It is amazing how much narrative archaeologists construct out of a single poorly preserved bone and radiocarbon dating that happens to conform nicely with a famous historical mystery. One should maintain a healthy skepticism about this sort of claim. There are surely alternative explanations for such "artefacts".
cma|10 days ago
Which claim are you referring to that they made? I looked through all the parts where they were quoted and most seemed to have couched language.
reedf1|10 days ago
You realize you are giving people the indication that you are knowledgeable on the subject, have read the article, or the underlying research - by framing your statement this way?
"much narrative archaeologists construct"
This comment has it's own narrative, to be skeptical of archaeologists. Be skeptical of the skeptics too.
Anyway you can read about the additional archaeological contexts which are used for evidence of the claim here (https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S23524...).