Anth 4000/5000 The Archaeology of Inequality

Course syllabus – Fall, 2005

Professor: Dr. Chris Beekman

Office: Admin., Suite 270, Office E

Office phone: 303-556-6040

Anthropology dept phone: 303-556-3554

E-mail: christopher.beekman@cudenver.edu

Class Location: NC 1515

Class Time: MW 1-215pm

Office Hours: By appointment

Class website: http://carbon.cudenver.edu/~cbeekman/teaching/anth4000a.html

INTRODUCTION AND COURSE OBJECTIVES

This course explores a fundamentally important element of human societies – that of inequality and power. Our first thought may be of gender inequalities, or of differing degrees of wealth. But unequal relationships can take many forms and have been studied in a variety of ways by disciplines including sociology, political science, economics, and anthropology. What forms does power take? How does it develop, expand, maintain itself? What is its connection to politics? How is domination resisted? These are questions that absorb all of the social sciences. But only archaeology is in a position to evaluate deeper questions that require a long term perspective. Are inequalities a natural human state bequeathed from our primate ancestors? Or is it something that appears for the first time at some given point in human history? Is there such a thing as an egalitarian society?

The goals of this course are to 1) introduce students to the range of theoretical approaches to studying social inequality while 2) focusing specifically on what archaeology contributes to this major focus of social research. We will do this by looking at a variety of ancient or historical societies through their material and written records. We will not move region by region or from ancient to recent societies, but will instead approach the problem thematically. The first part of the course will introduce students to theoretical approaches to inequality, hopefully questioning our own assumptions about why inequality exists and whether it may be justified or avoidable. Methods peculiar to archaeology for identifying inequalities will be discussed and critiqued from these perspectives. We will follow this with evaluations of whether inequalities are inherent to human society or whether they only emerged when particular circumstances arose in our history. The manifestation of inequality at very small scales will be examined (gender, age, kinship, ethnicity), followed by consideration of active strategies to improve one’s status or power. We will build up to the appearance of political systems and examine how inequality is suppressed or protected by government. Institutionalization provides entirely new opportunities for power and for the imposition of political or economic systems across vast areas. We will end with an introspective look at inequality among archaeologists – what are the intended or unintended consequences of the professionalization of our own discipline?

This course has been given the number anth 4000 because it has not been offered before, and this is its pilot run. I intend to make this a new permanent course, and would appreciate comments over the semester on how to improve it.

Course Prerequisites – Students taking the course should have previously taken an Introduction to Archaeology course, which supplies a broad understanding of archaeological history, methods, and a brief introduction to theory. This course will build upon those elements, and if you do not have that background, see me for suggested readings that you might consult to fill gaps in your knowledge.

EVALUATION OF STUDENT PERFORMANCE

General policies and expectations – As with any course at UCD, there are certain basic policies with which students must comply. Do not bring pets, children, noisy laptops, or active cellphones/beepers to class. Students are responsible for making sure that they are actually enrolled in the course, and for completing coursework on time. This course involves considerable reading and writing – usually 1 hour of class time will necessitate 3+ hours of work outside the class. In order to earn the credit that this course (or any other) is worth, you must be willing and able to invest the time that is required – everyone has outside commitments, jobs, and family life, so do not expect that academic standards will be relaxed just because you are overcommitted. Assignments turned in late will be docked one letter grade for each day they are late, i.e. a paper due Monday that is turned in Wednesday cannot get better than a “C”. Students with special needs should contact the AHEC Disability Service Office immediately to make arrangements, and I should also be informed as soon as possible.

CLAS policy re: incompletes is as follows. Incomplete grades (IW or IF) are not granted for low academic performance. To be eligible for an Incomplete grade, students must 1) successfully complete 75 percent of the course, 2) have special circumstances (verification may be required) that preclude the student from attending class and completing graded assignments, and 3) make arrangements to complete missing assignments with the original instructor.

Academic dishonesty is never tolerated, and students should familiarize themselves with the regulations on pages 30-31 of the current catalog. Plagiarism involves any attempt to pass off someone else’s ideas or data as one’s own, and this includes incorrect citation of sources in written work.

Grading – Grades will be assigned on a standard 10 pt. scale, meaning 90-100 = A, 80-89.99 = B, etc. Your grade will be based on the following:

Undergraduates – Anth 4000

Take Home Exam 1 30%

Take Home Exam 2 30%

Paper 30%

Class participation 10%

Graduate students – Anth 5000

Take Home Exam 1 25%

Take Home Exam 2 25%

Paper 30%

Class participation 10%

Class presentation 10%

Each of these is detailed below.

Exams - There will be two take-home exams in this course, worth differing amounts of your grade depending on whether you are registered for Anth 4000 or 5000. The exams will be given out on the dates specified on the syllabus, and due one week later. These will vary in length from 6-7 pages for undergraduates to 8-9 pages for graduate students.

Paper – There will be a research paper of approximately 20 pages, on a topic relating to power and inequality in archaeology or in ancient societies. The paper is worth 30% of your grade and will be due November 28th. Several dates are given below in the week by week schedule for when you should subit your paper topic and bibliography. The paper will be typed, double spaced, with normal margins and font size, and will be in a format consistent with that used in the journal American Antiquity, available in our library for comparison. The journal also publishes its formatting standards on the website of the Society for American Archaeology, at www.saa.org. These formatting guidelines include how to do citations and how to list items in the bibliography.

Paper topics may include a dissective analysis of a particular system of inequality in a given society, or how a particular system may have changed or come into existence, or a critical evaluation of theory. The papers may lean towards either theory or method, although papers that incorporate both are best. A number of articles potentially of interest are listed at the end of this syllabus that would be good starting points for the paper.

This is a research paper and that means that you need to use scholarly books and articles for your bibliography. Do not use reviews of books – use the book itself. Do not use student papers online or websites that somebody has stuck out there without any information about where they obtained their data. These kinds of pages are notoriously inaccurate. Do not just try to lean on a single chapter or book. A research paper means gathering data related to an actual topic and position, and this means that you need to draw together and integrate material from many sources. Web pages are not acceptable sources. People are habitually using web pages with incorrect or misleading information, and by the time I see it in your bibliography, it’s too late and you suffer the consequences. This of course does not apply to actual articles obtained through the Expanded Academic Index, JSTOR, Kluwer Online or other online databases accessible through our library’s webpage. Those are professional scholarly articles that have been placed online.

Class Presentation – Those enrolled in Anth 5000 will be giving presentations to the class of their research papers, which will be worth 10% of their final grade. Specific time to be allotted to the presentation will depend upon the number of graduate students who are enrolled in the course (and stay until the end!), but should range from 10-20 minutes. These presentations will be given to the class in Week 16. They should be tightly organized, within the time limits, and should explicate the main findings of the paper and their relevance to issues discussed during the course. Handouts or other visuals may be appropriate for the presentation and are encouraged.

Class Participation - 10% of your grade will be class participation. I do expect students to contribute to the discussion by doing the readings and participating in meaningful discussion of them in the classroom. I consider keeping up with the readings to be a very important component of any anthropology course, and it will impact upon your grades for the exams, paper, and class participation.

Graduate students enrolled in Anth 5000 – As noted above, the point distribution of assignments is somewhat different for graduate students, and they have an additional assignment in the form of a class presentation on their paper topic. Furthermore, performance expectations are higher for graduate students, who are expected to write with exceptional clarity and insight, although all students are expected to demonstrate critical thinking.

REQUIRED TEXTBOOKS AND READINGS

There is no textbook for this course. There are a series of readings that are to be read for the class day they are listed. All readings are available online as Adobe Acrobat *.pdf files through Electronic Reserve in the Auraria Library. Go to http://docuserv.auraria.edu/, select my name under the “Select an Instructor” pull-down menu, click “go,” click on the course title, type in the password “banjo,” click accept, then choose the article you wish to see which will then be opened or downloaded to your computer. Note: Articles are in alphabetical order by their title, not by the author. Should there be any problem with the Auraria system at any time, that is no excuse for not reading. Some of the journal articles are available through JSTOR, Expanded Index, Kluwer Online, or one of the other electronic databases available through our library. Others may be physically available in our library. Two articles are available as webpages only.

COURSE ORGANIZATION AND READINGS

Week	Date	Topic	Readings
1	Aug. 22 (M)	The Archaeology of Inequality: Introduction to Definitions and Concepts
	Aug. 24 (W)	Theory: Inequality as Solution or Inequality as Problem	Johnson 1982, Paynter and McGuire 1991
2	Aug. 29 (M)	Theory: Breaking apart Hierarchy – Heterogeneity and Heterarchy	McGuire 1983, Crumley 1995,
	Sep. 31 (W)	Power, Agency, and Resistance	Miller, et al. 1989, Clark and Blake 1994
3	Sep. 5 (M)	LABOR DAY HOLIDAY – NO CLASS
	Sep. 7 (W)	Method: How to Identify Inequality	Chapman 1990, Wason 1994 Ch. 8
4	Sep. 12 (M)	Is there an egalitarian society?: Egalitarianism, Democracies, and Utopian Societies	Morris 1997, Tarlow 2002
	Sep. 14 (W)	Origins of Inequality: Primate Dominance Hierarchies and Reproductive Success	Cummins 1996, Maschner and Patton 1996
5	Sep. 19 (M)	CONFERENCE IN MEXICO – NO CLASS
	Sep. 21 (W)	CONFERENCE IN MEXICO – NO CLASS
6	Sep. 26 (M)	Origins of Inequality: The Paleolithic	Harrold 1980, Vanhaeren and d’Errico 2005
	Sep. 28 (W)	Intimate inequalities: Gender and Age	Kent 1999, Stoodley 2000
7	Oct. 3 (M)	Establishing Rights to Resources: Kinship and Ethnicity	Brumfiel 1994, Mooder 2005
	Oct. 5 (W)	The Peacock Principle: Power through Performance and Display	Gilbert 1987, Kus and Raharijaona 1998
8	Oct. 10 (M)	Power through Generosity Submit Paper Topic	Dietler and Herbich 2001, Flower 2004
	Oct. 12 (W)	Power through Breaking or Circumventing the Rules Take Home Midterm Handed Out	Webster 1975, Gilman 1981
9	Oct. 17 (M)	Seeking Distant vs. Local Sources of Prestige	Gosden 1985, Pollard and Cahue 1999
	Oct. 19 (W)	Alliances and Factions Take Home Midterm Due	Smith 1986, Bonhage-Freund and Kurland 1994
10	Oct. 24 (M)	Governance and Power: Structure, Checks, and Balances Submit Paper Preliminary Bibliography	Morony 1991, Postgate 1992, Gose 1996
	Oct. 26 (W)	Legitimizing Power: Ideology and Law	Bauer 1996, Hammurabi 1780 B.C. (webpage)
11	Oct. 31 (M)	Distancing the Haves from the Have-Nots through High Culture	Baines and Yoffee 1998, Chang 1983 Ch. 5
	Nov. 2 (W)	Creating Subjects	Smith 2000, Kus and Raharijaona 2000
12	Nov. 7 (M)	Controlling Bodies: Surveillance, Slavery, and Prisons	Farnsworth 2000, Casella 2001, Smith 1999
	Nov. 9 (W)	Terror as Instrument of the State	Demarest 1988
13	Nov. 14 (M)	Revolution and Overturning Power	Graffam 1992, Iannone 2005
	Nov. 16 (W)	Archaeology of Capitalism and Colonialism	Leone 1995, Andrews 2001
14	Nov. 21 (M)	FALL BREAK – NO CLASS
	Nov. 23 (W)	FALL BREAK – NO CLASS
15	Nov. 28 (M)	Inequality of Archaeology – Power Relations within the Discipline Paper Due Take Home Final Handed Out	Hutson 1998 (webpage), Patterson 1999
	Nov. 30 (W)	AAA CONFERENCE – NO CLASS
16	Dec. 5 (M)	Graduate Class Presentations
	Dec. 7 (W)	Graduate Class Presentations Take Home Final Due

READINGS

Week 1

Johnson, Gregory A. 1982. Organizational Structure and Scalar Stress. In Theory and Explanation in Archaeology, edited by C. Renfrew, M. J. Rowlands, and B. A. Segraves, pp. 389-421. Academic Press, New York.

Paynter, Robert and Randall H. McGuire. 1991. The Archaeology of Inequality: Material Culture, Domination, and Resistance. In The Archaeology of Inequality, edited by Randall H. McGuire and Robert Paynter, pp. 1-27. Blackwell Press, Oxford.

Week 2

McGuire, Randall H. 1983. Breaking Down Cultural Complexity: Inequality and Heterogeneity. In Advances in Archaeological Method and Theory, Vol. 6, pp. 91-141. Academic Press, New York.

Crumley, Carole L. 1995. Heterarchy and the analysis of complex societies. In Heterarchy and the analysis of complex societies, ed. Ehrenreich, R. M., et al., pp. 1-6. Archaeological Papers of the American Anthropological Association Number 6.

Miller, Daniel, Michael Rowlands, and Christopher Tilley. 1989. Introduction. In Domination and Resistance, edited by Daniel Miller, Michael Rowlands, and Christopher Tilley, pp. 1-26. Routledge, London.

Clark, John E. and Michael Blake. 1994. The power of prestige: Competitive generosity and the emergence of rank societies in lowland Mesoamerica. In Factional Competition and Political Development in the New World, edited by E.M. Brumfiel and J.E. Fox, pp. 15-30. Cambridge University Press.

Week 3

Chapman, John. 1990. Social Inequality on Bulgarian Tells and the Varna Problem. In The Social Archaeology of Houses, edited by Ross Samson, pp. 49-92. Edinburgh University Press, Edinburgh.

Wason, Paul. 1994. Chapter 8. Catal Huyuk: a ranked Neolithic town in Anatolia? In The Archaeology of Rank, pp. 153-179. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

Week 4

Morris, Ian. 1997. An Archaeology of Equalities? The Greek City-States. In The Archaeology of City-States. Cross-Cultural Approaches, edited by Deborah L. Nichols and Thomas H. Charlton, pp. 91-105. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington, D.C.

Tarlow, Sarah. 2002. Excavating Utopia: Why Archaeologists should study “Ideal” Communities of the Nineteenth Century. International Journal of Historical Archaeology 6(4):299-323.

Cummins, Denise Dellarosa. 1996. Dominance Hierarchies and the Evolution of Human Reasoning. Minds and Machines 6:463-480.

Maschner, Herbert D.G. and John Q. Patton. 1996. Kin Selection and the Origins of Hereditary Social Inequality. In Darwinian Archaeologies, edited by Herbert D.G. Maschner, pp. 89-107. Plenum Press, New York.

Week 5

No Readings.

Week 6

Harrold, Francis B. 1980. A Comparative Analysis of Eurasian Palaeolithic Burials. World Archaeology 12(2):195-211.

Vanhaeren, Marian and Francesco d’Errico. 2005. Grave goods from the Saint-Germain-la-Rivière burial: Evidence for Social Inequality in the Upper Paleolithic. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 24:117-134.

Kent, Susan. 1999. Egalitarianism, equality, and equitable power. In Manifesting Power, Gender and the Interpretation of Power in Archaeology, edited by Tracy L. Sweely, pp. 30-48. Routledge, London.

Stoodley, Nick. 2000. From the Cradle to the Grave: Age Organization and the Early Anglo-Saxon Burial Rite. World Archaeology 31(3):456-472.

Week 7

Brumfiel, Elizabeth. 1994. Ethnic groups and political development in ancient Mexico. In Factional Competition and Political Development in the New World, edited by E. M. Brumfiel and J. W. Fox, pp. 89-102. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

Mooder, K.P., A.W. Weber, F.J. Bamforth, A.R. Lieverse, T.G. Schurr, V.I. Bazaliiski, N.A. Saval’ev. 2005. Matrilineal Affinities and Prehistoric Siberian Mortuary Practices: A Case Study from Neolithic Lake Baikal. Journal of Archaeological Science 32: 619-634.

Gilbert, Michelle. 1987. The Person of the King: Ritual and Power in a Ghanaian State. In Rituals of Royalty. Power and Ceremonial in Traditional Societies, edited by David Cannadine and Simon Price, pp. 298-330. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

Kus, Susan and Victor Raharijaona. 1998. Between Earth and Sky There are only a few Large Boulders: Sovereignty and Monumentality in Central Madagascar. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 17: 53-79.

Week 8

Dietler, Michael and Ingrid Herbich 2001. Feasts and labor Mobilization. Dissecting a Fundamental Economic Practice. In Feasts. Archaeological and Ethnographic Perspectives on Food, Politics, and Power, edited by Michael Dietler and Brian Hayden, pp. 240-264. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington, D.C.

Flower, Harriet I. 2004. Spectacle and Political Culture in the Roman Republic. In The Cambridge Companion to the Roman Republic, edited by Harriet I. Flower, pp. 322-343. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

Webster, David. 1975. Warfare and the Evolution of the State. American Antiquity 40(4):464-470.

Gilman, Antonio. 1981. The Development of Social Stratification in Bronze Age Europe. Current Anthropology 22(1):1-8.

Week 9

Gosden, Chris. 1985. Gifts and Kin in Early Iron Age Europe. Man 20(3):475-493.

Pollard, Helen P. and Laura Cahue. 1999. Mortuary Patterns of regional elites in the Lake Patzcuaro Basin of Western Mexico. Latin American Antiquity 10: 259-280.

Smith, Michael E. 1986. The Role of Social Stratification in the Aztec Empire: A View from the Provinces. American Anthropologist 88(1): 70‑91.

Bonhage-Freund, Mary Theresa and Jeffrey A. Kurland 1994. Tit-for-Tat among the Iroquois: A Game Theoretic Perspective on Inter-Tribal Political Organization. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 13:278-305.

Week 10

Morony, Michael. 1991. “In a City without Watchdogs the Fox is the Overseer”: Issues and Problems in the Study of Bureaucracy. In The Organization of Power. Aspects of Bureaucracy in the Ancient Near East, edited by McGuire Gibson and Robert D. Biggs, pp. 5-14. The Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago, Studies in Ancient Oriental Civilization, No. 46, Chicago. 2^nd edition with corrections.

Postgate, J. N. 1992. The Land of Assur and the Yoke of Assur. World Archaeology 23(2):247-263.

Gose, Peter. 1996. Oracles, Divine Kingship, and Political Representation in the Inka State. Ethnohistory 43(1):1-32.

Bauer, Brian. 1996. Legitimization of the State in Inca Myth and Ritual. American Anthropologist 98(2):327-337.

Hammurabi. 1780 B.C. The Hammurabi Code (ca. 1780 BCE). Trans. Leonard William King. Electronic Text by Virginia Tech. Found at http://history.hanover.edu/courses/excerpts/221ham.html

Week 11

Baines, John and Norman Yoffee. 1998. Order, Legitimacy, and Wealth in Ancient Egypt and Mesopotamia. In Archaic States, edited by Gary M. Feinman and Joyce Marcus, pp. 199-260. School of American Research Press, Santa Fe.

Chang, Kwang Chih. 1983. Chapter 5. Writing as the Path to Authority. In Art, Myth, and Ritual. The Path to Political Authority in Ancient China, pp. 81-94. Harvard University Press, Cambridge.

Smith, Adam T. 2000. Rendering the Political Aesthetic: Political Legitimacy in Urartian Representations of the Built Environment. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 19: 131-163.

Kus, Susan and Victor Raharijaona. 2000. House to Palace, Village to State: Scaling up Architecture and Ideology. American Anthropologist 102(1): 98-113.

Week 12

Farnsworth, Paul. 2000. Brutality or Benevolence in Plantation Archaeology. International Journal of Historical Archaeology 4(2):145-158.

Casella, Eleanor. 2001. To Watch or Restrain: Female Convict Prisons in 19^th-Century Tasmania. International Journal of Historical Archaeology 5(1):45-72.

Smith, Adam T. 1999. The Making of an Urartian Landscape in Southern Transcaucasia: A Study of Political Architectonics. American Journal of Archaeology 103(1):45-71.

Demarest, Arthur A. 1988. Overview: Mesoamerican Human Sacrifice in Evolutionary Perspective. In Ritual Human Sacrifice in Mesoamerica, organized by Elizabeth P. Benson and edited by Elizabeth H. Boone, pp. 227-247. Dumbarton Oaks, Washington, D.C.

Week 13

Graffam, Gray. 1992. Beyond State Collapse: Rural History, Raised Fields, and Pastoralism in the South Andes. American Anthropologist 94(4): 882-904.

Iannone, Gyles. 2005. The Rise and Fall of an Ancient Maya Petty Royal Court. Latin American Antiquity 16(1):26-44.

Leone, Mark P. 1995. A Historical Archaeology of Capitalism. American Anthropologist 97(2): 251-268.

Andrews, Susan C. and James P. Fenton. 2001. Archaeology and the Invisible Man: The Role of Slavery in the Production of Wealth and Social Class in the Bluegrass Region of Kentucky, 1820 to 1870. World Archaeology 33(1):115-136.

Week 14

No Readings.

Week 15

Hutson, Scott. 1998. Strategies for the Reproduction of Prestige in Archaeological Discourse. Assemblage. University of Sheffield Graduate Student Journal of Archaeology 4. Found at http://www.shef.ac.uk/assem/4/4hutson.html

Patterson, Thomas C. 1999. The Political Economy of Archaeology in the United States. Annual Review of Anthropology 28:155-174.

Additional Suggested Readings – Optional (Perhaps useful for Paper)

Blanton, R.E., G.M. Feinman, S.A. Kowalewski, and P.N. Peregrine. 1996. A Dual-Processual Theory for the Evolution of Mesoamerican Civilization. Current Anthropology 37: 1-14.

Christensen, Alexander F. 1998. Ethnohistorical Evidence for Inbreeding among the Pre-Hispanic Mixtec Royal Caste. Human Biology 70: 563-577.

Demarest, Arthur. 1992. Ideology in Ancient Maya Cultural Evolution: The Dynamics of Galactic Polities. In Ideology and Pre-Columbian Civilizations, edited by Arthur Demarest and Geoffrey W. Conrad, pp. 135-157. School of American Research Press, Santa Fe.

Houston, Stephen, and David Stuart. 1996. Of Gods, Glyphs and Kings: Divinity and Rulership among the Classic Maya. Antiquity 70: 289-312.

Inomata, Takeshi. 2001. The Power and Ideology of Artistic Creation: Elite Craft Specialists in Classic Maya Society. Current Anthropology 42: 321-350.

Joyce, Arthur A., Laura Arnaud Bustamente, and Marc N. Levine. 2001. Commoner Power: A Case Study from the Classic Period Collapse on the Oaxaca Coast. Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory 8(4): 343-385.

Marcus, Joyce. 1983. Topic 29. The Conquest Slabs of Building J, Monte Albán. In The Cloud People. Divergent Evolution of the Zapotec and Mixtec Civilizations, edited by Kent V. Flannery and Joyce Marcus, pp. 106-108. Academic Press, New York.

McGuire, Randall H. and Dean J. Saitta. 1996. Although They Have Petty Captains, They Obey Them Badly: the Dialectics of Prehispanic Western Pueblo Social Organization. American Antiquity 61: 197-216.

Nelson, Ben A., J. Andrew Darling, and David A. Kice. 1992. Mortuary practices and the social order at La Quemada, Zacatecas, Mexico. Latin American Antiquity 3:298-315.

Salzman, Philip Carl. 1999. Is Inequality Universal? Current Anthropology 40(1): 31-61.

Scham, S. A. 2001. The Archaeology of the Disenfranchised. Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory 8: 183-213.

Spores, Ronald. 1974. Marital Alliance in the Political Integration of Mixtec Kingdoms. American Anthropologist 76: 297-311.

Sugiyama, Saburo. 1993. Worldview materialized at Teotihuacan, Mexico. Latin American Antiquity 4(2): 103-129.

Tooker, Elisabeth. 1988. The United States Constitution and the Iroquois League. Ethnohistory 35(4):305-336.

Trigger, Bruce. 1989. A History of Archaeological Thought. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

Wiessner, Polly. 2002. The Vines of Complexity: Egalitarian Structures and the Institutionalization of Inequality Among the Enga. Current Anthropology 43: 233-252.

Please note the following detailed schedule for registration-related activities. Please be aware that because of the financial climate in which the University now exists, these are non-negotiable deadlines and rules.