Replies

New DNA analysis of the bones from 25 individuals in Xaltocan suggest that the population changed after the Aztec conquest. CREDIT: Lisa Overholtzer, Wichita State University

1 posted on 02/04/2013 8:10:04 PM PST by SunkenCiv

"It's likely that some people did leave, probably the elites who no longer had the same social roles," Overholzer said.

Well, that sure sounds familiar ...

3 posted on 02/04/2013 8:20:25 PM PST by ClearCase_guy (Nothing will change until after the war.)

Good article. Thanks for posting it. :)

4 posted on 02/04/2013 8:24:43 PM PST by EveningStar ("What color is the sky in your world?" -- Frasier Crane)

6 posted on 02/04/2013 9:27:03 PM PST by beaversmom

when the Aztecs ... brought their own taxpayers to repopulate the city.

I wonder if the author of this piece realizes just how much she revealed her liberal bias when she chose this language. A fundamental tenet of liberalism is the belief that people belong to government. This language strikes me as a strong expression of that belief.

Wouldn't a more neutral term have been "citizens" or "tribe members"?

Anyway... for the content of the article, it's interesting, but it also contains a bit of a "duh" factor. Human conquests throughout history have changed the genetic landscape of the areas that were conquered. Let's go back a few thousand years to when the people of Africa decided to move on to other continents--and found those Neanderthal people with whom they couldn't wait to mix genomes.

8 posted on 02/05/2013 4:01:44 AM PST by exDemMom (Now that I've finally accepted that I'm living a bad hair life, I'm more at peace with the world.)

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794