The discovery of a dinosaur bone in a drawer of Antarctic geological samples at the British Museum has ignited a debate over institutional credit and research protocols. The bone, identified as a fragment of a theropod femur, was unearthed not from the ice but from a neglected storage cabinet in the museum's basement.
The specimen, originally collected during a 1987 British Antarctic Survey expedition, had been mislabelled as a common rock. It was only during a routine inventory audit last month that a junior curator noticed anomalous bone-like structures. Subsequent CT scans confirmed the fossilised remains, approximately 70 million years old.
The museum has asserted its claim to the discovery, arguing that the bone's presence in its collection constitutes prior ownership and thus credit for the find. “This is a significant palaeontological asset,” said Dr. Helena Graves, head of vertebrate fossils. “The British Museum has a duty to preserve and study such materials. Our records show the bone was catalogued in 1988, albeit incorrectly.”
Critics, however, accuse the museum of institutional hoarding. Professor James Armitage, a palaeontologist at the University of Leeds, said: “This is a case of colonial-era thinking. The bone was found in Antarctic territory, under international scientific agreements. It should be shared with the global research community, not locked in a London drawer.”
The Antarctic Treaty System, which governs all activities south of 60 degrees latitude, requires that specimens be made accessible for international collaboration. The British Museum’s claim may test these protocols, particularly given the bone’s prolonged concealment.
Further complicating matters, the bone may belong to a previously unknown species. Initial analysis suggests it is distinct from other theropods found in Antarctica, raising the possibility of a new taxonomic discovery. "If this is a new species, the naming rights and research precedence are significant academic currency," said Dr. Graves.
The museum has announced it will form a dedicated research team, including international partners, to study the bone. However, it remains insistent on leading the work. “We discovered it. We will set the agenda,” Dr. Graves added.
Geopolitical implications are also emerging. Chile, which operates the nearest research base, has formally requested access to the specimen, citing its proximity to the discovery site. Argentina and Australia have expressed support for a multilateral review. The British government has yet to comment, though sources indicate it is deferring to the museum’s independence.
This incident highlights ongoing tensions in Antarctic science: the balance between national heritage and collective stewardship. As ice sheets retreat and more fossils surface, the question of who owns the past will only become more pressing.
