Angela
Veteran member
- Messages
- 21,783
- Reaction score
- 12,343
- Points
- 113
- Ethnic group
- Italian
See: See Stephanie Eisenmann et al (inc. Lazaridis, Reich and Krause)
"Reconciling material cultures in archaeology with genetic data: The nomenclature of clusters emerging from archaeogenomic analysis"
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-018-31123-z
"Genome-wide ancient DNA analysis of skeletons retrieved from archaeological excavations has provided a powerful new tool for the investigation of past populations and migrations. An important objective for the coming years is to properly integrate ancient genomics into archaeological research. This article aims to contribute to developing a better understanding and cooperation between the two disciplines and beyond. It focuses on the question of how best to name clusters encountered when analysing the genetic makeup of past human populations. Recent studies have frequently borrowed archaeological cultural designations to name these genetic groups, while neglecting the historically problematic nature of the concept of cultures in archaeology. After reviewing current practices in naming genetic clusters, we introduce three possible nomenclature systems (‘numeric system’, ‘mixed system (a)’, ‘geographic-temporal system’) along with their advantages and challenges."
In my opinion, this is in response to the, again, imo, idiotic squalling of some archaeologists at the labelling of the samples in the Lazaridis paper as "Minoan" and "Mycenaean" as well as other nomenclature to which they've objected. I didn't understand it then and I don't understand it now.
The whole thing reads to me like it's written for the educable retarded. Do archaeologists really need it broken down this way for them to understand? I guess so.
I understand the diplomacy the Reich group is trying to exert; I wish I could say I think it will be successful. Most people, no matter their education level or raw intelligence, are not logical and rational when something opposes their emotionally held beliefs, such as a belief that any discussion of ethnicity is racist, or if it conflicts with their livelihood, as this does for archaeologists who have staked their careers on certain views of culture.
So, a wasted effort I fear.
"Reconciling material cultures in archaeology with genetic data: The nomenclature of clusters emerging from archaeogenomic analysis"
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-018-31123-z
"Genome-wide ancient DNA analysis of skeletons retrieved from archaeological excavations has provided a powerful new tool for the investigation of past populations and migrations. An important objective for the coming years is to properly integrate ancient genomics into archaeological research. This article aims to contribute to developing a better understanding and cooperation between the two disciplines and beyond. It focuses on the question of how best to name clusters encountered when analysing the genetic makeup of past human populations. Recent studies have frequently borrowed archaeological cultural designations to name these genetic groups, while neglecting the historically problematic nature of the concept of cultures in archaeology. After reviewing current practices in naming genetic clusters, we introduce three possible nomenclature systems (‘numeric system’, ‘mixed system (a)’, ‘geographic-temporal system’) along with their advantages and challenges."
In my opinion, this is in response to the, again, imo, idiotic squalling of some archaeologists at the labelling of the samples in the Lazaridis paper as "Minoan" and "Mycenaean" as well as other nomenclature to which they've objected. I didn't understand it then and I don't understand it now.
The whole thing reads to me like it's written for the educable retarded. Do archaeologists really need it broken down this way for them to understand? I guess so.
I understand the diplomacy the Reich group is trying to exert; I wish I could say I think it will be successful. Most people, no matter their education level or raw intelligence, are not logical and rational when something opposes their emotionally held beliefs, such as a belief that any discussion of ethnicity is racist, or if it conflicts with their livelihood, as this does for archaeologists who have staked their careers on certain views of culture.
So, a wasted effort I fear.