This won't make the ahistoricists from either gender happy, because both of them rely on a oversimplified narrative of relationship dynamics between men and women that has always existed since the dawn of time.
Genomes didn’t reveal this. It was already known by various knowledgeable figures on the ancient culture of the isles and more recently established through poetic critique by Robert Graves (among others).
These theories were largely rejected by the established authorities and scientists because it couldn’t possibly have been even near the truth and yet…
This goes beyond the iron age into antiquity. What is seen as an Iron age practice is mere evidence of the practice persisting in spite of the repeated colonizations of the isles and (later) cultural pressures from the Mediterranean basin.
Somehow the shamanic types and poets always seem to be correct in the end. Maybe it is their lack of incentive to lie about such things.
Before all the downvotes one should compare notes and then maybe explore the thought experiment: why is pattern recognition more valuable in this age only in complex analyses of DNA or some other heuristic over similarly complex analyses of poetic myth as a cultural remnant. Especially given the tenuousness of scientific veracity when it’s truly mathematically considered to the full extent we are capable. Asking too much?
That sounds interesting. Can you provide some background? Who are “various knowledgeable figures” that knew that? And who are the “established authorities and scientists” that rejected that? Are there any references?
I linked a book by an author who lays it out better than I can. Otherwise, I would be writing the book. This is an internet forum, not an academic paper.
Does the book talk about the structure of British Iron Age society? Did Socrate talk about it? Who are the established figures that contradict them? I don’t understand what you are claiming exactly. Sure, it is not an academic paper, but that’s not a reason to be so vague.
