Genomic evidence for the Pleistocene and recent population history of Native Americans

How and when the Americas were populated remains contentious. Using ancient and modern genome-wide data, we found that the ancestors of all present-day Native Americans, including Athabascans and Amerindians, entered the Americas as a single migration wave from Siberia no earlier than 23 thousand years ago (ka) and after no more than an 8000-year isolation period in Beringia. After their arrival to the Americas, ancestral Native Americans diversified into two basal genetic branches around 13 ka, one that is now dispersed across North and South America and the other restricted to North America. Subsequent gene flow resulted in some Native Americans sharing ancestry with present-day East Asians (including Siberians) and, more distantly, Australo-Melanesians. Putative “Paleoamerican” relict populations, including the historical Mexican Pericúes and South American Fuego-Patagonians, are not directly related to modern Australo-Melanesians as suggested by the Paleoamerican Model.

Orientalism and intelligence analysis: deconstructing Anglo-American notions of the ‘Arab’

Despite revived notions of a ‘cultural divide’ between East and West, Edward's Said's ‘Orientalism’ has received little attention from scholars of intelligence and diplomacy. This article brings to light for the first time a number of recently declassified documents of a different nature to usual assessments produced by Anglo-American analytic bodies: those focussed primarily on the issue of ‘national character’. Using and critiquing Said's thesis of Western ‘Orientalism’ it reveals some critical and enduring conceptualizations articulated by the diplomatic and intelligence community about Arab culture such as the role of Islam, rhetoric, political motivation and notions of ‘honour’. Such a critical approach demonstrates how diplomatic and intelligence history can also be a history of culture, ideas and institutional mentalité.

The paradox of culture in a globalized world

Much of the work in intercultural communication studies in the past decade, especially in the field of applied linguistics, has been devoted to ‘disinventing’ the notion of culture. The problem with the word ‘culture’ as it has been used in anthropology, sociology, and in everyday life, it has been pointed out, is that it is used as a noun, conceived of as something ‘solid,’ an essential set of traits or characteristics of certain people or groups, something people ‘have’ rather than something they ‘do’ (Scollon, Scollon, & Jones, 2012). Among the most famous statements of this position is Brain Street’s classic paper ‘Culture is a Verb’ (1993), in which he argues that culture should be treated as ‘a signifying process the active construction of meaning rather than the static and reified or nominalizing’ sense in which the word is often used in anthropology, some linguistics circles, and in everyday conversation.