curprev13:1113:11, 6 December 2023 Joe Roetalkcontribs 22,708 bytes−193 Hedenstierna-Jonson et al. doesn't support this statement; they say only "the individual in Bj 581 was considered a male based on the assemblage of grave goods", citing a 1941 source (so not 'quickly')undoTag: Visual edit
curprev10:4510:45, 6 December 2023 Grand'mere Eugenetalkcontribs 22,901 bytes−112 Rem tag. NYT source cites study authors with hyperlink to American Journal of Physical Anthropology (Hedenstierna-Jonson, ''et al.''}, and also a hyperlink to the UNESCO World Heritage Convention description of BirkaundoTag: Visual edit