The Tie That Binds Us? Challenging the Primacy of DNA in Kinship Studies and Re-Centring Community in Defining Human Connections across Time

IF 1.6 2区 历史学 0 ARCHAEOLOGY
Hannah M. Moots, Krystal S. Tsosie, Mehmet Somel
{"title":"The Tie That Binds Us? Challenging the Primacy of DNA in Kinship Studies and Re-Centring Community in Defining Human Connections across Time","authors":"Hannah M. Moots, Krystal S. Tsosie, Mehmet Somel","doi":"10.1017/s0959774326100444","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Biological determinism continues to shape how kinship is defined, from research to repatriation proceedings. This privileging of biological relatedness reflects and reinforces dominant ‘Western’ frameworks of kinship, often sidelining culturally-specific, Indigenous, and community-centered understandings of family and social belonging. Advances in archaeogenomic technologies today offer unprecedented insight into past human societies, and these advances have the potential to forge new, multivocal, and inclusive approaches to kinship. However, the application of ancient DNA risks reproducing power imbalances and epistemic hierarchies when genetic connections are assumed to be the primary or sole measure of social ties. This paper examines the conceptual and ethical implications of privileging DNA as a measure of kinship, emphasizing how such practices can obscure complex social realities, undermine self-determination, and reify narrow and essentialist understandings of identity. We call for critical reflection about the agents and motivations of archaeogenomics research, on the role of genetics in defining relationships and urge that multiple knowledge systems be considered in studies of kinship, both past and present.","PeriodicalId":47164,"journal":{"name":"CAMBRIDGE ARCHAEOLOGICAL JOURNAL","volume":"48 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2026-04-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"CAMBRIDGE ARCHAEOLOGICAL JOURNAL","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/s0959774326100444","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"ARCHAEOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Biological determinism continues to shape how kinship is defined, from research to repatriation proceedings. This privileging of biological relatedness reflects and reinforces dominant ‘Western’ frameworks of kinship, often sidelining culturally-specific, Indigenous, and community-centered understandings of family and social belonging. Advances in archaeogenomic technologies today offer unprecedented insight into past human societies, and these advances have the potential to forge new, multivocal, and inclusive approaches to kinship. However, the application of ancient DNA risks reproducing power imbalances and epistemic hierarchies when genetic connections are assumed to be the primary or sole measure of social ties. This paper examines the conceptual and ethical implications of privileging DNA as a measure of kinship, emphasizing how such practices can obscure complex social realities, undermine self-determination, and reify narrow and essentialist understandings of identity. We call for critical reflection about the agents and motivations of archaeogenomics research, on the role of genetics in defining relationships and urge that multiple knowledge systems be considered in studies of kinship, both past and present.
捆绑我们的纽带?挑战DNA在亲属关系研究中的首要地位,重新定义跨时间的人际关系的社区中心
从研究到遣返程序,生物决定论继续影响亲属关系的定义。这种对生物亲缘关系的特权反映并强化了占主导地位的“西方”亲属关系框架,往往使特定文化的、土著的和以社区为中心的对家庭和社会归属的理解边缘化。今天,考古基因组学技术的进步使我们对过去的人类社会有了前所未有的了解,这些进步有可能形成新的、多声音的、包容性的亲属关系研究方法。然而,当遗传联系被认为是社会关系的主要或唯一衡量标准时,古代DNA的应用有再现权力不平衡和认知等级的风险。本文考察了将DNA作为亲属关系衡量标准的特权的概念和伦理含义,强调了这种做法如何模糊复杂的社会现实,破坏自决,并具体化了对身份的狭隘和本质主义理解。我们呼吁对考古基因组学研究的动因和动机进行批判性反思,对遗传学在定义关系中的作用进行批判性反思,并敦促在过去和现在的亲属关系研究中考虑多种知识系统。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.30
自引率
8.30%
发文量
38
期刊介绍: The Cambridge Archaeological Journal is the leading journal for cognitive and symbolic archaeology. It provides a forum for innovative, descriptive and theoretical archaeological research, paying particular attention to the role and development of human intellectual abilities and symbolic beliefs and practices. Specific topics covered in recent issues include: the use of cultural neurophenomenology for the understanding of Maya religious belief, agency and the individual, new approaches to rock art and shamanism, the significance of prehistoric monuments, ritual behaviour on Pacific Islands, and body metamorphosis in prehistoric boulder artworks. In addition to major articles and shorter notes, the Cambridge Archaeological Journal includes review features on significant recent books.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书