
Stonehenge: DNA Reveals Origin of Builders - paganel
https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-47938188
======
arethuza
What is amusing is that Scots myths claim that we came from Scythia - from the
Declaration of Arbroath (1320):

 _" we know and from the chronicles and books of the ancients wefind that
among other famous nations our own, the Scots, has been graced with widespread
renown. It journeyed from Greater Scythia by way of the Tyrrhenian Sea and the
Pillars of Hercules, and dwelt for a long course of time in Spain among the
most savage peoples, but nowhere could it be subdued by any people, however
barbarous. Thence it came, twelve hundred years after the people of Israel
crossed the Red Sea, to its home in the west where it still lives today."_

NB Yes, I know Stonehenge isn't in Scotland but some of the earliest Stone
Circles are apparently in Orkney.

~~~
jajag
The Irish Book of Conquests (Lebor Gabála Érenn) tells a similar story - in
fact I'd guess that's where the Scotch origin myth comes from:

[1]
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lebor_Gab%C3%A1la_%C3%89renn](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lebor_Gab%C3%A1la_%C3%89renn)

~~~
ameister14
I always thought the origins of Scotch was monks brewing it. Never realized
there was a mythology there

~~~
vowelless
I believe jajag is referring to the tape that holds things together as opposed
to the drink.

~~~
Intermernet
"No True Scotch" fallacy?

------
dalbasal
It's fascinating that various Irish, Scottish and (I think, but not sure)
Welsh legends make a similar eastern origin claim.

Over the last generation, we've had a bunch of what was assumed to be fiction
confirmed. Eric the red's voyage and viking visits to North America. All sorts
of very old biblical narratives are being confirmed, the existence of early
iron age kings and conflicts, for example, are being confirmed by archeology.
Troy, and the possible historical conflict with the Greek aegeans... Also from
the bronze)iron age transition period.

It's like a swing. Modern historians worked hard to get rid of all the bible-
based histories. A few generations later, the Bible (and lots of other old
books and oral traditions) is a surprisingly reliable source... as are folk
legends.

Noah's flood is as legitimate as it has been for 100 years. Searching for
Atlantis is as non-crazy as it has been for even longer. Some aboriginal
Australian oral histories are now thought (by some) to be incomprehensibly,
mind boggingly old...

I'm still hoping for confirmation of at Brendan the voyager.

~~~
senorjazz
> the Bible (and lots of other old books and oral traditions) is a
> surprisingly reliable source...

Going to need a source for that.

> Noah's flood is as legitimate as it has been for 100 years

To an extent. 95%+ of the story is false, apart from there (probably) was a
big flood. But the majority if the story is false.

As with most of the stories in the bible, they tied them into some real events
to ground them to the people, to myths of the age, then wove into them a
fantasy story perhaps with enough grounding to reality to state "based on a
true story", but probably not even that

~~~
4ntonius8lock
I personally wouldn't have used the Bible as an example, but...

I too am impressed that so many old folk tales/myths/legends have recently
been found to have a basis of reality.

I mean, the way I see it:

There are stories from a decade ago 'based on a true story' and if you look at
our modern 'myths', like a movie based on a true story, generally they are
very loosely based on the true story.

And that is with our modern ability to document and review what happened in
the past.

These stories were oral tradition for hundreds of years before being written.

The fact that they have any basis left is amazing and a testament to the
powerful events that resonated through history. It's a testament to the
ability of humans to pass on information in a uni directional time dimension.

* I'm completely non-religious.

~~~
SketchySeaBeast
> I too am impressed that so many old folk tales/myths/legends have recently
> been found to have a basis of reality.

Why wouldn't they? You're going to want to pass on interesting stories. And
what other means would they have had to transfer knowledge if not through oral
tradition? It would have been the only available medium. The stories deemed
interesting or important would have been the way people would have entertained
each other.

The other thing to keep in mind is that with these stories we can suffer from
historical pareidolia - where if the parts of the story fit the truth just
enough we assume that must be the basis. I don't know if that's always the
case.

~~~
4ntonius8lock
Why wouldn't they is already in my first post: play broken phone in school and
see what I mean. 400 years = 20 generations. How accurate is the retelling of
things that happened just 5 or 10 years ago... and for which pictures, books
and video exist for evidence? We are in the post modern era where we have to
make distinctions like personal truth and objective truth.

Amazement comes when reality exceeds expectations.

If this isn't just the case of pareidolia or cherry picking data:

It seems I see maintaining an oral history that retains any connection to
reality over hundreds of years as amazing.

That is because I see human communication as highly flawed, even in today's
day where recording and reproduction are easy. Also, think of education; how
much more standardized and advanced it is today and still people have a hard
time passing things on accurately.

Some people think of human communication as less flawed than I do. So I guess
there would be no amazement for them.

~~~
SketchySeaBeast
> Why wouldn't they is already in my first post: play broken phone in school
> and see what I mean.

Broken phone is you listening to a message whispered once to you, and there's
always a jerk in the middle who changes the story to something totally
different. These stories would have been told to you over and over again until
you know it by heart. They would naturally get embellished, and that's what we
see - floods cover the earth men become gods, mountain peaks become heaven.

It's also important to note that, while we don't know events from 5 to 10
years ago off by heart, we all remember where we were when 9/11 happened -
those are the sorts of events that would have been passed down. And really,
all we get out of these stories is the equivalent to "9/11 happened" \- many
of the stories lose all other details.

For instance, there's a general consensus that Noah's Ark is based upon a
flood myth shared by many different cultures is drawn from a Mesopotamian
precursors, and seems to stem from ~2000 BCE. There are a bunch of retellings
with a bunch of different details - there's heroes and gods, but the water
varies from "killing everything on Earth" to "a river flooding", and was due
to sin, or overpopulation, or just the caprices of the Gods.

That does sound like what would happen if you were playing telephone.

~~~
4ntonius8lock
Again, reality - expectations = our reaction to what we see.

You seem to feel your version of expectations are better tuned so that when we
subtract them from reality it is what you expected.

I see this as amazing. Again, that has to be because I see human communication
more flawed than you do. And that is fine. Personally, I think you do a lot of
hand waving when you say something like "there's always a jerk in the middle
who changes the story to something totally different" and then just outright
ignore that when talking about oral tradition maintenance. Especially when you
consider wars, famine, mass migrations, etc.

But alas, it's different expectations and and given that you aren't amazed,
your expectations are apparently more accurate (as long as those expectations
were truly held before the proof was shown)

~~~
pbhjpbhj
>"there's always a jerk in the middle who changes the story to something
totally different" and then just outright ignore that when talking about oral
tradition //

We actually have some confirmations where oral traditions weren't bawdlerised
in Judaeo-Christian history -- if you look at how they adopted a system of
rewarding verity (as Muslims do now, with learning their scripture by rote)
then you can see how separated populations maintained the same stories, in the
same form, without alteration of major factual points.

[https://www.sapiens.org/column/curiosities/dead-sea-
scrolls-...](https://www.sapiens.org/column/curiosities/dead-sea-scrolls-
historical-accounts/) read from "When I entered graduate school".

------
foxhop
New England (United States) has miles and miles of ancient and undocumented
rock walls which rival the ancient walls of Ireland and are largely ignored by
scientist.

~~~
e40
Would love to read more about this, if you have references...

~~~
foxhop
Most of the literature attributes the walls to early settlers and colonists.
The vast amount of walls especially in places that were never settled makes
this hypothesis wrong and outright misleading. Some walls were created by
colonists but you would need millions and millions to make all the walls in
this region.

The early colonists were substitance farmers and there are no journals or
diaries or documents which talk about building walls.

They do have diaries of farming and painting and all other topics but not
building walls up mountains and sprawling over legde and landscapes.

~~~
jshevek
I'm also interested in learning more if you have references/links you'd like
to recommend.

~~~
foxhop
Additionally the Native Americans never laid claim to making any of the rock
walls in this region.

Search up liDAR and New England. The region is still being scanned but each
time they scan more and more walls are illuminated.

[https://www.atlasobscura.com/articles/crowdsourcing-to-
map-t...](https://www.atlasobscura.com/articles/crowdsourcing-to-map-the-
stone-walls-of-new-hampshire)

[https://nhdes.maps.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?i...](https://nhdes.maps.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=f4d57ec1a6b8414190ca0662456dffb0)

------
kaycebasques
Is there a big database of ancient DNA that all researchers have access to?

~~~
andromeduck
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_HapMap_Project](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_HapMap_Project)

------
gpvos
I recently watched a video[0] that tried to make the case that the neolithic
invasion into Britain around 4,000 BC came from Doggerland. It seemed somewhat
speculative (and its author is honest about that), but not a complete crackpot
theory either. I wonder what the current scholarship is on the neolithic
invasion in Britain (and in Europe in general), and also on who lived in
Doggerland.

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dvOcK4wfIHo](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dvOcK4wfIHo)

------
vectorEQ
seems like they found some stuff nearby and attribute the build based on
proximity / estimated time-line? how hard is such evidence to suggest it was
really them who built it? any comments?

~~~
whenchamenia
Apparently not even that. Tfa says they just analyzed remains from what they
estimate is a similar time period as what they estimate stonehenge to be. Not
even local to the site. While some inferences can be drawn, this is mostly
puff.

~~~
singularity2001
I think the article was written in a bigger archeological context in which
relative genetic homogeneity was established for within the
Mesolithic,Neolithic and Chalcolithic periods.

