Beyond Genetics: Exploring Aspects of Non-Biological Kinship in Prehistoric Times

lssue 4, Volume 3
Download PDF
Cite This Article
Contents

Review Open Access

Beyond Genetics: Exploring Aspects of Non-Biological Kinship in Prehistoric Times

Sabina Cveček 1,2,3,4,* Ana Herrero-Corral 5 Katharina Rebay-Salisbury 4,6 Eszter Banffy 4,7 Maxime Brami 8 Raphaëlle Chaix 9 Václav Hrnčíř 10 Kent Johnson 11 David F. Lancy 12 Mélie Le Roy 13 Ruth Mace 14 Peter Schweitzer 15 Rebecca Sear 16 Andaine Seguin-Orlando 17 David Shankland 18 Mehmet Somel 19 Stella Souvatzi 20 Peter Whiteley 3 Aleksandra Žegarac 21
Author Information
Other Information
1
Negaunee Integrative Research Center, Field Museum of Natural History, Chicago, IL 60605, USA
2
Department of Anthropology, University of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, IL 60607, USA
3
Division of Anthropology, American Museum of Natural History, New York, NY 10024, USA
4
Austrian Archaeological Institute, Austrian Academy of Sciences, 1019 Vienna, Austria
5
Department of Prehistory, Archaeology, Social Anthropology and Historiographical Science and Techniques, University of Valladolid, 47002 Valladolid, Spain
6
Department of Prehistoric and Historical Archaeology, University of Vienna, 1010 Vienna, Austria
7
Institute of Archaeology, Eötvös Loránd University, Research Centre for the Humanities, 1097 Budapest, Hungary
8
Paleogenetics Group, Johannes Gutenberg University Mainz, 55128 Mainz, Germany
9
UMR7206 Eco-Anthropologie, CNRS, MNHN, Université Paris Cité, 75116 Paris, France
10
Department of Linguistic and Cultural Evolution, Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology, 04103 Leipzig, Germany
11
Sociology/Anthropology Department, SUNY Cortland, Cortland, NY 13045, USA
12
Department of Sociology, Anthropology and Criminal Justice, Utah State University, Logan, UT 84322, USA
13
School of Life and Environmental Sciences, Bournemouth University, Poole BH12 5BB, UK
14
Department of Anthropology, University College London, London WC1H 0BW, UK
15
Department of Social and Cultural Anthropology, University of Vienna, 1010 Vienna, Austria
16
Department of Psychology, Brunel University of London, Uxbridge UB8 3PH, UK
17
Centre for Anthropobiology and Genomics of Toulouse, CNRS UMR 5288, Université de Toulouse, 31000 Toulouse, France
18
Royal Anthropological Institute, London W1T 5BT, UK
19
Department of Biological Sciences, Middle East Technical University, Ankara 06800, Türkiye
20
Department of History, Archaeology and Social Anthropology, University of Thessaly, 38221 Volos, Greece
21
BioSense Institute, 21000 Novi Sad, Serbia
*
Authors to whom correspondence should be addressed.

Received: 05 September 2025 Accepted: 09 October 2025 Published: 22 October 2025

Creative Commons

© 2025 The authors. This is an open access article under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).

Views:35
Downloads:8
Nat. Anthropol. 2025, 3(4), 10016; DOI: 10.70322/natanthropol.2025.10016
ABSTRACT: This article explores alternative ways of conceptualizing kinship in prehistoric contexts beyond the confines of genetic reductionism. While ancient DNA research has revitalized interest in the archaeology of kinship, it often privileges patrilineal or matrilineal models and risks obscuring forms of relatedness not grounded in biological ties. Drawing on comparative anthropological models and archaeological case studies, the paper highlights the complexity of kinship as manifested in practices of adoption, fosterage, commensality, co-residence, and non-biological affiliation within (non)nuclear households. By integrating socio-cultural, economic, and material dimensions, it demonstrates the diverse methodological and theoretical approaches necessary to move beyond descent-centered reconstructions. The discussion advocates for an interdisciplinary framework that challenges reductionist assumptions and opens new avenues for understanding relatedness in the deep past. Finally, the article emphasizes the village as a unit of analysis within a multi-scalar approach. It presents future directions and archaeological correlates of adoption, child circulation, and fosterage derived from archaeological, genetic, and ethnographic evidence.
Keywords: Ancient DNA; Relatedness; Kinship; Interdisciplinary collaboration; Comparison; European prehistory; Anthropology; Archaeology; Adoption
TOP