Identity is a permanent integral feature of archaeological research. Even when it seems marginal to the current archaeological agenda, identity is brought back into the discussion by the urgency to engage with—often homogenizing—identity-based policies in contemporary politics. Lately, the emphasis placed on difference, fluidity and multivocality within archaeology has sensibly advanced the debate. Nevertheless, immutable identities continue to arise in studies of antiquity, replicating essentialist assumptions on the human past built around binary structures and simplistic equations of culture-historical reminiscence between material culture/practices and identities. The contributors to this special issue show how informing archaeological discourse with a semiotic methodology enhances the visibility of social dynamism, cultural complexities, among ancient human groups. This is particularly true for the communities silenced by history. These papers push the ontological and epistemological boundaries of archaeology by envisaging the archaeological record as a set of interconnected signs, whose cognitive potential overcomes the material space they occupy so that they become meaningful to different individuals and communities in diverse ways. Their stance maintains that semiotics holds the largely unexplored potential to enhance our understanding of the complexity of the past, ultimately offering a compelling standpoint to engage with contemporary identity-centred political debates.

What is kinship trouble? When and where did it emerge? Why does it matter and how can we overcome it? These questions guide our discussion of kinship trouble, a term meant to capture the difficulties in reconstructing ancient kin relations, but also an attempt to resolve them through interdisciplinary collaboration and ethically adequate approaches. Motivated by the importance of crossing disciplinary boundaries and the urgency of working together to understand human diversity in the past and present, we reconsider kinship not only as a biological or genetic but also as a social phenomenon for the study of societies through archaeogenetic, archaeological, and socio-cultural anthropological approaches. As to the question of how kinship trouble could be overcome, we propose making more ‘oddkin’ (sensu Haraway) to bring disciplines into the conversation and foster unexpected collaborations around three themes: ethical collaboration, the integration of biological and social approaches, and kinship studies as acts of care and (non)mutuality of being.

In recent years, palaeogenomics has significantly advanced our understanding of human population history and evolution. Emerging studies now employ ancient genomic data to explore biological relatedness in archaeological contexts, with a growing number of studies on the topic. These investigations probe, for instance, the role of biological kinship in burial organization and mortuary practices, shedding new light on the complexities of ancient and historical human societies. Our review surveys a few examples of these studies, scrutinizing the methods and interpretations of DNA-based kinship research. We discuss the overlap between biological relatedness and other forms of kinship, acknowledging the complexity of human relationships across time and cultures. Emphasizing interdisciplinary collaboration, we advocate for integrating theoretical frameworks from sociocultural anthropology, archaeology, and Indigenous studies into palaeogenomics for a more thorough understanding of kinship in past societies. Additionally, we offer guidance throughout for newcomers venturing into using ancient DNA to study relatedness, reviewing key methodological aspects involved in biological relatedness inference and addressing common misconceptions, potential pitfalls, and methodological limitations.

Semioidentity refers to the sign–identity relationship in its pragmatic and metapragmatic dimensions. A component of social semiotic analysis, the study of semioidentity offers a distinctive contribution to archaeology by making explicit the different kinds of signs and their functions in the interpretive process. It privileges indexical signs as a means of anchoring interpretation and thus provides opportunities for additional higher-order claims about ideology and belief systems. A semiotic approach contributes to knowledge growth by positing that the most reliable interpretations—that is, those most likely to be true in the long term—are those that incorporate a variety of semiotic resources since their functions will act to constrain one another. In this essay, I discuss semiotic resources and semiotic ideology from the perspective of Peircean semiotics. I then offer a case study focusing on the archaeology of the Pueblo Revolt and the emergence of a pan-Pueblo historical consciousness to illustrate some of the rich insights that it affords.

There has been much discussion of various lines of evidence—genetic, bioarchaeological, and cultural–phylogenetic—that indicate patrilineal and patrilocal kinship systems predominated in Neolithic to Bronze Age Europe. These patterns were unique to this time and place, however, and evidence from prior periods and from other regions outside of Europe suggest a broader diversity in kinship systems that was replaced over time. Moreover, practices such as cousin marriage might have emerged in distinct regions, influenced by subsistence strategies and particular lifeways. In considering this diversity, we propose that the patrilineal/patrilocal developments observed in Europe during the Neolithic and Bronze Age were a distinctive prehistoric process among livestock herders and agriculturalists who dispersed into this region. Patrilineal kinship spread with these dispersals, as it now appears that matriliny was practised at Neolithic Çatalhöyük and in Iron Age Britain, for example. In this context, we can argue for different kinship systems in continental Europe before, during and after the Neolithic.

How might the affective work of politics be accessed through the fragments of material culture that we recover as archaeologists? This paper considers how political identities can be formed and shaped affectively through engagement with the qualities of craft objects and the connected world of experience that they index. Taking up a case study from nineteenth-century highland Madagascar, I explore how political affects are caught up with the making and using of everyday things and how the transposed qualities of objects and the metonymic connections they evoke offer a means to tie changes in material culture to shifts in political affects over time.

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.

With this paper, we aim to bring the history of the rural landscapes and communities of the ancient (‘Classical’) Mediterranean back into the limelight, drawing attention to their contributions to and pivotal roles within the multifaceted structural transformations of the Mediterranean in the first millennium bce. To do so, we focus on two case studies from one particular region that looms large amongst those heavily exploited by ancient colonial powers: the island of Sardinia. In chronological terms, our focus is on the so-called Punic and Roman periods, roughly spanning between the fifth century bce and the fifth century ce. Long overlooked, if not outright dismissed, in conventional accounts of the ancient Mediterranean, the rural communities of Punic-Roman Sardinia were not only vital economic producers, but also formed large and culturally distinct social groups. They actively maintained their own traditions, ways of living and practices in the face of the ruling classes’ disruptive initiatives. Their actions to shape their identity and history resonate closely with the theory of the ‘history of subaltern groups’ formulated in Antonio Gramsci’s Prison Notebooks, particularly Notebook 25. We draw upon a semiotic understanding of Gramsci’s notion of subalternity to strengthen archaeology’s ability to foreground the materiality of those communities unaccounted for by history. Our goal is to discuss comparatively the material signs of rural life of Punic and Roman-period Sardinia, to outline an alternative decolonial perspective on the island and to consider its implications for the wider ancient Mediterranean.

This study investigates trends in the conceptualization, methods and analysis of kinship throughout the corpus of bioarchaeological research from the pre-Hispanic Andes in recent years (since 2000). Building on a summary of key shifts in archaeogenetics and definitions of foundational concepts like ayllu social organization and relationship kinship in the Indigenous Americas, the study carries out bibliometric analysis of four methods-based search strings. The resulting corpus (N=25 publications) is analysed for word frequency and correlation to understand how kinship analysis has changed through time, across cultures and contexts and according to methods used within bioarchaeology. Results show that explicit testing of kinship-related hypotheses has remained somewhat steady across aDNA, biodistance, cranial vault modification (CVM) and isotopic studies—especially for foundational bioarchaeology journals—and may be experiencing a resurgence. However, household and community levels of kinship were often excluded from study conceptualization and research questions. Results suggest isotopic analysis can augment archaeogenetic and morphometric approaches to understanding how common geography and substance consumption constitute kin groups. Collaborative, multi-correlate databases of archaeological individuals are proposed to advance kinship studies in Andean bioarchaeology.

In this paper, I use examples from the Roman past and the Brexit present of the UK to discuss the links between practices, identities and the changing dimensions of imperial power. In both the traditional archaeological context of later Roman Britain and in excavating the roots of Brexit in post-War British politics, analysis of the practical semiotics of identity is the most fruitful way to understand the social processes under way. In each context, the meaning of different practices, articulated through the concepts of identities and boundaries, is crucial to the structuration of, respectively, a late imperial and a post-imperial society. The tensions between imperial and local identities are manifest across a wide suite of practices, the investigation of which provides a dynamic method for understanding how these tensions play out, with consequences for the fragmentation of the Roman Empire, on the one hand, and of the UK, on the other.

This article draws on queer and feminist social anthropological epistemologies in order to sketch out a methodological framework for the interpretation of archaeological data from funerary contexts. Funerary assemblages have ongoing significance in archaeological models of identity and social structure, including one’s status, gender, cosmological beliefs, etc. Biomolecular analyses of human remains are a major source of data about the past and are increasingly used to reconstruct past social structures, especially where there is evidence of biological connection between individuals at a single funerary site. However, archaeological interpretation of these sites is complicated by their origin in social interactions, belief structures, and sometimes extended funerary rites, which themselves may have been adapted for a range of ritual, political and interpersonal needs. Here, we consider the funerary sphere as a site of ‘kin-work’, a concept from feminist anthropology that centres the everyday, habitual, and often overlooked material efforts of sustaining inter- and intra-generational familial relations. We argue that kinning practices form a key part of burial rites as the dead person or persons’ relationships are reconsidered, renegotiated, transformed, or manipulated. The goal is to develop a model of kin relations within funerary contexts in order to contribute to a more nuanced archaeology of social practice that complements emerging discussions of family structure, kinship and relatedness.

The capacity to relate a signal to an arbitrary, specific and generally understood meaning—symbolism—is an integral feature of human language. Here, we explore two aspects of knapping technology at the Acheulean site of Boxgrove that may suggest symbolic communication. Tranchet tips are a difficult handaxe form to create, but are unusually prevalent at Boxgrove. We use geometric morphometrics to show that despite tranchet flaking increasing planform irregularity, handaxes with tranchet tips have more standardized 3D shapes than those without. This challenging standardization suggests tranchet tips at Boxgrove were part of a normative prescription for a particular handaxe form. Boxgrove presents some of the thinnest handaxes in the Acheulean world. To replicate such thin bifaces involves the technique of turning-the-edge. Since this technique is visually and causally opaque it may not be possible to learn through observation or even pointing, instead requiring arbitrary referents to teach naïve knappers. We use scar ordering on handaxes to show a variety of instances of turning-the-edge in different depositional units at Boxgrove, indicating it was socially transmitted to multiple knappers. The presence of societally understood norms, coupled with a technique that requires specific referents to teach its salient features, suggests symbolism was a feature of hominin communication at Boxgrove 480,000 years ago.

Kinship in archaeology has often been understood through a narrow biological lens, privileging genetic relatedness and the nuclear family as the primary unit of social organization. Yet anthropological and ethnographic studies demonstrate that care and child-rearing are widely shared practices that extend beyond parents, involving kin and non-kin alike. This article explores how such forms of cooperative childcare, particularly alloparenting, can be recognized in prehistoric burial contexts. By integrating archaeological, genetic, isotopic and osteological evidence, it argues for a broader interpretation of adult–child co-burials, moving beyond the assumption of direct biological parenthood. A series of Iberian case studies illustrates both the potential and the challenges of detecting fostering, non-parental care and the social significance of children in mortuary practices. Finally, the article introduces the SKIN: Social Kinship and Cooperative Care project, which applies a multi-disciplinary framework to investigate how women and children buried together in Iberia’s later prehistory reveal the diversity of social bonds that shaped communities.

Panoramic accounts of long-term socio-political change tend to marginalize the role of animals. Taking a materialist stance, we re-evaluate the ways livestock shaped the emergence of the tributary mode of production out of a kinship-ordered mode of production. This explicitly Marxist analytical framework foregrounds the interplay between value, wealth, and labour, while attending to the economic specificities of livestock that make it particularly dynamic. Drawing on ethnohistorical data, we identify wealth in livestock as heritable, expandable, flexible, and convertible, while inherently unstable. We offer the first synthesis tying these qualities together and present a holistic picture of how these qualities can catalyse the class formation by promoting differential accumulation of wealth, economic growth, and direct appropriation of value from producers. These dynamics offer an animal-centric explanatory lens to view the long-term trajectory of northern Mesopotamia from the Neolithic through the Late Chalcolithic (9700-3500 BCE), where caprines, cattle, and pigs were central to the development of urbanism and states. While our analysis is specific to the social formations, species, and human-animal relations in northern Mesopotamia, the framework we present can be applied to contexts globally to better understand the animal side of political economic dynamics of early complex societies.

Worldbuilding is a concept that has been used to describe the creation of immersive landscapes in fiction and games and is deeply resonant with archaeological knowledge construction. This article argues for worldbuilding in archaeology as a creative intervention that encourages an exploration of archaeological data throughout the process of creation, interpretation and dissemination to generate past worlds, shaped through community storytelling. Through the examples of Çatalhöyük in Second Life, Other Eyes and the Avebury Papers projects, I explore a playful practice that closely interrogates reuse of archaeological data and encourages lateral thinking amongst students and other archaeological storytellers.

Houses and unilineal descent groups have been treated as different types of social phenomena in socio-cultural anthropology, and as borrowed for analysis of households and settlements in archaeology. This paper contends that houses and lineages, especially those configured by Crow–Omaha kinship terminologies, are better considered as perspectival variants, reflecting differences that are fundamentally synchronic versus diachronic. Crow–Omaha systems and house societies exhibit signal similarities, occupying an intermediate status between kin-based and class-based formations, and evidently derive in an evolutionary sense from prior ‘Iroquois’ or ‘Dravidian’ forms. Setting out the terms in which kinship systems should be considered if they are to serve as useful explanatory analogues for archaeological analysis, the paper then proceeds to examine Lévi-Strauss’s original inspiration for the ‘house’, i.e. societies of the Pacific Northwest Coast of North America. It is no coincidence, the present paper contends, that Kwakwa̲ka̲’wakw, the archetypal house society is situated adjacent to a Crow-matrilineal series of communities that share a great deal in common with it culturally, as a result of centuries of exchange. In short, the house needs to re-attend to kinship structures, as descent groups need to be reconnected with exchange structures and alliance processes earlier elaborated by Lévi-Strauss.

This paper examines the phenomenon of posthumous kinship. In 1951, E.E. Evans-Pritchard introduced us to the possibility that a ghost could be defined as the legal father or mother of a child. Since the time of his writing, this once seemingly ‘exotic’ cultural practice has been brought ‘home’ to Western audiences through the clinical practice of harvesting gametes of recently (or soon to be) deceased individuals for reproductive purposes. Through an examination of several cases in which the dead have been made to ‘father’ or ‘mother’ a child, this paper explores the social and political ramifications of posthumous kinship including what it reveals about shifting Euro-American understandings concerning biological properties (and property), subjectivity, embodiment and the contested boundary between life and death.

Northwestern Iberia was inhabited by communities whose only settlement model was the hillfort throughout the Iron Age. In archaeological terms, these people are included in the so-called ‘Castro Culture’. These communities experienced social and material changes at the end of the Iron Age. From the second century bc onwards, a more hierarchical and complex social system, together with a process of monumentalization and sophistication of the architecture of the settlements, was adopted. More specifically, in the region between the Douro and Miño rivers, a series of highly original subterranean constructions have been documented. Unique in the archaeological record of the European Iron Age, the function of sites has been much debated, with the most accepted use as steam bath. In this article, these buildings are analysed from a performative approach, to understand their meaning and function in the context of the landscape of the hillforts.

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.

This study offers a review of the artistic dimension of the Chinchorro culture, a complex hunter-gatherer society along the coast of the Atacama Desert that, around 7000 years ago, created elaborate representations of the dead. It provides archaeological background and investigates the possible reasons for the development of artificial mummification. Drawing on the art therapy model and the concepts of art and grief, the analysis interprets Chinchorro mortuary rituals as expressions of emotional and social processes. This study argues that these anthropogenically prepared mummies represent artistic expressions that reflect the intentional decision-making and emotional awareness of these ancient communities, serving as a means to process grief. Furthermore, the paper highlights the multifaceted nature of Chinchorro society, including the mining and use of pigments such as manganese—materials that, while symbolically meaningful, posed serious health risks and may have contributed to the eventual decline of their elaborate funerary practices. Finally, the study underscores the enduring cultural significance of the Chinchorro, particularly in shaping contemporary identity of Arica region, where artistic portrayal of dead links ancient and modern narratives of cultural heritage.