Ancient/Now - June 21st

DNA analysis continues to cast out old archaeological assumptions

Kara Cooney

Amber Myers Wells

, and

Jordan Galczynski

Jun 21, 2024

DNA analysis continues to cast out old archaeological assumptions

undefined — Suontaka Sword (center) in Finnish National Museum of Finland, 18.11.2017. (Velivieras, Wikipedia, CC BY-SA 4.0)

Can you scientifically prove identity history? Our ability to sequence DNA from ancient human remains continues to provide evidence-based insights demanding we reconsider our perspectives on history. This also further highlighs just how embedded our modern cultural biases are—even in those who know how important it is to understand and recognize such biases. (But don’t worry: we know that ancient history isn’t political at all…) Let’s look at some recent press releases on how DNA analysis of human remains is casting out old archaeological assumptions. Interestingly, both feature studies that have to do with gender.

An article for Defector considers the case of the individual found in the so-called “Sountaka grave,” a 1,000 year-old grave in Finland first excavated 1878, and questions whether or not archaeologists can “exhume gender from the long-dead.” Well, it seems a new DNA study has completely shaken up past archaeological interpretations about this grave. As Archaeology reported in 2021,

The 1,000-year-old grave held human remains, a sword with a bronze handle, a second weapon, and jewelry typically associated with a woman’s clothing. It had been previously suggested that the grave held the remains of a man and a woman, or a woman who had been a warrior or a leader. The new study indicates that just one person was laid on a feather blanket, wearing furs and feminine clothing, with a hilt-less sword at the left hip.

Osteology and gendered grave goods have been a primary sources of evidence to determine the sex and gender of human remains found in archaeological contexts. However, advancements in DNA technology now allow researchers to sequence the DNA of human remains if a sufficient amount of biological material survives. In the case of the individual found in the Suontaka grave, a 2021 study reported that DNA analysis revealed their chromosomes were XXY, indicating this was a biological male with an extra copy of the X chromosome (a condition known as Klinefelter syndrome). This new biological information means that archaeologists must now completely reconsider their preconceived notions about the person buried in this grave and how this genetic condition may have affected their gendered role in society. The fact that the person was interred with both male and female elements is on point with the DNA evidence, after all. Ancient people weren’t always binary in their thinking about gender and sexuality; indeed, this particular case shows extraordinary nuance.

In another archaeological news story reported by The New York Times, the analysis of 1,000-year-old DNA from human remains found in a chultún at Chichén Itzá concluded that the majority of the individuals were young males, providing new information about human sacrifice in ancient Mayan religious rituals, and once again sweeping away old assumptions. The article reports,

Early archaeologists studying the Maya had proposed that the culture was preoccupied with sacrificing young virgin women. That theory has been challenged in recent decades with the discovery that most people sacrificed in the sacred cenote — a natural sinkhole at Chichén Itzá — were children.

“That obviously flew in the face of the argument that it was mostly young virgin women being thrown into the cenote,” said Jaime Awe, an archaeologist at Northern Arizona University in Flagstaff who was not involved in the study. The obsession with virgins in archaeological circles most likely arose from a combination of colonial ideas and limited data, he said.

Drawing conclusions from limited data is what historians and archaeologists do. Their job is to try and assemble a jigsaw puzzle with innumerable missing pieces, and it is no easy task. DNA analysis is providing researchers with insights and information that cannot be gained through excavation alone. It continues to remind us how our ability to study the past will always be limited by the inescapable bias of our own experiences and assumptions—in this case colonial dehumanization of indigenous peoples—and is a humbling reminder of how much we can never know or reconstruct about the past. Even with DNA insights, there will always be voids in our understanding of the past. Because now that we know the sacrificed were young men, what then? Should we see it as a purge of potential rulers from a cast-aside dynasty? Or the sacrifice of a neighboring society’s best and brightest? The historical hypothesizing and debates must begin again.

Archaeologists didn’t need DNA analysis to tell them that they should not be led by assumptions about the person buried in the Suontaka grave based on a broach and a sword, but our human compulsion to create a narrative and tell a story will always be there. We learn about the past to tell their stories now, to each other, so that we can better understand ourselves. Even so, as scientific evidence from technological tools like DNA analysis continue to dismantle the guardrails of our implicit patriarchal assumptions, we are gaining perspectives on the past that are more nuanced, complex, and interesting. And humans in the present day might even benefit a bit from that beautiful nuance themselves. One can only hope…

The European Court of Human Rights has rejected the J. Paul Getty Museum’s appeal and upholds the decision issued by Italian authorities on the recovery of the “Victorious Youth”

One more thing…

Kara recently appeared on the Archaeosoup podcast to discuss the Flint Dibble vs. Graham Hancock debate on The Joe Rogan Experience—check it out!

Ancient/Now - June 21st

DNA analysis continues to cast out old archaeological assumptions

DNA analysis continues to cast out old archaeological assumptions

What else are we reading?

One more thing…

Discussion about this post