key bit:
> The authors note that individuals not related to Vikings genetically, such as native Pictish people of Scotland and Ireland, sometimes received traditional Viking burials
so @trekonomics is totally full of crap - the thing he links to defines Vikings in genetic terms https://twitter.com/trekonomics/status/1306391405539983361 …
-
-
5/ Given that (a) the signifier "viking" exists in our language, and (b) the signified thing existed, yes, vikings DID exist. You're not being pedantic (which implies correct), you're just being wrong, combative, and boring.
Show this threadThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
And common usage is a good and fine thing. A discussion of *who Vikings were* which doesn’t make that distinction is suspect. Fallacy is ad hom, not continuum.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
they were often just going *hiking* but got carried away.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.