The Human Nature of Genocide:

Exploring the Professional Potential of Human Rights Archaeology

Molly Kaplan
December, 2013
Vassar College
Molly Kaplan
Human Rights Archaeology
The Human Nature of Genocide:
Exploring the Professional Potential of Human Rights Archaeology

Abstract: While the end of World War II brought global recognition to systematic human
rights violations and the crime of genocide, the second half of the twentieth century has
nonetheless been characterized by an increase in these atrocities. Having evolved since the
1980s, human rights archaeology focuses on the excavation of mass graves from war crimes and
genocide. Archaeological excavation serves to lessen the impact of these disasters by
establishing accountability, repatriating remains, and compiling an account of events for the
world to remember throughout the course of history. The case study of the 1943 Katyn Massacre
exemplifies how archaeology can serve to mitigate conflicting legal and humanitarian
investigative goals, especially in terms of public memory. Overall, challenges to human rights
archaeology and mass-grave excavation include disorganized decision-making and insufficient
logistical support due to a lack of investigative structures. Professionalization of human rights
archaeology at the institutional level will facilitate more efficient investigations and more
comprehensive accounts of international atrocities. As demonstrated by the Argentine case study
of Sector 134, this kind of organization and support, especially in terms of pre-excavation
analysis, provide a clearer understanding of burial patterns and victim profiles. Once established
as a network of teams, human rights archaeology will be better equipped to reveal broader
patterns of genocide, and thus expose the modus operandi behind global atrocities. This work not
only provides closure to victims and their loved ones, but has the potential to prevent these kinds
of anthropogenic disasters from happening in the future.

Historical Overview
While the end of the Holocaust and World War II brought global recognition to

systematic human rights violations and the crime of genocide, the second half of the twentieth

century has nonetheless been characterized by an increase in these atrocities. In 1948 the UN

Convention on the Crime of Genocide officially codified “genocide” following Raphael

Lemkin’s definition as: the intentional mass eradication of the personal security, liberty, health,

dignity, and lives of targeted national group members (Feirestein; Ferllini, “Human Rights

Violations;” Gould). In a league beyond homicide or war killings, genocide and its associated

terrorism are widely understood as being uniquely modern phenomena—although there is some

debate as to whether certain prehistoric cases constitute genocide (Feierstein; Bower). As

motivated by race, religion, territorial expansion, and political control, genocide at its core is an

2
Molly Kaplan
Human Rights Archaeology
extremist form of social reorganization that is rationalized by its perpetrators as a legitimate

means to an end (Ferllini, “Human Rights Violations;” Feierstein).

In line with the notion that genocide is a modern crime, there has been a global increase

in the frequency and magnitude of extralegal killings, torture, and other human rights violations

since these crimes were officially recognized in 1948 (Ferllini, “Human Rights Violations;”

Gould). The rise in genocidal practices has been met, however, with international standards that

provide a legal and moral basis for investigating mass executions and violations, as well as

tribunals that seek to compile historical records of the truth (Raino, et al.; Ferllini, “Human

Rights Violations”). A parallel development of human rights NGOs (such as Amnesty

International, Human Rights Watch, Physicians for Human Rights) has further led to the

excavation of mass graves as a primary way to investigate genocide (Ferllini, “Human Rights

Violations;” Ferllini, “Forensic Anthropological Investigations”).

Professional archaeologists have been involved in mass-grave excavations since the

1980s. For several decades medical doctors or military personal were called upon to supervise

the openings of mass graves, the first of which took place in the Katyn Forest of Smolensk,

Russia in 1943—before the Genocide Convention had yet convened. Setting the precedence for

future mass grave work, Katyn marks one of the first empirical approaches to war crime

investigations that incorporates archaeological methods (Haglund; Gould; Klonowski). Although

subsequent international excavations would continue to identify missing World War II soldiers,

it was not until 1984 in Argentina that forensic archaeology and anthropology would be officially

assimilated into mass-grave human rights investigations. After the downfall of Argentina’s

military dictatorship in 1983, the Argentina National Commission on the Disappeared Persons

(CONADEP) issued a nation-wide search for the bodies of the 30,000 individuals that had gone

3
Molly Kaplan
Human Rights Archaeology
missing during this regime. Initial exhumation work, however, was crude and sloppy, and public

outcry ultimately ushered-in a delegation of forensic scientists led by Dr. Clyde Snow. In order

to fully carry out the massive task of finding and recovering the “disappeared” buried primarily

in public cemeteries throughout the country, Dr. Snow founded the Argentine Team of Forensic

Anthropology (EAAF) as a permanent investigative entity. The work that this team has been

conducting ever since has pioneered human rights archaeology around the world (Ferllini,

“Human Rights Violations;” Haglund; Bernardi & Fondebrinder).

Indeed, mass grave excavations throughout the late 1980s and 1990s were characterized

by a growing utilization of forensic archaeology. Throughout recent years, members of the

EAAF and its offshoot teams in Chile and Guatemala have been deployed to excavate in

genocide-stricken nations such as Yugoslavia and Rwanda (Ferllini, “Human Rights

Violations”). The most common trend in current human rights investigations, however, is for

governments or NGOs to assemble temporary teams of western experts to aid in excavations

with varying degrees of involvement. Since the early 1990s archaeologists have contributed to

human rights excavations in Brazil, Ethiopia, Peru, Haiti, Zimbabwe, Sri Lanka and more

(Haglund; Ferllini, “Human Rights Violations”). Most recently, the evidence recovered by US

forensic archaeologists on the Muthanna Kurdish Massacre in Iraq was used to convict and

ultimately execute dictator Sadaam Hussein (Pringle). Yet, with the exceptions of the Latin

American teams, archaeological excavation of mass graves is occurring on a case-by-case basis

as mandated by a an array of institutions, and this has led to very serious problems (Ferllini,

“Forensic Anthropological Investigations”). In 1991 the UN vaguely outlined procedures for

conducting mass grave excavations in “The Minnesota Protocol,” but without further

standardization, human rights investigations remain quite disorganized (Haglund; Hunter &

4
Molly Kaplan
Human Rights Archaeology
Simpson). As seen with the EAAF, human rights archaeology as a professionalized discipline

has the incredible potential to impact genocide investigations around the world. Especially with

continual technological advancement that can aid in excavation and identification—such as

electronic mapping and DNA—human rights archaeology will continue to grow, but only if there

is more bureaucratic work to better standardize and organize this field.

Mitigating Effects of Human Rights Archaeology

Archaeology, with its empirically credible and detailed methods, has had significant

positive impacts when applied towards mass grave investigations. In the fall-out of genocide and

corrupt civil wars, there are several different parties to whom mass-grave excavations must

answer, including survivors, victims’ families, the accused perpetrators, and the unofficial

historical record that constitutes public memory (often dubbed the “court of history”). Under

ideal circumstances, the mass-grave work of archaeology has the potential to address the needs

of each of these involved parties, particularly the court of history, and, thus, has the potential to

mitigate human rights disasters in several ways (Gould; Haglund):

Establish accountability: The records and remains recovered by forensic archaeologists

are often used in legal proceedings seeking justice for the victims of genocide. Archeology’s

thorough documentation of mass grave contexts must therefore hold up credibly under a court of

law. As an objective account of events leading to the formation of a mass grave, the evidence

provided by archaeologists in some cases may contribute to either the acquital or conviction of

accused perpetrators.

Identify/repatriate remains: Forensic archaeologists and anthropologists carefully remove

all human remains and associated objects. One of the primary roles of human rights

archaeologists is to assemble information that will help identify victims in order to repatriate

5
Molly Kaplan
Human Rights Archaeology
remains to families and communities. The personal effects recovered from mass graves greatly

aid in identification, in addition to helping families achieve closure (Gould; Sanford)

Establish an account of events to withstand history: While archaeology’s credibility

allows it to stand up under legal scrutiny, this same credibility permits that its archived accounts

of mass killings also withstand the test of time. Oftentimes human rights legal proceedings do

not yield sufficient justice for all, but archaeology’s accurate and complete records of the events

of genocide are what best survive in public memory and combat revisionist attempts to rewrite

history (as will be discussed below) (Gould; Haglund; Cerone).

Expose atrocities to the world: In line with the notion of the court of history,

archaeology’s ability to reveal the patterned nature of human rights crimes can facilitate

international standards that hopefully prevent these kinds of crimes in the future. As the effect

that may have the most drastic impacts, exposing these patterns of genocide to the world may

serve to diminish the power of perpetrators’ strategies and thus diminish the human impact of

these future disasters (Gould; Haglund).

As the following case study of the Katyn Massacre excavation demonstrates, while

archaeology has the potential to mitigate the impacts of human rights crimes in all of these listed

ways, doing so is not always easy. Because the legal priorities of mass grave excavation often

conflict with aims to repatriate remains, archaeology is therefore best able to balance these goals

by addressing the court of history. Especially in regards to political tensions in the aftermath of

mass executions, archaeology’s ability to compile objective, comprehensive accounts of events

has the potential to “set the record straight” in a way that survives throughout long-term memory.

Case Study: Katyn Massacre, 1940

(Gould)

6
Molly Kaplan
Human Rights Archaeology
The Katyn Massacre in Smolensk, Russia marked the first official opening of a mass

grave with the goal of investigating war crimes (Haglund; Ferllini “Human Rights Violations”).

In response to Nazi propaganda claiming that the Soviets had unlawfully killed thousands of

Polish officers in the Katyn Forest in 1940, an Independent International Commission of forensic

medicine specialists was assembled in 1943 to investigate the massacre. If Nazi claims were

found to be true, this could have greatly weakened Allie and Soviet bonds in the midst of World

War II, which is why the Independent Commission was established to lead investigations with

both Polish and German teams.

Excavations of eight mass graves in Katyn uncovered 4,153 bodies. The bodies were

found, face down, tangled in layers of ten to twelve individuals, ranging from six to eleven feet

deep. Those in the middle of the graves were better preserved than the skeletonized bodies on the

outer edges (which is a phenomenon that would later be called the feather edge effect )(Gould;

Haglund). All of the victims had been shot in the back of the head, and most were immobilized

with rope of Soviet manufacturing. There was evidence of torture, including an imprint of a

Soviet bayonet on one of the victim’s faces.

Personal effects recovered from the graves primarily included clothing and documents,

while valuables appeared to have been taken by those responsible for the killings. The presence

of Soviet newspapers aided with dating the graves’ formation, in addition to broadly categorizing

the victims as potentially educated professionals. As confirmed by personal documents, hundreds

of doctors, surgeons, lawyers, engineers, and teachers were among the victims—all of whom

were Polish soldiers, as indicated by their uniforms. Wooden cigarette cases with the engraved

name Kozielsk identified the nearby concentration camp as the probable holding location of these

victims prior to execution.

7
Molly Kaplan
Human Rights Archaeology
Along with the newspapers, the most recent date on a recovered diary, May 6, 1940,

placed the massacre as likely occurring in the spring of 1940. The lack of insects on the bodies

reinforced that the killings took place in the cooler season of March-May, while the

dendrochronology of tree saplings suggested that the trees had been transplanted onto the graves

three years earlier (in 1940). This 1940 date of the massacre was crucial, as German invasion

into this part of Russia did not occur until August 1941 and therefore indicated that the Soviets

were likely the ones responsible for the massacre.

Addressing the archaeological goals of mass grave excavation, the case of Katyn

exemplifies both the importance of forensic human rights investigations along with the political

and ethical complexities of these cases. In terms of legal accountability, Katyn is an instance in

which wartime politics ultimately prohibited the goal of perpetrator justice. In 1944, when

investigators established the crucial 1940 date of the massacre, the Allie response was to ignore

the case in order to maintain relations with the Soviets and bring World War II to a close.

Though the investigation clearly implicated Soviet forces, the Polish government was unable to

seek legal justice, and it was in fact Geobbles from the Nazi regime who was later tried for the

massacre (although these charges were eventually dropped) (Gould).

In the case of Katyn, excavation was to some extent able to mitigate the impacts of the

massacre in terms of victim identification and repatriation. Of the 4,153 bodies found, 2,914

were identified. Yet, even when a thorough account of the events had been established, there was

still lingering tension due to the legal injustice and political conflicts around this case. It took 32

years of debate before a Katyn memorial with the 1940 date was erected (in 1976) (Gould). As

each stage of this case exemplifies, the external goals dictating mass-grave investigations are not

only highly charged, but they can often be at odds with one another.

8
Molly Kaplan
Human Rights Archaeology

Conflicting Humanitarian and Legal Goals

An inherent challenge to all human rights investigations is the complex array of motives

and needs of the various stakeholders. In many cases the goals of the legal justice system in

particular do not necessarily allign with the goals of the victims' families. When prosecutors

mandate mass grave excavations to gather evidence for a criminal trial, their primary focus is to

understand the death event and the actions of the perpetrators involved. Instead of identifying

and repatriating all remains, determining the manner and cause of death can be done by

excavating a relatively small sample of the mass grave (Ferllini, “Forensic Anthropological

Investigations;” Hunter & Simpson). While this strategy may be efficient, this leaves many

without answers or closure. Trials themselves are also often slow, frustrating processes that do

not provide significant justice (Gould). Because of the scale and complexity of the atrocities, it

can take decades to assemble evidence and still may be impossible to know which oppressors

were responsible for which aspects of the crime (Cerone). By the time a case is brought to trial,

“witnesses will be dead, otherwise incapacitated and scattered,” and the perpetrators that are

found guilty usually represent about a handful of those actually involved (Cerone, 24; Gould).

Indeed, many survivors and victims’ families have no interest in legal justice. For them it

is often much more important for their loved ones and their personal effects to be recovered. In

certain cultures women are unable to remarry if there is no confirmation of a husband’s death,

while other families will not receive insurance payments or restitution (Hunter & Simpson). It is

important to note, however, that closure may mean drastically different things to different

people: some survivors of traumas such as genocide want to be rid of all reminders, including the

personal effects of loved ones, while others experience catharsis when visiting grave excavations

9
Molly Kaplan
Human Rights Archaeology
(Sanford). It is crucial for investigators to be mindful of these opposing needs of the community,

which is why answering to the broader “court of history” may be the best mitigating role for

archaeology.

Archaeology’s Role in the Court of History

The third, often unrecognized party involved in human rights disasters is the public

memory that forms after an event has occurred and proceeds to endure and evolve over time.

Along with answering to victims, families, and the court of law, mass-grave archaeology best

answers to this social, historical record, and arguably serves as the best antidote to the revisionist

politics that often develop in the aftermath of an atrocity (Gould).

The "anonymity of victimhood" is one such common historical practice that refers to the

intentional forgetting of victims that occurs after genocide when politics and social biases work

to actively blur the truth (Gould; Feierstein). Because the intent of genocide is to eliminate

victims on account of their membership to a particular group, manipulating the way an event is

publicly remembered is often a significant objective of perpetrators that serves to further justify

their actions (Cerone; Feierstein). In Argentina, for example, the term “Dirty war,” used to refer

to the large-scale political kidnappings and executions of the late 1970s, is a phrase coined by the

military dictatatorship in order to dismiss these war crimes as being casualties of a civil war that

got out of hand (Feierstein). Additionally, in cases of widespread oppression, civilians are often

forced to commit crimes or murder against their will, and yet the trend of labeling genocide

victims as "innocent" implies that these individuals are not true victims themselves (Sanford;

Feierstein). Other categorical names such as the "disappeared" or "the lost soldier" further serve

to perpetuate victim anonymity and diminish the impact of genocide and war crimes. One of the

main goals of archaeological investigation is to challenge these wide-spread myths and give a

10
Molly Kaplan
Human Rights Archaeology
voice to the victims (Gould). Through identification when possible, but primarily in terms of

compiling unbiased, comprehensive accounts of mass killing events, archaeology has the power

to greatly impact public memory.

As the strongest way to mitigate the effects of anthropogenic disasters, archaeology’s

ability to address the court of history via its scientifically based methods is how the field best

works to combat the politics of victimhood. At its core, human rights archaeology approaches the

search, excavation and recovery of mass graves with the ultimate goal of preserving context and

documenting findings. A discipline uninterested and unbiased in politics, archaeology makes

interpretations as guided by the evidence, and therefore remains sensitive to the complex roles

that people assume under genocidal circumstances (Gould). Because forensic archaeology

always must answer to the court of law, this legal credibility further permits archaeological

findings to hold up under historical scrutiny. As demonstrated in the case of Katyn, the true

account of events uncovered by archaeology is ultimately what has prevailed throughout history.

While societal healing is an incredibly complex process, these kinds of comprehensive,

permanent accounts compiled by archaeology will always be there when society is ready for

them. Apart from the individual victims affected by mass oppression, the historical record

addresses the community-at-large and should remain a priority in human rights investigations

(Gómez & Umaña). Ideally, archaeology should therefore always approach mass grave

excavations with the main goal of finding out exactly what happened, without being restrained

by political, monetary or logistical pressures—which as of now is unfortunately not the case.

Challenges and Limitations to Mass Grave Excavation

Archaeology best answers to the court of history through its commitment to preserving

context, but this is because excavation itself is inherently destructive. Tons of decision-making

11
Molly Kaplan
Human Rights Archaeology
goes into mass-grave excavation, and these decisions are largely influenced by the goals of those

mandating the investigation (Gómez & Umaña; Hunter & Simpson). Particularly in terms of the

humanitarian versus forensic priorities of human rights cases, some governments and NGOs

make the distinction between exhumation as geared toward personal identification and

excavation as collecting legal evidence for international tribunals and truth commissions (Gómez

& Umaña). Once investigative priorities have been established, there then comes the array of

preparatory work, in addition to the logistical and procedural considerations that occur

throughout the investigative process. These include everything from team formation and task

assignment, to equipment and supplies, to chain of custody and documentation (Raino, et al.;

Hunter & Simpson). Yet, despite the sensitive nature of all of the decisions required for mass

grave investigations, there is still an international lack of preparation for these kinds of tasks that

is combined with an overarching lack of basic standards and operating procedures to promote

investigative flexibility (Klonowski; Gómez & Umaña).

Organizational Structure

In general, there are no international standards mandating that archaeologists be a part of

human rights teams. In many cases this has led to untrained laborers carelessly destroying

evidence, yet, even when nations have qualified professionals, the sheer number of mass-grave

excavations is overwhelming and there is a debilitating absence of coordination (Klonowski;

Gómez & Umaña). One of the main issues for the archaeologists actually summoned to

participate in mass grave excavations is that they are not given the autonomy or authority to

make decisions, but instead must answer to those who have called upon them. These

archaeologists typically face layers of bureaucratic problems, including a lack of political

support, perpetrator custody of the graves, and a lack of a legal framework that allows them to

12
Molly Kaplan
Human Rights Archaeology
lead investigation (Bernardi & Fondebrinder). While there are a few autonomous human rights

archaeology teams such as the EAAF, generally investigations are conducted on a case-by-case,

volunteer basis with foreign experts being recruited from primarily western nations. This general

lack of professionalism in terms of organizational structure leads to an array of social and

logistical problems.

Team Dynamics

While it is an improvement that governing bodies and NGOs are increasingly importing

archaeologists to participate in mass grave excavations, there are still several downsides to the

incorporation of these predominantly foreign investigators. On the one hand, foreign experts can

provide an objective outsider’s prospective, especially when local archaeologists are few in a

region. Yet, on the other hand, these foreigners are often placed among teams without any fixed

authority, and this can cause tensions to run quite high and lead to an overall lack of cohesion.

As Eva Klonowski reports, for example, when a local pathologist in Bosnia felt encroached upon

by anthropologists, the supervising commission gave him complete control over the

investigation, and this led to oversights such as the destruction of evidence, sloppy recovery, and

the mixing up of remains in body bags (Klonowski).

Another factor to consider when importing foreign investigators is that personal health

and safety issues must always be a primary concern. Consulting forensic experts not only need to

have proper medical care and vaccinations, but they also usually require extra security in active

warzones (Ferllini, “Human Rights Violations;” Gómez & Umaña; Pringle). Furthermore, as

outsiders, foreign experts may not know the sociocultural lay of the land in terms of local

customs and attitudes towards the dead (Gómez & Umaña). This can necessitate extensive

13
Molly Kaplan
Human Rights Archaeology
training on behalf of the local authorities, and/or lead to tensions among the community. The US

in particular does not have a good reputation for respecting mass-grave victims (Pringle).

Logistical Constraints

Beyond issues of team dymanics, logistical challenges, such as stringent budgets and

unrealistic deadlines, are often an even greater hurdle for human rights ivestigations. This is

especially true in regions where basic infrastructures have been severely weakened or destroyed

(Klonowski). Along with all of the necessary equipment and lab facilities (including storage and

refrigeration) the investigators themselves also need basic ammenities such as food, water,

shelter and fuel for transport (Hunter & Simpson). Though field experts are often adaptable to

difficult circumstances, these kinds of logistical challenges can ultimately derail, if not seriously

hinder, the successful completion of an investigation.

Professionalizing Human Rights Archaeology

Further professionalizing human rights archaeology as a discipline could address a wide

array of the political and logistical obstacles mentioned above. Currently, there are too many

players participating in mass-grave excavations without any sort of organizational structure to

help dictate their investigative roles. In the way that Richard Gould emphasizes the need for a

widely-accepted “chain of command” for all types of disaster investigations, the

professionalization of human rights archaeology so too both inherently proscribes and requires

this degree of structure. On a micro level, there is a functional need within each mass grave

excavation to have some sort of a working minimum standard to facilitate basic decision-making

and logistical operations (Gould; Hunter & Simpson). Paradoxically, because archaeology is

destructive by nature, its methodologies should serve as this minimum standard, as they promote

the rigorous documentation and preservation of context and evidence. Furthermore, because it is

14
Molly Kaplan
Human Rights Archaeology
already the responsibility of forensic archaeologists to locate, recover and document remains and

artifacts, these experts should also play leading administrative roles in human rights excavations

(Gould). As of now, apart from the UN's “Minnesota Protocol” of 1991, there is no codified

piece of international legislation dictating how mass-grave investigations should be conducted; if

newer international protocols officially mandated anthropology as an integral part of mass grave

exhumations, this would hopefully spark the establishment of human rights teams around the

world in which archaeologists would be leading players (Hunter & Simpson). A network of

professionally established forensic teams across the globe would give archaeologists and

anthropologists the autonomy to carry out mass grave excavations according to their credible,

methodical standards. Without having to answer to biased governments or underfunded NGOs,

autonomous forensic teams with their own facilities, equipment and procedures would facilitate

much swifter investigations and more complete accounts for the court of history.

As a sound model for how to professionalize human rights anthropology, the Argentine

Team of Forensic Anthropology (EAAF) established by Dr. Clyde Snow in 1984, continues to

conduct local and international mass grave investigations uninhibited by many of the

bureaucratic challenges discussed above. One advantage of the EAAF is that its geographically

diverse professionals come from the same countries in which the team investigates. These

members are not faced with the tension or stigma of being foreigners because they are sensitive

to the cultural needs of communities and can often encourage local cooperation. Furthermore,

although the EAAF was first founded to investigate mass disappearances in Argentina, this team

now works to train new experts who continue to branch out across the world. Having these kinds

of global connections allows the EAAF to share information and resources, and maintain ties

with international human rights organizations. In this regard, with offshoot teams already in

15
Molly Kaplan
Human Rights Archaeology
Guatemala and Chile, the EAAF serves as a pioneer for the kind of professional global

networking of human rights archaeology in the future (Bernardi & Fondebrinder).

Beyond their wide-spread reach, the EAAF is also a great organizational model in termos

of their thorough and efficient investigative methods. For one, as an independent, non-profit

organization, the EAAF has the freedom and the resources to carry out extensive pre-excavation

research that significantly aids in investigations. As exemplified by the Argentinian case study

that follows, this kind of preoperational research—especially statistical analysis from compiled

interviews, documents, and antemortem data—greatly serves to focus mass grave investigations

and provide rich information that contributes to understanding the larger patterns of human rights

violations in general:

Case Study: Sector 134 Avellanada Cemetery, Buenos Aires

(Bernardi & Fondebrinder)

Throughout the oppressive 1976-1983 dictatorship in Argentina, it was widely reported

that many of the 30,000 “disappeared” individuals from this period were concealed in the “No

Name” (NN) graves of public cemeteries. In order to cover up these political killings and erase

them from the public memory, the military government generated thousands of death certificates

and cemetery records to account for these burials (Feierstein). Sector 134 of the Avellaneda

Cemetery in the province of Buenos Aires is one of these NN grave zones where military trucks

had been observed systematically unloading bodies throughout the late 1970s. Finally under the

request of the Prosecutor’s office in 1988, the EAAF commenced a pioneering investigation of

Sector 134. In preparation for the excavation lead anthropologists Snow and Bihurriet turned to

the “official” burial documents in order get a better sense of what (and who) this NN grave might

contain. Specifically, they conducted extensive statistical analysis of Avellanada’s cemetery

16
Molly Kaplan
Human Rights Archaeology
records from the years before and during the dictatorship to look for a shift in the biological and

traumatic profiles of the 245 NN individuals documented in Sector 134. They noticed that the

pre-dictatorship NN population consisted primarily of older men who died from natural causes

and were brought in by hospital personnel at fairly constant rates. Yet during the dictatorship

there was a significant increase in the annual number of NNs buried in Sector 134, particularly

during 1976-1979. This newer population, of primarily young people between 20 and 35 years

old, consisted of 30 percent women who had been transported by military or police personnel.

The principle cause of death in this group was gunshot wounds.

After excavating Sector 134 and uncovering 336 individuals from 19 common graves,

these statistical predictions closely matched the realities. The largest concentration (40.1%) of

the NNs found in Sector 134 was of 21-35 year-olds (135 individuals), most of whom had died

of gunshot wounds, while the next largest concentration (32.1%) were individuals over 50 years

old (108 individuals). The biological profiles of this second group corresponded closely with

those of the traditional NN population, although eleven of these older individuals did have bullet

wounds. Sector 134 clearly represented a comingling of Argentina’s “indigent” and

“disappeared” populations in support of claims that the military government had concealed

kidnapped and executed individuals by disposing of their remains in public cemeteries.

Criminal Patterns
In this case, it was both the archaeological excavation and the intensive preliminary

investigation that confirmed this concealment strategy as a criminal pattern of the Argentine

military dictatorship. Besides providing archaeologists with an idea of who would be found in

Sector 134, the statistical analysis performed by Snow and Bihurriet has larger implications for

human rights archaeology and its ability to understand patterns of large-scale criminal activity. In

17
Molly Kaplan
Human Rights Archaeology
this case, broader regional analysis of NN populations revealed similar trends to those seen in

Sector 134, particularly in the cemeteries surrounding Buenos Aires where there had been the

most reported terrorism. Additionally, studies of missing persons records compiled from across

the country further matched the demographics of the NN population in Sector 134: 30 percent of

the 10,000 disappeared individuals registered during the dictatorship were women, while 70

percent of these people were between 21-35 years-old (Bernardi & Fondebrinder). Without

needing to expend the time and resources excavating every common grave presumed to contain

disappeared individuals, investigators could see patterns indicative of the spread of military

oppression simply by examining the documentation. While excavation is needed in order to

identify the victims, this kind of analysis allowed forensic investigators to see government burial

strategies and develop a profile of the victims being targeted in these political killings.

Broadening the scope of this research could help zero-in on where specific victims may be

buried: because the victims in Argentina were primarily young people between 20-35 years,

collecting data on union, political, student, and guerilla groups near known military detention

centers could illuminate which cemeteries are the final resting places for certain victims—as well

as provide a temporal and spatial pattern for how the military swept throughout the country

(Bernardi & Fondebrinder).

The EAAF’s work in Argentina demonstrates the ways that self-sufficient forensic teams

can greatly enhance human rights excavations through complimentary research and analysis.

Especially in terms of archaeology’s goal of compiling detailed accounts of mass killing events,

extensive pre and post excavation analysis can allow investigators to truly reconstruct the modus

operandi (MO) of these crimes. Yet, in order to do these kinds of investigations, anthropological

teams need to be firmly established in the way the EAAF is. Rarely are antemortem data such as

18
Molly Kaplan
Human Rights Archaeology
missing persons reports even available for these kinds of analyses, hence the need for

international standards for centralized databases and records (Klonowski; Gómez & Umaña).

Only when human rights archaeology has global standing and support can it fulfill its maximum

potential for developing detailed accounts of crimes against humanity.

The Human Nature of Genocide: Archaeology’s True Potential

While the kind of thorough research conducted by the EAAF represents the future of

professionalized human rights archaeology, mass grave excavations already have the potential to

expose the broader human nature behind genocidal atrocities, which could greatly aid in the

prevention of these crimes. When basic archaeological methods are applied to mass grave

investigations, patterns of the perpetrators’ intentions begin to reveal themselves to where

parallels can be drawn between mass killings and human rights violations around the world. In

terms of both victim profiles and burial patterns, disclosing the strategies behind genocide and

war crimes is where archaeology has the most power to take these strategies away from

perpetrators and thus diminish the possibility of these atrocities reoccurring in the future.

As demonstrated in the case study of Argentina, each occasion of systematic killing and

repression has its own sets of goals and strategies. Yet, beyond the case-specific patterns, there

also appears to be a basic MO for human rights crimes in general, which archaeology may very

well be the best medium to reveal. Understanding the common traits shared by individuals in

mass graves is one way that anthropology can uncover what it was about these victims that

perpetrators believed merited extermination. Examining the basic biological profiles of mass

grave victims has already shown how in some cases racial origin motivates these war crimes,

while in other cases supposed political subversion on the part of young people is the driving

19
Molly Kaplan
Human Rights Archaeology
factor (Ellis; Gould). Archaeological study of how groups of people may be clustered in a grave

site further reveals patterns about the victims’ relationships to each other: in corrupt civil wars,

for example, children’s remains will often be found unassociated with mothers because these

children were most likely kidnapped as a way for regimes to terrorize civilians (Bernardi &

Fondebrinder; Ellis). In these kinds of totalitarian political killings, another pattern disclosed by

victim profiling is that the majority of abducted, tortured, and killed individuals are usually from

areas just outside of the main cities where the government desires to extend its influence

(Bernardi & Fondebrinder).

Being able to see the larger picture of who may be targeted in genocide and military

repression gives forensic archaeologists and anthropologists the potential to educate people on

their degree of risk. Understanding how certain people are targeted under oppressive

circumstances therefore may aid in future victims being better able to protect themselves.

However, it is the profounder meaning behind why these victims are targeted in the first place

that may give them solace and/or diminish the human impact of violent anthropogenic disasters.

If genocide survivors can be made aware of why they and their loved ones were seen as

threatening to the corrupt regime, maybe this awareness can aid in feelings of guilt or confusion.

While genocide seems irrational, in the perspective of the perpetrators their actions are merited

and justified; if populations understood this twisted reasoning then maybe they can better grasp

the “meaning” behind the mass death (Feierstein).

In terms of mass burials themselves, archaeologically examining their characteristics

reveals much about broader genocidal tactics. Although there is no singular definition of a “mass

grave,” analyses of the contexts of these graves, including their location, appearance, layout and

contents can tell much about their function and have already yielded several patterns behind

20
Molly Kaplan
Human Rights Archaeology
human rights crimes (Gould; Haglund). How bodies are strewn in a mass grave, for example,

reflects the intention and decision-making behind the burial. Dismemberment in particular is

strongly linked to human rights crimes—especially those that are political in nature in which

torture and/or concealment are primary tactics (Gómez & Umaña). Clandestine graves, on the

other hand, are well understood as mechanisms by which oppressors attempt to cover up their

crimes and continue to perpetuate terror. Clandestine graves are not defined by their location so

much as by their function of repressing memory and instilling fear: survivors often know where

these graves are, but are prevented from going to the site or commemorating their interred loved

ones (Gómez & Umaña). In the same way that concentration camps are public symbols of the

oppressors’ power that promote inaction through fear and guilt, clandestine graves such as the

ones in Argentina’s public cemeteries speak volumes about the psychological workings of

genocides and “dirty” wars (Feierstein; Gómez & Umaña’ Gould). Archaeologists, therefore are

not only capable of physically recognizing clandestine graves, but their work makes them able to

expose these deeper meanings and strategies behind their purpose—which speaks to the true

power of the field (Gómez & Umaña).

Conclusions

This notion of meaning in human rights crimes is where archaeology arguably has the

best ability to mitigate these disasters at the level of revealing perpetrator strategies. Along with

uncovering why certain people become victims in these cases, exposing how it is that the killers

execute their crimes and perpetuate their terror gives archaeology the power to diminish the

effectiveness of these strategies in the future. In other words, archaeology truly has the potential

21
Molly Kaplan
Human Rights Archaeology
to “study the bureaucratic machinery of repression through the layers of evidence” (Bernardi &

Fondebrinder p.213).

Yet, while archaeological investigations of mass burials can already illuminate the MOs

of genocide and human rights crimes, it is the sharing of this information with the world that will

truly serve to prevent these atrocities from reoccurring. Though educating the public about these

criminal patterns can help people at risk become more aware, it is the global recognition of the

inner workings of these crimes that will make them all the less effective. If the world is watching

and mindful of the tactics that oppressors use to eliminate and terrorize populations, the power

that comes from these strategies will be greatly diminished, as the mechanisms of fear and

coercion will have been revealed. Unfortunately there is a global hypocrisy in which human

rights violations are often committed by the same western nations that police these crimes, and,

therefore go unrecognized; but it is this kind of higher consciousness that archaeology has the

influence to generate through its dedication to the court of history. By continuing to investigate

mass graves and becoming more professionalized as a field, human rights archaeology has the

potential to affect great change in the world in terms of preventing and mitigating these horrific

human rights disasters.

22
Molly Kaplan
Human Rights Archaeology

References
Bernardi, Patricia and Fondebrider, Luis. 2007. Forensic Archaeology and the Scientific
Documentation of Human Rights Violations: An Argentinian Example from the Early
1980s. In Forensic Archaeology and Human Rights Violations, Ferllini, Roxana (Ed.).
Springfield, Illinois: Thomas Books, pp. 205-232

Bower, Bruce. 2010. Massacre at Sacred Ridge: A Violent Pueblo Incident Sparks Debate
Regarding Prehistoric Genocide. Science News 178(10): 22-26.

Cerone, John. 2007. The Nature of International Criminal Law and Implications for
Investigations. In Forensic Archaeology and Human Rights Violations, Ferllini, Roxana
(Ed.). Springfield, Illinois: Thomas Books, pp. 24-54.

Ellis, Peter. 2007. Archaeology and the Forensic Pathologist. In Forensic Archaeology and
Human Rights Violations, Ferllini, Roxana (Ed.). Springfield, Illinois: Thomas Books,
pp. 101-121.

Feierstein, Daniel. 2007. El genocidio como práctica social: Entre el Nazismo y la experiencia
argentina. Buenos Aires: Fondo de Cultura Económica.

Ferllini, Roxana. 2007. Forensic Anthropological Interventions: Challenges in the Field and
at Mortuary. In Forensic Archaeology and Human Rights Violations, Ferllini, Roxana
(Ed.). Springfield, Illinois: Thomas Books, pp. 122-147.

Ferllini, Roxana. 2007. Human Rights Violations, Past and Present: Consequences and
Interventions. In Forensic Archaeology and Human Rights Violations, Ferllini, Roxana
(Ed.). Springfield, Illinois: Thomas Books, pp. 3-23.

Gómez López, Ana Maria, and Patiño Umaña, Andrés. Who is Missing? Problems in the
Application of Forensic Archaeology and Anthropology in Columbia’s Conflict. In
Forensic Archaeology and Human Rights Violations, Ferllini, Roxana (Ed.). Springfield,
Illinois: Thomas Books, pp. 170-204.

Gould, Richard. 2007. Disaster Archaeology. Utah: University of Utah Press.

Chapter 4: Ethnoarchaeology and the Aftermath: The Process of Memorialization
Chapter 7: Human-Rights Archaeology: Lessons from Katyn and Vukovar
Chapter 9: The Realities of the Recent Past

Haglund, William D., Conner, Melissa, and Scott, Douglas D. 2001. The Archaeology of
Contemporary Mass Graves. Historical Archaeology 35(1): 57-69.

Hunter, John, and Simpson, Barrie. 2007. Preparing the Ground: Archaeology in a War

23
Molly Kaplan
Human Rights Archaeology
Zone. In Forensic Archaeology and Human Rights Violations, Ferllini, Roxana (Ed.).
Springfield, Illinois: Thomas Books, pp. 266-292.

Klonowski, Eva, Elvira. 2007. Forensic Anthropology in Bosnia and Herezegovina: Theory
and Practice Amidst Politics and Egos. In Forensic Archaeology and Human Rights
Violations, Ferllini, Roxana (Ed.). Springfield, Illinois: Thomas Books, pp. 148-169.

Peterson, Karla. 2008. “The Use of Forensic Archaeology to Investigate Genocide.” Senior
Project, University of Wisconsin-La Crosse.

Pringle, H. 2009. Witness to Genocide. Archaeology, 62(1): 1-10.

www.archaeology.org/0901/etc/iraq.html

Raino, Juha, Lalu Kaisa, and Sajantila, Antti. 2007. International Forensic Investigations:
Legal Framework, Organisation, and Performance. In Forensic Archaeology and Human
Rights Violations, Ferllini, Roxana (Ed.). Springfield, Illinois: Thomas Books, pp. 55-74.

Sanford, Victoria. 2007. Bridging the Emotional Gulf: Reflections on Excavation of Traumatic
Memories. Archaeological Review from Cambridge 22(2): 13-23.

24