"Genetic History - A Challenge to Historical and Archaeological Studies" (Berlin, 1&2 october 2015, Humboldt University) (original) (raw)
Related papers
In recent years, molecular genetics has opened up an entirely new approach to human history. DNA evidence is now being used not only in studies of early human evolution (molecular anthropology), but is increasingly helping to solve the puzzles of history. This emergent research field has become known as »genetic history«. The paper gives an overview on this new field of research. The aim is both to discuss in what ways the ascendant discipline of genetic history is relevant, and to pinpoint both the potentials and the pitfalls of the field. At the same time, we would like to raise the profile of the field within the humanities and cultural studies. We hope that the opportunity for communication between representatives of different disciplines will contribute to loosening up the widespread monodisciplinary method of working and, in particular, bring together the relevant scientific and cultural streams of research.
Molecular anthropology: the judicial use of genetic data in archaeology
Anthropology has always been an unashamed scavenger discipline, acquiring and employing techniques developed in other physical, life and social sciences to apply to a holistic approach to studying humanity. In this regard, the adoption of genetic analyses into archaeological investigations has paralleled many previous adoptions including those of radiometric dating, stable isotope analysis and chemical analysis of material culture. Employing DNA data in reconstructions of prehistory, however, has been hampered particularly by the expense of generating the data e both financial and logistical e and, at least initially, by unwarranted resistance to take seriously molecular data. While the expense continues to rise as new techniques become available, there has been a reversal in the place of genetic data in that it is now privileged over other sources of data. This kind of molecular chauvinism leads to overreach in inter- pretation and is no less likely to hamper our progress. Moving forward we would do best be judicial in the use of genetic data alongside other independent archaeological evidence in reconstructing the past.
Genetics, archaeology and culture
Mediterranean Archaeology and Archaeometry, 14(1), 297-315. ISSN 1108-9628 (Print), 2241-8121 (Online), 2014
This article explores historical and contemporary approaches to the use of genetic and archaeological evidence in the interpretation of European Prehistory. It begins by reviewing the early work of anthropologists, which was ambitious in scientific scope and effort, but doomed in interpretation by the framework of colonial expansion and racial hierarchy within which it arose. It briefly considers the emergence of serology and genetic studies, and the gradual displacement of the racial paradigm following the Second World War. The Neolithic transition and the genetics of populations in Europe model of Ammerman and Cavalli-Sforza is used to generate a fuller discussion of the dimensions involved in combining archaeological and genetic evidence, and alternative mechanisms are explored. The potential for ancient DNA to contribute to this and other debates is raised, and the prospects offered by more recent scientific developments in human genetics are considered. Genetic studies-modern and ancient-have become established as having the potential to support archaeological investigations with considerable breadth and time-depth. The paper aims to offer a nuanced consideration of a number of issues arising from this discussion and concludes that genes, environment, language and archaeology are individually and together legitimate and pressing subjects of enquiry for the scholar of the past.
DNA evidence? The impact of genetic research on historical debates
BioSocieties, 2010
The article explores how the relationship between genetics and history is performed in genetics studies that aim to reconstruct human migrations. It focuses on two case studies: research on the nature of genetic diversity of South Asian populations and on the genetic history of different Jewish communities. Analysis is based on a close reading of 16 articles on the genetic history of Jewish and South Asian populations and on in-depth interviews with eight geneticists who played a key role in either or both types of studies and with 20 historians with expertise in the issues examined in the genetic studies under survey. The paper discusses the way geneticists construct their contribution to historical debates and the way this contribution is perceived by historians. It will be demonstrated that geneticists and historians are keen on demarcating their disciplines from each other with geneticists insisting on keeping some distance from historical evidence for the sake of maintaining 'objectivity', and historians questioning the epistemological validity of genetic interventions into their field. It will be argued that what accounts for this lack of engagement with each other's discipline is the sociocultural norms associated with academic practice in the natural sciences and humanities and a tendency towards monodisciplinary peer-review.
Goes, B.R. (ed.), C.J.C. Reuvenslezing—15. Amsterdam: Stichting voor de Nederlandse Archeologie, 36 pp. ISBN 9076289077, 2003
Clash of cultures| Archaeology and genetics
2006
This paper examines the ways in which genetic data have been used to interpret the transition to agriculture in Europe over the past two decades, and the relationship of these interpretations to more strictly archaeological explanations. It is suggested that, until recently, those working within the two disciplines have been using not only different data sets and methodologies, but also working within different disciplinary traditions which have inhibited communication and collaboration, and the production of a genuinely integrated field of 'archaeogenetics'.