On October 12, 1492, Christopher Columbus He came to a place he hadn’t expected to reach. His happy misfortune gave rise to a series of events which resulted in the social, economic, biological and political reorganization of the world. The recent documentary Columbus’ DNA. Its true origin has generated considerable interest and controversy by purporting to reveal the true ancestry of Christopher Columbus through the analysis of genetic material stored in the admiral’s purported skeletal remains. Although the film is presented as an unprecedented exploration of Columbus’ heritage, it is essential Examine the scientific validity of your claimsparticularly with regard to the attribution of cultural or religious identities based solely on genetic data.
One of the documentary’s central claims is that Columbus was of Jewish origin based on genetic markers identified in his and his son’s remains. Hernando Colon. However, it is essential to understand that although DNA can provide information about ancestry, cannot definitively assign cultural or religious identities. Genetic markers associated with Jewish ancestry do not necessarily indicate adherence to Jewish culture or religion. Many people may have genetic variants present in Jewish populations without identifying as Jewish or practicing Judaism.
The authors’ assertion that Columbus was a Sephardic Jew simplifies a complex historical narrative. The Jewish population of Spain in the medieval period was diverse and included individuals with diverse cultural and religious practices. Therefore, attributing Columbus’ identity solely to his genetic makeup neglects the broader sociocultural context in which he lived. As several researchers have noted, identity is multifaceted, encompassing personal beliefs, cultural practices, and social affiliations that cannot be reduced to genetic data alone. Even in situations involving contemporary individuals and present-day populations, it is impossible to ascribe a national, religious, or cultural identity to a person based solely on their genetic material.
The forensic doctor José Antonio Lorente with some bone remains analyzed during his investigation.
RTVE
The portion of the documentary dealing with the Columbuses’ biological kinship relies heavily on uniparental markers (particularly the paternal Y chromosome) to trace Columbus’ lineage. Although these markers can reveal information about direct maternal or paternal ancestry, they provide a incomplete picture of an individual’s genetic heritage.
Analysis of the Y chromosome alone tells us about the paternal lineage, but does not take into account the contributions of maternal ancestors or the broader family tree. As such, it may overlook important aspects of an individual’s ancestry. Similarly, mitochondrial DNA only reveals maternal lineage. Furthermore, the analysis reportedly focused on “very damaged” Columbus DNA samples from various bone fragments, raising questions about the robustness of the conclusions drawn from data so limited in resolution. Without complete genetic material, any claims about ancestry become tenuous at best.
“There is a risk that these findings will be misused to promote particular ideological narratives that distort history and encourage nationalist and/or supremacist discourse. »
The identification of the analyzed remains as belonging to Columbus has been the subject of debate among historians and archaeologists for years. Establishing a direct link between these remains and Columbus adds another layer of uncertainty to the discoveries presented in the documentary. This work is not supplemented by other tests, such as the analysis of carbon 14 or stable isotopes, which would have helped in the identification of the remains, in particular the geographical origin. Furthermore, it is important to emphasize that even in ancestry studies with current samples, what is revealed is a genetic affinity, not an absolute belonging.
Therefore, clearly identifying the geographical origin (Western Mediterranean according to the documentary) and membership in a religious group for which there are no genetic studies on contemporary individuals (in this case, medieval Sephardic Jews) through DNA is simply impossible. On the other hand, the controversial results concerning the supposed brother, ultimately identified as a distant relative, lack robustness due to the lack of adequate multidisciplinary research and the limitations that the DNA of the supposed remains of Christopher Columbus appears to represent. This should have started by establishing, with the greatest probability, that these were indeed his remains, especially if we consider the vicissitudes that, according to the documentary, the bones of Diego Colon.
Condition of the skeletal remains of Christopher Columbus after opening the chest kept in the Cathedral of Seville.
The implications of manipulating the viewer by simulating the use of genetic analysis to validate historical accounts are profound: by attributing or reconstructing Columbus’ identity primarily through genetic discoveries, we risk oversimplifying a rich mosaic of human experiences that encompasses much more than biological inheritance. These narratives can lead to misrepresentations of historical figures like Columbus, who played complex roles in the evolution of history, roles that cannot be adequately understood through genetics alone, much less when they are associated with sociocultural characteristics such as religious affiliation. There is also a risk that these results will be misused to promote particular ideological narratives which distort history and promote nationalist and/or supremacist discourses.
Yes ok Columbus’ DNA. Its true origin presents a captivating account of the ancestry of Christopher Columbus through scientific research, ultimately does not meet its scientific rigor and the depth of the historical context. To fully understand historical figures like Columbus, it is necessary to adopt a multidisciplinary approach which allows, with various techniques, to increase the probability of identification and to strengthen the conclusions, but above all a multifaceted approach which takes into account not only genetics, but also the rich complexities of human identity, shaped by culture, history and personal experience.
Only then can we appreciate the complex tapestry of our shared past without reducing it to simple biological determinism. Perhaps the authors of the documentary, like Christopher Columbus, arrived by misadventure to an undesirable destination. This is not to say that nothing positive can be learned from your experience. Despite everything, it is It is essential that authors publish their work in specialized journals so that finally, a detailed and rigorous review of its results can be carried out.
Rodrigo Barquera is a postdoctoral researcher in archaeogenetics at the Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology (MPI-EVA) (Leipzig, Germany).
Patxi Pérez Ramallo is a postdoctoral researcher in osteology, stable isotopes and radiocarbon dating at the Norwegian University of Science and Technology (NTNU) (Trondheim, Norway) and the Max Planck Institute for Geoanthropology (Jena, Germany).
Victor Acuña Alonzo He is professor and director of the National Institute of Anthropology and History (INAH) (Mexico City, Mexico)
