Social media summary

Ancient DNA work highlights matrilocal residence patterns, inducing a rethink of how we study past social organisation.

How to infer residence patterns from ancient DNA data

In recent years, aDNA data have provided a novel means to study social organisation in past communities (Nägele et al., Reference Nägele, Rivollat, Yu and Wang2022). These methods rely in part on the analysis of uniparentally inherited markers; mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) and Y chromosome (chrY). mtDNA is inherited from mothers to all of their biological children, while chrY is passed from fathers to sons. In a patrilocal community, males remain local, and females move to the community from elsewhere, introducing new mtDNA that is passed on to their children. This increases mtDNA diversity; therefore, we expect the mtDNA diversity to be higher than the chrY diversity. Likewise in a matrilocal community, since females remain local, we expect continuity in the mtDNA lineages and higher diversity in chrY, as there is an influx of non-local males (Fig. 2). When tracing patterns of genetic descent for these two markers, matriline/patriline genetic connections (mtDNA or chrY lineages) are observed in cases where a single mitochondrial or chrY haplotype is continuously present within a household. In this text, we use the terms matrilineal and patrilineal connections to refer only to genetic descent structures.

Figure 2.

An example of how the mtDNA and chrY diversities contrast within a matrilocal and a patrilocal group of individuals. For the matrilocal example, in the pedigree on the upper panel, the mitochondrial haplotype of the oldest female individual is shown in green. The maternal lineage continues from the oldest female individual to the youngest (green line), since the females reside within the same group across the generations. In contrast, the male descendant of the oldest male individual leaves the group (orange arrow), resulting in the end of the paternal chrY line in the group. In the two consecutive generations, there is male influx from a different external group (red and blue arrows). In a case where we would have individuals’ mtDNA and chrY sequences in this group, we would have seen the same mtDNA haplotype in every individual – which reflects low diversity. However, the chrY haplotypes would have shown the opposite signal – high diversity. The difference we would have observed between the two markers is shown in the right panel. The opposite pattern – where the chrY pool has low diversity and the mtDNA pool shows high diversity – is shown for the patrilocal example.

However, since mtDNA and chrY only capture information on the maternal and paternal lineages, multiple individuals can share the same mtDNA and/or chrY. Therefore, sharing a uniparentally inherited marker is not sufficient to estimate genetic relatedness between individuals. Additionally, the extent of genetic relatedness within a community can inform aspects of social organisation. In order to infer broader connections, such as genetic relatedness networks, the whole set of information from both parents, i.e. autosomal data, is required. Lately, the increase in aDNA data generation and the rise of large-scale genetic projects have allowed for the so-called ‘whole cemetery analyses’ (e.g. Rivollat et al., Reference Rivollat, Rohrlach, Ringbauer, Childebayeva, Mendisco, Barquera, Szolek, Le Roy, Colleran, Tuke, Aron, Pemonge, Späth, Télouk, Rey, Goude, Balter, Krause, Rottier and Haak2023; J. Wang et al., Reference Wang, Yan, Li, Zan, Zhao, Zhao, Chen, Wang, Ji, Zhang, Yang, Zhang, Qiao, Guo, Rao, Zhang, Wang, Ran, Duan and Ning2025), facilitating comprehensive identification of biological relations among the buried individuals. In this sense, elevated rates of genetic relatedness among the male individuals, in comparison to the cemetery-wide average, would indicate that males remain local and therefore have more relatives buried in the same cemetery and/or in close proximity, which is consistent with patrilocality. The opposite pattern – high genetic relatedness among females within a given cemetery – would suggest matrilocality, where females do not relocate and are buried in their ‘local’ residence.

A large number of aDNA studies have reported on patrilocal societies (e.g. Blöcher et al., Reference Blöcher, Brami, Feinauer, Stolarczyk, Diekmann, Vetterdietz, Karapetian, Winkelbach, Kokot, Vallini, Stobbe, Haak, Papageorgopoulou, Krause, Sharapova and Burger2023; Chyleński et al., Reference Chyleński, Makarowicz, Juras, Krzewińska, Pospieszny, Ehler, Breszka, Górski, Taras, Szczepanek, Polańska, Włodarczak, Lasota-Kuś, Wójcik, Romaniszyn, Szmyt, Kośko, Ignaczak, Sadowski and Malmström2023; Dulias et al., Reference Dulias, Foody, Justeau, Silva, Martiniano, Oteo-García, Fichera, Rodrigues, Gandini, Meynert, Donnelly, Aitman, Chamberlain, Lelong, Kozikowski, Powlesland, Waddington, Mattiangeli and Richards2022; Gnecchi-Ruscone et al., Reference Gnecchi-Ruscone, Rácz, Samu, Szeniczey, Faragó, Knipper, Friedrich, Zlámalová, Traverso, Liccardo, Wabnitz, Popli, Wang, Radzeviciute, Gulyás, Koncz, Balogh, Lezsák, Mácsai and Hofmanová2024; Marlowe, Reference Marlowe2005; Mittnik et al., Reference Mittnik, Massy, Knipper, Wittenborn, Friedrich, Pfrengle, Burri, Carlichi-Witjes, Deeg, Furtwängler, Harbeck, von Heyking, Kociumaka, Kucukkalipci, Lindauer, Metz, Staskiewicz, Thiel, Wahl and Krause2019; Moore et al., Reference Moore, Wilson, Challanain, McCormick, Marshall, Dulias, Foody, Justeau, Pala, Richards and Edwards2022; Rivollat et al., Reference Rivollat, Rohrlach, Ringbauer, Childebayeva, Mendisco, Barquera, Szolek, Le Roy, Colleran, Tuke, Aron, Pemonge, Späth, Télouk, Rey, Goude, Balter, Krause, Rottier and Haak2023; for some reviews on the topic, see Bickle & Hofmann, Reference Bickle and Hofmann2022; Bickle et al., Reference Bickle, Hofmann, Souvatzi, Cintas-Peña, Rebay-Salisbury, Schauer, Khalil, Shaw and Vleet2025; Guyon et al., Reference Guyon, Heyer and Chaix2025; Hrnčíř et al., Reference Hrnčíř, Vondrovský and Květina2020). However, during the last year, three research studies have been published from different parts of the world and from different time periods, reporting on evidence for past matrilocal societies and/or genetic matriline connections (Cassidy et al., Reference Cassidy, Russell, Smith, Delbarre, Cheetham, Manley, Mattiangeli, Breslin, Jackson, McCann, Little, O’Connor, Heaslip, Lawson, Endicott and Bradley2025; J. Wang et al., Reference Wang, Yan, Li, Zan, Zhao, Zhao, Chen, Wang, Ji, Zhang, Yang, Zhang, Qiao, Guo, Rao, Zhang, Wang, Ran, Duan and Ning2025; Yüncü et al., Reference Yüncü, Doğu, Kaptan, Kılıç, Mazzucato, Güler, Eker, Katırcıoğlu, Chyleński, Vural, Sağlıcan, Atağ, Bozkurt, Pearson, Sevkar, Altınışık, Milella, Karamurat, Aktürk and Somel2025).

Durotriges tribe

The first study discusses the British Celts who lived around 2,000 BP. The Celtic society has the earliest record of female rulers, indicating the possibility for women to reach the highest political status (Allason-Jones, Reference Allason-Jones2012). According to historical evidence, women in the Celtic society could inherit property and participate in and lead warfare actions. They are also reported to have practised polyandry (having more than one husband) and even divorced husbands, if wanted (Julius Caesar – De Bello Gallico; Allason-Jones, Reference Allason-Jones2012). In this case, as well, even though archaeology and material culture have provided evidence of a higher female status in Celtic societies, it is not possible to reconstruct societal structures in their entirety (Pope, Reference Pope2022). Historical records are themselves not a completely accurate source, as they are always subject to writers’ biases (e.g. Caesar – De Bello Gallico; Tacitus – Germania).

The study by Cassidy et al. (Reference Cassidy, Russell, Smith, Delbarre, Cheetham, Manley, Mattiangeli, Breslin, Jackson, McCann, Little, O’Connor, Heaslip, Lawson, Endicott and Bradley2025) focuses on the Durotriges tribe, who occupied the central southern English coast from 2,100 to 1,800 BP. Analysing their graves and the associated grave goods, it was inferred that in the Durotriges tribe, women had a higher status, as female burials were associated with more prestige items (Russell et al., Reference Russell, Smith, Cheetham, Evans and Manley2019).

Analysing aDNA data from the cemetery, researchers found that the majority of the interred individuals were genetically related. More than two-thirds of the studied individuals shared the same mtDNA haplotype, resulting in low mtDNA diversity. These results indicated an association of the specific mtDNA lineage, one that was maintained across multiple generations, with the archaeological site in which the remains were found, implying genetic matrilineality. In contrast, chrY diversity was much higher. Integrating the connections from autosomal DNA, the paper reports a higher rate of relatedness among female individuals across generations, with males having a much higher percentage among non-related individuals. These patterns point to a society of matrilineal genetic descent structure and an extensively male-biased movement.

Combining these results with other contemporary archaeological sites from Britain, researchers suggest that matrilocality appears to be widespread, with more communities being characterised by low mtDNA diversity. This contrasts evidence from previous time periods – Bronze Age (∼3,000 BP) – when mostly patrilocality has been recognised (Booth et al., Reference Booth, Brück, Brace and Barnes2021), suggesting matrilocality might have become more common with the passage of time, or that patrilocal and matrilocal societies co-existed. Similar patterns have also been reported for Celtic societies outside Britain. In a study from southern Germany, strontium isotope analyses present no differentiation based on biological sex (Gretzinger et al., Reference Gretzinger, Schmitt, Mötsch, Carlhoff, Lamnidis, Huang, Ringbauer, Knipper, Francken, Mandt, Hansen, Freund, Posth, Rathmann, Harvati, Wieland, Granehäll, Maixner, Zink and Schiffels2024), in contrast to evidence from other contemporary settings (e.g. Knipper et al., Reference Knipper, Mittnik, Massy, Kociumaka, Kucukkalipci, Maus, Wittenborn, Metz, Staskiewicz, Krause and Stockhammer2017; Mittnik et al., Reference Mittnik, Massy, Knipper, Wittenborn, Friedrich, Pfrengle, Burri, Carlichi-Witjes, Deeg, Furtwängler, Harbeck, von Heyking, Kociumaka, Kucukkalipci, Lindauer, Metz, Staskiewicz, Thiel, Wahl and Krause2019; Sjögren et al., Reference Sjögren, Olalde, Carver, Allentoft, Knowles, Kroonen, Pike, Schröter, Brown, Brown, Harrison, Bertemes, Reich, Kristiansen and Heyd2020).

Fujia

The second study (J. Wang et al., Reference Wang, Yan, Li, Zan, Zhao, Zhao, Chen, Wang, Ji, Zhang, Yang, Zhang, Qiao, Guo, Rao, Zhang, Wang, Ran, Duan and Ning2025) reports on a community from East Neolithic China, Fujia (4,700–4,500 BP), where genetic connections were mainly traced through the maternal line. Researchers analysed two cemeteries associated with the settlement of Fujia. These consist of both primary and secondary burials, with an assemblage exceeding 500 individuals, and a burial span of around 250 years (∼10 generations). Osteological analysis revealed no sex or age-at-death bias in the burial position or the associated mortuary practices. Isotopic analyses, to the limits of its resolution, recognised the community as ‘geographically constricted’, with no evidence of long-distance exogamy. This is in contrast to other contemporaneous groups in China that point to high population density and a hypothesised network of elite exchanges across regions (J. Wang et al., Reference Wang, Yan, Li, Zan, Zhao, Zhao, Chen, Wang, Ji, Zhang, Yang, Zhang, Qiao, Guo, Rao, Zhang, Wang, Ran, Duan and Ning2025).

In these two Fujia cemeteries, two distinct mtDNA haplogroups were identified. Interestingly, those buried in the same cemetery shared identical mitochondrial sequences, regardless of biological sex, indicating two shared maternal lineages. On the contrary, the chrY variation in both cemeteries was found to be higher than the mitochondrial one. Looking into the patterns of autosomal genetic similarity, researchers found higher degrees of relatedness within the cemeteries than between them, concluding that the individuals were buried first and foremost according to their maternal line. Given the longevity of the site’s occupation, the limited mitochondrial and the significantly higher chrY diversity, it seems that the two cemeteries were being used by matrilineal ‘close-kin’ groups.

Both osteoarchaeological and genetic data confirmed that male individuals were buried together with females of the same matriline, contrasting what is commonly observed in patrilineal cemeteries in which females are buried together with their male partners (e.g. Gnecchi-Ruscone et al., Reference Gnecchi-Ruscone, Rácz, Samu, Szeniczey, Faragó, Knipper, Friedrich, Zlámalová, Traverso, Liccardo, Wabnitz, Popli, Wang, Radzeviciute, Gulyás, Koncz, Balogh, Lezsák, Mácsai and Hofmanová2024). According to the authors, as Fujia shares archaeological characteristics with numerous contemporaneous sites in the region, this social structure associated with matrilineal organisation can potentially be a broader regional pattern rather than a unique isolated case.

Çatalhöyük

Tracing further back in time, new findings from an ∼9,000-year-old site in south-central Anatolia – Çatalhöyük – hint at the absence of patrilocal residence patterns (Yüncü et al., Reference Yüncü, Doğu, Kaptan, Kılıç, Mazzucato, Güler, Eker, Katırcıoğlu, Chyleński, Vural, Sağlıcan, Atağ, Bozkurt, Pearson, Sevkar, Altınışık, Milella, Karamurat, Aktürk and Somel2025). Çatalhöyük is a well-known Neolithic settlement owing to an extensive excavation history dating back to 1961, with continuous occupation for one thousand years, distinctive house structures, wall paintings, female figurines, and funerary practices.

One important feature of these funerary practices is that burials are placed inside the houses. This presents a unique opportunity to investigate genetic relatedness networks within and between households and can offer insights into potentially gender-based familial organisations. In the study, an investigation of multi-generational pedigrees showed that the co-buried individuals from the same houses had matrilineal genetic connections. The homogeneity of mtDNA within buildings was higher than the homogeneity between buildings, implying in-house connections through the female line. Conversely, the chrY homogeneity was comparable within and between buildings. The authors observe these patterns across all main periods of occupation (9,050–8,250 BP). Together, these findings point to female-centred practices within the site, with a likely matrilocal residence among the households. We note that this intra-house pattern is independent of the sex-biased mobility on the community level.

On the community level, when combining all households as a whole, the analysis of uniparental markers revealed comparable levels of mtDNA and chrY diversity, compatible with bilocality, i.e. no elevation in mtDNA diversity, which would be the case if the community was patrilocal. The authors argue that the absence of genetic and archaeological evidence for patrilocality in Çatalhöyük, which is similarly lacking in the few studies of other Neolithic settlements in Anatolia (Altınışık et al., Reference Altınışık, Kazancı, Aydoğan, Gemici, Erdal, Sarıaltun, Vural, Koptekin, Gürün, Sağlıcan, Fernandes, Çakan, Koruyucu, Lagerholm, Karamurat, Özkan, Kılınç, Sevkar, Sürer and Somel2022; Pearson et al., Reference Pearson, Evans, Lamb, Baird, Hodder, Marciniak, Larsen, Knüsel, Haddow, Pilloud, Bogaard, Fairbairn, Plug, Mazzucato, Mustafaoğlu, Feldman, Somel and Fernández-Domínguez2023; Yaka et al., Reference Yaka, Mapelli, Kaptan, Doğu, Chyleński, Erdal, Koptekin, Vural, Bayliss, Mazzucato, Fer, Çokoğlu, Lagerholm, Krzewińska, Karamurat, Gemici, Sevkar, Dağtaş, Kılınç and Somel2021), can suggest a bilateral residence, meaning gender-independent residence patterns. As such, with the current state of knowledge about the time period, existing evidence contrasts with the male-centred social structures observed in Neolithic Europe.

A separate study of the material culture at Çatalhöyük – for example, architectural features, technological elements, and burial practices – together with the genetic data, has provided additional insights into the social organisation in Çatalhöyük (Mazzucato et al., Reference Mazzucato, Coscia, Küçükakdağ Doğu, Haddow, Kılıç, Yüncü and Somel2025). Material culture similarity across the households correlated with genetic relatedness among individuals buried within them, with spatially concentrated patterns that change through time (Mazzucato et al., Reference Mazzucato, Coscia, Küçükakdağ Doğu, Haddow, Kılıç, Yüncü and Somel2025). Taken together with the genetic results on residence patterns, they show that residence and kinship in Çatalhöyük cannot be reduced to normative models, but rather were fluid and embedded in complex networks of interactions.