The sale of human remains has prompted some discussion on social media recently. I've seen a lot of comments about how it must be illegal - so I thought I would write a quick thread about how (unfortunately) it isn't. 1/15

Firstly, there is no concept of ownership of human remains in law. They really belong to no-one, whatever a bill of sale might say. The phrase they used to use for the status of corpses in common law was pleasingly, “the only lawful possessor of the dead body is the earth” 2/15

This may not apply if a body part has ‘acquired different attributes by virtue of the application of skill’ e.g. in anatomical preparation or art. This is why it is possible for someone to legitimately own Damien Hirst's 'For the Love of God' diamond skull with real teeth 3/15

Human remains less than 100 years old can fall under the Human Tissue Act 2004, which may make it an offence to store or display recent human tissue without an appropriate license in some (but not all) situations. 4/15 http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2004/30/section/1

The HTA is silent on the sale of such material however, as long as such remains are held in the right places with the right licenses. The HTA does not apply to archaeological human remains or those with an older provenance. 5/15

Buried remains which are then disturbed are protected by law. The Burial Act 1857 & the Disused Burial Grounds Act 1884, with other legislation, require a license be issued by the Ministry of Justice for disinterment, or permission from Church of England known as a Faculty. 6/15

As such, archaeological sites expecting to encounter human remains (a Roman or Saxon cemetery for example) are covered by this legislation and usually a license is applied for in advance of archaeological work. Excavation of remains should not happen without it. 7/15

(It is worth noting that human remains from a genuine excavation would never now be sold – it is decided in advance where the bones will go. They could be reburied, or deposited in a museum or similar institution. 8/15)

A license has always been required for excavation, although it was not until the latter part of the 20th century this was regularly implemented – archaeological sites were given a bit of an informal pass in the distant past. 9/15

Interestingly, the unexpected and controversial excavation of a young royal – Anne Mowbray – in 1964 demonstrated that even large organisations did not necessarily know a license was needed for excavation of archaeological human remains. 10/15 https://bit.ly/2Bs4d9a 

So, in terms of archaeological human remains, the removal of them from the ground or a crypt can be illegal, and be prosecuted, but storing or selling the resultant remains - which cannot be legitimately owned - is generally not. 11/15

This seems somewhat unbelievable, which makes it important in the absence of an appropriate law to adopt a strong ethical stance. All human remains deserve to be treated with dignity and respect whatever their provenance. 12/15

The British Association for Biological Anthropology and Osteoarchaeology has produced a Statement on the Sale of Human Remains, and is clear that “the sale [or trade] of human remains is unethical” and cannot be condoned 13/15 http://www.babao.org.uk/publications/ethics-and-standards/

This ethical stance should be adopted by auction houses & shops which continue to sell or display human remains. Since ‘legality’ is difficult to immediately ascertain, complaining to these organisations and removing your custom is imperative to force an ethical policy. 14/15

Finally, it's important to recognise that when there is a market for human remains, people will do terrible things to profit from it. This is the real cost of such sales, even ones with an air of legitimacy - more looting & grave-robbing in ever more unscrupulous ways. 15/15