Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-v9fdk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-09T07:58:57.840Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Genetics, archaeology and the wider world

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 January 2015

Mark Pluciennik
Mark Pluciennik*
Affiliation:
Department of Archaeology, University of Wales, Lampeter SA48 7ED, Dyfed, Wales
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Molecular biology is prompting a renewed interest in genetic histories of ancient peoples. What are the old ‘ethnic units’ of these modern studies?

Type
Reports
Information
Antiquity , Volume 70 , Issue 267 , March 1996 , pp. 13 - 14
Copyright
Copyright © Antiquity Publications Ltd. 1996

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Cavalli-Sforza, L., Menozzi, P. & Piazza, A.. 1993. Domic expansions and human evolution, Science 259: 639-46.Google Scholar
Cavalli-Sforza, L., Menozzi, P. & Piazza, A. 1994. The history and geography of human genes. Princeton (NJ): Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Hacklberg, E. 1995. Digging into our genes [rnview of Cavalli-Sforza et al. 1994], Antiquity 69: 177-9.Google Scholar
Irwin, A. 1995. Trust me, I am a scientist. Times Higher Education Supplement (24 March): 13.Google Scholar
Jones, S. 1994. The language of the genes. London: Flamingo.Google Scholar
Moore, J. 1995. The end of a paradigm, Current Anthropology 36: 530-31.Google Scholar
Renfrew, C. 1987. Archaeology and language: the puzzle of Indo-European origins. London: Jonathan Capo.Google Scholar
Renfrew, C. 1992. Archaeology, genetics and linguistic diversity, Man 27:445-78.Google Scholar
Renfrew, C. 1994. World linguistic diversity, Scientific American 270: 104-10.Google Scholar
Sokal, R. et al. 1993. Genetic relationships of European populations reflect their othnohistorical affinities, American Journal of Physical Anthropology 91: 55–70.Google Scholar