Editing Matrilineality (section)

== Early human kinship ==
Scholars disagree on the nature of early human, that is, [[Homo sapiens]], kinship.{{Efn|Neanderthals may have been patrilocal in mating patterns, again evidenced by aDNA (https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-022-05283-y, but also see https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3088635/, and https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-022-05283-y for a population at the easternmost fringe of their known range).}} In the late 19th century, most scholars believed, influenced by [[Lewis H. Morgan]]'s book ''[[Ancient Society]]'', that early kinship was matrilineal.<ref>Murdock, G. P. 1949. ''Social Structure''. London and New York: Macmillan, p. 185.</ref> [[Friedrich Engels]] took this up in ''[[The Origin of the Family, Private Property and the State]]''. This thesis that our first domestic institution was the matrilineal [[clan]], not the [[family]], became [[Communist theory|communist orthodoxy]]. However, by the 20th century most social anthropologists disagreed,<ref>Malinowski, B. 1956. ''Marriage: Past and Present. A debate between Robert Briffault and Bronislaw Malinowski,'' ed. M. F. Ashley Montagu. Boston: Porter Sargent.</ref><ref>Harris, M. 1969. ''The Rise of Anthropological Theory.'' London: Routledge, p. 305.</ref> although during the 1970s and 1980s, [[feminism|feminist]] scholars often revived it.<ref>Leacock, E. B. 1981. ''Myths of Male Dominance. Collected articles on women cross-culturally.'' New York: Monthly Review Press.</ref>

In recent years, [[evolutionary biologist]]s, geneticists and [[palaeoanthropologist]]s have found indirect genetic and other evidence of early matriliny.<ref>Hrdy, S. B. 2009. ''Mothers and others. The evolutionary origins of mutual understanding.'' London and Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.</ref><ref>Knight, C. 2008. [http://www.radicalanthropologygroup.org/old/class_text_105.pdf Early human kinship was matrilineal.] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140407063411/http://www.radicalanthropologygroup.org/old/class_text_105.pdf |date=7 April 2014 }} In N. J. Allen, H. Callan, R. Dunbar and W. James (eds.), Early Human Kinship. Oxford: Blackwell, pp. 61–82.</ref><ref>Opie, K. and C. Power, 2009. ''Grandmothering and Female Coalitions. A basis for matrilineal priority?'' In N. J. Allen, H. Callan, R. Dunbar and W. James (eds.), ''Early Human Kinship''. Oxford: Blackwell, pp. 168–186.</ref><ref>Chris Knight, 2012. [http://libcom.org/history/engels-was-right-early-human-kinship-was-matrilineal Engels was Right: Early Human Kinship was Matrilineal.]</ref> Some genetic data suggest that over millennia, female [[sub-Saharan Africa]]n hunter-gatherers have lived with their maternal kin after marriage.<ref>Schlebusch, C.M. (2010) Genetic variation in Khoisan-speaking populations from southern Africa. Dissertation, University of Witwatersrand this is available online, see pages following p.68, Fig 3.18 and p.180-81, fig 4.23 and p.243, p.287</ref> Also, when sisters and their mothers help each other with childcare, the descent line tends to be matrilineal.<ref>{{cite journal | last1 = Wu | first1 = J-J | last2 = He | first2 = Q-Q | last3 = Deng | first3 = L-L | last4 = Wang | first4 = S–C | last5 = Mace | first5 = R | last6 = Ji | first6 = T | last7 = Tao | first7 = Y | year = 2013 | title = Communal breeding promotes a matrilineal social system where husband and wife live apart | journal = Proc R Soc B | volume = 280 | issue = 1758| page = 20130010 | doi = 10.1098/rspb.2013.0010 | pmid = 23486437 | pmc = 3619460 }}</ref> [[Biological anthropology|Biological anthropologists]] now largely agree that cooperative childcare helped the large human brain and human psychology to evolve.<ref>{{cite journal | last1 = Burkart | first1 = J. M. | last2 = Hrdy | first2 = S. B. | last3 = van Schaik | first3 = C. P. | year = 2009 | title = Cooperative breeding and human cognitive evolution | journal = Evolutionary Anthropology | volume = 18 | issue = 5| pages = 175–186 | doi=10.1002/evan.20222| citeseerx = 10.1.1.724.8494 | s2cid = 31180845 }}</ref> 

Matriliny is often tied to [[matrilocality]], which shows significant nuance. Pastoralists and farmers often gravitate toward patrilocality.<ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Verdu |first1=Paul |last2=Becker |first2=Noémie S. A. |last3=Froment |first3=Alain |last4=Georges |first4=Myriam |last5=Grugni |first5=Viola |last6=Quintana-Murci |first6=Lluis |last7=Hombert |first7=Jean-Marie |last8=Van der Veen |first8=Lolke |last9=Le Bomin |first9=Sylvie |last10=Bahuchet |first10=Serge |last11=Heyer |first11=Evelyne |date=2013 |title=Sociocultural behavior, sex-biased admixture, and effective population sizes in Central African Pygmies and non-Pygmies |journal=Molecular Biology and Evolution |volume=30 |issue=4 |pages=918–937 |doi=10.1093/molbev/mss328 |issn=1537-1719 |pmc=3603314 |pmid=23300254}}</ref> However, studies show that hunter-gatherer societies have a flexible [[philopatry]] or practice multilocality; matrilocality and [[Patrilocal residence|patrilocality]] are not the only possibilities.<ref name=":0" /><ref>{{Cite journal |last=Marlowe |first=Frank W. |date=2004 |title=Marital Residence among Foragers |url=https://www.africabib.org/rec.php?RID=P00035606 |journal=Current Anthropology |language=en |volume=45 |issue=2 |pages=277–283|doi=10.1086/382256 |s2cid=145129698 }}</ref> Flexibility leads to a more egalitarian society, as both men and women can choose with whom to live.<ref name=":0">{{Cite journal |last1=Hill |first1=Kim R. |last2=Walker |first2=Robert S. |last3=Bozicević |first3=Miran |last4=Eder |first4=James |last5=Headland |first5=Thomas |last6=Hewlett |first6=Barry |last7=Hurtado |first7=A. Magdalena |last8=Marlowe |first8=Frank |last9=Wiessner |first9=Polly |last10=Wood |first10=Brian |date=2011-03-11 |title=Co-residence patterns in hunter-gatherer societies show unique human social structure |url=https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/21393537/#:~:text=We%20found%20that%20hunter-gatherers,residential%20groups%20are%20genetically%20unrelated. |journal=Science |volume=331 |issue=6022 |pages=1286–1289 |doi=10.1126/science.1199071 |issn=1095-9203 |pmid=21393537|bibcode=2011Sci...331.1286H |s2cid=93958 }}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Dyble |first1=M. |last2=Salali |first2=G. D. |last3=Chaudhary |first3=N. |last4=Page |first4=A. |last5=Smith |first5=D. |last6=Thompson |first6=J. |last7=Vinicius |first7=L. |last8=Mace |first8=R. |last9=Migliano |first9=A. B. |date=2015-05-15 |title=Human behavior. Sex equality can explain the unique social structure of hunter-gatherer bands |url=https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/25977551/ |journal=Science |volume=348 |issue=6236 |pages=796–798 |doi=10.1126/science.aaa5139 |issn=1095-9203 |pmid=25977551|s2cid=5078886 }}</ref> So, for example, among the pygmy [[Aka people|Aka Peoples]] a young couple usually settles in the husband's camp after the birth of their first child.<ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Destro-Bisol |first1=Giovanni |last2=Donati |first2=Francesco |last3=Coia |first3=Valentina |last4=Boschi |first4=Ilaria |last5=Verginelli |first5=Fabio |last6=Caglià |first6=Alessandra |last7=Tofanelli |first7=Sergio |last8=Spedini |first8=Gabriella |last9=Capelli |first9=Cristian |date=2004-09-01 |title=Variation of Female and Male Lineages in Sub-Saharan Populations: the Importance of Sociocultural Factors |url=https://doi.org/10.1093/molbev/msh186 |journal=Molecular Biology and Evolution |volume=21 |issue=9 |pages=1673–1682 |doi=10.1093/molbev/msh186 |pmid=15190128 |issn=0737-4038}}</ref> However, the husband can stay in the wife's community, where one of his brothers or sisters can join him. Kinship and residence in hunter-gatherer societies may thus be complex and multifaceted. Supporting this, a re-check of past data on hunter gatherers showed that about 40% of groups were bilocal, 22.9% matrilocal, and 25% patrilocal.<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Dyble |first=M. |date=2016 |title=The behavioural ecology and evolutionary implications of hunter-gatherer social organisation |s2cid=202198539 |language=en}}</ref>