Social arrangements. Kinship, descent and affinity in the mortuary architecture of Early Neolithic Britain and Ireland

Abstract

This article reassesses the social significance of Early Neolithic chambered tombs. It critically evaluates inferences about social organization drawn from tomb architecture and interpretations of kinship based on aDNA analyses of human remains from tombs. Adopting the perspective that kinship is a multifaceted and ongoing field of practice, it argues that the arrangement of tomb chambers was related to the negotiation of Early Neolithic kinship. Drawing together inferences about biological relatedness from aDNA analyses with interpretations of chamber arrangements, it suggests that variation in the architectural arrangements and sequential modification of chambered tombs relates to different ways of negotiating aspects of kinship, particularly descent and affinity. It presents interpretations of how kinship was negotiated at Early Neolithic tombs in different regions of Britain and Ireland and concludes that it is increasingly possible to gauge pattern and diversity in Neolithic negotiations of kinship, descent and affinity by combining different strands of evidence, including architectural arrangement.

A high-resolution picture of kinship practices in an Early Neolithic tomb

“…Our data prove that the arrangement of chambers at this Neolithic tomb was centrally determined by notions of kinship, a matter long debated for such monuments 22 . While determination of who could be buried at Hazleton North was primarily patrilineal, we observe a significant spatial patterning in the placement of individuals from different maternal sub-lineages, with all 12 individuals belonging to the sub-lineages of SC1f and U3f buried in the south, and 9 out 13 belonging to the sub-lineages of NC2f and NC3f buried in the north, including the first generation mothers in the 3 out 4 cases where we have been able to locate them (P-value=0.0011 from a Fisher's Exact Test for a difference in the spatial placement of these four sub-lineages) (Fig.…”

“…Adoption or kinship by association may also have played a role in the inclusion of biologically unrelated individuals. Hazleton North cannot be considered a template for all Neolithic chambered tombs since the layout of such monuments varied and kinship practices could have varied between (and within) the different regions where such tombs were built 22 . Nonetheless, this analysis advances our understanding of kinship and chambered tomb construction in Neolithic Britain.…”

Sex bias in Neolithic megalithic burials

“…From an estimated 41 MNI at the site, approximately 22 of which are adults, genome‐wide data was generated for 35 individuals. Surprisingly, 27 of these individuals formed a “virilocal patrilineal descent system” (Fowler, 2022, p. 7), meaning that the individuals were descended from a single male ancestor (NC1M) and the four women with whom he reproduced. The four women may have determined their kin's placement within the chambered tomb (Fowler, 2022; Fowler et al, 2022).…”

“…Surprisingly, 27 of these individuals formed a “virilocal patrilineal descent system” (Fowler, 2022, p. 7), meaning that the individuals were descended from a single male ancestor (NC1M) and the four women with whom he reproduced. The four women may have determined their kin's placement within the chambered tomb (Fowler, 2022; Fowler et al, 2022). The study is an exceptional example of what we should be striving for, as the genetic data for almost an entire site allows for a full contextualization of the archeological data that could previously not be carried out.…”

“…Analysis of genome‐wide data has allowed researchers to investigate the unwritten history of ancient cultures and societies. Several studies have focused on and provided insights into the movement and integration of prehistoric peoples in Western Eurasia (Brace et al, 2019; Cassidy et al, 2016; Olalde et al, 2018), as well as into paleodemographic structures (Sánchez‐Quinto et al, 2019; Fowler, 2022). In their study of genome‐wide data from selected ancient individuals from Neolithic megalithic sites in modern‐day United Kingdom, Ireland, and Sweden, Sánchez‐Quinto et al (2019) highlighted a possible male sex‐biased admixture, that is, a bias in genetic contribution in a population, evidenced by limited Y‐chromosome haplogroup lineages and a greater diversity in mtDNA haplogroups.…”