Briton’s Cheddar Man White? Scientist Now Uncertain About DNA Analysis Suggesting First Briton Had ‘Dark to Black Skin’

Cheddar Man

The most recent construction of the Cheddar Man skeleton depicted him with dark skin, curly hair and blue eyes. (Photo by Mark Richards/Daily Mail)

There’s a possibility the U.K.’s “Cheddar Man” may have been white after all, according to one main scientist who helped reconstruct the face of Briton’s oldest near-complete skeleton.

The declaration comes just a month after scientists performed a DNA analysis on the 10,000-year-old skeleton and sensationally revealed he had “dark to black skin,” curly hair and blue eyes. However, Geneticist Susan Walsh of Indiana University–Purdue University Indianapolis now says there’s simply no way of knowing Cheddar Man’s actual skin color.

While her computer model showed his “probable profile” as being Black, Walsh said DNA testing isn’t enough to say for certain, as the DNA may have degraded over all these years.

“It’s not a simple statement of ‘this person was dark-skinned,’ “ she told New Scientist. “It is his most probable profile, based on current research.”

Utilizing genetic sequencing and facial reconstruction techniques, researchers cross-reference genomes extracted from the ancient skeleton to construct a modern image of his outward appearance. The 10mm of bone powder drilled from his skull was enough to reveal anticipated clues into Cheddar Man’s phenotype and hunter-gatherer lifestyle — or so we thought.

A previous reconstruction of the first Briton, made by the University of Manchester before DNA tests were available, depicted him with fair, white skin, Daily Mail reported. That model had brown eyes, instead of blue, and lighter hair.

The most recent DNA analyzed from the skeleton showed a 76 percent chance he had dark skin, but scientists still say it’s impossible to know for sure.

Independent journalism still matters.

We hope this story was worth your time. For over 14 years, Atlanta Black Star has stayed Black-owned and independently run. We didn't get here by waiting on ad budgets that were never built to prioritize us. Our readers did that.

Corporate support for Black media has always been thin. Outlets like ours get roughly 1% of the $170 billion spent on U.S. advertising each year, and that margin is shrinking further as advertisers walk back the DEI-linked commitments they made in 2020. That's the backdrop. It's not why we're asking.

The wider picture isn't any steadier. Newspaper ad revenue has fallen more than 80% since 2005, and local newsrooms are closing at a rate of roughly two a week nationwide. When outlets go under, it's rarely the ones built to center a Black perspective from the ground up that get to stick around.

We know a request for support isn't why you came here. But without readers choosing to fund this work directly, the depth of reporting we can do at home and abroad shrinks along with everyone else's. If you're not in a position to give, that doesn't change how much we value you as a reader.

If you are able to, a recurring contribution does more for us than a single one-time gift, because it lets us plan the next investigation instead of just the next invoice. It takes about 30 seconds, no long form, no account. Thank you for continuing to support independent journalism and freedom of the press.

Back to top