Ancestry in Human Remains Analyses

Ancestry in Human Remains Analysis

Overview of Lecture Content

  • Presented by Dr. Kori Lea Filipek.

  • Contains sensitive content related to the history of scientific racism which may be offensive to some individuals.

Mid-Module Feedback

Student Feedback Highlights

  • Positive Feedback: "YOU ARE FANTASTIC!", "BRILLIANT!", "YOU'RE A GENIUS!", "YOU ROCK!", "YOU'RE SO FUNNY!", "TOP EBAYER A+++!"

  • Mixed Feedback: "YOU CAN BE A JERK SOMETIMES."

  • Comments solicited regarding course or instructor feedback, with humorous remarks on preferences for the lecture over real-life experiences.

Course Content Review

Key Themes from Previous Sessions

  • The human skeleton serves as a foundation for understanding human anatomy as well as forensic anthropology practices.

  • Methods of bioprofiling and osteoprofiling covered include:

    • Sex Estimation

    • Age Estimation

    • Ancestry

    • Variation

    • Pathology

    • Trauma

  • Emphasis on experiential knowledge in forensic anthropology practices.

Introduction to Ancestry Assessment

Audience Engagement Question

  • Prompt: "What is your ancestry?"

Objectives of the Session

  • Aim to understand:

    • The historical context of assessing 'race' in forensic science.

    • The various methods for estimating ancestry within forensic anthropology.

    • Critical viewpoints on the ancestry estimation process.

    • Benefits and limitations associated with ancestry estimation in forensic contexts.

Definition of Ancestry

Formal Definition

  • Ancestry refers to the ancestral geographical origin of an individual.

  • Forensic anthropologists estimate ancestry alongside age, sex, and stature, forming a biological profile critical for medicolegal identification.

  • Notable contention surrounding the practice:

    • Critics argue it reinforces racial constructs and perpetuates the outdated concept of 'biological races'.

    • The skeletal structure does not indicate skin color, underscoring ethical implications of racial classification.

Ancestry Assessments in Forensic Anthropology

Clarification on Ancestry vs Race

  • Ancestry ≠ Race: Forensic anthropologists assess skeletal remains using geographical human variation, acknowledging the social dimensions of ancestry.

  • The evaluation of ancestry requires interpreting skeletal differences alongside historical and cultural contexts, complicating assessments.

Current Ancestry Estimation Practices

The Three Region Model

  • Introduced to streamline the identification of unknown individuals and narrow search parameters for missing persons.

Ancestry Estimation Methods

Types of Analysis

  1. Cranial Metrics (Craniometry):

    • Historical method dating back to the 18th century based on measurements of skull dimensions using standardized landmarks.

    • Involves inter-landmark distance calculations to establish biological relationships via discriminant function analysis (DFA).

    • Detailed procedures are outlined in forensic data collection standards including:

      • Langley et al., 2016.

      • Buikstra & Ubelaker, 1994.

  2. Cranial Non-metrics (Morphoscopic Traits):

    • Qualitative analysis focused on morphological variations indicative of ancestry, often linked to geographic origins via traits analyzed statistically.

  3. Dental Non-metrics:

    • Tapped into nonmetric traits genetically tied to population groups, with varying predictive accuracy based on geographical models.

Cranial Metric Ancestry Estimation

Method Description

  • Emphasizes measurement techniques to gather cranial data, with established procedures.

  • Used to determine 'biodistance' using DFA or Linear Discriminant Function Analysis (LDFA).

  • Includes measuring 24 craniofacial features with reference to data collection standards, indicating potential accuracy in ancestry estimation.

Cranial Nonmetric Ancestry Estimation

Method Overview

  • Developed methodologies from the 18th century based on visible morphological features of the skull.

  • Incorporation of statistical approaches such as the Optimized Summed Scoring Attributes (OSSA) to analyze morphoscopic traits for ancestry estimations.

Historical Context on Cranial Traits

Prominent Figures and Their Contributions

  • Hooton: Advocated for the recognition of cranial nonmetric traits and initiated standardization measures via the Harvard List.

  • Daubert Principles: Hooton's approach critiqued for not supporting legal admissibility guidelines, leading to further refinements in the methodology documented by Hefner.

Limitations of Cranial Nonmetric Classification

Key Challenges

  • High inter- and intraobserver variability impacts the reliability of trait assessments.

  • Still employed in forensic practice - however, a shift towards a three-region model rather than traditional racial categories is emphasized due to scientific critiques.

Historical Morphoscopic Classifications

Past vs Present Practices

  • Antiquated classifications: Mongoloid, Caucasoid, Negroid skulls and traits have evolved, but still influence contemporary practices.

Comparison of Racial Traits

Craniofacial Variations Overview

  • Specific craniofacial trait variations categorized by geographic race, rooted in earlier anthropological perspectives with inherent criticisms of scientific accuracy and racial hierarchies.

Discussion on Ancestry Assessment Approaches

Why Assess Ancestry?

  • Police interests in creating biological profiles: Age, sex, stature, ancestry, and identifying features are crucial for investigations.

Ethical Considerations and Racial Constructs

Socio-Cultural Implications

  • Acknowledgment that physical variation among populations is primarily adaptive and subject to geographical influence such as Bergmann’s and Allen’s rules.

  • The necessity of differentiating between biological variation and social constructs of race, addressing the importance of understanding ancestry accurately and ethically in forensic contexts.

The Historical Roots of 'Race'

Emerging Ideas and Concept Development

  • Discussion of conceptual development beginning in the 17th century with key figures like François Bernier and Carl Linnaeus.

  • Linnaeus’ classifications framed racial stereotypes that persist, reflecting colonial and hierarchical influences in early anthropology.

The Legacy of Scientific Racism

Consequences in Forensic Anthropology

  • Historical perspectives led to the justification of discrimination and supported racial inequality contributing to scientific racism being embedded in modern forensic practices.

Addressing Modern Racial Hierarquies

Moving Towards Scientific Objectivity

  • Critical exposure of classification systems stemming from colonial attitudes necessitates a shift towards a more just and empirical understanding of human variation without perpetuating racial myths.

Conclusion: Debating Ancestry Assessment

Current Considerations and Future Directions

  • Engaging in ongoing debate about the merits and implications of ancestry assessment in forensic anthropology remains essential for ethical practice and advancing scientific understanding while confronting biases entrenched in historical frameworks.