This methodological choice is likely to influence future studies of similar historical materials. The lesson is not that private collections are preferable to museum collections as sources, but that the authentication approach needs to be calibrated to the specific provenance history of each sample. No universal hierarchy of sample type is applicable; what matters is whether the methodological approach is capable of distinguishing authentic ancient DNA from contamination given the specific history of the sample at hand.
—
## The Investigators’ Voices: Reading the Study’s Framing
The language that researchers use in presenting their findings is itself evidence of how they understand the significance and limitations of their work. Reading the 2024 study’s framing carefully illuminates what the researchers themselves believed they had and had not established.
Walther Parson’s statement — “That changes the picture, because now the hair samples give the same result as the blood sample” — reflects a specific historical concern. The earlier stalemate between the 1996 Munich blood result and the 2001-2002 Münster hair result had been the scientific foundation for the claim that the question remained genuinely open. Parson’s statement acknowledges that the picture before 2024 genuinely was unclear, and that the new result — hair samples now consistent with the blood sample — resolves the specific conflict that created that unclearness.
Turi King’s public statements reflected a career spent applying ancient DNA to historical questions and a clear-eyed understanding of what such methods can and cannot determine. Her comment that the case was exciting precisely because they were able to use the latest methods to finally answer the question reflects genuine scientific satisfaction — not the resolution of everything, but the resolution of the specific question the study was designed to answer. Her immediate follow-up — “Sadly our data still can’t tell us who he was!” — demonstrates that she understood clearly the distinction between the question they answered and the larger question that remains open.