Ok, so I've just finished a quick scan through both the new DNA study @DrDonnaYates mentioned yesterday, along w/ its supplementary info >
-
-
Replying to @caitlinrgreen
On the whole, not sure from the perspective of Britons/Anglo-Saxons (my main area) it tells us anything much new--suggests 10%-20% of DNA >
2 replies 2 retweets 6 likes -
Replying to @caitlinrgreen
> 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 >
1 reply 2 retweets 4 likes -
Replying to @caitlinrgreen
> period', which raises signif points of uncertainty, & we've seen figures in this range before, so.... :-/ Also has the usual worrying >
1 reply 1 retweet 4 likes -
Replying to @caitlinrgreen
> gaps in the data, slightly old-fashioned ideas of nature of AS adventus which doesn't take account or show awareness of modern work & >
1 reply 1 retweet 2 likes -
Replying to @caitlinrgreen
> 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 >
1 reply 2 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @caitlinrgreen
> historical questions in way geneticists and others seem to believe it does... Essentially, still have issues that interpretation of this >
1 reply 2 retweets 3 likes -
Replying to @caitlinrgreen
> material collected c.1500yrs after events studied relies on models and assumptions to understand how it *might* relate to the past :-/ >
1 reply 2 retweets 4 likes -
Replying to @caitlinrgreen
> 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! :)
4 replies 2 retweets 7 likes -
Replying to @caitlinrgreen
@caitlinrgreen had a feeling this would fire you up :) great stuff1 reply 0 retweets 1 like
@CatherineEsse thanks! :)
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.