ANTH 235, SOCIAL ARCHAEOLOGY
Elman Service’s four-fold scalar classification of human
societies:
 bands
 tribes (also known as segmentary societies)
 chiefdoms
 early states
Elman Rogers Service (1915-1996), ca. 1940
TECHNIQUES OF STUDY FOR BAND-LEVEL
SOCIETIES:
In band societies, economic organization and, to a large
extent, political organization are constructed exclusively at
a local level – there are no permanent administrative
centers.
Investigating activities within a site: the aim is to
understand the nature of the activities that took place there,
and of the social group that used it.
One important distinction can be drawn between cave sites
and open sites.
Ethnoarchaeology – links the ethnographic present (the
systemic context) with the behavioral past (the
archaeological context).
Koobi Fora, on east shore of Lake Turkana, northern
Kenya; work of archaeologist, Glynn Isaac (1937-1985)
Glynn Isaac excavating an early Paleolithic site at
Olorgesailie, Kenya, ca. 1965
Investigating territories in mobile societies: Off-site
archaeology – how do people use the territory between
sites? Sampling strategy to determine density of stone
tools over large area. Space and density are the two critical
factors examined.
TECHNIQUES OF STUDY FOR SEGMENTARY
SOCIETIES (TRIBES):
Investigating settlements in segmentary societies:
Broken K Pueblo, Arizona; 1200-1300 CE; work of
archaeologist James N. Hill (1934-1997)
Other approaches to the study of “tribal” societies:
 The study of social ranking from individual burials
 Collective works and communal action
 Economics
(especially farming methods and craft
specialization)
TECHNIQUES OF STUDY FOR CHIEFDOMS &
EARLY STATES:
First task: identify primary centers.
Second task: identify the functions of those centers.
Current work of Arizona State University archaeologist
George Cowgill at Teotihuacán, Mexico (below).
OTHER CONCERNS OF SOCIAL ARCHAEOLOGY:
INVESTIGATING SOCIAL RANKING:
The essence of a centralized society and of centralized
government is a disparity between rich and poor in
ownership, access to resources, facilities, power, and status.
The study of social organization in complex societies is
thus in large measure the study of social ranking.
Sources of data:




elite residences
evidence of great wealth
depictions of the elite
burials (the most abundant and useful resource)
THE ARCHAEOLOGY OF GENDER:
[ feminist archaeology which has the explicit objective of
exposing and correcting the historical androcentrism (male
bias) of archaeology]
Sex is biologically determined and can be understood by
archaeologists through the analysis of human skeletons.
Male (left) and female (right) fruit flies, Drosophila melanogaster.
“Male” and “female” are biologically determined characteristics.
Gender, however, is a social construct; therefore the roles
associated with gender can vary from place to place and
through time, even within a single society.
Gender studies in archaeology avoid simple correspondences between
general classes of artifacts and single genders: no “men’s tools” versus
“women’s tools”…
Three so-called “Venus figurines” from the later European Ice Age,
ca. 25,000 years ago. (Left) Dolní Věstonice, Czech Republic,
burnt clay; (center) Willendorf, Austria, limestone; (right)
Lespugue, France, mammoth ivory.
How do we interpret the abundance of such female figures
depicted in European art in the pre-Metal Age period?
 Was there an “Old Europe” dominated by feminine
values that disappeared in the Bronze Age with the
emergence of a war-like male hierarchy?
 Alternatively, did this elaborate female symbolism
express objectification and subordination of women?
Which interpretation is correct?
Is either interpretation correct?
REMEMBER: you’ve heard it before – the
archaeologist’s ability to interpret the material remains of
the past is limited more by our theoretical naïveté and a
lack of methodological sophistication than by the
information itself in the ground.
For further reading, see:
Adovasio, J. M., O. Soffer, and J. Page. (2009). The
Invisible Sex, Uncovering the True Roles of Women in
Prehistory. Walnut Creek, CA: Left Coast Press.
Owen, Linda R. (2005). Distorting the Past: Gender
and the Division of Labor in the European Upper
Paleolithic. Tübingen: Kerns Verlag.