Cookies on this website

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you click 'Accept all cookies' we'll assume that you are happy to receive all cookies and you won't see this message again. If you click 'Reject all non-essential cookies' only necessary cookies providing core functionality such as security, network management, and accessibility will be enabled. Click 'Find out more' for information on how to change your cookie settings.

Tang Dynasty ceramic grave goods

Floor G, Gallery 10, China to AD800

Tang Dynasty ceramic grave goods, c.7th - 10th century CE

The question of what the dead need has preoccupied humans since prehistoric times and the Ashmolean is full of the contents of graves. For millenia, we have tried to imagine what will be useful or desirable for our dead to take with them into the afterlife. However, things that once belonged to the deceased can remain useful to the living.  Whilst this certainly includes things like property, it can also mean parts of their bodies, such as organs or tissues. One might argue that the deceased should be required to donate their useable organs; the deceased are not harmed by this, and the living may benefit a great deal. One might also argue, however, that organs and tissues are akin to ‘property’, and the deceased, or their families, have the right to choose what is done with them. 

Should the wishes of the deceased always come before the needs of the bereaved, or is there sometimes an ethical reason to prioritise the living?

If there might be significant benefit to the living, might it ever be permissible to break a promise to the deceased?

 

Modified Human Skull, Jericho, c.7000 BCE

Floor G, Gallery 19, Ancient Middle East

Unknown maker, Modified Human Skull, Jericho, c.7000 BCE

This is one of the oldest pieces of sculpture ever discovered: a skull modified with clay, cowrie shells and pigment. For us, it is a mysterious relic of a distant, little-known past. We have no idea what precise function it served or why it was made.

Human remains are often contentious objects and can elicit very personal responses and beliefs, particularly since the treatment of the dead varies widely across cultures and throughout history. For some even viewing them is considered uncomfortable and wrong. There are ethical issues associated with the display of human remains in museum spaces, but should certain historical remains still be available for public view and learning?

Do different cultural beliefs about the body after death change what counts as ethical treatment of human remains in museums?

 

Supported by the Ashmolean Museum and Nuffield Department of Clinical Neurosciences