even more emphatic when evidence came to light that 1-he was older than previous "native American" ancestors, and 2-he was not genetically related to other "native American" ancestors. If they can prove (and it seems they have) that this person who was not a "native American" was here before ancestors of todays "native Americans" then their claims to being the original occupants of these lands fall apart, as does the basis for their treaties that grant them all of their special rights. Heap BIG political issue.
Yeah, I remember all of that when this was news earlier. I had also forgotten (but read on another recent thread) that Clinton allowed the site to be basically destroyed and useless for further study. I'm just so glad the courts allowed this to go forward. It would seem to me that in order for the Yakima to claim this person as an ancestor, they would have to have the bones examined/tested first, to prove their claim. Otherwise, is every bone found in the US deemed their ancester and thus not looked into?
susie
The tribes laid on the BS very thick. I thought they were going to win in court and keep KM from being examined by scientists
"If they can prove (and it seems they have) that this person who was not a "native American" was here before ancestors of todays "native Americans" then their claims to being the original occupants of these lands fall apart, as does the basis for their treaties that grant them all of their special rights."
Not really.
Regardless of who came from where, when, the United States Government, at specific times and places, signed specific contracts with specific tribes that were on the ground at that time, then. Whatever happens to shift our understanding of the timeline of settlement thousands of years prior to that time, of who came from where, nothing changes the binding legal nature of the contracts concluded by the United States Government with specific tribes, and those tribes have the rights delineated in those contracts.
The USA cannot wriggle off the hook of its own contractual obligations because of very ancient history in Indian timelines. Who Kennewick Man was and where he might have come from has precisely zero effect on the enforceability of Indian Treaties concluded between Tribe X and the US Government.
The Indians claim to the land, which the US Government recognized (which is why the Government signed the treaties in the first place) does not become "unrecognized" by the US Government no matter what is discovered about the distant origins of the Indians. Even if the original inhabitants of the Americas are found to all have been caucasian, driven out by Indians, who were in turn conquered by white settlers in the 19th Century, the contractual obligations of the United States in treaties signed by the United States with specific tribes in the 1800s remain in full force and effect.
Kennewick Man is interesting. It may change the way that some peoples look at their timeline. It changes nothing about the law or treaties at all. Indians have the rights and privileges they negotiated for in their treaties. The US Government can't get out of those treaties no matter what ancient history was.
Nah - he was just a tourist. Just ask the local "natives".
I agree. One of the reasons I really enjoy this ping list is all the evidence that the world before written history was very dynamic (like the world after the advent of written history - duh!). The Native Americans for their own political reasons don't want that history revealed.