“…Flint and obsidian to make stone tools could be exchanged over long distances and certain prestige goods such as jade also travelled far (Bausch 2004;Cunliffe 2008:152-153;Fontijn 2020:68;Habu 2004:224-227;Kuzmin 2017;Pétrequin et al 2012), yet the traditional understanding of Neolithic social complexity has been that it was regional and concentrated. In the Bronze Age, by contrast, the demand for metals-which could only be obtained through very long-distance trading networks-led to a macro-regional division of labour, resulting in a more decentralised political complexity (Childe 1930;Kristiansen 2018aKristiansen , 2018bScott 2017). Kristiansen (2018a:2) argues that the fundamental socio-economic structures established in the Bronze Age-including international commodity trade and the rise of cities-dominated Eurasia until 1500, a claim made in more detail by social anthropologist Jack Goody (2006aGoody ( , 2006bcf.…”
The Bronze Age was a time of pivotal economic change when new long-distance trading networks became associated with a macro-regional division of labour and decentralised political complexity. These developments occurred against the background of a shifting mosaic of subsistence patterns, which included the east-west exchange of crops across Eurasia and (in some areas) greater use of secondary products. As Bronze Age economies became more specialised and diverse, it might be assumed that there was also an increased emphasis on the procurement and trade of fish and other marine resources. However, archaeological analyses of such resources are limited in contrast to land-based subsistence patterns and many questions remain. This essay aims to build a broad interpretive framework for analysing the role of marine resources in the Bronze Age. Our provisional results find that an increased emphasis on specialist systems of agropastoralism reduced the use of marine resources in many parts of Eurasia during this period. However, evidence from Japan and the eastern Mediterranean suggests that, at least in some regions, marine resources became commodities traded over long-distances by the late Bronze Age, though this requires further quantification. Island Southeast Asia displays a different pattern from other regions considered here in a greater continuity of marine resource use from the Neolithic into the historic era, perhaps due to a lower reliance on agropastoralism.
“…Flint and obsidian to make stone tools could be exchanged over long distances and certain prestige goods such as jade also travelled far (Bausch 2004;Cunliffe 2008:152-153;Fontijn 2020:68;Habu 2004:224-227;Kuzmin 2017;Pétrequin et al 2012), yet the traditional understanding of Neolithic social complexity has been that it was regional and concentrated. In the Bronze Age, by contrast, the demand for metals-which could only be obtained through very long-distance trading networks-led to a macro-regional division of labour, resulting in a more decentralised political complexity (Childe 1930;Kristiansen 2018aKristiansen , 2018bScott 2017). Kristiansen (2018a:2) argues that the fundamental socio-economic structures established in the Bronze Age-including international commodity trade and the rise of cities-dominated Eurasia until 1500, a claim made in more detail by social anthropologist Jack Goody (2006aGoody ( , 2006bcf.…”
The Bronze Age was a time of pivotal economic change when new long-distance trading networks became associated with a macro-regional division of labour and decentralised political complexity. These developments occurred against the background of a shifting mosaic of subsistence patterns, which included the east-west exchange of crops across Eurasia and (in some areas) greater use of secondary products. As Bronze Age economies became more specialised and diverse, it might be assumed that there was also an increased emphasis on the procurement and trade of fish and other marine resources. However, archaeological analyses of such resources are limited in contrast to land-based subsistence patterns and many questions remain. This essay aims to build a broad interpretive framework for analysing the role of marine resources in the Bronze Age. Our provisional results find that an increased emphasis on specialist systems of agropastoralism reduced the use of marine resources in many parts of Eurasia during this period. However, evidence from Japan and the eastern Mediterranean suggests that, at least in some regions, marine resources became commodities traded over long-distances by the late Bronze Age, though this requires further quantification. Island Southeast Asia displays a different pattern from other regions considered here in a greater continuity of marine resource use from the Neolithic into the historic era, perhaps due to a lower reliance on agropastoralism.
Globalization has a long history, although how long depends on how you define it. That history teaches us that globalization is not irreversible: that it ebbs and flows over time, and that it would be foolish to assume that today’s hyper-globalization is necessarily here to stay. This chapter argues that one cannot understand the history of globalization without taking political factors into account – both domestic political forces and geopolitics shape, and are shaped by, international economic integration. It also argues that one cannot understand the history of comparative economic development without taking globalization into account. Globalization compels observers to take geography seriously and to think more like historians.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.