PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
April 15, 2026Cambridge Archaeological Journal1 citationsOpen Access

Kinship Analysis in Specified Contexts: When Interdisciplinary Cooperation is Too Narrow, Results Tend to be Misleading

View Full Paper
SCSabina CvečekAGAndré Gingrich

Key Points

  • This article explores the implications of narrow interdisciplinary cooperation in kinship analysis, particularly in archaeogenetics and archaeology.
  • Analysis of recent Pannonian Avar excavations
  • Examination of kinship practices through archaeology and archaeogenetics
  • Inclusion of socio-cultural anthropology in kinship analysis
  • Narrow interdisciplinary efforts lead to misleading conclusions
  • Socio-cultural complexities are often ignored in genetic analyses
  • Understanding kinship requires ethnographically grounded interpretations

Abstract

Abstract Kinship studies recently have been going through a new wave of attraction in archaeogenetics and archaeology. Interdisciplinary cooperation remains an important challenge in these endeavours. Any research that requires interdisciplinary efforts will lead to reductive and potentially misleading conclusions if that cooperation is restricted to a range that is too narrow. The consequences usually are inadequate research results and insufficient ranges of interpretation. Moreover, such methodologically limited inquiries also may entail ethical concerns. Some of this is also valid for kinship analyses, in the study of the deep past as well as for contemporary communities. The present article examines the recently presented case of (‘Pannonian’) Avar excavations to demonstrate how archaeogenetic and archaeological interpretations may tend to ignore socio-cultural complexities. By arguing for the inclusion of socio-cultural anthropology in professional interdisciplinary kinship analyses of the deep past, concepts such as polygyny, levirate, ghost marriage and the notion of ‘female exogamy’ are examined for the case under scrutiny. The article illustrates how certain kinship practices—often misinterpreted in solely genetic terms or entirely ignored—can be understood as ethnographically grounded while also having a cross-cultural meaning suitable for comparison that is indispensable for the study of kinship in any historical period.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Cveček et al. (2026) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/69df2bece4eeef8a2a6b0e28https://doi.org/10.1017/s0959774326100390
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper