4 ms·

So, they weren't barbarians because some of them farmed? Seems to be a rather low bar.

by vacri 10y ago

mythrwy 10y ago
Washington Post has become a rather low bar in general the last few years. I've stopped reading it all together and am disappointed to see the number of articles from it cropping up on HN lately. Also (off topic) they have begin a policy of shadowbanning commenters in their comment sections who disagree with their "official" policy on things. It's really barely one step above Brietbart now days in my opinion.
- dpark 10y ago
  > Also (off topic) they have begin a policy of shadowbanning commenters in their comment sections who disagree with their "official" policy on things. This policy is known to exist or you believe it does? Serious question.
  - deleted 10y ago
    [deleted]
  - mythrwy 10y ago
    You mean is it a published policy? Not that I know of. Does it happen? At least once (personally observed) and I assume more. They really ought to get rid of comments if they are going to shadowban. An echo chamber of Clinton support is kind of sad at this point and I doubt it fools anyone. It is their paper and they have a right to publish whatever propaganda they want. And they certainly have been doing that. It's kind of sad to see the major paper of our nations capital sunk to this level but I guess it's the trajectory of big media right now.
namenotrequired 10y ago
My interpretation of what the article says is they weren't all barbarians because some of them seem to have coexisted with the locals peacefully.
- vacri 10y ago
  A 'barbarian' doesn't have to be a violent invader. It's just an 'uncouth and uncivilised' person.
pacala 10y ago
> Some bones suggested that the individual was born into a roaming tribe but later settled down; others indicated the opposite lifestyle change. Not sure what history Susanne Hakenbeck studies, but asiatic hersdmen populations in Eastern Europe have a long documented history of looting for slaves. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crimean%E2%80%93Nogai_raids_into_East_Slavic_lands https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crimean%E2%80%93Nogai_raids_in... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Devshirme https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Devshirme
- qordoba 10y ago
  If your argument is correct US and European slave trade in 19th and 20th century shows us what?
  - pacala 10y ago
    It shows that observed mixture of populations doesn't imply peaceful coexistence. Which refutes the main thesis of the article / research.
qordoba 10y ago
...and Romans were drinking Soylent and sending probes to Mars?

So, they weren't barbarians because some of them farmed? Seems to be a rather low bar.

by vacri 10y ago

So, they weren't barbarians because some of them farmed? Seems to be a rather low bar.

Washington Post has become a rather low bar in general the last few years. I've stopped reading it all together and am disappointed to see the number of articles from it cropping up on HN lately. Also (off topic) they have begin a policy of shadowbanning commenters in their comment sections who disagree with their "official" policy on things. It's really barely one step above Brietbart now days in my opinion.

dpark 10y ago
> Also (off topic) they have begin a policy of shadowbanning commenters in their comment sections who disagree with their "official" policy on things. This policy is known to exist or you believe it does? Serious question.
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]
- mythrwy 10y ago
  You mean is it a published policy? Not that I know of. Does it happen? At least once (personally observed) and I assume more. They really ought to get rid of comments if they are going to shadowban. An echo chamber of Clinton support is kind of sad at this point and I doubt it fools anyone. It is their paper and they have a right to publish whatever propaganda they want. And they certainly have been doing that. It's kind of sad to see the major paper of our nations capital sunk to this level but I guess it's the trajectory of big media right now.

namenotrequired 10y ago

My interpretation of what the article says is they weren't all barbarians because some of them seem to have coexisted with the locals peacefully.

vacri 10y ago
A 'barbarian' doesn't have to be a violent invader. It's just an 'uncouth and uncivilised' person.

pacala 10y ago

> Some bones suggested that the individual was born into a roaming tribe but later settled down; others indicated the opposite lifestyle change. Not sure what history Susanne Hakenbeck studies, but asiatic hersdmen populations in Eastern Europe have a long documented history of looting for slaves. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crimean%E2%80%93Nogai_raids_into_East_Slavic_lands https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crimean%E2%80%93Nogai_raids_in... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Devshirme https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Devshirme

qordoba 10y ago
If your argument is correct US and European slave trade in 19th and 20th century shows us what?
- pacala 10y ago
  It shows that observed mixture of populations doesn't imply peaceful coexistence. Which refutes the main thesis of the article / research.

qordoba 10y ago

...and Romans were drinking Soylent and sending probes to Mars?