Monday, November 12, 2012

Directionally Challenged

This article has now officially become irritating. Last year the decided that the Iceman, a 5000 year old corps found in the Alps, was of Sardinian descent. From this they postulated various theories of the movements of people and agriculture, the ruling theory being that agriculture came up from the south and as these people mixed with the local hunter/gatherers their populations exploded.

I'm not really sure why they think the Iceman came from Sardinia, since his genome sequence is closer to that found from prehistoric bodies in Bulgaria and Sweden, but of modern humans he most resembles Sardinians so these means agriculture came from the south to the north and what? his parents were Sardinians and he was a tourist.

Maybe the movements of people came up from the Balkans and Black Sea into northern Europe, into the Alps and up to place like Sweden; THEN south into regions like Sardinia. Especially since Sardinia is an Island.

"Five thousand years ago, it's not really expected that our populations were so mobile," Sikora told LiveScience. And why would that be I wonder? We clearly spread across the planet. Did we do it gradually or in fits and starts? My guess is that we did it gradually and in fits and starts and in giant leaps, always looking for food and a food source. 

Read for confusion.  Maybe I'm too sleepy on the Monday morning to read this article correctly.

2 comments:

Dolarandgold said...


Thanks very possible, please visit my humble blog






منتديات مصراوى توب

منتديات مصراوى توب

منتديات مصراوى توب


eric said...

I'd say the first item to consider is: a modern day genetic population of Sardinia does not mean that same genetic population was always present. So, Otzi's relationship to ~modern-day~ Sardinian's raises questions, especially since Otzi's birthplace, via isotopic analysis of his teeth, was determined to be northern Italy. So, picture Northern Italy and Sardinia as two locations. I'm sure this is overly simplistic, but now step through all the combinations we can think of, considering that in Modern Times, Otzi does not genetically match up with Northern Italy:

1. Ancient Times: Northern Italy and Sardinia were both inhabited by people genetically related to Otzi.
-- Prior to Modern Times: the genetically-related inhabitants were displaced or migrated away from Northern Italy, but remained in Sardinia.

2. Ancient Times: Only Northern Italy was inhabited by folk related to Otzi.
-- Prior to Modern Times: This N. Italian population was dispaced or migrated away to Sardinia, mingling with or displacing a local Sardinian population (or Sardinia was uninhabited).

3. Ancient Times: Only Sardinia was inhabited by folk genetically related to Otzi
-- Small groups from Sardinia migrated to N. Italy, including Otzi's family. The migrating population was small enough to not make a genetic impact on N. Italy.

4. Ancient Times: Neither Sardinia nor Northern Italy was populated by people genetically related to Otzi.
-- Otzi is an outlier who relocated to the area.
-- Prior to Modern Times: Enough of Otzi's original folk migrated or were displaced to Sardinia to make an impact.


The article points out the difficulty of treating modern day populations as geographically equivalent to Otzi's time. Looks like there's some other ancient genetic material to compare Otzi with. In the end, it paints Europe as washed over multiple times by different peoples; moving around, or coming through in waves. "Truth is stranger than fiction" so, this stuff is great inspiration for anyone's fantasy setting.

Gygaxian Fantasy Worlds: An Introduction

For several weeks now, we’ve been hyping up the Gygaxian Fantasy World series on various platforms, Facebook, X, Instagram, and Twitch. It ...