Skip to main content
Book cover

Ethical Approaches to Human Remains pp 315–346Cite as

3D Data in Human Remains Disciplines: The Ethical Challenges

Abstract

The rapid proliferation of 3D imaging in mainstream science is changing the quality and quantity of data that can be obtained. In the study of human remains, the structures and variations of the skeleton holds significant probative value in reconstructing the biological and physical history of that individual. As such, these new 3D tools are being successfully applied in the visualisation and assessment of human remains across forensic and archaeological contexts. However, while the practical applications are being discussed in the published literature, there has been little to no consideration of the more conceptual issues around the widespread use of these novel technologies in human remains disciplines. 3D imaging is producing increasingly accurate and realistic models that share many physical traits, and cultural and societal significances with the original skeletal remains. These are serious causes of concern for the ownership , sharing , and use of these resultant 3D digitisations , especially since there are already unique ethical challenges in the study and use of human remains. This chapter will discuss these issues within the context of a survey which revealed conflicting opinions between researchers and curators concerning the use, ownership, and ethics of 3D digital data of human remains.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • DOI: 10.1007/978-3-030-32926-6_14
  • Chapter length: 32 pages
  • Instant PDF download
  • Readable on all devices
  • Own it forever
  • Exclusive offer for individuals only
  • Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout
eBook
USD   84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • ISBN: 978-3-030-32926-6
  • Instant PDF download
  • Readable on all devices
  • Own it forever
  • Exclusive offer for individuals only
  • Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout
Softcover Book
USD   109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
Hardcover Book
USD   159.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
Learn about institutional subscriptions
Fig. 14.1
Fig. 14.2
Fig. 14.3
Fig. 14.4
Fig. 14.5
Fig. 14.6
Fig. 14.7
Fig. 14.8

Notes

  1. 1.

    N.b. Participants had the option to skip questions and as such sample sizes varies between questions presented later.

  2. 2.

    A full publication of the results is intended for the near future.

  3. 3.

    A research agreement is considered as a formal agreement between the researcher(s) and the curating institution as to the agreed boundaries of data to be collected and how that data can be used and shared.

  4. 4.

    Two institutions did not allow collection of 2D and photographic data, one institution did not allow 3D data collection.

  5. 5.

    The number of responses (n) has been included for each response rate as there is variation between the questions as some were not compulsory.

  6. 6.

    The authors acknowledge that these are moderately sized samples , however there is a broad spectrum of demographics (in terms of occupation, location, and background) that gives a wide collection of perspectives. Furthermore, in terms of the size of the disciplines and nature of the study, this is a reasonable sample size to expect.

References

  • Abungu, G. 2004. The Declaration of Contested Issue. ICOM News 57 (1): 5.

    Google Scholar 

  • Afrasiabi, P. 1997. Property Rights in Ancient Human Skeletal Remains. Southern California Law Review 70: 805–839.

    Google Scholar 

  • Alberti, S., P. Bienkowski, M. Chapman, et al. 2009. Should We Display the Dead? Museum and Society 7: 133–149.

    Google Scholar 

  • Algee-Hewitt, B.F.B. 2016. Population Inference from Contemporary American Craniometrics. The American Journal of Physical Anthropology 160 (4): 604–624.

    Google Scholar 

  • Allard, T.T., M.L. Sitchon, R. Sawatzky, et al. 2005. Use of Hand-Held Laser Scanning and 3D Printing for Creation of a Museum Exhibit. In Proceedings of the 6th International Symposium on Virtual Reality, Archaeology and Cultural Heritage: Short and Project Papers, ed. M. Mudge, N. Ryan, and R. Scopigno, 97–101. Geneva: Eurographics Association.

    Google Scholar 

  • American Association of Physical Anthropologists [AAPA]. 2003. Code of Ethics of the American Association of Physical Anthropologists. http://physanth.org/about/committees/ethics/aapa-code-ethics-and-other-ethics-resources/. Accessed 29 May 2018.

  • Andersson, B., and M. Valfridsson. 2005. Digital 3D Facial Reconstruction Based on Computed Tomography. Norrköping: Linköpings Universitet.

    Google Scholar 

  • Antikenmuseum Basel. 2017. Special Exhibition: Scanning Seti. The Regeneration of a Pharaonic Tomb. http://www.antikenmuseumbasel.ch/en/ausstellungen.html. Accessed 29 May 2018.

  • Antoine, D., and J. Ambers. 2014. The Scientific Analysis of Human Remains from the British Museum Collection: Research Potential and Examples from the Nile Valley. In Regarding the Dead: Human Remains in the British Museum, ed. A. Fletcher, D. Antoine, and J.D. Hill, 20–30. London: The British Museum Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Appleby, J., Mitchell, P., Robinson, C., et al. 2014. The Scoliosis of Richard III, Last Plantagenet King of England: Diagnosis and Clinical Significance. Lancet 383 (9932): 1944.

    Google Scholar 

  • Arbour, J., and C. Brown. 2014. Incomplete Specimens in Geometric Morphometric Analyses. Methods in Ecology and Evolution 5: 16–26.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baynes, C. 2017. Ancient Egyptian Tomb Resurrected Using 3D Printer 2,000 Miles Away in Switzerland. The Independent. 13 November.

    Google Scholar 

  • Benazzi, S., and S. Senck. 2011. Comparing 3-Dimensional Virtual Methods for Reconstruction in Craniomaxillofacial Surgery. Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery 69 (4): 1184–1194.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bimber, O., S.M. Gatesy, L.M. Witmer, et al. 2002. Merging Fossil Specimens with Computer-Generated Information. Computer 35 (9): 25–30.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bolliger, S.A., M.J. Thali, S. Ross, et al. 2008. Virtual Autopsy Using Imaging: Bridging Radiologic and Forensic Sciences. A Review of the Virtopsy and Similar Projects. European Radiology 18 (2): 273–282.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bowron, E. 2001. Handling and Packaging of Human Skeletal Remains: Principles and Practice. Dissertation, Durham University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bowron, E. 2003. A New Approach to the Storage of Human Skeletal Remains. The Conservator 27: 95–106.

    Google Scholar 

  • British Association of Biological Anthropology and Archaeology [BABAO]. 2018. Ethics and Standards. http://www.babao.org.uk/publications/ethics-and-standards/. Accessed 30 May 2018.

  • Brooks, J. 2012. Beneath the Canvas: A Conversation with Forensic Artist Stephen Mancusi. Forensic Examiner 22 (1): 50–55.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bruno, F., S. Bruno, G. De Sensi, et al. 2010. From 3D Reconstruction to Virtual Reality: A Complete Methodology for Digital Archaeological Exhibition. Journal of Cultural Heritage 11 (1): 42–49.

    Google Scholar 

  • Buck, U., S. Naether, B. Räss, et al. 2013. Accident or Homicide—Virtual Crime Scene Reconstruction Using 3D Methods. Forensic Science International 225 (1): 75–84.

    Google Scholar 

  • Budowle, B., F.R. Bieber, and A.J. Eisenberg. 2005. Forensic Aspects of Mass Disasters: Strategic Considerations for DNA-Based Human Identification. Legal Medicine 7 (4): 230–243.

    Google Scholar 

  • Buikstra, J., and D. Ubelaker (eds.). 1994. Standards for Data Collection from Human Skeletal Remains. Fayetteville: Arkansas Archaeological Survey.

    Google Scholar 

  • Caffell, A.C., C.A., Roberts, R.C. Janaway, et al. 2001. Pressures on Osteological Collections: The Importance of Damage Limitation. In Human Remains Conservation, Retrieval and Analysis: Proceedings of a Conference Held in Williamsburg, VA, Nov 7–11th 1999, 187–197. Oxford: Archaeopress.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carone, A. 2013. Printing at Home with A 3D Printer. KPBS News. 9 July. https://www.kpbs.org/news/2013/jul/09/printing-art-home-3d-printer/. Accessed 11 November 2019.

  • Cassidy, C., A. Fabola, A. Miller, et al. 2017. A Digital Museum Infrastructure for Preserving Community Collections from Climate Change. In Workshop, Long and Short Paper, and Poster Proceedings from the Third Immersive Learning Research Network Conference, Coimbra, Portugal, 26–29 June, ed. D. Beck, C. Allison, J. Pirker, et al., 170–177. Cham: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cheshire, T. 2016. Archaeology’s Future Lies in 3D Scanning the Past. Wired. 8 January. http://www.wired.co.uk/article/isis-nefertiti-archaeology-3d-scanning. Accessed 30 May 2018.

  • Copyright, Designs and Patents Act. 1988. The Stationery Office, London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Creative Commons. 2015. About the Licenses. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/. Accessed 30 May 2018.

  • Cronin, C. 2015. 3D Printing: Cultural Property as Intellectual Property. Columbia Journal of Law and The Arts 39: 1–31.

    Google Scholar 

  • Csordas, T.J. 2000. Computerised Cadavers: Shades of Being and Representation in Virtual Reality. In Biotechnology and Culture: Bodies, Anxieties, Ethics, ed. P.E. Brodwin, 173–192. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dawson, P. 2016. The Design and Development of Digital Return Platforms for Northern Indigenous Heritage. Calgary: University of Calgary.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dawson, P., R. Levy, and N. Lyons. 2011. Breaking the Fourth Wall’: 3D Virtual Worlds as Tools for Knowledge Repatriation in Archaeology. Journal of Social Archaeology 11: 387–402.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dedouit, F., F. Savall, F.Z. Mokrane, et al. 2014. Virtual Anthropology and Forensic Identification Using Multidetector CT. British Institute of Radiology 87 (1036): 20130468.

    Google Scholar 

  • Department for Culture, Media and Sport [DCMS]. 2005. Guidance for the Care of Human Remains in Museums. London: Department for Culture, Media and Sport.

    Google Scholar 

  • Digitised Diseases. n.d. Digitised Diseases. http://www.digitiseddiseases.org/alpha/. Accessed 30 May 2018.

  • Dimick, P. 2015. How 3D Printing Facilitates Interactive Learning. 3DPrint.com, 26 December. https://3dprint.com/112623/3dp-in-interactive-learning/. Accessed 11 November 2019.

  • Ebert, L.C., T.T. Nguyen, R. Breitbeck, et al. 2014. The Forensic Holodeck: An Immersive Display for Forensic Crime Scene Reconstructions. Forensic Science, Medicine and Pathology 10 (4): 623–626.

    Google Scholar 

  • Errickson, D., T.J.U. Thompson, and B.W.J. Rankin. 2014. The Application of 3D Visualization of Osteological Trauma for the Courtroom: A Critical Review. Journal of Forensic Radiology and Imaging 2 (3): 132–137.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ewing, R.G. 2011. Finding Middle Ground: Case Studies in Negotiated Repatriation. Dissertation, Simon Fraser University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fasel, J.H., D. Aguiar, D. Kiss-Bodolay, et al. 2016. Adapting Anatomy Teaching to Surgical Trends: A Combination of Classical Dissection, Medical Imaging, and 3D-Printing Technologies. Surgical and Radiologic Anatomy 38 (3): 361–367.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fernández-Lozano, J., G. Gutiérrez-Alonso, M.Á. Ruiz-Tejada, et al. 2017. 3D Digital Documentation and Image Enhancement Integration into Schematic Rock Art Analysis and Preservation: The Castrocontrigo Neolithic Rock Art (NW Spain). Journal of Cultural Heritage 26: 160–166.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fletcher, C. n.d. Men of the Mary Rose: 3D. http://www.virtualtudors.org/. Accessed 30 May 2018.

  • Franklin, D., L. Swift, and A. Flavel. 2016. “Virtual Anthropology” and Radiographic Imaging in the Forensic Medical Sciences. Egyptian Journal of Forensic Sciences 6 (2): 31–43.

    Google Scholar 

  • Froth, C., and O.W. Rauhut. 2013. The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly: The Influence of Skull Reconstructions and Intraspecific Variability in Studies of Cranial Morphometrics in Theropods and Basal Saurischians. PLoS One 8 (8): e72007.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gardner, L. 2007. The Uses of Stored Collections in Some London Museums. Papers from the Institute of Archaeology 18 (S1): 36–78.

    Google Scholar 

  • Garrie, D.B. 2014. Digital Forensic Evidence in the Courtroom: Understanding Content and Quality Digital Forensic Evidence in the Courtroom: Understanding Content and Quality. Northwestern Journal of Technology 12 (2): 122–128.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gibson, S., and T. Howard. 2000 Interactive Reconstruction of Virtual Environments from Photographs, with Application to Scene-of-Crime Analysis. In Proceedings of the ACM Symposium on Virtual Reality Software and Technology, Seoul, Korea, 22–25 October, 41–48. New York: ACM.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gómez-Robles, A., M. Martinón-Torres, J.M.B. De Castro et al. 2011. A Geometric Morphometric Analysis of Hominin Upper Premolars. Shape Variation and Morphological Integration. Journal of Human Evolution 61 (6): 688–702.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gonçalves, J.A., and R. Henriques. 2015. UAV Photogrammetry for Topographic Monitoring of Coastal Areas. The ISPRS Journal of Photogrammetry and Remote Sensing 104: 101–111.

    Google Scholar 

  • Griffith, S.J., and C.E.L. Thompson. 2017. The Use of Laser Scanning for Visualization and Quantification of Abrasion on Water-Submerged Bone. In Human Remains: Another Dimension. The Application of Imaging to the Study of Human Remains, ed. D. Errickson and T. Thompson, 103–122. London: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Guo, J.-F., Y.-L. Cai, and Y.P. Wang. 1995. Morphology-Based Interpolation for 3D Medical Image Reconstruction. Computerized Medical Imaging and Graphics 19 (3): 267–279.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hamilton, D., and K. Sayle. 2017. Stable Isotopes, Chronology, and Bayesian Models for the Viking Archaeology of North-East Iceland. Journal of Island and Coastal Archaeology. https://doi.org/10.1080/15564894.2017.1363097.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Hess, M., S. Robson, F. Millar, et al. 2009. Niabara—The Western Solomon Islands War Canoe at the British Museum—3D Documentation, Virtual Reconstruction and Digital Repatriation. In Proceedings of the 15th International Conference on Virtual Systems and Multimedia, Vienna, Austria, 9–12 September, ed. R. Sablatnig, M. Kampel, and M. Lettner, 41–46. Los Alamitos: IEEE Computing Society.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hirst, C. 2017. British Museum Exhibition Review: The Jericho Skull, Creating an Ancestor. Papers from the Institute of Archaeology 27 (1): 1–4.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hirst, C., Smith, S.E., A. Lockey. 2017. Perspectives on 3D Data: Ownership, Sharing, and Use. https://digitaldataucl.wordpress.com/. Accessed 15 June 2018.

  • Holm, S. 2011. Removing Bodies from Display is Nonsense. New Scientist 2803. 9 March. https://www.newscientist.com/article/mg20928030-100-removing-bodies-from-display-is-nonsense/. Accessed 30 May 2018.

  • Holpuch, A. 2018. Artists’ Impressions: Sculptors Help to Identify Victims Found on US-Mexico Border The Guardian. 15 January. https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/jan/15/new-york-sculptors-border-deaths. Accessed 30 May 2018.

  • Hublin, J.-J. 2013. Palaeontology: Free Digital Scans of Human Fossils. Nature 497 (7448): 183.

    Google Scholar 

  • Human Tissue Act. 2004. The Stationery Office, London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Human Tissue (Scotland) Act. 2006. The Scottish Parliament, Edinburgh.

    Google Scholar 

  • Irish, J., A. Brough, I. De Groote, et al. 2017. Skeleton2Go: A New Tool for Learning Human Skeletal Anatomy. Paper presented at the 19th Annual Conference of the British Association for Biological Anthropology and Osteoarchaeology, Liverpool John Moores University, Liverpool, 8–10 May 2017.

    Google Scholar 

  • Isaac, G. 2015. Preclusive Alliances: Digital 3-D, Museums, and The Reconciling of Culturally Diverse Knowledges. Current Anthropology 56: S286–S296.

    Google Scholar 

  • Janin, G.K. 2017. Sex Estimation of Non-Adults: Can It Be Done? A Geometric Morphometric Approach. Paper presented at MORPH17: A Conference on the Applications of Morphometrics, Aarhus University, Denmark, 4–5 May 2017.

    Google Scholar 

  • JISC: Joint Information Systems Committee. 2014. 3D Digitisation and Intellectual Property Rights. https://www.jisc.ac.uk/guides/3d-digitisation-and-intellectual-property-rights. Accessed 30 May 2018.

  • Jones, J. 2009. Museums on the Internet? Get Real. The Guardian. 9 July. https://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/jonathanjonesblog/2009/jul/09/museums-internet-future. Accessed 25 June 2018.

  • Jones, J. 2014. Tutankhamun Does Not Deserve this 21st-Century Desecration. The Guardian. 21 October. https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/oct/21/tutankhamun-desecration-computer-scan-images-pharoah-archaeological. Accessed 30 May 2018.

  • Jones, P.R., and M. Rioux. 1997. Three-Dimensional Surface Anthropometry: Applications to the Human Body. Optics and Lasers in Engineering 28 (2): 89–117.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kalvin, A.D., D. Dean, and J.J. Hublin. 1995. Reconstruction of Human Fossils. IEEE Computer Graphics Applications 15: 12–15.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kansa, S.W., E.C. Kansa, and J.M. Schultz. 2007. Open Context, Data Sharing and Archaeology. Near Eastern Archaeology 70 (4): 187–193.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kappers, A.M.L. 2011. Human Perception of Shape from Touch. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences 366 (1581): 3106–3114.

    Google Scholar 

  • Katz, J., and A. Tokovinine. 2017. The Past, Now Showing in 3D: An Introduction. Digital Applications in Archaeology and Cultural Heritage 6: 1–3.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kau, C.H., S. Richmond, A.I. Zhurov, et al. 2005. Reliability of Measuring Facial Morphology with a 3-Dimensional Laser Scanning System. American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics 128 (4): 424–430.

    Google Scholar 

  • Khan, Y. 2012. Museums in the Information Age: Survival of the Most Digital? The Guardian. 5 December. https://www.theguardian.com/culture-professionals-network/culture-professionals-blog/2012/dec/05/museums-adapting-digital-age. Accessed 25 June 2018.

  • Khatri, M., D. Misra, and S. Rai. 2017. Unfolding the Mysterious Path of Forensic Facial Reconstruction: Review of Different Imaging Modalities. MAMC Journal of Medical Science 3 (3): 120–127.

    Google Scholar 

  • Koller, D., Frischer, B., and G. Humphreys. 2009. Research Challenges for Digital Archives of 3D Cultural Heritage Models. Journal on Computing and Cultural Heritage 2 (3): 7:1–7:17.

    Google Scholar 

  • Koslow, T. 2016. Maidstone Museum to Use 3D Printing to Help Reconstruct 2,500-Year-Old Mummy. 3DPrint.com. 18 August. https://3dprint.com/146324/maidstone-museum-mummy/. Accessed 30 May 2018.

  • Krassenstein, B. 2014. King Richard III’s Entire 3D Printed Skeleton Unveiled for Museum Opening. 3DPrint.com. 25 July. https://3dprint.com/10295/king-richard-iii-3d-bones/. Accessed 30 May 2018.

  • Kuzminsky, S., and M. Gardiner. 2012. Three-Dimensional Laser Scanning: Potential Uses for Museum Conservation and Scientific Research. Journal of Archaeological Science 39: 2744–2751.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kwan, D., and J. Kwan. 2017. Empowering Cultural Preservation in China Through Participatory Digitization. Journal of Archaeological Science: Reports 12: 161–164.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lautenschlager, S., and M. Rücklin. 2014. Beyond the Print—Virtual Paleontology in Science Publishing, Outreach, and Education. Journal of Paleontology 88 (4): 727–734.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lorenzi, R. 2014. King Tut Re-Creation Presents a Shocking Image. Seeker. 20 October. https://www.seeker.com/king-tut-re-creation-presents-a-shocking-image-1769204424.html. Accessed 30 May 2018.

  • Ma, M., H. Zheng, and H. Lallie. 2010. Virtual Reality and 3D Animation in Forensic Visualization. Journal of Forensic Sciences 55 (5): 1227–1231.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mahfouz, M., A. Mustafa, A. Fatah, et al. 2017. Computerized Reconstruction of Fragmentary Skeletal Remains. Forensic Science International 275: 212–223.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mallett, X., and M.P. Evison. 2017. Critical Issues in the Historical and Contemporary Development of Forensic Anthropology in Australia: An International Comparison. Forensic Science International 275: 314.e1–314.e8.

    Google Scholar 

  • Margoni, T. 2015. The Digitisation of Cultural Heritage Originality, Derivative Works and (Non) Original Photographs. Amsterdam: University of Amsterdam.

    Google Scholar 

  • Márquez-Grant, N., and D. Errickson. 2017. Ethical Considerations: An Added Dimension. In Human Remains: Another Dimension. The Application of Imaging to the Study of Human Remains, ed. D. Errickson and T. Thompson, 123–134. London: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mathys, A., S. Lemaitre, J. Brecko, et al. 2013. Agora 3D: Evaluating 3D Imaging Technology for the Research, Conservation and Display of Museum Collections. Antiquity 87 (336): 1–3.

    Google Scholar 

  • Matsumura, H., H. Hung, N. Cuong, et al. 2017. Mid-Holocene Hunter-Gatherers ‘Gaomiao’ in Hunan, China: The First of the Two-Layer Model in the Population History of East/Southeast Asia. In New Perspectives in Southeast Asian and Pacific Prehistory, ed. P.J. Piper, H. Matsumura and D. Bulbeck, 61–78. Acton: Australian National Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • McMenamin, P., M. Quayle, C. McHenry, et al. 2014. The Production of Anatomical Teaching Resources Using Three-Dimensional (3D) Printing Technology. Anatomical Science Education 7 (6): 479–486.

    Google Scholar 

  • Medrano, K. 2017. Ancient Skull of Viking Kind Gorm the Old Reconstructed with 3-D Printing. Newsweek. 21 November. http://www.newsweek.com/viking-gorm-old-skull-skeleton-3d-printing-archaeology-718156. Accessed 30 May 2018.

  • Mendoza, H. 2014. 3D Printing of Chinese Cultural Artifacts Causes Controversy. 3DPrint.com. 14 June. https://3dprint.com/6048/3d-printing-chinese-artifacts/. Accessed 30 May 2018.

  • Mendoza, H. 2017. Using 3D Technology to Recreate the Lost Faces of Herculaneum. 3DPrint.com. 23 June. https://www.3dprint.com/178803/3d-recreate-faces-herculaneum/. Accessed 30 May 2018.

  • Metallo, A., and V. Rossi. 2011. The Future of Three-Dimensional Imaging and Museum Applications. Curator 54 (1): 63–69.

    Google Scholar 

  • Morell, V. 1995. Who Owns the Past? Science 268 (5216): 1424–1426.

    Google Scholar 

  • Morphosource. n.d. Morphosource. https://www.morphosource.org/. Accessed 30 May 2018.

  • Museums Association. 2006. Policy Statement on Repatriation of Cultural Property. http://www.museumsassociation.org/policy/01092006-policy-statement-on-repatriation-of-cultural-property. Accessed 30 May 2018.

  • NBC News. 2014. Tut, Tut: New View of King Tutankhamun Sparks Debate. NBC News. 2 November. https://www.nbcnews.com/science/science-news/tut-tut-new-view-king-tutankhamun-sparks-debate-n239166. Accessed 30 May 2018.

  • Neumüller, M., A. Reichinger, F. Rist, et al. 2014. 3D Printing for Cultural Heritage: Preservation, Accessibility, Research and Education. In 3D research Challenges in Cultural Heritage: A Roadmap in Digital Heritage. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 8355, ed. M. Ioannides and E. Quak. Springer, Berlin, 119–134.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nicholson, E., and K. Harvati. 2006. Quantitative Analysis of Human Mandibular Shape Using Three-Dimensional Geometric Morphometrics. American Journal of Physical Anthropology 131 (3): 368–383.

    Google Scholar 

  • Niven, L., T. Stelle, H. Finke, et al. 2009. Virtual Skeletons: Using a Structured Light Scanner to Create a 3D Faunal Comparative Collection. Journal of Archaeological Science 36 (9): 2018–2023.

    Google Scholar 

  • Owen, J. 2002. The New Dissemination of Knowledge: Digital Libraries and Institutional Roles in Scholarly Publishing. Journal Economic Methodology 9: 275–288.

    Google Scholar 

  • Palmer, A. 2015. Untouchable: Creating Desire and Knowledge in Museum Costume and Textile Exhibitions. Fashion Theory 12: 31–63.

    Google Scholar 

  • Parker Pearson, M., T. Schadla-Hall, and G. Moshenska. 2011. Resolving the Human Remains Crisis in British Archaeology. Papers from the Institute of Archaeology 21: 5–9.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pearce, N., M. Weller, E. Scalon, et al. 2010. Digital Scholarship Considered: How New Technologies Could Transform Academic Work. Education 16: 33–44.

    Google Scholar 

  • Percoco, G., F. Lavecchia, and A.J.S. Salmerón. 2015. Preliminary Study on the 3D Digitization of Millimeter Scale Products by Means of Photogrammetry. Procedia CIRP 33: 257–262.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pickford, M. 2002. New Reconstruction of the Moroto Hominoid Snout and a Reassessment of Its Affinities to Afropithecus Turkanensis. Journal of Human Evolution 17: 1–19.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pickrell, J. 2017. Ancient Australian Goes Home. Science 358 (6365): 853.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rai, A.K. 1999. Regulating Scientific Research: Intellectual Property Rights and the Norms of Science. Northwestern University Law Review 94: 77–152.

    Google Scholar 

  • Redfern, R., and M. Clegg. 2017. Archaeologically Derived Human Remains in England: Legacy and Future. World Archaeology 49 (5): 574–587.

    Google Scholar 

  • Remondino, F. 2011. Heritage Recording and 3D Modeling with Photogrammetry and 3D Scanning. Remote Sensing 3 (6): 1104–1138.

    Google Scholar 

  • Resta, P., L. Roy, M.K. De Montano et al. 2002. Digital Repatriation: Virtual Museum Partnership with Indigenous Peoples. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Computers in Education, Auckland, New Zealand, 3–6 December, 1482–1483. Los Alamitos: IEEE Computer Society.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rickert, J. 2015. Printing the Past: 3D Imaging Technologies and Archaeology. Dissertation, University of Waterloo.

    Google Scholar 

  • Riding, J. 1992. Without Ethics and Morality: A Historical Overview of Imperial Archaeology and American Indians. Arizona State Law Journal 24 (1): 11–34.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rodríguez-Martín, M., P. Rodríguez-Gonzálvez, S. Lagüela, et al. 2016. Macro-Photogrammetry as a Tool for the Accurate Measurement of Three-Dimensional Misalignment in Welding. Automation Construction 71: 189–197.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rountree, J., W. Wong, and H. Robert. 2002. Learning to Look: Real and Virtual Artifacts. Educational Technology and Society 5: 129–134.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rowe, J., A. Razdan, D. Collins, et al. 2001. A 3D Digital Library System: Capture, Analysis, Query, and Display. In Abstracts of the Proceedings of the 4th International Conference of Asian Digital Libraries (ICADL), Bangalore, India, 10–12 December 2001.

    Google Scholar 

  • Russell, A.-W. 2012. Designing the Digital Archaeological Record: Collecting, Preserving, and Sharing Archaeological Information. Dissertation, Northern Arizona University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Savall, F., C. Rérolle, F. Hérin, et al. 2016. Reliability of the Suchey-Brooks Method for a French Contemporary Population. Forensic Science International 266: 586.e1–586.e5.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schofield, D. 2007. Animating and Interacting with Graphical Evidence: Bringing Courtrooms to Life with Virtual Reconstructions. In Computer Graphics. Imaging and Visualisation: New Advances, CGIV 2007, Bangkok, Thailand, 14–17 August 2007.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schurmans, U., Razdan, A., Simon, A. et al. 2002. Advances in Geometric Modelling and Feature Extraction on Pots, Rocks and Bones for Representation and Query Via the Internet. In Archaeological informatics: Pushing the Envelope. Computer Applications and Quantitative Methods in Archaeology. Proceedings of the 29th Conference of Computer Applications in Archaeology, Gotland, Sweden, April 2001, 191–204, ed. G. Burenhult and J. Arvidsson. Oxford: Archaeopress.

    Google Scholar 

  • Simpson, M. 1996. Making Representations: Museums in the Post-Colonial Era. Oxon: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sketchfab. 2018. Sketchfab. https://sketchfab.com/. Accessed 1 June 2018.

  • Smith, M. 2010. A Necessary Duty, a Hideous Fault: Digital Technology and the Ethics of Archaeological Conservation. Dissertation, Texas A&M University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Soler, F., F.J. Melero, and M. Luzón. 2017. A Complete 3D Information System for Cultural Heritage Documentation. Journal of Cultural Heritage 23: 49–57.

    Google Scholar 

  • Solly, M. 2017. This Replica of a Tlingit Killer Whale Hat Is Spurring Dialogue About Digitization. Smithsonian Magazine. 11 September. https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smithsonian-institution/replica-tlingit-killer-whale-hat-spurring-dialogue-about-digitization-180964483/. Accessed 30 May 2018.

  • Speed, B. 2016. Nefertiti for Everyone: Returning Egypt’s Cultural History with the Help of a 3D Printer. New Statesman. 2 March. https://www.newstatesman.com/culture/art-design/2016/03/nefertiti-everyone-returning-egypt-s-cultural-history-help-3d-printer. Accessed 30 May 2018.

  • Stephan, C.N. 2005. Facial Approximation: A Review of the Current State of Play for Archaeologists. International Journal Osteoarchaeology 15: 298–302.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stromberg, J. 2013. What Digitisation Will Do for the Future of Museums. Smithsonian Magazine. 29 August. https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smithsonian-institution/what-digitization-will-do-for-the-future-of-museums-2454655/. Accessed 30 May 2018.

  • Sulaiman, N., E. Bachad, A. Ching, et al. 2012. Close-Range 3D Laser Scanning for Archaeological Artefact Documentation. Paper Presented at the 5th International Remote Sensing and GIS Workshop Series on Demography, Land Use—Land Cover and Disaster, Badung, Indonesia, 29–30 November 2012.

    Google Scholar 

  • Swain, H. 2002. The Ethics of Displaying Human Remains from British Archaeological Sites. Public Archaeology 2: 95–100.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smithsonian. 2016a. Smithsonian Collections. https://newsdesk.si.edu/factsheets/fact-sheet-smithsonian-collections. Accessed 30 May 2018.

  • Smithsonian. 2016b. 3D Collection. http://humanorigins.si.edu/evidence/3d-collection. Accessed 30 May 2018.

  • Thompson, E.L. 2017. Legal and Ethical Considerations for Digital Recreations of Cultural Heritage. Chapman Law Review 20 (1): 153–176.

    Google Scholar 

  • University of Tennessee. n.d. WM Bass Donated Skeletal Collection. https://fac.utk.edu/wm-bass-donated-skeletal-collection/. Accessed 30 May 2018.

  • Urbanová, P., P. Hejna, and M. Jurda. 2015. Testing Photogrammetry-Based Techniques for Three-Dimensional Surface Documentation in Forensic Pathology. Forensic Science International 250: 77–86.

    Google Scholar 

  • Verhoff, M.A., F. Ramsthaler, J. Krähahn, et al. 2008. Digital Forensic Osteology—Possibilities in Cooperation with the Virtopsy Project. Forensic Science International 174 (2–3): 152–156.

    Google Scholar 

  • Victoria and Albert Museum. 2016. Size of the V and A Collections. http://www.vam.ac.uk/content/articles/s/size-of-the-v-and-a-collections/. Accessed 30 May 2018.

  • Victoria and Albert Museum. 2017. ReACH: Towards a New Convention on Digital Reproductions. [Video] Available at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Lwpjst6C5E. Accessed 30 May 2018.

  • Villa, C., J. Buckberry, C. Cattaneo, et al. 2013. Technical Note: Reliability of Suchey-Brooks and Buckberry-Chamberlain Methods on 3D Visualizations from CT and Laser Scans. American Journal of Physical Anthropology 151: 158–163.

    Google Scholar 

  • Viner, M. 2018. Overview of Advances in Forensic Radiological Methods of Human Identification. In New Perspectives in Forensic Human Skeletal Identification, ed. K.E. Latham, E.J. Bartelink, and M. Finnegan, 217–226. London: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Visual Computing Lab CNR-ISTI. 2017. MeshLab. http://meshlab.sourceforge.net/. Accessed 30 May 2018.

  • Voon, C. 2016. Artists Covertly Scan Bust of Nefertiti and Release the Data for Free Online. Hyperallergic. 19 February. https://hyperallergic.com/274635/artists-covertly-scan-bust-of-nefertiti-and-release-the-data-for-free-online/. Accessed 30 May 2018.

  • Wagner, B., V. Boucsein, and A. Maercker. 2011. The Impact of Forensic Investigations Following Assisted Suicide on Posttraumatic Stress Disorder. Swiss Medical Weekly 141: w13284.

    Google Scholar 

  • Walczak, K., W. Cellary, and M. White. 2006. Virtual Museum Exhibitions. Computer 39 (3): 93–95.

    Google Scholar 

  • Walker, P.L., J.R. Johnson, and P.M. Lambert. 1988. Age and Sex Biases in the Preservation of Human Skeletal Remains. American Journal of Physical Anthropology 76: 183–188.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ward, C. 2003. Conservation Survey of the Human Skeletal Material in the Wendorf Collection. London: Department of Ancient Egypt and Sudan, British Museum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weyrich, L., S. Duchene, S., and A. Cooper. 2017. Neanderthal Behaviour, Diet, and Disease Inferred from Ancient DNA in Dental Calculus. Nature 544 (7650): 257–361.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wilkinson, C. 2005. Computerized Forensic Facial Reconstruction: A Review of Current Systems. Forensic Science, Medicine and Pathology 1 (3): 173–177.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wilkinson, C., M. Roughley, and Macgregor, M. 2017. The Face of Robert the Bruce. Paper Presented at the 19th Annual Conference of the British Association for Biological Anthropology and Osteoarchaeology, Liverpool John Moores University, Liverpool, 8–10 May 2017.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wills, B., C. Ward, and V.S. Gómez. 2014. Conservation of Human Remains from Archaeological Contexts. In Regarding the Dead: Human Remains in the British Museum, ed. A. Fletcher, D. Antoine, and J.D. Hill, 49–73. London: The British Museum Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wilson, A.S., Holland, A.D., and Sparrow, T. (eds). 2017. Laser Scanning of Skeletal Pathological Conditions. In Human Remains: Another Dimension. The Application of Imaging to the Study of Human Remains, ed. D. Errickson, and T. Thompson, 123–134. London: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ynnerman, A., T. Rydell, D. Antoine, et al. 2016. Interactive Visualization of 3D Scanned Mummies at Public Venues. Communications of the ACM 59 (12): 72–81.

    Google Scholar 

  • Younan, S., and C. Treadaway. 2015. Digital 3D Models of Heritage Artefacts: Towards a Digital Dream Space. Digital Applications in Archaeology and Cultural Heritage 2 (4): 240–247.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank the collection managers and researchers who have kindly taken the time to complete the questionnaires. We also want to acknowledge the vision of the editors in creating this volume as a valuable step towards establishing formalised and considered practice in the use of new 3D technologies in human remains research.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Centre for the Forensic Sciences, Department of Security and Crime Science, University College London, 35 Tavistock Square, London, WC1H 9EZ, UK

    Sian E. Smith

  2. Institute of Archaeology, University College London, Gordon Square, London, WC1H 0PY, UK

    Sian E. Smith & Cara S. Hirst

Authors
  1. Sian E. Smith
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Cara S. Hirst
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Sian E. Smith .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. School of Law, Policing and Forensics, Staffordshire University, Science Centre, Stoke-on-Trent, UK

    Dr. Kirsty Squires

  2. Defence Academy of the United Kingdom, Cranfield Forensic Institute, Cranfield University, Shrivenham, UK

    Dr. David Errickson

  3. Defence Academy of the United Kingdom, Cranfield Forensic Institute, Cranfield University, Shrivenham, UK

    Dr. Nicholas Márquez-Grant

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Smith, S.E., Hirst, C.S. (2019). 3D Data in Human Remains Disciplines: The Ethical Challenges. In: Squires, K., Errickson, D., Márquez-Grant, N. (eds) Ethical Approaches to Human Remains. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-32926-6_14

Download citation