Comment on the Article Archaeology, Language, and the Question of Sámi Ethnogenesis

Datos Bibliográficos

ID22835682
AutoresMinerva Piha (0000-0003-1307-8491, Associate Professor, Faculty of Education and Arts, Nord University Levanger Norway, autor de correspondencia), Mikko K Heikkilä (Associate Professor, Tampere University Tampere Finland), Jaakko Häkkinen (0000-0002-0860-7670, Independent Researcher Sipoo Finland)
Año2024
Volumen93
Número2
Páginas456-470
Fecha de publicación2024-02-05
Peer ReviewedSí
Open AccessNo
TipoARTICLE
RevistaActa Archaeologica (JOURNAL)
Identificadores de la revistaISSN: 0065-101X • E-ISSN: 1600-0390
EditorialWalter de Gruyter GmbH (PUBLISHER • DE)
DOI10.1163/16000390-09401059
OpenAlexW4391647424
IdiomaEN
Citas recibidas1
Referencias citadas8

In this response to the article Archaeology, Language, and the Question of Sámi Ethnogenesis by Asgeir Svestad and Bjørnar Olsen (2023), we correct major misunderstandings made by Svestad and Olsen concerning the methodology of historical linguistics and its relation to archaeology. Our comment concerns the following topics: We explain that there cannot be one ethnogenesis that could be approached by different disciplines because different disciplines are independent and meet only momentarily. We also demonstrate that continuity does not disprove migration, nor vice versa , and explain some methods of linguistic substrate studies that the authors have misunderstood. In Svestad and Olsen’s article, there are also some clearly erroneous statements that we correct in our response. In spite of our critical comments, we genuinely encourage multidisciplinary discussion and cooperation because we share the same research interest: to deepen our understanding of the human past.

Archaeology · Ethnic group · Ethnogenesis · Linguistics · Sociology · Anthropology · European Linguistics and Anthropology · History · Indigenous Studies and Ecology · Philosophy