Ok, so I've just finished a quick scan through both the new DNA study @DrDonnaYates mentioned yesterday, along w/ its supplementary info >
-
-
> in Modern Britain is via post-Roman immigration, but doesn't deal w/ the Woolf/Härke issues over how this might relate to the 'migration >
-
> period', which raises signif points of uncertainty, & we've seen figures in this range before, so.... :-/ Also has the usual worrying >
-
> gaps in the data, slightly old-fashioned ideas of nature of AS adventus which doesn't take account or show awareness of modern work & >
-
> research on this, & etc etc (have moaned in print about this before!). In sum, worth being aware of, but it doesn't actually solve the >
-
> historical questions in way geneticists and others seem to believe it does... Essentially, still have issues that interpretation of this >
-
> material collected c.1500yrs after events studied relies on models and assumptions to understand how it *might* relate to the past :-/ >
-
> Study of ancient DNA might get us further, ofc, but that's not what this looks at. Anyways, that's me done on this, will shut up now! :)
-
One final thing: this is the map of continental DNA they compared GB DNA to....notice any gaps?! *Anglo*-Saxons ;)pic.twitter.com/NBwTiMlaZ5
- 3 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
@caitlinrgreen Agree: a lot of this already established using other methods/evidence. Few would have expected much 'Roman DNA' for a start! -
@Harry_cartoons Yes---I mean, it's interesting & supports previous work, but doesn't deal with the actual historical issues of how this > -
@Harry_cartoons > modern DNA relates to events a millennia and a half ago! Tbh, no great surprises at all from my areas of the country, > -
@Harry_cartoons > and some of the gaps and assumptions just seem wrong, from the perspective of an Anglo-Saxonist :-/
End of conversation
New conversation -
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.