For the tribe, this was the outcome it had sought since the 1990s.

For scientists, it was also a moment that forced reconsideration of how ancient remains should be studied and how much weight should be given to tribal knowledge, geography, oral history, archaeology, and genetics together.

The case had begun with a false choice: either the remains belonged to science or they belonged to Native history.

The eventual resolution suggested a more complicated possibility.

Scientific study could produce knowledge, but it did not require institutions to retain permanent control over human remains.

Research could occur with tribal permission.

New evidence could be used to support repatriation rather than delay it.

That change in relationship was significant.

The ancestor had spent decades in a museum collection because institutions considered his scientific value extraordinary.

In the end, the same scientific revolution that made him even more valuable to genetic research helped establish the case for returning him.