Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

‘Viking’ was a job, not a matter of heredity: ancient DNA study (2020)

science.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

201–210 of 210 posts

Re: ‘Viking’ was a job, not a matter of heredity: ancient DNA study (2020)

#201

Post by vintermann »

JuniperMesos wrote: post #200
vintermann wrote: post #166

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not Americans doing these things. I've met plenty of Europeans with exotic identity claims, romanticizing some past culture instead of the living culture around them - Viking metal rather than folk music, to put it like that (there are also of course responsible ways to enjoy exotic metal genres). By making it into Americans vs. Europeans you're doing a bit of what you're criticizing yourself. Yeah sure, we all…

Viking metal is a folk music tradition of Europe! Just a very modern one that postdates the invention of the electric guitar and Tony Iommi losing his fingertips in an industrial accident :) A lot of Viking-themed metal is pretty historically uninformed and cheesy, although that's true of lots of metal and for that matter lots of other art.

Yes, I'll accept that it's a modern folk tradition. And I'm actually OK with cheesy too, as long as something doesn't pass itself off as more historically accurate than it is. As Farya Faraji pointed out, we don't know what Norse Viking music was like, but it's unlikely to have included throat singing, and we know they liked pan pipes. (Invading England to a George Zhamfir soundtrack?)

Re: ‘Viking’ was a job, not a matter of heredity: ancient DNA study (2020)

#203

Post by lo_zamoyski »

Throaway1982 wrote: post #190
lo_zamoyski wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> that's not how immigrant communities see themselves. Whoa, who's talking about immigrant families? Immigrant families came from somewhere else. That's their identity, because it's where they came from. But if your family has been here for a few generations, then I have news for you: you're not immigrants! > I do in fact know the perecentages of my national makeup. Nobles know their ancestry down to the smallest det…

The percentages come from their ancestry (their GRANDPARENTS), not culture.

Obviously. But the fallacy trades on that insignificant mathematical curiosity to imply something that is ultimately cultural in nature.

Being "Japanese" is a matter of culture, not some kind of "magical Japanese DNA". So it doesn't make sense to say you're "12.5% Japanese". There is no "Japanese DNA". This is different than claiming that you have Japanese ancestry.

Re: ‘Viking’ was a job, not a matter of heredity: ancient DNA study (2020)

#204

Post by JuniperMesos »

selimthegrim wrote: post #41
antonymoose wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Would wearing a haircut from that dreadful viking TV show and a Thor hammer necklace count? I’ve seen quite a meme-worthy characters over the years

There was that one Indian guy who hit the gym, bleached his skin and hair and now does a pretty credible Viking impression.

Shared Indo-European heritage.

Re: ‘Viking’ was a job, not a matter of heredity: ancient DNA study (2020)

#205

Post by aicnic »

marcus_holmes wrote: post #196
_DeadFred_ wrote: post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Identity doesn't work that way. Doesn't change where my family came from, my families traditions, what identity bits my family chose to hang onto, or how we try to understand the world. Good job keeping up your culture of being petty judges of us though. At least when your ancestors did it we were your neighbors and you had good cause (we were the wrong religion or whatever your ancestors hated in us and your family…

Hey, so I had a conversation with my wife last night about this. Really interesting. She challenged me on this, and pointed out that this is the exact same argument about trans folks, and that I was taking the same position as J K Rowling. Now, while I think she made some good points at times, I don't agree with her, and it made me stop and think. So, yeah, I've changed my mind on this. Go call yourself Irish if you…

JKR is correct though. "Woman" cannot merely be an identity for men to appropriate as they please. We exist in a social, historical and legal framework in which it is understood that women are female, and that men who call themselves women are just pretending.

Re: ‘Viking’ was a job, not a matter of heredity: ancient DNA study (2020)

#206

Post by kleton »

philwelch wrote: post #39
kleton wrote: post #20

It's safe to say that 100% of the Northmen who invaded England in 1066 shared that same "job description", however.

By 1066, not quite. That was an invading army led by the King of Norway to press his claim on the throne of England. I’m sure many of the soldiers in that army had been Vikings but at that time they were soldiers of a Christian king, which would have been considered much more legitimate than being a heathen raider. I guess the Normans were also of Nordic descent but they had given up the Viking way of life a century…

> Nordic descent but they had given up the Viking way

So they were indeed Vikings as a matter of heredity?

Re: ‘Viking’ was a job, not a matter of heredity: ancient DNA study (2020)

#207

Post by _DeadFred_ »

marcus_holmes wrote: post #196
_DeadFred_ wrote: post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Identity doesn't work that way. Doesn't change where my family came from, my families traditions, what identity bits my family chose to hang onto, or how we try to understand the world. Good job keeping up your culture of being petty judges of us though. At least when your ancestors did it we were your neighbors and you had good cause (we were the wrong religion or whatever your ancestors hated in us and your family…

Hey, so I had a conversation with my wife last night about this. Really interesting. She challenged me on this, and pointed out that this is the exact same argument about trans folks, and that I was taking the same position as J K Rowling. Now, while I think she made some good points at times, I don't agree with her, and it made me stop and think. So, yeah, I've changed my mind on this. Go call yourself Irish if you…

Cool on you for re-examining your position (irregardless of the outcome of it). Sadly I'm past the point of being that person who felt kinship/a bond with Europe/Europeans, and didn't instill it in my kids. Like I said it'll probably be a moot point when my generation passes so guys won't have to deal with it forever.

Re: ‘Viking’ was a job, not a matter of heredity: ancient DNA study (2020)

#208

Post by philwelch »

kleton wrote: post #206
philwelch wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

By 1066, not quite. That was an invading army led by the King of Norway to press his claim on the throne of England. I’m sure many of the soldiers in that army had been Vikings but at that time they were soldiers of a Christian king, which would have been considered much more legitimate than being a heathen raider. I guess the Normans were also of Nordic descent but they had given up the Viking way of life a century…

> Nordic descent but they had given up the Viking way So they were indeed Vikings as a matter of heredity?

“Viking” isn’t a matter of heredity though. If your grandfather was a bricklayer, you’re not a bricklayer as a matter of heredity, you have to actually lay bricks. Likewise, if your grandfather was a viking, you have to actually go raiding and pillaging to be one yourself. Which is not something you’re likely to do if the king of France gave your grandfather an entire duchy in exchange for a promise to stop doing that sort of thing.

Re: ‘Viking’ was a job, not a matter of heredity: ancient DNA study (2020)

#209

Post by _DeadFred_ »

aicnic wrote: post #205
marcus_holmes wrote: post #196

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hey, so I had a conversation with my wife last night about this. Really interesting. She challenged me on this, and pointed out that this is the exact same argument about trans folks, and that I was taking the same position as J K Rowling. Now, while I think she made some good points at times, I don't agree with her, and it made me stop and think. So, yeah, I've changed my mind on this. Go call yourself Irish if you…

JKR is correct though. "Woman" cannot merely be an identity for men to appropriate as they please. We exist in a social, historical and legal framework in which it is understood that women are female, and that men who call themselves women are just pretending.

Bro you made an account just to post this? We live in a society where the people that push the view you are are unserious ideologues that excuse/hide/ignore the Epstein files among a multitude of actual other real issues, that continue to vote in politicians with numerous scandals more serious than your 'identity definition' bs here. Focus on something actually important like 'the meanie Irish poster hurt my feelie feelz online' like I do. Or all the messed up stuff people who claim to care about/protect society are doing while they distract you with 'but the trans'.

Re: ‘Viking’ was a job, not a matter of heredity: ancient DNA study (2020)

#210

Post by philwelch »

scottyah wrote: post #65
philwelch wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Much like pirates and gangsters, Vikings are cool if you consider them from an aesthetic as opposed to moralistic perspective. Everyone has evil ancestors, but some of them were cool.

Ninjas, samurai, Native Americans in war paint, etc. It's like every culture (that has survived) has reverence for their own group.

The samurai didn’t survive the Satsuma Rebellion but they were admired and respected even by many of the people who fought against them in the following decades. You don’t even have to be Japanese to think samurai are cool, they just are, even if, in practice, you wouldn’t want to actually live in a society with them.
Post reply on HN