SECRETS OF THE 3 SKULLS
BOFFINS PUTTING HEADS TOGETHER IN BID TO SOLVE MYSTERY OF THE BONES SAY PROJECT HIGHLIGHTS CASE FOR MANDATORY NATIONAL DNA DATABASE
IT is a gripping story of three mysterious human skulls and the scientific search to give them an identity. It is a story, stretching thousands of years, that is soaked in history crime and religion.
It is a story that travels from the dawn of mankind to the late 20th century.
And it is a story that underlines the possible need for a mandatory DNA database.
The detective work is centred in Burton, and the painstaking labour to put flesh on the bones has stretched two years.
The first puzzle being pieced together is that of Greta, a female skull found in Branston, in 1943. Greta is believed to be over 14,000 years old – three times the age of Stonehenge.
Through her ancient DNA, it is hoped some of the secrets of mankind’s origins will be unlocked.
The second puzzle is that of Mabus, a skull, originally thought to be 5,000 years old, discovered in Stretton Gravel Pits in 1952. It involves DNA detective work of a less complex kind. The race is on to give a true name to Mabus.
The third puzzle is that of a skull given the bizarre title Fred the Head. It is that of a murder victim, discovered, buried in a kneeling position, in the outskirts of Burton 50 years ago. He has never been identified despite a slew of public appeals.
Who really was Fred? A national DNA bank would provide the answer, says anthropologist David Adkins, involved in all three Burton projects.
He said: “Although the projects are very different they have all highlighted a common problem – the fact that we do not have a complete or mandatory National DNA Database – a record containing the DNA of every living person in Britain today.
“The subject is steeped in controversy and suspicion and appears to have slipped off the political radar once again. It is a political hot potato with several groups claiming a mandatory record would be an infringement of human rights and a threat to our liberty and freedom.
“We do have a National DNA Database – hailed one of the best in the world, although this is not a mandatory record for the wider population and is primarily concerned with the genetics of those linked to crime. As such it doesn’t cover everyone. Any moves to expand this have caused passionate opposition.
“The Burton projects, however, have highlighted how useful a mandatory record would be. This was not apparent at the very start, but as we progressed it became clear how much more we could learn from such a record.
“It is not only the Burton projects that would benefit, of course. A mandatory – and comprehensive – DNA-Database would be an invaluable tool for solving crime, particularly violent crime, with murder and rape high up on the list. All these crimes leave traces of DNA behind and highlight the obvious benefits a fully inclusive database would provide.
“There are over 600 unidentified bodies lying unclaimed in Britain today and although many will be solved, many, sadly, will not. It is these that a mandatory record would almost certainly resolve.”
It was David who found Greta and Mabus after they went missing following the closure of Burton Museum 40 years ago. He discovered them both languishing in a Stoke museum.
Project Mabus is currently stirring the most interest. Steps are being taken to establish if the skull is that of Aschetillus Pagan who owned Stretton Mill in the 12th century. He features in Burton Abbey documents in the year 1150AD and the remains were found close to the site of the old mill.
Aschetillus Pagan may be a member of the Paganel or Payens family – one of whom founded the Knights Templar in the 1100s.
Project Greta is a study of ancient DNA that will help us understand where we came from.
Project Fred is a meeting of forensics and anthropology. David explained: “Project Greta, the examination of what we believe to be Britain’s oldest skull, is aiming to see how ancient genes evolved and if they have survived in people living today. Does Greta have descendants and what percentage of the population is descended from Britain’s first woman – the Eve of England?
“Project Fred concerns the unknown body of a man that has lain unidentified since he was found in Burton in 1971. It is regarded as one of Britain’s longest unsolved murder cases. We have a full DNA profile, but, sadly, there are no matches in the system.
“Although Greta and Fred are two very different projects the use of DNA analysis is critical to both. One in a mainly academic sense to help trace our evolution, the other in a very practical sense to help solve an unsolved murder.
“This is where a mandatory record would be of enormous benefit to all the Burton projects - both Greta and Fred would be massively enhanced when placed within the context of the complete genetic code of Britain.
“This would be invaluable to many branches of anthropology, although for Project Greta, itself, we would be able to see how her descendants populated Britain, and what percentage of her genes survive in people alive today. We could sit her on the right branch of the human family tree.
“The benefits to Project Fred would be even greater. Firstly, we would be able to find his relatives and then establish exactly who he is. The investigation that has so far taken over 50 years could be potentially solved in a matter of hours, days or weeks.
“When it comes to studying human ancestry and evolution, a complete DNA Database would enable us to see our connections with each other and how populations have developed and spread through time. It could even show us how mankind is still evolving.
“We could also study the evolution of diseases more effectively than ever before. The possibilities are almost endless. The more DNA samples we have, the more accurate and meaningful the picture becomes. Could this have an impact into research into diseases such as cancer?
“It could be argued that a mandatory database is essential. Not only is it an invaluable research tool, it is absolutely key to fighting crime. It could also be argued that it is an infringement of our human rights not to have one. But the subject is understandably contentious and I can see both perspectives.
“At present we have less than 10 per cent of the population’s DNA in the systems that do exist and while samples linked to crime are held on file – and several genealogy sites have evolved in recent years – the numbers are still comparatively small.
“On a personal level, I am undecided as to whether there should be a mandatory database or not – I can see both sides of the argument. I think we need a lot more information and a lot more public discussion and debate about it and maybe one day we will reach a happy compromise.”