Precise details about the deaths of his final companions are unknown.

Some family relationships are debated.

Aspects of his ancestry have been debated.

The archive is therefore both dense and full of holes.

That paradox is worth remembering.

A society can photograph a man hundreds of times and still fail to preserve the information he would have considered most important.

It can record his voice and not know his name.

It can measure his body and not understand his grief.

It can collect his tools and not restore the community that gave those tools meaning.

The most ethical way to use the photographs today is not to reject them.