Request concerning the project “Embodied Climate” (2025/121) - updated

On 11 November 2025, the National Committee for Research Ethics on Human Remains (Human Remains Committee) received a request from Anne Marie Wort, doctoral candidate in the Department of Anthropology at the University of Massachusetts Amherst, USA. The request is an update to the request regarding analyses in the project “Embodied Climate: A Bioarchaeological and Paleoclimatic Investigation of Dietary Resilience and Physiological Stress in Medieval Scandinavia (1000–1350 CE)”, which was evaluated at the committee’s meeting on 15 September 2025, with an advisory statement given on 22 October 2025.

Wort’s request to the Human Remains Committee includes a filled-out submission form, project description, an ethical self-assessment, and a list of work cited. The request was evaluated by the Human Remains Committee in its meeting on 3 December 2025.

In the following, a summary of the project’s purpose, materials, and methods is provided, along with a description of the relevant updates. For a more comprehensive description of the project, reference is made to the advisory statement of 22 October 2025.

Summary of the project description

The project examines how diet shaped experiences of famine in medieval Scandinavia (1000-1350 CE) during the Little Ice Age, focusing on Sweden, Norway, and Denmark. Combining bioarchaeology and paleoclimatology, the project analyzes dietary adaptations and physiological stress in relation to climate variability across different regional and social contexts. 

The exact material and number of samples are undetermined, as collection inventories are incomplete due to a relocation process. The skeletal material will be collected from rural, semi-rural, and urban burial sites from coastal and inland sites. The project targets moderately to well-preserved remains, especially adults. The target chronological range is 1000 to 1350 CE ending before the Black Death to avoid its effects on health patterns. If needed, however, the scope may extend to 1600 CE. 

The project will combine osteological, isotopic, and environmental methods to investigate human diet and resilience to climatic variability. Biological data, supplemented by existing studies, will be integrated with paleoclimate proxies to explore links between environmental fluctuations and physiological stress, with resilience indices applied to evaluate community-level adaptation and vulnerability. Sampling will only be conducted in cases where existing datasets are deemed insufficient to answer the proposed research questions. Potential sampling would focus on rib fragments. 

Summary of the committee’s advice

In its statement of 22 October, the committee did not recommend approval of palaeopathological analyses and sampling in the project. Overall, the committee was in the opinion that the project description was unclear regarding its design and scope. Further, the committee noted the need for specification and reflection on four points:

1. Specification of the criteria by which the adequacy of existing data will be evaluated, and a systematic framework for determining when additional palaeopathological analyses and/or sampling would be justified. 
2. A sufficiently detailed description of the protocol for sampling and subsequent analyses of the material. 
3. An export of the material for analyses abroad will require an export permit before sampling begins.
4. Consideration of the possibility that the material may include Sámi remains.

The updated request

Remarks #1 and #2

The updated request contains a substantially expanded methodological description intended to cover the Committee’s remarks 1 and 2. 

The site locations (not yet identified) will be stratified by geographic context – coastal urban, coastal rural, inland urban, and inland rural – and further divided into two temporal periods, 1000–1200 CE and 1200–1350 CE. The idea is that this structure will allow for comparisons of health patterns across different settlement types and landscapes during both a climatically stable and a climatically variable period.

For the pathological assessments, the target sample size is 20 individuals per subgroup, amounting to a total of 160 individuals across eight subgroups in Norway. The number of individuals proposed for analysis has been selected to ensure meaningful and statistically robust results. Because published paleopathological data is inconsistent, direct examination of skeletal remains is necessary to ensure standardized recording and improve comparability with isotopic results. Standard osteological methods will be used for sex and age estimation, pathology scoring, and assessment of stress indicators, stature, and body mass, enabling a coherent evaluation of health and nutrition in medieval Norwegian populations.

Stable isotope analysis will rely primarily on existing published data. New isotopic sampling will only be conducted if institutional approval is obtained and if the published material proves insufficient. In such cases, the sample size for stable isotope analysis may reach up to 20 individuals per subgroup. Any new δ¹³C, δ¹⁵N, and δ³⁴S analyses will be conducted on small rib fragments, with full documentation of each specimen. Isotopic values will be used to model mortality risk (Siler hazard model) and to test associations between diet and health stress markers through logistic regression and Mann–Whitney tests. 

Remark #3 

The Committee’s remark number 3 is mentioned in the methodological section, where it is stated that if the analyses cannot be carried out in Norway, an export license will be obtained through the Museum of Cultural History at UiO, in compliance with national regulations.

Remark #4

The Committee’s remark number 4 is addressed in the updated ethical self-assessment. The project leader intends to avoid using Sámi material, but will, if necessary, obtain the required permissions.

The committee’s evaluation

In its ethical evaluation of the application, the committee uses the Guidelines for Ethical Research on Human Remains (National Committee for Research Ethics on Human Remains, 2022) as its primary reference. Where relevant, the committee may also consider other national and international research ethics guidelines. 

The project presents compelling research questions and is anchored within a strong research environment. In the updated submission, the project leader also demonstrates improved familiarity with the published literature. However, several uncertainties and deficiencies remain regarding the material, methods, and planned analyses.

The application provides no specifications concerning the material or site locations and does not outline inclusion criteria for the sampling protocol or present a concrete plan for how the selected material will address the stated research questions. The eight proposed subgroups do not seem to be grounded in confirmed available material. Some of the material groups, e.g. the material from Bergen, may not be sufficiently large to support such statistical analyses. Further, it is not clear how the project will reliably determine whether skeletons date before or after 1200 CE (the temporal distinction of the subgroups), and before or after 1350 CE (the upper chronological limit of the project), given that no direct dating of the material is planned. Therefore, it remains unclear whether the material the applicant intends to analyze, and whether the methods chosen, are suitable for answering the research questions defined.

The committee also wishes to note that, for the period in question, several individuals in Norwegian collections are represented only by crania. The project will therefore in many cases need alternatives to ribs and femora. Furthermore, analyses derived from ribs and femora are not directly comparable.

The committee encourages the project leader to reflect on two issues concerning the chronological boundaries of the project:

1. As noted by the project leader, the peak of the Little Ice Age occurred between c. 1600 and 1800 CE. Given that the project aims to analyze material related to climatic changes associated with the Little Ice Age, it appears inconsistent to set the upper chronological limit at 1350 CE. While the Black Death provides a material-based rationale for the boundary, there is a risk that, with this time frame, the project will not be able to draw meaningful conclusions about the possible dietary impact of the Little Ice Age.
2. The project leader limits the study period to the onset of the Black Death in order “to minimize confounding effects on nutritional health patterns.” At the same time, it is stated that “if sample availability is limited, the range may be extended to 1600 to include the peak of the Little Ice Age.” Should the period be extended to 1600, it becomes unclear how the project intends to maintain the stated aim of minimizing confounding effects on nutritional health patterns.
    

Conclusion

The committee finds that the project still lacks specifications regarding the material or site locations, as well as a sufficiently detailed description of the sampling protocol and subsequent analytical procedures. Therefore, the committee cannot recommend approval of palaeopathological analyses and sampling in this project as currently described. 

If the project leader intends to submit a new application, the following should be provided:

• A sufficiently detailed description of the sampling protocol including museum number and collection number, and analytical procedures, including clear inclusion criteria.
• A description of how the project leader intends to address or mitigate the issues concerning the chronological boundaries of the project.

Yours sincerely

Sean D. Denham, Chair
Lene Os Johannessen, Secretariat

Copy: Museum of Cultural History (University of Oslo), NTNU University museum and University Museum of Bergen (University of Bergen).