5 ms·

This comment is an accurate contextualization of the report within the broader literature. It appears to have been heavily downvoted, which seems to be a matter

This comment is an accurate contextualization of the report within the broader literature. It appears to have been heavily downvoted, which seems to be a matter of patriarchal grievance culture revanchism rather than informed engagement with the material. What a shame.

Veen 4y ago
> patriarchal grievance culture revanchism That's a new one for the left-wing academia bingo card.
- AprilArcus 4y ago
  I'm pleased you enjoyed it. We can bandy words all we like, but it won't change the fact that we descend equally from mothers as well as fathers. By analogy, the fact that Kievan Rus' was founded by Vikings doesn't make the Russian people essentially Norse in some kind of metaphysical sense.
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
  - astrange 4y ago
    Oddly that doesn’t always happen. The pattern of foreign male invaders marrying local women is common, like the Vikings and Normans arriving in the UK, but Scottish people identify as Scottish and not “actually French and Scandinavian”. And even genetics websites arbitrarily decide to cluster them that way. (23AndMe and several other sites give me 100% British despite my YDNA and mtDNA both being ~2% among typical British people.)
- Archelaos 4y ago
  As the author of the initial comment, I was very surprised to see that it was downvoted. I did not expect that here on HN. See how carefully the original Science article quoted by user Veen avoids cliches of national historiography. Here is their abstract: "The ancient Mediterranean port city of Ashkelon, identified as 'Philistine' during the Iron Age, underwent a marked cultural change between the Late Bronze and the early Iron Age. It has been long debated whether this change was driven by a substantial movement of people, possibly linked to a larger migration of the so-called 'Sea Peoples.' Here, we report genome-wide data of 10 Bronze and Iron Age individuals from Ashkelon. We find that the early Iron Age population was genetically distinct due to a European-related admixture. This genetic signal is no longer detectible in the later Iron Age population. Our results support that a migration event occurred during the Bronze to Iron Age transition in Ashkelon but did not leave a long-lasting genetic signature." So a "European-related admixture" without a "long-lasting genetic signature" in the original paper becomes "likely of Greek origin" on a Web-site calling itself "Greek Reporter". How could that not be chauvinism? It is using a later national identity and projects it back to a time where it has no real meaning. This was popular 100 years ago for example with the Germans and their Germanic or the French and their Gaul ancestors, neclecting all the other influences. If we are confronted with an admixture, singling out a certain "origin" is pure ideology. This view is so deeply incorporated into todays humanities disciplines (no matter whether a scholar tends more towards the Left or the Right in her or his political views -- a few exception might always be found, though), that I am totally buffled about the downvotes. And I know what I am talking about here, having myself an academic background in the study of European culture and history of ideas. It feels like skipping at least half a century of awarness raising in our disciplines.
  - Veen 4y ago
    Many people are quite attached to their cliches of nationalist historiography. In fact, they find it quite annoying when they are called chauvinists for believing them.
  - imbnwa 4y ago
    > If we are confronted with an admixture, singling out a certain "origin" is pure ideology. Somebody's a Foucault reader?
    - astrange 4y ago
      Or just Zizek.
      - imbnwa 4y ago
        Likely more accurate given the language used
- astrange 4y ago
  If you want to fight bad usage of those words, you shouldn’t complain when they’re correctly used.
  - wumpus 4y ago
    I'm pretty sure that it's OK to criticize words even when used correctly.
wumpus 4y ago
How can you tell why people downvote?

Veen 4y ago

> patriarchal grievance culture revanchism That's a new one for the left-wing academia bingo card.

AprilArcus 4y ago
I'm pleased you enjoyed it. We can bandy words all we like, but it won't change the fact that we descend equally from mothers as well as fathers. By analogy, the fact that Kievan Rus' was founded by Vikings doesn't make the Russian people essentially Norse in some kind of metaphysical sense.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- astrange 4y ago
  Oddly that doesn’t always happen. The pattern of foreign male invaders marrying local women is common, like the Vikings and Normans arriving in the UK, but Scottish people identify as Scottish and not “actually French and Scandinavian”. And even genetics websites arbitrarily decide to cluster them that way. (23AndMe and several other sites give me 100% British despite my YDNA and mtDNA both being ~2% among typical British people.)
Archelaos 4y ago
As the author of the initial comment, I was very surprised to see that it was downvoted. I did not expect that here on HN. See how carefully the original Science article quoted by user Veen avoids cliches of national historiography. Here is their abstract: "The ancient Mediterranean port city of Ashkelon, identified as 'Philistine' during the Iron Age, underwent a marked cultural change between the Late Bronze and the early Iron Age. It has been long debated whether this change was driven by a substantial movement of people, possibly linked to a larger migration of the so-called 'Sea Peoples.' Here, we report genome-wide data of 10 Bronze and Iron Age individuals from Ashkelon. We find that the early Iron Age population was genetically distinct due to a European-related admixture. This genetic signal is no longer detectible in the later Iron Age population. Our results support that a migration event occurred during the Bronze to Iron Age transition in Ashkelon but did not leave a long-lasting genetic signature." So a "European-related admixture" without a "long-lasting genetic signature" in the original paper becomes "likely of Greek origin" on a Web-site calling itself "Greek Reporter". How could that not be chauvinism? It is using a later national identity and projects it back to a time where it has no real meaning. This was popular 100 years ago for example with the Germans and their Germanic or the French and their Gaul ancestors, neclecting all the other influences. If we are confronted with an admixture, singling out a certain "origin" is pure ideology. This view is so deeply incorporated into todays humanities disciplines (no matter whether a scholar tends more towards the Left or the Right in her or his political views -- a few exception might always be found, though), that I am totally buffled about the downvotes. And I know what I am talking about here, having myself an academic background in the study of European culture and history of ideas. It feels like skipping at least half a century of awarness raising in our disciplines.
- Veen 4y ago
  Many people are quite attached to their cliches of nationalist historiography. In fact, they find it quite annoying when they are called chauvinists for believing them.
- imbnwa 4y ago
  > If we are confronted with an admixture, singling out a certain "origin" is pure ideology. Somebody's a Foucault reader?
  - astrange 4y ago
    Or just Zizek.
    - imbnwa 4y ago
      Likely more accurate given the language used
astrange 4y ago
If you want to fight bad usage of those words, you shouldn’t complain when they’re correctly used.
- wumpus 4y ago
  I'm pretty sure that it's OK to criticize words even when used correctly.

wumpus 4y ago

How can you tell why people downvote?