Settlers: Genetics, Geography and the Peopling of Britain, Oxford University Museum of Natural History, Oxford
Vital research on human migration is presented well in this timely exhibition about how Britain’s population has changed over time. By Jack Ashby
University museums differ from others in important ways, particularly when you consider what their aim is. But when you visit the Oxford University Museum of Natural History (OUMNH), much like the UK’s other big university museums in Manchester, Oxford, Glasgow and Cambridge, you may not spot the existential differences. By and large they look like other such institutions, but they are not.
The differences become apparent when considering what a university gets out of investing in a museum. They can make good business sense if they can position themselves as successful brokers between the public and the university’s research. The importance of the societal impact that a university makes through public engagement has become enormous and academic research funding can rely on it. Museums have the venues, audiences and, most importantly, the expertise to deliver that public engagement. The marriage is a happy one.
Once you have explored OUMNH’s permanent displays, which are exceptionally rich in natural history favourites – dinosaurs, dodos, skeletons and taxidermy – you find yourself in its temporary exhibition space, which occupies one side of the balcony that surrounds the cathedral-like gallery.
Settlers: Genetics, Geography and the Peopling of Britain is the museum’s latest exhibition based on research by the university. It tells the story of where modern-day Britons came from, using information from genetics, archaeology and social sciences.
It is becoming standard for university museum exhibitions to be strategically focused on providing platforms for engaging the public in the institution’s research. Finances are not the only consideration behind this way of working. A key point of difference for university museums is that they have access to thousands of world-leading academics, who can provide cutting-edge exhibition content.
Where it all began
The Settlers show starts at the beginning: the first humans arrived in Britain around 800,000 years ago in the form of our relatives Homo neanderthalensis and Homo heidelbergensis. Migrations in and out, driven by climate, politics and everything else, followed on from there. The objects on display are well chosen: I appreciate it when university museums recognise their local role – the 340,000 year-old Neanderthal hand axes on display are from Oxfordshire.
The telling of the story of human movement is timely too. Although Brexit is only specifically referenced in how it may affect the future movement of people, one can’t help but conclude from some of the text that migration is the norm – “The history of Britain’s population is all about arriving, staying and settling, or leaving, moving and settling elsewhere.”
The language is subtle – no one could complain that it was biased towards a remain agenda (although Oxford voted 70.3% to stay in the EU), but it would be hard to make a case for leaving based on what you read here.
The star of the show is the Red Lady of Paviland. Its significance is somewhat hidden at the end of a long section of text, but at around 34,000 years old, it may be the earliest ceremonial burial in Europe. The ochre-covered skeleton was found in south Wales by William Buckland, the first professor of geology at the university, in 1823. He incorrectly assumed it was female because it was decorated by beads. Although not mentioned in the exhibition, this unfortunate stereotyping is another example of how historic collections can relate to current social issues.
People have lived continuously in the British Isles since the ice last retreated 11,600 years ago, and the largest section of the exhibition is focused on the genetic make-up of the people who live here now. This is introduced with one of the exhibition’s few object-led displays, exploring how closely related we are to other organisms. For example, we share 98% of our genes with a chimp and 85% with a mouse, and any two humans are 99.9% genetically alike.
As much as anything, this case seems to serve mostly as an excuse to include some natural history in the exhibition as it is not really on-topic, but the OUMNH is a natural history museum after all.
Complex subjects
The “Ask a researcher” videos explain topics such as the meaning of “genetic relatedness”, which is an important yet difficult concept even though it is a widely used phrase. However, having two video installations opposite each other in a narrow gallery to explain the concept causes bottlenecks in visitor flow.
There is no denying that there is a lot of complicated information in this exhibition, arguably too much for most visitors to take in. Similarly, the inclusion of so much detailed research data makes it hard to find the fascinating stories within. One kiosk scrolled through 18 screens of data detailing the findings of the university’s People of the British Isles study, which compared levels of genetic variation in rural communities.
This is perhaps a manifestation of the quandary that university museums face when it comes to providing platforms for research-engagement. Is it enough to just communicate the findings or do visitors need to know that they are being engaged in university research? Do they need to know the process or just the headlines?
Nonetheless, there are some interesting take-home messages from the information on display. What have the Romans ever done for us? Genetically speaking, not much. Neither did the Normans. And for the English, neither did the Vikings. These peoples had huge linguistic, political and cultural impacts, but settled in too few a number, or eventually returned home without leaving much of a genetic legacy. I also learned that we do not inherit DNA from every one of our ancestors: those from more than 400 years ago likely passed on little or nothing.
University museums are still experimenting with ways to share their institution’s research. Genetics is a challenging subject to communicate through exhibitions as its detail is inescapably complicated. It is also not particularly object-based or visual, although OUMNH has reproduced the content from the Settlers exhibition online, where it may be easier to digest. But it is hugely important, and using it alongside traditional archaeology to tell a story that relates to all of us is of real value.
Jack Ashby is the museum manager of the University Museum of Zoology, Cambridge
Project data
Cost £80,000
Main funder Wellcome Trust
Exhibition design Lai Couto
Interpretation Oxford University Museum of Natural History
Science writer Georgina Ferry
Digital Fish in a Bottle; Oxford University Museum of
Natural History
Display cases Click Netherfield
Modular walling MBA Worldwide
The differences become apparent when considering what a university gets out of investing in a museum. They can make good business sense if they can position themselves as successful brokers between the public and the university’s research. The importance of the societal impact that a university makes through public engagement has become enormous and academic research funding can rely on it. Museums have the venues, audiences and, most importantly, the expertise to deliver that public engagement. The marriage is a happy one.
Once you have explored OUMNH’s permanent displays, which are exceptionally rich in natural history favourites – dinosaurs, dodos, skeletons and taxidermy – you find yourself in its temporary exhibition space, which occupies one side of the balcony that surrounds the cathedral-like gallery.
Settlers: Genetics, Geography and the Peopling of Britain is the museum’s latest exhibition based on research by the university. It tells the story of where modern-day Britons came from, using information from genetics, archaeology and social sciences.
It is becoming standard for university museum exhibitions to be strategically focused on providing platforms for engaging the public in the institution’s research. Finances are not the only consideration behind this way of working. A key point of difference for university museums is that they have access to thousands of world-leading academics, who can provide cutting-edge exhibition content.
Where it all began
The Settlers show starts at the beginning: the first humans arrived in Britain around 800,000 years ago in the form of our relatives Homo neanderthalensis and Homo heidelbergensis. Migrations in and out, driven by climate, politics and everything else, followed on from there. The objects on display are well chosen: I appreciate it when university museums recognise their local role – the 340,000 year-old Neanderthal hand axes on display are from Oxfordshire.
The telling of the story of human movement is timely too. Although Brexit is only specifically referenced in how it may affect the future movement of people, one can’t help but conclude from some of the text that migration is the norm – “The history of Britain’s population is all about arriving, staying and settling, or leaving, moving and settling elsewhere.”
The language is subtle – no one could complain that it was biased towards a remain agenda (although Oxford voted 70.3% to stay in the EU), but it would be hard to make a case for leaving based on what you read here.
The star of the show is the Red Lady of Paviland. Its significance is somewhat hidden at the end of a long section of text, but at around 34,000 years old, it may be the earliest ceremonial burial in Europe. The ochre-covered skeleton was found in south Wales by William Buckland, the first professor of geology at the university, in 1823. He incorrectly assumed it was female because it was decorated by beads. Although not mentioned in the exhibition, this unfortunate stereotyping is another example of how historic collections can relate to current social issues.
People have lived continuously in the British Isles since the ice last retreated 11,600 years ago, and the largest section of the exhibition is focused on the genetic make-up of the people who live here now. This is introduced with one of the exhibition’s few object-led displays, exploring how closely related we are to other organisms. For example, we share 98% of our genes with a chimp and 85% with a mouse, and any two humans are 99.9% genetically alike.
As much as anything, this case seems to serve mostly as an excuse to include some natural history in the exhibition as it is not really on-topic, but the OUMNH is a natural history museum after all.
Complex subjects
The “Ask a researcher” videos explain topics such as the meaning of “genetic relatedness”, which is an important yet difficult concept even though it is a widely used phrase. However, having two video installations opposite each other in a narrow gallery to explain the concept causes bottlenecks in visitor flow.
There is no denying that there is a lot of complicated information in this exhibition, arguably too much for most visitors to take in. Similarly, the inclusion of so much detailed research data makes it hard to find the fascinating stories within. One kiosk scrolled through 18 screens of data detailing the findings of the university’s People of the British Isles study, which compared levels of genetic variation in rural communities.
This is perhaps a manifestation of the quandary that university museums face when it comes to providing platforms for research-engagement. Is it enough to just communicate the findings or do visitors need to know that they are being engaged in university research? Do they need to know the process or just the headlines?
Nonetheless, there are some interesting take-home messages from the information on display. What have the Romans ever done for us? Genetically speaking, not much. Neither did the Normans. And for the English, neither did the Vikings. These peoples had huge linguistic, political and cultural impacts, but settled in too few a number, or eventually returned home without leaving much of a genetic legacy. I also learned that we do not inherit DNA from every one of our ancestors: those from more than 400 years ago likely passed on little or nothing.
University museums are still experimenting with ways to share their institution’s research. Genetics is a challenging subject to communicate through exhibitions as its detail is inescapably complicated. It is also not particularly object-based or visual, although OUMNH has reproduced the content from the Settlers exhibition online, where it may be easier to digest. But it is hugely important, and using it alongside traditional archaeology to tell a story that relates to all of us is of real value.
Jack Ashby is the museum manager of the University Museum of Zoology, Cambridge
Project data
Cost £80,000
Main funder Wellcome Trust
Exhibition design Lai Couto
Interpretation Oxford University Museum of Natural History
Science writer Georgina Ferry
Digital Fish in a Bottle; Oxford University Museum of
Natural History
Display cases Click Netherfield
Modular walling MBA Worldwide