Kinship[change | change source]
Kinship tells us how we are related to our family or each other, through our biology and history. Kinship can be a complex system of social groups. It is a universal system as everyone has a family. Some small and large scale societies use kinship not only for human reproduction but for “economic transactions, the political system and [their] religious beliefs” (J.Hendry, 1999).
History[change | change source]
The anthropologist Lewis Henry-Morgan was the founder of kinship studies. He watched the Iroquois, a Native American group in the North eastern United States. He was mostly interested in what was keeping societies together. He was the first to state the different types of kinship systems that exist, in his book, called ‘Systems of Consanguinity and Affinity of the Human Family’.
Types[change | change source]
There are two main types of kinship.
Consanguinity means to be related by blood. Laws in some countries use the amount of consanguinity between two people. For instance, deciding who is allowed to be married. It can also be used to decide who can receive property after death if there is no will. Many religions also use the amount of consanguinity to define acceptable practices.
Descent[change | change source]
There are two types of descent involved in kinship. Patrilineal are the relations that come from the father’s blood line. Matrilineal are the relations that come from the mother’s blood line.
Examples of kinship[change | change source]
- parent (father or mother)
- child (son or daughter)
- sibling (brother or sister)
- grandparent (grandfather or grandmother)
- grandchild (grandson or granddaughter)
- uncle or aunt
- nephew or niece
References[change | change source]
- C. Delaney. (2004). ‘Relatives and Relations’: Investigating Culture. Oxford: Blackwell. p.192.
- J. Hendry. (1999). ‘Family, Kinship and Marriage’: An Introduction to Social Anthropology. London Palgrave.
- L. Rival. (1998). ‘Androgenous Parents and Guest Children’: The Huaorani Couvade. Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute, Vol.4: p.619-642.