PHOTO PROVIDED BY THE GRAND COUNCIL OF THE WABAN-AKI NATION, LA TRIBUNE ARCHIVES
The Grand Council of the Waban-Aki Nation noted at the end of October that an archaeological site of importance to the W8banaki Nation located on the campus of Bishop’s University, in Estrie, had been the subject of looting.
In recent days, several media have reported that a looting operation has taken place on a culturally important site for the W8banaki Nation (Abenaki), site of gatherings, exchanges and burials. Witness site of past occupations, inscribed in the memories of ancestors for several generations. The latter is located on the Bishop’s University campus1.
When such acts are committed, it is particularly confronting. It is difficult not to think that even in death, Aboriginal peoples have a secondary importance, especially by the fact that the Aboriginal burial sites do not enjoy any special protection from either the provincial or the federal level.
In the context of this situation, it should first be noted that comfort has been found in all the respect and the very embodiment of the relationship that Bishop’s University has developed over time with the Nation. They listened to us and heard us sincerely. The University recognized some time ago that its campus is located in the w8banaki territory and it behaved in a consistent manner to the recognition then carried out. It has also undertaken to carry out increased surveillance of the premises in order to prevent looters from carrying out additional operations.
Does the term pillager shock you? In Quebec, the Cultural Heritage Law supervises the various archaeological works that can be carried out. Article 68 of this same law stipulates that: “No one may carry out excavations or surveys on a building for the purpose of searching for archaeological goods or sites without having previously obtained an archaeological research permit from the Minister and having paid the fees. fees established by government regulation for the study of his permit application. “ 2 Thus, a person without such a permit cannot be considered, in my opinion, other than a looter.
Looting is a common act, even trivialized, where there is a notable laxity in the application of the law. These are not isolated acts or unique to the W8banaki Nation.
Many looters across the province proceed without scruple to strip the collective wealth that is the archaeological heritage, regardless of the nature of the sites targeted. For many of them, these are only additional objects to add to their collection or intended for the black market without regard to the destruction of the different contexts in which these same objects are found. Even less with a certain consideration for the indigenous peoples for whom it is the very past of our ancestors that is stolen from us – the one that is, most of the time, not written in the various history textbooks.
The photos of artifacts collected are circulating happily on various websites, without any embarrassment, for lack of real consequences. Even once notified of the recurring presence of looters in certain specific places, the Ministry of Culture and Communications only takes note. Why such lightness in the protection granted to heritage, whether it is indigenous or not?
Did the person (s) who carried out the acts on the Bishop’s site know the value of the site to the W8banaki Nation? In the absence of certainty to this effect, it seems to me possible to let the doubt hover, although this does not in any way forgive the actions taken. However, if these same people had followed the terms of the law, they would have had to seek consent from Bishop’s, considering that the site is located on his private property. The University would then have informed the Nation of this potential project and it would then have been very simple to send a notice that this site, due to the presence of burials, should not be the subject of any excavation.
It is truly thanks to collaborations with various landowners that the Nation ensures a certain protection on the various burial sites, because neither the Cultural Heritage Law nor the Interment and Exhumation Act, for example, do not grant special protection status to these burial sites.
Thus, in the absence of various commitments with individuals, there is no guarantee that these sites will receive any consideration.
In this era of reconciliation, would it not be the time to open up the various laws and provide that the resting places of the ancestors of the various indigenous peoples can benefit from the respect that should be theirs, even if these burials are not in places? cemeteries? It seems to me that we should not have to convince of the need for such protection.
Wliwni (said to himself ole-oné), Thank you!
Wli nanawalmezi! Take good care of yourself !