The DOI matches its Crossref record; 39 of the 39 references it cites were found in a registry or an index; none of the 90 sources its claims cite is checked for support yet.
THE TWILIGHT OF THE GODS? GENOMIC HISTORY AND THE RETURN OF RACE IN THE STUDY OF THE ANCIENT MEDITERRANEAN
Open accessAbstract
This article discusses the impact of genomic history, a subdiscipline that emerged in the study of the ancient Mediterranean in the 2010s. In 2014, scientists first published a method for extracting genetic material, which they christened aDNA (ancient DNA), from ancient human remains in hot climates. After a decade of research, genomic history is now poised to transform our understanding of Mediterranean premodernity, centering migration and conflict as the key mechanisms for cultural change. Despite years of critique, aDNA researchers have failed to seriously examine the bioessentialist assumptions implicit in their work—a failure that has led many to deploy language that is strikingly evocative of pre-World War II racialism. Even worse, some genomic historians continue to make troubling overtures toward the ethnonationalist Right, which has been ascendant across Europe and North America since the 2010s. This article traces the intellectual genealogy of genomic history from World War II to the present, examines recent attempts to answer criticism from the humanities and social sciences, and suggests paths for responsible use of aDNA in historical and prehistorical scholarship.
Overview
AI snapshot
Written from the paper’s full text.
TL;DR
This historiographical essay argues that genomic history of the ancient Mediterranean, which emerged after 2014 with methods for extracting ancient DNA from hot-climate remains, has revived bioessentialist assumptions and rhetoric strikingly reminiscent of pre-World War II racialism. Tracing the field's intellectual genealogy from the postwar UNESCO anti-racist consensus through David Reich's *Who We Are and How We Got Here* (2018) to post-2020 ethical reckonings, the author calls for abandoning the label "genomic history" and treating the genome as evidence about processes, not as a "master text" of history.
Key findings
- Genomic historians position aDNA as an authoritative "third source" for ancient history; Iosif Lazaridis is quoted calling it a source separate from the not "fully objective" nature of texts or the inscrutability of the archaeological record, and Reich claims "theory is always trumped by data" and that genome variation "has surpassed the traditional toolkit of archaeology."
- The essay draws explicit parallels between Reich's rhetoric and that of prewar racialists: Reich's framing of ancient groups such as "Ancient North Eurasians" as groups that "would without a doubt have been called a 'race' had they lived today," and his revival of a framework established by Gustaf Kossinna (1858–1931), whose "settlement archaeology" held a necessary correspondence between material culture, language, environment, and race. Sixty-seven social scientists signed an open letter condemning Reich's views after the book appeared.
- Case studies of early aDNA work show small, unrepresentative samples used for sweeping claims: Stamatoyannopoulos et al. (2017) used 241 living Peloponnesian individuals to "disprove" Fallmerayer's 1830 extinction thesis; Lazaridis et al. (2017) compared 19 ancient genomes from Crete and mainland Greece with 30 present-day residents of Greece and Cyprus; Schuenemann et al. (2017) used 151 individuals from skulls pilfered from Abusir el-Meleq with no known archaeological contexts, concluding ancient Egyptians had less sub-Saharan African ancestry than present-day Egyptians.
- Post-2020 responses are described as limited: the 2021 Alpaslan-Roodenberg et al. ethics manifesto (signed by Reich and Krause) devoted only a single dismissive paragraph to genomic history's interventions in racial or ethnonationalist controversies, and the author calls it "limited, defensive, and apparently nonbinding." Lazaridis et al.'s 2022 study added 215 coauthors including humanists and purged prewar race science from its bibliography, yet still closed its three-thousand-year period of study with the appearance of Slavs and Turks.
Methods
- Design: a historiographical and intellectual-genealogy essay, not an empirical study; the author traces bioessentialist readings of culture from their postwar disappearance to their return in Mediterranean premodernist scholarship.
- Data: published scholarship, chiefly David Reich's *Who We Are and How We Got Here* (2018) as the field's central methodological text, plus archaeogenetic publications from 2014 to the present (Stamatoyannopoulos et al. 2017; Lazaridis et al. 2017 and 2022; Schuenemann et al. 2017; Skourtanioti et al. 2023; Alpaslan-Roodenberg et al. 2021), read against prewar race science and cultural historicism (Kossinna, Madison Grant, Fallmerayer).
- Analysis: close rhetorical and methodological comparison between genomic-history claims and prewar racialist/cultural-historicist frameworks, organized in five parts covering origins (1960s–70s genetics, HGP, HGDP), Reich's monograph, the revival of cultural historicism, Mediterranean controversies 2015–2020, and the post-2020 aftermath.
Limitations
- Stated by the author: he acknowledges that flaws in genomic historians' work "should not foreclose the use of genetic or genomic data" in Mediterranean antiquity, and that these scholars "backpedaled their more sensational rhetoric" after the 2020 protests; he also concedes the "optimistic model" he proposes (the fate of craniometry) deserves caution given its post-1945 context.
- Stated by the author: he anticipates the objection that concentrating on Reich's monograph and its jacket copy is unfair, noting that the monograph "was obviously not peer reviewed."
- Evident from the text: the argument rests heavily on one popular synthesis (Reich 2018) and on rhetorical parallels rather than systematic sampling of the archaeogenetic literature; the author's own position is explicitly partisan ("I am personally doubtful that the so-called 'Yamnaya' people possess any greater validity than the 'Dinarics,' 'Nordics,' or 'brachycephaloids'"), and no quantitative or comparative coding of the corpus is described.
Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Figures
Verification
Claims the paper makes
89 Sources not found · 51 Own interpretation · 43 No basis given · 3 Not checked yet · 1 Own result
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“And then, after around 1950, the category vanished.”
§ THE TWILIGHT OF THE GODS? GENOMIC HISTORY AND THE RETURN OF RACE IN THE STUDY OF THE ANCIENT MEDITERRANEAN > Abstract
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Scientists typically elided modern cultural labels with the geographical origin of a genetic sample.37”
§ THE TWILIGHT OF THE GODS? GENOMIC HISTORY AND THE RETURN OF RACE IN THE STUDY OF THE ANCIENT MEDITERRANEAN > Abstract
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [37]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Not matched
In the paper
“Computing technology enabled premodernists to synthesize multiple large datasets at once.24”
§ THE TWILIGHT OF THE GODS? GENOMIC HISTORY AND THE RETURN OF RACE IN THE STUDY OF THE ANCIENT MEDITERRANEAN > Abstract
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [24]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Not matched
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Moreover, early historical geneticists were prone to making categorical mistakes.”
§ THE TWILIGHT OF THE GODS? GENOMIC HISTORY AND THE RETURN OF RACE IN THE STUDY OF THE ANCIENT MEDITERRANEAN > Abstract
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Around the time of America's victory in the Cold War, Mediterranean premodernists started becoming very interested in the nonhuman factors behind historical trends.22”
§ THE TWILIGHT OF THE GODS? GENOMIC HISTORY AND THE RETURN OF RACE IN THE STUDY OF THE ANCIENT MEDITERRANEAN > Abstract
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [22]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Not matched
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Thus, until around 2010, archaeogenetics made little pretense of offering a new methodology for writing history or prehistory.”
§ THE TWILIGHT OF THE GODS? GENOMIC HISTORY AND THE RETURN OF RACE IN THE STUDY OF THE ANCIENT MEDITERRANEAN > Abstract
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“But in the late 2000s, scientists developed new technology to extract DNA from ancient human remains.This was given the sobriquet aDNA (ancient DNA).40”
§ THE TWILIGHT OF THE GODS? GENOMIC HISTORY AND THE RETURN OF RACE IN THE STUDY OF THE ANCIENT MEDITERRANEAN > Abstract
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [40]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Not matched
In the paper
“Reich's book boasts an endorsement by Anne Wojcicki, the chief executive officer of the personal DNA ancestry company 23andMe, 72”
§ THE TWILIGHT OF THE GODS? GENOMIC HISTORY AND THE RETURN OF RACE IN THE STUDY OF THE ANCIENT MEDITERRANEAN > II. THE RHETORIC OF REPLACEMENT
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [72]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Not matched
In the paper
“It was in response to this language that sixty-seven prominent social scientists signed an open letter condemning Reich's views shortly after Who We Are was published.92”
§ THE TWILIGHT OF THE GODS? GENOMIC HISTORY AND THE RETURN OF RACE IN THE STUDY OF THE ANCIENT MEDITERRANEAN > II. THE RHETORIC OF REPLACEMENT
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [92]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Not matched
In the paper
“As late as 2020, Reich was spreading the genomic dragnet as widely as possible, calling for the elimination of laws that limited access to human remains, particularly the remains of indigenous people kept in museum “anatomical collections.”97”
§ THE TWILIGHT OF THE GODS? GENOMIC HISTORY AND THE RETURN OF RACE IN THE STUDY OF THE ANCIENT MEDITERRANEAN > II. THE RHETORIC OF REPLACEMENT
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [97]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Not matched
- Probably not a substantial claim. 121
- It may state two separate claims as one. 45
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Genomic historians claim to have uncovered lost histories of migration, warfare, and cultural change.”
§ THE TWILIGHT OF THE GODS? GENOMIC HISTORY AND THE RETURN OF RACE IN THE STUDY OF THE ANCIENT MEDITERRANEAN > Abstract
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Even worse, some genomic historians continue to make troubling overtures toward the ethnonationalist Right, which has been ascendant across Europe and North America since the 2010s.”
§ THE TWILIGHT OF THE GODS? GENOMIC HISTORY AND THE RETURN OF RACE IN THE STUDY OF THE ANCIENT MEDITERRANEAN > Abstract
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
- Rests on an assumption: The ethnonationalist Right has been ascendant across Europe and North America since the 2010s.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“It took about a decade for developments in the study of the human genome to have much impact on the study of the ancient Mediterranean.”
§ THE TWILIGHT OF THE GODS? GENOMIC HISTORY AND THE RETURN OF RACE IN THE STUDY OF THE ANCIENT MEDITERRANEAN > Abstract
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Spectacular discoveries in paleontology had bridged the gap between human and hominid history, opening the question of how human human civilization was. 25”
§ THE TWILIGHT OF THE GODS? GENOMIC HISTORY AND THE RETURN OF RACE IN THE STUDY OF THE ANCIENT MEDITERRANEAN > Abstract
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [25]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
In the paper
“The growing reckoning with global warming in the late 1990s renewed attention to the role of climate in shaping history.23”
§ THE TWILIGHT OF THE GODS? GENOMIC HISTORY AND THE RETURN OF RACE IN THE STUDY OF THE ANCIENT MEDITERRANEAN > Abstract
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [23]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The earliest genomic studies of the ancient Mediterranean followed his lead.”
§ THE TWILIGHT OF THE GODS? GENOMIC HISTORY AND THE RETURN OF RACE IN THE STUDY OF THE ANCIENT MEDITERRANEAN > Abstract
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“To bolster their thesis, the geneticists used aDNA to date the first arrival of Yersinia pestis (the pathogen that causes bubonic plague) and the horse into central Europe at around the same time.61”
§ THE TWILIGHT OF THE GODS? GENOMIC HISTORY AND THE RETURN OF RACE IN THE STUDY OF THE ANCIENT MEDITERRANEAN > II. THE RHETORIC OF REPLACEMENT
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [61]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Central to his argument is the claim that the genomic dataset can reconstruct the history of deep antiquity in ways that other datasets cannot.”
§ THE TWILIGHT OF THE GODS? GENOMIC HISTORY AND THE RETURN OF RACE IN THE STUDY OF THE ANCIENT MEDITERRANEAN > Abstract
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Moreover, I recognize that these scholars backpedaled their more sensational rhetoric after the 2020 protests for racial justice in the United States and United Kingdom.”
§ THE TWILIGHT OF THE GODS? GENOMIC HISTORY AND THE RETURN OF RACE IN THE STUDY OF THE ANCIENT MEDITERRANEAN > Abstract
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In one 2016 study, Reich, Krause, and Pääbo drew on a sample of sixty-nine individual genomes dated to a period of ten millennia to argue for an influx of genetic material from eastern to central Europe during the Early Bronze Age.”
§ THE TWILIGHT OF THE GODS? GENOMIC HISTORY AND THE RETURN OF RACE IN THE STUDY OF THE ANCIENT MEDITERRANEAN > II. THE RHETORIC OF REPLACEMENT
plaindirectn = 9- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
In the paper
“The loci for this research were research groups led by Johannes Krause at the Max Planck Institute in Jena, Svante Pääbo at the Max Planck Institute in Leipzig, and David Reich at Harvard Medical School.42”
§ THE TWILIGHT OF THE GODS? GENOMIC HISTORY AND THE RETURN OF RACE IN THE STUDY OF THE ANCIENT MEDITERRANEAN > Abstract
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [42]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
In the paper
“Ultimately, the goal of genomic historians was to date the migration of proto-Indo-European language speakers from the Eurasian steppe as having occurred after 3000 BCE.62”
§ THE TWILIGHT OF THE GODS? GENOMIC HISTORY AND THE RETURN OF RACE IN THE STUDY OF THE ANCIENT MEDITERRANEAN > II. THE RHETORIC OF REPLACEMENT
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [62]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“But these relevant contexts do not make it into Stamatoyannopoulos 46.”
§ THE TWILIGHT OF THE GODS? GENOMIC HISTORY AND THE RETURN OF RACE IN THE STUDY OF THE ANCIENT MEDITERRANEAN > II. THE RHETORIC OF REPLACEMENT
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“A stream of publications that promised to lay out the geographies of human mobility in deep antiquity soon appeared.”
§ THE TWILIGHT OF THE GODS? GENOMIC HISTORY AND THE RETURN OF RACE IN THE STUDY OF THE ANCIENT MEDITERRANEAN > Abstract
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“use a genetic sample of 241 living individuals in the Peloponnese to disprove a 190-year-old theory associated with the Tyrolean historian Jakob Philipp Fallmerayer (1790-1861).46”
§ THE TWILIGHT OF THE GODS? GENOMIC HISTORY AND THE RETURN OF RACE IN THE STUDY OF THE ANCIENT MEDITERRANEAN > II. THE RHETORIC OF REPLACEMENT
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [46]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaindirectn = 241- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
- Not matched
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Up to early 2018, Reich's laboratory had sequenced aDNA from some 2,110 individuals worldwide; his sample was disproportionately weighted (by both practical and legal considerations) toward northwestern Eurasia.”
§ THE TWILIGHT OF THE GODS? GENOMIC HISTORY AND THE RETURN OF RACE IN THE STUDY OF THE ANCIENT MEDITERRANEAN > II. THE RHETORIC OF REPLACEMENT
plaincorrelationaln = 2,110- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“They dated this migration simultaneously with the appearance the Corded Ware archaeological culture in central Europe, which they take as the Yamnaya culture's lineal descendent.60”
§ THE TWILIGHT OF THE GODS? GENOMIC HISTORY AND THE RETURN OF RACE IN THE STUDY OF THE ANCIENT MEDITERRANEAN > II. THE RHETORIC OF REPLACEMENT
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [60]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Like many historical geneticists, Stamatoyannopoulos et al. heavily massaged their data to screen out genetic traces of migrations in the past two hundred years.”
§ THE TWILIGHT OF THE GODS? GENOMIC HISTORY AND THE RETURN OF RACE IN THE STUDY OF THE ANCIENT MEDITERRANEAN > II. THE RHETORIC OF REPLACEMENT
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Two German scientists withdrew from Reich's project once they realized that he sympathized with Kossinna's theories.67”
§ THE TWILIGHT OF THE GODS? GENOMIC HISTORY AND THE RETURN OF RACE IN THE STUDY OF THE ANCIENT MEDITERRANEAN > II. THE RHETORIC OF REPLACEMENT
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [67]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Reich was incredulous; simultaneously, he downplayed the parallels between Kossinna and himself and questioned why Kossinna's racial beliefs should be relevant nine decades after his death.”
§ THE TWILIGHT OF THE GODS? GENOMIC HISTORY AND THE RETURN OF RACE IN THE STUDY OF THE ANCIENT MEDITERRANEAN > II. THE RHETORIC OF REPLACEMENT
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Reich continues to coauthor studies with, and use data produced by, 23andMe employees.73”
§ THE TWILIGHT OF THE GODS? GENOMIC HISTORY AND THE RETURN OF RACE IN THE STUDY OF THE ANCIENT MEDITERRANEAN > II. THE RHETORIC OF REPLACEMENT
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [73]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
In the paper
“Reich's monograph was obviously not peer reviewed.74”
§ THE TWILIGHT OF THE GODS? GENOMIC HISTORY AND THE RETURN OF RACE IN THE STUDY OF THE ANCIENT MEDITERRANEAN > II. THE RHETORIC OF REPLACEMENT
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [74]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
boosted- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
- Not matched
In the paper
“This is evident with Aegean prehistory, which has racked up an impressive number of archaeogenetic publications.83”
§ THE TWILIGHT OF THE GODS? GENOMIC HISTORY AND THE RETURN OF RACE IN THE STUDY OF THE ANCIENT MEDITERRANEAN > II. THE RHETORIC OF REPLACEMENT
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [83]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
In the paper
“And even if Reich has explicitly denied the political consequences of his research, his publisher has been less reticent in this regard.The back cover of the 2019 Vintage paperback edition of his book misquotes John Hawks's 2018 Wall Street Journal review to label Reich's book a “potential political bombshell.””
§ THE TWILIGHT OF THE GODS? GENOMIC HISTORY AND THE RETURN OF RACE IN THE STUDY OF THE ANCIENT MEDITERRANEAN > II. THE RHETORIC OF REPLACEMENT
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites John Hawks's 2018 Wall Street Journal review
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
In the paper
“In 2010, Pääbo's laboratory published a sequenced Neanderthal genome.”
§ THE TWILIGHT OF THE GODS? GENOMIC HISTORY AND THE RETURN OF RACE IN THE STUDY OF THE ANCIENT MEDITERRANEAN > II. THE RHETORIC OF REPLACEMENT
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [93]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
In the paper
“They discovered that some present-day Europeans carry between 1 percent and 4 percent of their genome from Neanderthal ancestors.93”
§ THE TWILIGHT OF THE GODS? GENOMIC HISTORY AND THE RETURN OF RACE IN THE STUDY OF THE ANCIENT MEDITERRANEAN > II. THE RHETORIC OF REPLACEMENT
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [93]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
In the paper
“Their conclusion from this small sample was that the ancient Egyptians had migrated to Africa from west Asia and thus were not really “African.”Significant migration from sub-Saharan Africa only took place in the past two thousand years.107”
§ THE TWILIGHT OF THE GODS? GENOMIC HISTORY AND THE RETURN OF RACE IN THE STUDY OF THE ANCIENT MEDITERRANEAN > IV. PARACHUTING IN: GENOMIC HISTORY AND THE ANCIENT MEDITERRANEAN, 2015-2020
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [107]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaindirectSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
In the paper
“(Possible skeletal remains containing aDNA from a Denisovan had been published by Krause et al.only in 2010.95 )”
§ THE TWILIGHT OF THE GODS? GENOMIC HISTORY AND THE RETURN OF RACE IN THE STUDY OF THE ANCIENT MEDITERRANEAN > II. THE RHETORIC OF REPLACEMENT
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [95]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In early 2017, Iosif Lazaridis and his coauthors made headlines with an aDNA study that purported to show that modern-day Greeks are the direct descendants of the ancient Mycenaeans and Minoans.”
§ THE TWILIGHT OF THE GODS? GENOMIC HISTORY AND THE RETURN OF RACE IN THE STUDY OF THE ANCIENT MEDITERRANEAN > IV. PARACHUTING IN: GENOMIC HISTORY AND THE ANCIENT MEDITERRANEAN, 2015-2020
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“On the other hand, some modern stakeholders (as we have seen with the case of Stamatoyannopoulos et al.'s study) were positively giddy to have their ancestors studied.”
§ THE TWILIGHT OF THE GODS? GENOMIC HISTORY AND THE RETURN OF RACE IN THE STUDY OF THE ANCIENT MEDITERRANEAN > II. THE RHETORIC OF REPLACEMENT
plainSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
In the paper
“The following year, Reich and his collaborators made the startling discovery that many people in the Asia-Pacific region appear to carry ancestry from a hitherto unknown group of hominid ancestors, which they labeled the Denisovans.94”
§ THE TWILIGHT OF THE GODS? GENOMIC HISTORY AND THE RETURN OF RACE IN THE STUDY OF THE ANCIENT MEDITERRANEAN > II. THE RHETORIC OF REPLACEMENT
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [94]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
In the paper
“An aDNA study that was conducted on the genomes of nineteen individuals who were interred in ancient Beirut, Lebanon, and ninety-nine living individuals found that the present-day inhabitants of the country were genetically very similar to the Bronze Age Canaanites.118”
§ THE TWILIGHT OF THE GODS? GENOMIC HISTORY AND THE RETURN OF RACE IN THE STUDY OF THE ANCIENT MEDITERRANEAN > IV. PARACHUTING IN: GENOMIC HISTORY AND THE ANCIENT MEDITERRANEAN, 2015-2020
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [118]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaincorrelationaln = 19- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
- Not matched
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The aDNA laboratories publish dozens of studies each year, studies that often clear peer review quickly.”
§ THE TWILIGHT OF THE GODS? GENOMIC HISTORY AND THE RETURN OF RACE IN THE STUDY OF THE ANCIENT MEDITERRANEAN > IV. PARACHUTING IN: GENOMIC HISTORY AND THE ANCIENT MEDITERRANEAN, 2015-2020
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Following the wave of antiracism protests in the summer of 2020, museums and other rights-holders began withdrawing scientific access to human remains in preparation for reinventory, repatriation, or reburial.”
§ THE TWILIGHT OF THE GODS? GENOMIC HISTORY AND THE RETURN OF RACE IN THE STUDY OF THE ANCIENT MEDITERRANEAN > V. 2020 AND ITS AFTERMATH
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The institutional climate turned hostile in the second half of the year.”
§ THE TWILIGHT OF THE GODS? GENOMIC HISTORY AND THE RETURN OF RACE IN THE STUDY OF THE ANCIENT MEDITERRANEAN > V. 2020 AND ITS AFTERMATH
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Despite bouts of negative press attention, they still benefited from the support of influential backers and continued access to sampling material.”
§ THE TWILIGHT OF THE GODS? GENOMIC HISTORY AND THE RETURN OF RACE IN THE STUDY OF THE ANCIENT MEDITERRANEAN > V. 2020 AND ITS AFTERMATH
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“In 2021, Reich and Krause signed an ethics manifesto whose lead author was Songül Alpaslan-Roodenberg, a researcher at Harvard Medical School.123”
§ THE TWILIGHT OF THE GODS? GENOMIC HISTORY AND THE RETURN OF RACE IN THE STUDY OF THE ANCIENT MEDITERRANEAN > V. 2020 AND ITS AFTERMATH
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [123]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“As soon as they are published, university press offices translate the studies' scientific language into buzzworthy language, identifying how the studies have disrupted something.”
§ THE TWILIGHT OF THE GODS? GENOMIC HISTORY AND THE RETURN OF RACE IN THE STUDY OF THE ANCIENT MEDITERRANEAN > IV. PARACHUTING IN: GENOMIC HISTORY AND THE ANCIENT MEDITERRANEAN, 2015-2020
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In the years following 2020, we have seen genomic historians of the ancient Mediterranean respond in a few different ways: vocalizing their commitment to ethical research; increased collaboration with archaeologists and ancient historians; and, perhaps productively, an interest in what information the genome can offer other than insights into migration.”
§ THE TWILIGHT OF THE GODS? GENOMIC HISTORY AND THE RETURN OF RACE IN THE STUDY OF THE ANCIENT MEDITERRANEAN > V. 2020 AND ITS AFTERMATH
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Furthermore, they recognized that the names of archaeological cultures are modern constructs.135”
§ THE TWILIGHT OF THE GODS? GENOMIC HISTORY AND THE RETURN OF RACE IN THE STUDY OF THE ANCIENT MEDITERRANEAN > V. 2020 AND ITS AFTERMATH
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [135]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
In the paper
“More to the point for Mediterranean antiquity, Alpaslan-Roodenberg et al. devoted only a dismissive single paragraph to addressing genomic history's passion for intervening in racial or ethnonationalist controversies.128”
§ THE TWILIGHT OF THE GODS? GENOMIC HISTORY AND THE RETURN OF RACE IN THE STUDY OF THE ANCIENT MEDITERRANEAN > V. 2020 AND ITS AFTERMATH
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [128]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
- Not matched
In the paper
“Some critics chafed that genomic historians were now writing their own ethical guidelines.126”
§ THE TWILIGHT OF THE GODS? GENOMIC HISTORY AND THE RETURN OF RACE IN THE STUDY OF THE ANCIENT MEDITERRANEAN > V. 2020 AND ITS AFTERMATH
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [126]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
In the paper
“(Unfortunately, the authors of the latter study were condemned for accessing indigenous human remains without contacting living stakeholders, reminding us that even non-migrationist aDNA studies have problems.130 )”
§ THE TWILIGHT OF THE GODS? GENOMIC HISTORY AND THE RETURN OF RACE IN THE STUDY OF THE ANCIENT MEDITERRANEAN > V. 2020 AND ITS AFTERMATH
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [130]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaindirectSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“For instance, they adopted a conciliatory tone toward the humanists, listing ancient historians, archeological scientists, and Aegean prehistorians among their 215 coauthors.”
§ THE TWILIGHT OF THE GODS? GENOMIC HISTORY AND THE RETURN OF RACE IN THE STUDY OF THE ANCIENT MEDITERRANEAN > V. 2020 AND ITS AFTERMATH
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“As early as 2017 and 2018, researchers associated with Reich and Krause had recognized the genomic dataset's utility in reconstructing ancient social structures.”
§ THE TWILIGHT OF THE GODS? GENOMIC HISTORY AND THE RETURN OF RACE IN THE STUDY OF THE ANCIENT MEDITERRANEAN > V. 2020 AND ITS AFTERMATH
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“They also purged prewar race science from their bibliography and concluded by acknowledging “the ancient individuals whose genetic data we analyzed and whose permission we could not directly ask.” 134”
§ THE TWILIGHT OF THE GODS? GENOMIC HISTORY AND THE RETURN OF RACE IN THE STUDY OF THE ANCIENT MEDITERRANEAN > V. 2020 AND ITS AFTERMATH
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [134]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Using this data, Lazaridis et al. hoped to trace the migration of ancient “Yamnaya” people into the Balkans during the Early Bronze Age.”
§ THE TWILIGHT OF THE GODS? GENOMIC HISTORY AND THE RETURN OF RACE IN THE STUDY OF THE ANCIENT MEDITERRANEAN > V. 2020 AND ITS AFTERMATH
plain- Asserted: fails — The authors may not put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The authors may not put it forward as true. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“A pair of early aDNA studies demonstrated kinship within premodern burial groups in central Europe and the American Southwest.”
§ THE TWILIGHT OF THE GODS? GENOMIC HISTORY AND THE RETURN OF RACE IN THE STUDY OF THE ANCIENT MEDITERRANEAN > V. 2020 AND ITS AFTERMATH
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Opening with a meditation on method-this is where Lazaridis et al. referred to aDNA as a “third source” for the historian, a source that complements texts and archaeology-the authors discussed scenarios wherein aDNA evidence could be useful for historians.”
§ THE TWILIGHT OF THE GODS? GENOMIC HISTORY AND THE RETURN OF RACE IN THE STUDY OF THE ANCIENT MEDITERRANEAN > V. 2020 AND ITS AFTERMATH
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“(As a nod to their own difficult disciplinary past, most physical anthropologists now call themselves biological anthropologists.)”
§ THE TWILIGHT OF THE GODS? GENOMIC HISTORY AND THE RETURN OF RACE IN THE STUDY OF THE ANCIENT MEDITERRANEAN > V. 2020 AND ITS AFTERMATH
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In both cases, the authors used their small, unrepresentative, and capriciously preserved datasets to draw sweeping conclusions.”
§ THE TWILIGHT OF THE GODS? GENOMIC HISTORY AND THE RETURN OF RACE IN THE STUDY OF THE ANCIENT MEDITERRANEAN > Additional information
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In both cases, the authors dismissed most, if not all, relevant historical or archaeological scholarship.”
§ THE TWILIGHT OF THE GODS? GENOMIC HISTORY AND THE RETURN OF RACE IN THE STUDY OF THE ANCIENT MEDITERRANEAN > Additional information
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: unclear — It is unclear why the paper says it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“But in reality, craniometry offered no such thing, and it effectively disappeared following World War II.”
§ THE TWILIGHT OF THE GODS? GENOMIC HISTORY AND THE RETURN OF RACE IN THE STUDY OF THE ANCIENT MEDITERRANEAN > V. 2020 AND ITS AFTERMATH
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“However, critics immediately noticed that Lazaridis et al. cited Angel's craniometric research of the 1930s and 1940s as current scholarship.”
§ THE TWILIGHT OF THE GODS? GENOMIC HISTORY AND THE RETURN OF RACE IN THE STUDY OF THE ANCIENT MEDITERRANEAN > Acknowledgements
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [101]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
In the paper
“Lazaridis et al. did not cite any of the many publications that responded to his work.105”
§ THE TWILIGHT OF THE GODS? GENOMIC HISTORY AND THE RETURN OF RACE IN THE STUDY OF THE ANCIENT MEDITERRANEAN > Acknowledgements
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [105]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
- Not matched
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Others have meditated on the methodological challenges that have been raised since 2017 and have sought out collaboration with archaeologists and historians.”
§ THE TWILIGHT OF THE GODS? GENOMIC HISTORY AND THE RETURN OF RACE IN THE STUDY OF THE ANCIENT MEDITERRANEAN > V. 2020 AND ITS AFTERMATH
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Indeed, two Reich-affiliated studies published in 2019 and 2022 confirm ancient Italy's place as the”
§ THE TWILIGHT OF THE GODS? GENOMIC HISTORY AND THE RETURN OF RACE IN THE STUDY OF THE ANCIENT MEDITERRANEAN > Additional information
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [116]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Some genomic historians have acknowledged lapses in research ethics prior to 2020.”
§ THE TWILIGHT OF THE GODS? GENOMIC HISTORY AND THE RETURN OF RACE IN THE STUDY OF THE ANCIENT MEDITERRANEAN > V. 2020 AND ITS AFTERMATH
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
In the paper
“None of these skulls have known archaeological contexts, although carbon-14 dating places them between the New Kingdom and the Roman Period.106”
§ THE TWILIGHT OF THE GODS? GENOMIC HISTORY AND THE RETURN OF RACE IN THE STUDY OF THE ANCIENT MEDITERRANEAN > Acknowledgements
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [106]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plainn = 151- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
In the paper
“(Thus, Reich recently coauthored a study that has”
§ THE TWILIGHT OF THE GODS? GENOMIC HISTORY AND THE RETURN OF RACE IN THE STUDY OF THE ANCIENT MEDITERRANEAN > Additional information
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [117]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
boosted- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“(Schuenemann et al. said very little about the formation of their sample, taking it as representative of Egyptian history as a whole-and not one specific upper Egyptian cemetery ransacked for skulls in the nineteenth century.)”
§ THE TWILIGHT OF THE GODS? GENOMIC HISTORY AND THE RETURN OF RACE IN THE STUDY OF THE ANCIENT MEDITERRANEAN > Additional information
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Where there are no legal barriers to studying human remains, Alpaslan-Roodenberg et al. made a vague commitment to consult living stakeholders.”
§ THE TWILIGHT OF THE GODS? GENOMIC HISTORY AND THE RETURN OF RACE IN THE STUDY OF THE ANCIENT MEDITERRANEAN > The Ohio State University
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [123]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
In the paper
“(Indeed, Stamatoyannopoulos et al.'s article, which was published only a few months prior to Lazaridis et al.'s article, partially relied on mtDNA evidence.100 )”
§ THE TWILIGHT OF THE GODS? GENOMIC HISTORY AND THE RETURN OF RACE IN THE STUDY OF THE ANCIENT MEDITERRANEAN > The Ohio State University
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [100]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
In the paper
“But this still leaves open the possibility of variation in some twenty million base pairs, and variations in these are responsible for physical appearance, genetic illnesses, and potentially other things.33”
§ THE TWILIGHT OF THE GODS? GENOMIC HISTORY AND THE RETURN OF RACE IN THE STUDY OF THE ANCIENT MEDITERRANEAN > Abstract
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [33]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Indeed, the abundance of so much new information reopened many scholarly questions that, in the twentieth century, had been considered resolved.”
§ THE TWILIGHT OF THE GODS? GENOMIC HISTORY AND THE RETURN OF RACE IN THE STUDY OF THE ANCIENT MEDITERRANEAN > Abstract
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Nearly the entire genome (99.9% was the rather arbitrary figure cited by backers of the HGP) is shared by all living human beings.”
§ THE TWILIGHT OF THE GODS? GENOMIC HISTORY AND THE RETURN OF RACE IN THE STUDY OF THE ANCIENT MEDITERRANEAN > Abstract
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Race science was about to reenter the picture.”
§ THE TWILIGHT OF THE GODS? GENOMIC HISTORY AND THE RETURN OF RACE IN THE STUDY OF THE ANCIENT MEDITERRANEAN > Abstract
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Unlike other formerly used datasets (such as skeletons), an individual person's genome is largely unaffected by the environment.It mostly reflects ancestry.”
§ THE TWILIGHT OF THE GODS? GENOMIC HISTORY AND THE RETURN OF RACE IN THE STUDY OF THE ANCIENT MEDITERRANEAN > Abstract
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: unclear — It is unclear why the paper says it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Rests on an assumption: An individual person's genome is largely unaffected by the environment and mostly reflects ancestry.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Too many genomic historians believe that DNA represents the unquestionable master text of history.”
§ THE TWILIGHT OF THE GODS? GENOMIC HISTORY AND THE RETURN OF RACE IN THE STUDY OF THE ANCIENT MEDITERRANEAN > Abstract
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Fallmerayer (a sharp critic of the German philhellenism that peaked during the Greek War of Independence) argued that the race of ancient Greeks was extinct, having been replaced by Slavs, Albanians, and Turks during the Middle Ages.”
§ THE TWILIGHT OF THE GODS? GENOMIC HISTORY AND THE RETURN OF RACE IN THE STUDY OF THE ANCIENT MEDITERRANEAN > II. THE RHETORIC OF REPLACEMENT
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Evidence from biology trumps methods from the humanities and social sciences.”
§ THE TWILIGHT OF THE GODS? GENOMIC HISTORY AND THE RETURN OF RACE IN THE STUDY OF THE ANCIENT MEDITERRANEAN > Abstract
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Moreover, Stamatoyannopoulos et al.'s claims were obviously couched in the language of the Far Right, which took advantage of the crisis by rousing Greece's endemic xenophobia toward Slavs, Muslims, and others to gain parliamentary representation in the four general elections between 2012 and 2015.50”
§ THE TWILIGHT OF THE GODS? GENOMIC HISTORY AND THE RETURN OF RACE IN THE STUDY OF THE ANCIENT MEDITERRANEAN > II. THE RHETORIC OF REPLACEMENT
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [50]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Nonetheless, we are only beginning to see meaningful changes in the methods, assumptions, or practices embodied in the work of genomic historians.”
§ THE TWILIGHT OF THE GODS? GENOMIC HISTORY AND THE RETURN OF RACE IN THE STUDY OF THE ANCIENT MEDITERRANEAN > Abstract
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Leaving aside the issues of sample size and representativeness that plague aDNA research, the genomic historians faced serious problems of interpretation.”
§ THE TWILIGHT OF THE GODS? GENOMIC HISTORY AND THE RETURN OF RACE IN THE STUDY OF THE ANCIENT MEDITERRANEAN > II. THE RHETORIC OF REPLACEMENT
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Indeed, knee-jerk hostility toward the humanities and social sciences pervaded the first generation of aDNA studies published between 2015 and 2020.”
§ THE TWILIGHT OF THE GODS? GENOMIC HISTORY AND THE RETURN OF RACE IN THE STUDY OF THE ANCIENT MEDITERRANEAN > II. THE RHETORIC OF REPLACEMENT
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Kossinna saw prehistoric societies as facsimiles of the modern nation-state and held that there was a necessary correspondence between material culture, language, physical environment, and race.65”
§ THE TWILIGHT OF THE GODS? GENOMIC HISTORY AND THE RETURN OF RACE IN THE STUDY OF THE ANCIENT MEDITERRANEAN > II. THE RHETORIC OF REPLACEMENT
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [65]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This leaves us with an interesting but very hypothetical theory.”
§ THE TWILIGHT OF THE GODS? GENOMIC HISTORY AND THE RETURN OF RACE IN THE STUDY OF THE ANCIENT MEDITERRANEAN > II. THE RHETORIC OF REPLACEMENT
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
In the paper
“as the premier Nordicist of the 1910s, he argued that biology was the unseen principle behind human history and that modern state borders needed to be redrawn to take it into account.”
§ THE TWILIGHT OF THE GODS? GENOMIC HISTORY AND THE RETURN OF RACE IN THE STUDY OF THE ANCIENT MEDITERRANEAN > II. THE RHETORIC OF REPLACEMENT
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [75]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In the spirit of accepting reductive answers, Reich conceives of the human past in terms of migration, replacement, warfare, and extermination.”
§ THE TWILIGHT OF THE GODS? GENOMIC HISTORY AND THE RETURN OF RACE IN THE STUDY OF THE ANCIENT MEDITERRANEAN > II. THE RHETORIC OF REPLACEMENT
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“But we should notice the considerable overlap between the two men's rhetoric.”
§ THE TWILIGHT OF THE GODS? GENOMIC HISTORY AND THE RETURN OF RACE IN THE STUDY OF THE ANCIENT MEDITERRANEAN > II. THE RHETORIC OF REPLACEMENT
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“But his rhetoric draws unavoidable parallels with the racialist rhetoric that was popular in Kossinna's day.”
§ THE TWILIGHT OF THE GODS? GENOMIC HISTORY AND THE RETURN OF RACE IN THE STUDY OF THE ANCIENT MEDITERRANEAN > II. THE RHETORIC OF REPLACEMENT
boostedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Reich sees cultural historicism and racialism as independent phenomena.”
§ THE TWILIGHT OF THE GODS? GENOMIC HISTORY AND THE RETURN OF RACE IN THE STUDY OF THE ANCIENT MEDITERRANEAN > II. THE RHETORIC OF REPLACEMENT
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Indeed, Reich holds that postwar archaeology's rejection of migrationism can be explained only by the improper influence of politics (in this case, postwar anti-racism) over science.”
§ THE TWILIGHT OF THE GODS? GENOMIC HISTORY AND THE RETURN OF RACE IN THE STUDY OF THE ANCIENT MEDITERRANEAN > II. THE RHETORIC OF REPLACEMENT
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Kossinna's generation broadly agreed that changes in material culture meant changes in population.”
§ THE TWILIGHT OF THE GODS? GENOMIC HISTORY AND THE RETURN OF RACE IN THE STUDY OF THE ANCIENT MEDITERRANEAN > II. THE RHETORIC OF REPLACEMENT
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“This term, popularized by the historian of archaeology Bruce G. Trigger (1937-2006), loosely described a paradigm of late nineteenth-and early twentieth-century scholarship that was generally dismissive of human beings' capacity to innovate or change over time.Rather, the spread of styles, technologies, or practices represented the replacement of one population by another, whether through conquest”
§ THE TWILIGHT OF THE GODS? GENOMIC HISTORY AND THE RETURN OF RACE IN THE STUDY OF THE ANCIENT MEDITERRANEAN > II. THE RHETORIC OF REPLACEMENT
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [80]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Grant and Reich share a basic rhetoric of replacement: the idea that the old ideas that constituted human history were wrong and that, thanks to modern science, we can know the truth.”
§ THE TWILIGHT OF THE GODS? GENOMIC HISTORY AND THE RETURN OF RACE IN THE STUDY OF THE ANCIENT MEDITERRANEAN > II. THE RHETORIC OF REPLACEMENT
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Although cultural historicists and genomic historians differ in their objectives, the questions they ask are identical: What were our origins?How did we get here?Why did we triumph over others?”
§ THE TWILIGHT OF THE GODS? GENOMIC HISTORY AND THE RETURN OF RACE IN THE STUDY OF THE ANCIENT MEDITERRANEAN > II. THE RHETORIC OF REPLACEMENT
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Grant posited that “race” predated all other forms of identity; only societies that realized the supremacy of biology deserved to exist.”
§ THE TWILIGHT OF THE GODS? GENOMIC HISTORY AND THE RETURN OF RACE IN THE STUDY OF THE ANCIENT MEDITERRANEAN > II. THE RHETORIC OF REPLACEMENT
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [75]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Yet, by the 1930s, this relatively liberal spin on racialism was in decline.”
§ THE TWILIGHT OF THE GODS? GENOMIC HISTORY AND THE RETURN OF RACE IN THE STUDY OF THE ANCIENT MEDITERRANEAN > II. THE RHETORIC OF REPLACEMENT
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
In the paper
“His position is that aDNA proves that racism is fundamentally illogical.”
§ THE TWILIGHT OF THE GODS? GENOMIC HISTORY AND THE RETURN OF RACE IN THE STUDY OF THE ANCIENT MEDITERRANEAN > II. THE RHETORIC OF REPLACEMENT
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [87]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Angel appears to have downgraded race to a descriptive, rather than a prescriptive, category.”
§ THE TWILIGHT OF THE GODS? GENOMIC HISTORY AND THE RETURN OF RACE IN THE STUDY OF THE ANCIENT MEDITERRANEAN > II. THE RHETORIC OF REPLACEMENT
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Nonetheless, certain races carry genomic signifiers of ancient proto-races that no longer exist, races that have been christened “West Eurasians,” “Ancient North Eurasians,” “Early European Farmers,” and so on.”
§ THE TWILIGHT OF THE GODS? GENOMIC HISTORY AND THE RETURN OF RACE IN THE STUDY OF THE ANCIENT MEDITERRANEAN > II. THE RHETORIC OF REPLACEMENT
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“But as he repeatedly stated, these “types” are essentially descriptive and have no bearing on history.”
§ THE TWILIGHT OF THE GODS? GENOMIC HISTORY AND THE RETURN OF RACE IN THE STUDY OF THE ANCIENT MEDITERRANEAN > II. THE RHETORIC OF REPLACEMENT
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [86]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
In the paper
“Contemporary racial groups can only be traced back a few thousand years-that is, too late in the scheme of human evolution to be meaningful.87”
§ THE TWILIGHT OF THE GODS? GENOMIC HISTORY AND THE RETURN OF RACE IN THE STUDY OF THE ANCIENT MEDITERRANEAN > II. THE RHETORIC OF REPLACEMENT
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [87]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“His certainty that these groups actually existed can be traced back to his involvement in the spectacular debut of aDNA research at the end of the 2000s.”
§ THE TWILIGHT OF THE GODS? GENOMIC HISTORY AND THE RETURN OF RACE IN THE STUDY OF THE ANCIENT MEDITERRANEAN > II. THE RHETORIC OF REPLACEMENT
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Before genomic historians were forced to reevaluate their public messaging in 2020, they were keen to parachute into longstanding debates regarding national, racial, or ethnic identity.”
§ THE TWILIGHT OF THE GODS? GENOMIC HISTORY AND THE RETURN OF RACE IN THE STUDY OF THE ANCIENT MEDITERRANEAN > IV. PARACHUTING IN: GENOMIC HISTORY AND THE ANCIENT MEDITERRANEAN, 2015-2020
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Moreover, many of the racialized communities associated with said human remains-indigenous people, the descendants of enslaved Africans, and othershad good reason to be skeptical why well-funded, predominantly white American and European scientists now wanted access to the bones of their ancestors.99”
§ THE TWILIGHT OF THE GODS? GENOMIC HISTORY AND THE RETURN OF RACE IN THE STUDY OF THE ANCIENT MEDITERRANEAN > II. THE RHETORIC OF REPLACEMENT
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [99]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Many of the issues that plagued the first generation of genomic history studies published between 2015 and 2020 came precisely because its practitioners were amazed by their own capacity for science-and disregarded everyone else's.”
§ THE TWILIGHT OF THE GODS? GENOMIC HISTORY AND THE RETURN OF RACE IN THE STUDY OF THE ANCIENT MEDITERRANEAN > II. THE RHETORIC OF REPLACEMENT
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“As we have already seen with Stamatoyannopoulos et al.'s 2017 study, early genomic historians were usually coy in addressing the questions that structured their research.”
§ THE TWILIGHT OF THE GODS? GENOMIC HISTORY AND THE RETURN OF RACE IN THE STUDY OF THE ANCIENT MEDITERRANEAN > IV. PARACHUTING IN: GENOMIC HISTORY AND THE ANCIENT MEDITERRANEAN, 2015-2020
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The effort to use genetic material to “prove” the Greekness of contemporary Greece has been longstanding; as early as the 1980s, Greek scientists were using mtDNA to make the same point.”
§ THE TWILIGHT OF THE GODS? GENOMIC HISTORY AND THE RETURN OF RACE IN THE STUDY OF THE ANCIENT MEDITERRANEAN > IV. PARACHUTING IN: GENOMIC HISTORY AND THE ANCIENT MEDITERRANEAN, 2015-2020
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Black abolitionists, including David Walker (1796-1830) and Alexander Crummell (1819-1898), countered by claiming that ancient Egypt was a Black civilization.112”
§ THE TWILIGHT OF THE GODS? GENOMIC HISTORY AND THE RETURN OF RACE IN THE STUDY OF THE ANCIENT MEDITERRANEAN > IV. PARACHUTING IN: GENOMIC HISTORY AND THE ANCIENT MEDITERRANEAN, 2015-2020
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [112]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Religious identity is a fixed legal category in Lebanon, one with real consequences to members of different sectarian communities.”
§ THE TWILIGHT OF THE GODS? GENOMIC HISTORY AND THE RETURN OF RACE IN THE STUDY OF THE ANCIENT MEDITERRANEAN > IV. PARACHUTING IN: GENOMIC HISTORY AND THE ANCIENT MEDITERRANEAN, 2015-2020
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“No other field of premodern studies benefits from such close ties to industry.”
§ THE TWILIGHT OF THE GODS? GENOMIC HISTORY AND THE RETURN OF RACE IN THE STUDY OF THE ANCIENT MEDITERRANEAN > IV. PARACHUTING IN: GENOMIC HISTORY AND THE ANCIENT MEDITERRANEAN, 2015-2020
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This would not be surprising to Lebanon's Maronite nationalists, who resent being called “Arab” because they are actually the pure-blooded descendants of the ancient Phoenicians.”
§ THE TWILIGHT OF THE GODS? GENOMIC HISTORY AND THE RETURN OF RACE IN THE STUDY OF THE ANCIENT MEDITERRANEAN > IV. PARACHUTING IN: GENOMIC HISTORY AND THE ANCIENT MEDITERRANEAN, 2015-2020
hedgedn = 19- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Prior to June 2020, genomic historians had been relatively insulated from critique.”
§ THE TWILIGHT OF THE GODS? GENOMIC HISTORY AND THE RETURN OF RACE IN THE STUDY OF THE ANCIENT MEDITERRANEAN > V. 2020 AND ITS AFTERMATH
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Publishing in those venues, archaeogeneticists make claims that extend far beyond the purview of the biological sciences, and they do so knowing how unlikely it is that their manuscripts will encounter humanists during peer review.120”
§ THE TWILIGHT OF THE GODS? GENOMIC HISTORY AND THE RETURN OF RACE IN THE STUDY OF THE ANCIENT MEDITERRANEAN > IV. PARACHUTING IN: GENOMIC HISTORY AND THE ANCIENT MEDITERRANEAN, 2015-2020
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [120]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: unclear — It is unclear whether it could be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This buzz makes authors' articles more enticing to scientific journals, particularly those with industry readership, such as Nature, Science, and Cell.”
§ THE TWILIGHT OF THE GODS? GENOMIC HISTORY AND THE RETURN OF RACE IN THE STUDY OF THE ANCIENT MEDITERRANEAN > IV. PARACHUTING IN: GENOMIC HISTORY AND THE ANCIENT MEDITERRANEAN, 2015-2020
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“(As we will see in the next section, the recent inclusion of humanists as coauthors has not remedied the situation.)”
§ THE TWILIGHT OF THE GODS? GENOMIC HISTORY AND THE RETURN OF RACE IN THE STUDY OF THE ANCIENT MEDITERRANEAN > IV. PARACHUTING IN: GENOMIC HISTORY AND THE ANCIENT MEDITERRANEAN, 2015-2020
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Genomic history did not emerge in just any time; it emerged in our time, the same 2010s when the Far Right was ascendant and the bioessentialist lexicon infiltrated discourses of culture, identity, and race across the political spectrum.122”
§ THE TWILIGHT OF THE GODS? GENOMIC HISTORY AND THE RETURN OF RACE IN THE STUDY OF THE ANCIENT MEDITERRANEAN > IV. PARACHUTING IN: GENOMIC HISTORY AND THE ANCIENT MEDITERRANEAN, 2015-2020
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [122]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
In the paper
“The buzz furthers public interest in personal DNA ancestry testing.121”
§ THE TWILIGHT OF THE GODS? GENOMIC HISTORY AND THE RETURN OF RACE IN THE STUDY OF THE ANCIENT MEDITERRANEAN > IV. PARACHUTING IN: GENOMIC HISTORY AND THE ANCIENT MEDITERRANEAN, 2015-2020
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [121]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
In the paper
“What we have is a bundle of loose strings that leads the authors, inter alia, to speculate on the skin color of the ancient Greeks.137”
§ THE TWILIGHT OF THE GODS? GENOMIC HISTORY AND THE RETURN OF RACE IN THE STUDY OF THE ANCIENT MEDITERRANEAN > V. 2020 AND ITS AFTERMATH
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [137]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Genomic history's most coherent recent attempt to address questions of methodology can be found in a 2022 study published by Lazaridis et al.”
§ THE TWILIGHT OF THE GODS? GENOMIC HISTORY AND THE RETURN OF RACE IN THE STUDY OF THE ANCIENT MEDITERRANEAN > V. 2020 AND ITS AFTERMATH
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“But overall, genomic historians remain obsessed with prehistoric migration, population replacement, and the elusive “Yamnaya.””
§ THE TWILIGHT OF THE GODS? GENOMIC HISTORY AND THE RETURN OF RACE IN THE STUDY OF THE ANCIENT MEDITERRANEAN > V. 2020 AND ITS AFTERMATH
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“(We would ignore the continued, intractable problem of sample size.)”
§ THE TWILIGHT OF THE GODS? GENOMIC HISTORY AND THE RETURN OF RACE IN THE STUDY OF THE ANCIENT MEDITERRANEAN > V. 2020 AND ITS AFTERMATH
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Even as genomic history's ethical issues remain partially unacknowledged, some promising trends in pre-2020 genomic history have advanced.”
§ THE TWILIGHT OF THE GODS? GENOMIC HISTORY AND THE RETURN OF RACE IN THE STUDY OF THE ANCIENT MEDITERRANEAN > V. 2020 AND ITS AFTERMATH
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Recent press comments by Reich's coauthors suggest that reluctant stakeholders continue to be bypassed.127”
§ THE TWILIGHT OF THE GODS? GENOMIC HISTORY AND THE RETURN OF RACE IN THE STUDY OF THE ANCIENT MEDITERRANEAN > V. 2020 AND ITS AFTERMATH
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [127]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Thus, genomic history's post-2020 trajectory offers Mediterranean premodernists conflicting signs.”
§ THE TWILIGHT OF THE GODS? GENOMIC HISTORY AND THE RETURN OF RACE IN THE STUDY OF THE ANCIENT MEDITERRANEAN > V. 2020 AND ITS AFTERMATH
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Inasmuch as Alpaslan-Roodenberg et al.'s statement marks a post-2020 reckoning in genomic history, it is limited, defensive, and apparently nonbinding.”
§ THE TWILIGHT OF THE GODS? GENOMIC HISTORY AND THE RETURN OF RACE IN THE STUDY OF THE ANCIENT MEDITERRANEAN > V. 2020 AND ITS AFTERMATH
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Lazaridis et al. would like us to have (in text, material culture, and aDNA) a series of imperfect datasets that, when superimposed, offer clarity.But that is not what we have.”
§ THE TWILIGHT OF THE GODS? GENOMIC HISTORY AND THE RETURN OF RACE IN THE STUDY OF THE ANCIENT MEDITERRANEAN > V. 2020 AND ITS AFTERMATH
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“But this once again mischaracterizes the nature of the relationship between the National Socialists and their archaeology.”
§ THE TWILIGHT OF THE GODS? GENOMIC HISTORY AND THE RETURN OF RACE IN THE STUDY OF THE ANCIENT MEDITERRANEAN > V. 2020 AND ITS AFTERMATH
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
- Rests on an assumption: Race science made Nazism possible.
In the paper
“(Like many British archaeologists, Evans disliked Aryanism.104 )”
§ THE TWILIGHT OF THE GODS? GENOMIC HISTORY AND THE RETURN OF RACE IN THE STUDY OF THE ANCIENT MEDITERRANEAN > Acknowledgements
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [104]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“And in both cases, the authors fell victim to confirmation bias-which is to say that their work”
§ THE TWILIGHT OF THE GODS? GENOMIC HISTORY AND THE RETURN OF RACE IN THE STUDY OF THE ANCIENT MEDITERRANEAN > Additional information
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: unclear — It is unclear whether it could be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: unclear — It is unclear why the paper says it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Bernal's theory, which in many ways is a creature of the nineteenth century, has never been accepted by prehistorians.”
§ THE TWILIGHT OF THE GODS? GENOMIC HISTORY AND THE RETURN OF RACE IN THE STUDY OF THE ANCIENT MEDITERRANEAN > Acknowledgements
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [105]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
- Not matched
In the paper
“Lazaridis et al.'s first target was Arthur J.Evans (1851-1941), who, in the 1890s, had held that the”
§ THE TWILIGHT OF THE GODS? GENOMIC HISTORY AND THE RETURN OF RACE IN THE STUDY OF THE ANCIENT MEDITERRANEAN > Acknowledgements
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [103]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
In the paper
“Rather than revealing the racial fusion of the ancient Greeks, physical remains could tell stories of diet, nutrition, and possibly social structure.139”
§ THE TWILIGHT OF THE GODS? GENOMIC HISTORY AND THE RETURN OF RACE IN THE STUDY OF THE ANCIENT MEDITERRANEAN > V. 2020 AND ITS AFTERMATH
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [139]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Accepting the limits of positivism does not mean rejecting the genome as evidence.”
§ THE TWILIGHT OF THE GODS? GENOMIC HISTORY AND THE RETURN OF RACE IN THE STUDY OF THE ANCIENT MEDITERRANEAN > V. 2020 AND ITS AFTERMATH
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Yet even the most recent research repeats genomic history's original sins-overhyped claims, bioessentialist assumptions about identity, winking reference to far-right tropes.”
§ THE TWILIGHT OF THE GODS? GENOMIC HISTORY AND THE RETURN OF RACE IN THE STUDY OF THE ANCIENT MEDITERRANEAN > V. 2020 AND ITS AFTERMATH
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Even as archaeogeneticists have dialed back their rhetoric since 2020, the field has yet to seriously question Cavalli-Sforza's groundwork in the 1960s-a groundwork that was interested in documenting”
§ THE TWILIGHT OF THE GODS? GENOMIC HISTORY AND THE RETURN OF RACE IN THE STUDY OF THE ANCIENT MEDITERRANEAN > Additional information
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Alpaslan-Roodenberg et al. made a limited commitment to conduct research on ancient human remains with the permission of present-day descendant groups.”
§ THE TWILIGHT OF THE GODS? GENOMIC HISTORY AND THE RETURN OF RACE IN THE STUDY OF THE ANCIENT MEDITERRANEAN > The Ohio State University
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [123]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
In the paper
“In 2017, Verena J. Schuenemann and her collaborators used a sample of genetic data from 151 individuals whose skulls were pilfered from tombs at Abusir el-Meleq, Egypt, and exported to Germany in the nineteenth century.”
§ THE TWILIGHT OF THE GODS? GENOMIC HISTORY AND THE RETURN OF RACE IN THE STUDY OF THE ANCIENT MEDITERRANEAN > Acknowledgements
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [106]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plainn = 151- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Although Angel continued to use bioessentialist (or even racialist) language well into the 1980s, his work clearly undercut the paradigm under which he had been trained.”
§ THE TWILIGHT OF THE GODS? GENOMIC HISTORY AND THE RETURN OF RACE IN THE STUDY OF THE ANCIENT MEDITERRANEAN > V. 2020 AND ITS AFTERMATH
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The aDNA researchers who accept the limits of their knowledge know that they are not writing or even contributing to “history”; like archaeologists, they are looking not at what happened in the past but at the processes by which the past happened.”
§ THE TWILIGHT OF THE GODS? GENOMIC HISTORY AND THE RETURN OF RACE IN THE STUDY OF THE ANCIENT MEDITERRANEAN > V. 2020 AND ITS AFTERMATH
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Craniometrists once promised they could (among other things) identify the biological secrets that made ancient Greeks great.138”
§ THE TWILIGHT OF THE GODS? GENOMIC HISTORY AND THE RETURN OF RACE IN THE STUDY OF THE ANCIENT MEDITERRANEAN > V. 2020 AND ITS AFTERMATH
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [138]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Migrations, wars, and other events that have been lost to human memory cannot be reconstructed as historical events.”
§ THE TWILIGHT OF THE GODS? GENOMIC HISTORY AND THE RETURN OF RACE IN THE STUDY OF THE ANCIENT MEDITERRANEAN > V. 2020 AND ITS AFTERMATH
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Where legally mandatory, Alpaslan-Roodenberg et al. agreed to follow laws that restrict access to human remains-for instance, the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act of 1990 (NAGPRA), which regulates federally funded museums that hold collections of archaeological objects and human remains from indigenous communities in the United States.”
§ THE TWILIGHT OF THE GODS? GENOMIC HISTORY AND THE RETURN OF RACE IN THE STUDY OF THE ANCIENT MEDITERRANEAN > The Ohio State University
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [123]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
In the paper
“The interest in”
§ THE TWILIGHT OF THE GODS? GENOMIC HISTORY AND THE RETURN OF RACE IN THE STUDY OF THE ANCIENT MEDITERRANEAN > The Ohio State University
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Cavalli-Sforza, Menozzi, and Piazza, The History and Geography of Human Genes, 24
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
The paper relies on this without support.
The ethnonationalist Right has been ascendant across Europe and North America since the 2010s.
“which has been ascendant across Europe and North America since the 2010s.”
The paper relies on this without support.
A direct relationship between culture and biology is racialist.
“In positing a direct relationship between culture and biology, genomic historians have consciously or unconsciously revived the racialist assumptions that undergirded the study of the ancient past prior to World War II.”
The paper relies on this without support.
An individual person's genome is largely unaffected by the environment and mostly reflects ancestry.
“Unlike other formerly used datasets (such as skeletons), an individual person's genome is largely unaffected by the environment.It mostly reflects ancestry.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Race science made Nazism possible.
“The problem was not that the Nazis twisted archaeology or anthropology in their machinations to hoodwink the public; it was that race science made Nazism possible.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Prior to Lazaridis et al.'s article, few Mediterranean premodernists paid much attention to archaeogenetics.
“Prior to the publication of Lazaridis et al.'s article, few Mediterranean premodernists paid much attention to archaeogenetics.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Italian historiography exudes pride in the cosmopolitanism and multiculturalism of ancient Rome.
“Italian historiography exudes pride in the cosmopolitanism and multiculturalism of ancient Rome.”
The paper relies on this without support.
The use of pilfered human remains to reconstruct the phenotypes of ancient people is outrageous.
“What Gourdine et al. diplomatically left out is the sheer outrageousness of Schuenemann et al.'s entire project.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Scientists should not impose modern racial constructions onto the ancient world.
“why were scientists still obsessed with imposing modern racial constructions onto the ancient world?”
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
Each contradiction between two passages listed here was confirmed by an independent check.
Rated minor: it would not touch a result — a value no result rests on, a p-value that stays on the same side of the significance level, or a conflict that is clerical, resolved elsewhere in the paper, or outside its own findings.
In the paper
§ THE TWILIGHT OF THE GODS? GENOMIC HISTORY AND THE RETURN OF RACE IN THE STUDY OF THE ANCIENT MEDITERRANEAN > Abstract
“David Reich's Who We Are and Where We Came From (2018)”
§ THE TWILIGHT OF THE GODS? GENOMIC HISTORY AND THE RETURN OF RACE IN THE STUDY OF THE ANCIENT MEDITERRANEAN > Abstract
“Who We Are and How We Got Here (2018)”
Citations
Cites
A global reference for human genetic variation
The 1000 Genomes Project Consortium, authors, C., Auton, A., Abecasis, G. R., Steering committee, Altshuler, D. M., Durbin, R. M., Abecasis, G. R., Bentley, D. R., Chakravarti, A., et al. (2015) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature15393 · Cited by 18,247
A draft sequence of the Neandertal genome
Green, R. E., Krause, J., Briggs, A. W., Maricic, T., Stenzel, U., Kircher, M., Patterson, N., Li, H., Zhai, W., Fritz, M. H.-Y., et al. (2010) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.1188021 · Cited by 4,318
Massive migration from the steppe was a source for Indo-European languages in Europe
Haak, W., Lazaridis, I., Patterson, N., Rohland, N., Mallick, S., Llamas, B., Brandt, G., Nordenfelt, S., Harney, E., Stewardson, K., et al. (2015) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature14317 · Cited by 1,940
History and Geography of Human Genes
Piazza, A. (1994) · Advances in forensic haemogenetics · doi:10.1007/978-3-642-78782-9_1 · Cited by 1,639
Fatal invention: how science, politics, and big business re-create race in the twenty-first century
Roberts, D. E. (2011) · Choice Reviews Online · doi:10.5860/choice.49-2029 · Cited by 1,028
Denisova Admixture and the First Modern Human Dispersals into Southeast Asia and Oceania
Reich, D., Patterson, N., Kircher, M., Delfin, F., Nandineni, M. R., Pugach, I., Ko, A. M.-S., Ko, Y.-C., Jinam, T. A., Phipps, M. E., et al. (2011) · The American Journal of Human Genetics · doi:10.1016/j.ajhg.2011.09.005 · Cited by 656
Early Divergent Strains of Yersinia pestis in Eurasia 5,000 Years Ago
Rasmussen, S., Allentoft, M. E., Nielsen, K. R., Orlando, L., Sikora, M., Sjögren, K.-G., Pedersen, A. G., Schubert, M., Dam, A. V., Kapel, C. M. O., et al. (2015) · Cell · doi:10.1016/j.cell.2015.10.009 · Cited by 589
Duster, T. (2004) · Routledge eBooks · doi:10.4324/9780203426951 · Cited by 576
The origins and spread of domestic horses from the Western Eurasian steppes
Librado, P., Khan, N., Fages, A., Kusliy, M. A., Suchan, T., Tonasso‐Calvière, L., Schiavinato, S., Alioğlu, D., Fromentier, A., Perdereau, A., et al. (2021) · Nature · doi:10.1038/s41586-021-04018-9 · Cited by 450
The Passing of the Great Race; Or, the Racial Basis of European History
N., M. I., & Grant, M. (1917) · Geographical Journal · doi:10.2307/1779910 · Cited by 315
Research works printed but not linked: 5
- Angela Saini, Superior: The Return of Race Science (Boston: Beacon Press, 2019), 98.
- Maarten Boudry and Massimo Pigliucci, introduction to Science Unlimited? The Challenges of Scientism, ed. Maarten Boudry and Massimo Pigliucci (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2017), 2.
- See also Lazaridis et al., "Genetic Origins," 215. 104. See Schoep, "Building the Labyrinth," 13-14. 105. Martin Bernal, Black Athena: The Afroasiatic Roots of Classical Civilization, 3 vols. (New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press, 1987-2006), cited in Lazaridis et al., "Genetic Origins," 217. 106.
- Verena J. Schuenemann et al., "Ancient Egyptian Mummy Genomes Suggest an Increase of Sub-Saharan African Ancestry in Post-Roman Periods," Nature Communications 8 (2017). 125. Harney et al., "The Genetic Legacy of African Americans." This recent study is critiqued in Ewen Callaway, "Ancient DNA Reveals the Living Descendants of Enslaved People through 23andMe," Nature 620 (2023), 251-52. 126.
- George E. Mylonas and Doris Raymond, 2 vols. (St. Louis: Washington University, 1953), 2:1224-31. 14682303, 0, · DOI
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Parmenter, C. S. (2024) · doi:10.1093/9780197757147.001.0001 · Cited by 22
Self-citationThe Oxford Handbook of Archaeology and Language
(2025) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/oxfordhb/9780192868350.001.0001 · Cited by 5
Niger-Congo archaeolinguistics, including Bantu
Bostoen, K. A. G., Coutros, P. R., & Schlebusch, C. M. (2025) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/oxfordhb/9780192868350.013.30 · Cited by 4
“The Peculiar Hellenic Alloy”: Carl Blegen’s Narrative of Greek Racial Development in Context
Duray, A. (2025) · American Journal of Archaeology · doi:10.1086/733891 · Cited by 3
‘In Our Blood’: Archaeology and ‘Indigeneity’ in the British National Party’s Magazine Identity
Richardson, L.-J. (2024) · Public Archaeology · doi:10.1080/14655187.2025.2505375 · Cited by 3
Metadata
- Authors
- Parmenter, C. S.
- Affiliations
- The Ohio State University (US)
- Corresponding author
- Parmenter, Christopher Stedman
- Venue
- History and Theory
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2023-10-08
- Volume
- 63
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 45-70
- ISSN
- 0018-2656 (ISSN-L)
- 1468-2303
- OpenAlex
- W4387451084
- Cited by
- 63
- References
- 36
- Citations by year
- 2026: 4 · 2025: 40 · 2024: 19
- FWCI
- 40.61
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- History and Theory (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Anthropology › Race, Genetics, and Society
- Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Forensic and Genetic Research
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › History › Philosophy, History, and Historiography
- Keywords
- ancient DNA, ancient Mediterranean, race, racialism, ethnic nationalism, migration, conflict, cultural change, premodern period, intellectual genealogy
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
A language model drew the claims from the paper on 2026-11-10, under version 3 of the claim definition (model deepseek-v4.1-flash, prompt extract-v3).
A second model labelled each claim on 2026-11-10 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: THE TWILIGHT OF THE GODS? GENOMIC HISTORY AND THE RETURN OF RACE IN THE STUDY OF THE ANCIENT MEDITERRANEAN. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/hith.12328
- The paper
- Parmenter, C. S. (2024). THE TWILIGHT OF THE GODS? GENOMIC HISTORY AND THE RETURN OF RACE IN THE STUDY OF THE ANCIENT MEDITERRANEAN. History and Theory. https://doi.org/10.1111/hith.12328
