I think the more important question to ask regarding these flutes is whether it is appropriate for
us to name them after a group of people or culture at all! I think this is especially relevant given
that the instruments we have today are not made by members of that group/culture (in nearly all
cases), and do not generally replicate the design details of any original instrument, in either acoustically
relevant measurements or in blowing style. The similarities are rather vague when you look into it
in detail.
The vast majority of "Anasazi" flutes sold today have much wider bores than the original instruments, tone
holes that have been repositioned to better align with modern western musical intervals, and a flat or notch
at the rim to aid in a shakuhachi-style of blowing, which was not at all evident on original instruments.
Wear marks on original instruments, together with the earliest available photographs of Hopi players,
conclusively show that these flutes were typically blown using an inter-dental approach, like a persian
ney. These flutes sound very different when played this way.
We also have no idea of the kind of music these were used for, nor the cultural purpose or significance
of the instrument. Unfortunately, I think making these modern flutes and selling them as being in any
way connected to a past or present indigenous culture is just a blatant case of cultural appropriation.
This, I think, is far more offensive than whether we call the instrument "Anasazi" or "Ancestral Puebloan".
I think a better approach is to name these modern flutes based on their design characteristics
(rim blown, pentatonic, key of G#, etc) and perhaps make reference to a specific original flute if the
modern one is a close replica of some existing museum original.
There are several original instruments in various museums and they vary quite drastically in size, scale and
design, so it is not as if there was a common standard, or anything close to that. As with other Native
American-style flutes, I think we have conjured up quite a lot of fiction related to these instruments and have
(probably inadvertently) promoted our own fictions to the extent that many people now start to view them as fact.
It is easy to be very offensive, and to do a lot of cultural damage, this way, all while having the very best of
intentions.
A few years ago I spent a lot of time studying original instruments, making acoustically accurate replicas,
learning to play them using a variety of different blowing techniques, studying archival photographs, and
collaborating with a Native American flute maker to replicate and document some of the lesser studied flutes
from this era (such as the Pueblo Bonito flutes, and the Grand Gulch flute), but the more I got into it the less
comfortable I felt about pushing my interpretations about someone else's cultural artifacts. Eventually, I learned
enough to realize that I really didn't know enough about the people, their culture, their music, or their instruments,
to be qualified to comment. So I eventually just stopped. If you are interested in learning more about these
instruments there is a lot of information (probably both informative and misleading) on the history section of
the
Flutopedia website.