Elizabeth Arkush, Paul Roscoe, Jennifer Birch, Ben Raffield
{"title":"人类学考古学中的“联盟”问题","authors":"Elizabeth Arkush, Paul Roscoe, Jennifer Birch, Ben Raffield","doi":"10.1016/j.jaa.2025.101706","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Alliances are critical components of human sociality, often essential to social existence itself. It is no surprise therefore that alliance crops up everywhere in anthropological and archaeological discourse. Yet scholarship on alliance consists largely of case studies rather than analytical discussion of the phenomenon itself. While alliances can be difficult to identify with confidence in the archaeological record, they are too important in human affairs to ignore. Motivated by our belief that anthropological archaeology cannot fully address competition and conflict without a better understanding of alliances, we survey here various dimensions of alliance that we hope can be useful in advancing the field. We focus primarily on military and political aspects of alliances – i.e., alliances intended to increase non-lethal and lethal collective strength and power. Our investigation draws from the ethnographic and historical record of premodern societies to identify both the common characteristics of alliances and their dimensions of variability. We offer thoughts on how some of this variation might be explained, and we conclude with some hypotheses and suggestions for future research.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":47957,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Anthropological Archaeology","volume":"79 ","pages":"Article 101706"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Problematizing ‘alliance’ in anthropological archaeology\",\"authors\":\"Elizabeth Arkush, Paul Roscoe, Jennifer Birch, Ben Raffield\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.jaa.2025.101706\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><div>Alliances are critical components of human sociality, often essential to social existence itself. It is no surprise therefore that alliance crops up everywhere in anthropological and archaeological discourse. Yet scholarship on alliance consists largely of case studies rather than analytical discussion of the phenomenon itself. While alliances can be difficult to identify with confidence in the archaeological record, they are too important in human affairs to ignore. Motivated by our belief that anthropological archaeology cannot fully address competition and conflict without a better understanding of alliances, we survey here various dimensions of alliance that we hope can be useful in advancing the field. We focus primarily on military and political aspects of alliances – i.e., alliances intended to increase non-lethal and lethal collective strength and power. Our investigation draws from the ethnographic and historical record of premodern societies to identify both the common characteristics of alliances and their dimensions of variability. We offer thoughts on how some of this variation might be explained, and we conclude with some hypotheses and suggestions for future research.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":47957,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Anthropological Archaeology\",\"volume\":\"79 \",\"pages\":\"Article 101706\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-06-12\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Anthropological Archaeology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0278416525000510\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ANTHROPOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Anthropological Archaeology","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0278416525000510","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ANTHROPOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Problematizing ‘alliance’ in anthropological archaeology
Alliances are critical components of human sociality, often essential to social existence itself. It is no surprise therefore that alliance crops up everywhere in anthropological and archaeological discourse. Yet scholarship on alliance consists largely of case studies rather than analytical discussion of the phenomenon itself. While alliances can be difficult to identify with confidence in the archaeological record, they are too important in human affairs to ignore. Motivated by our belief that anthropological archaeology cannot fully address competition and conflict without a better understanding of alliances, we survey here various dimensions of alliance that we hope can be useful in advancing the field. We focus primarily on military and political aspects of alliances – i.e., alliances intended to increase non-lethal and lethal collective strength and power. Our investigation draws from the ethnographic and historical record of premodern societies to identify both the common characteristics of alliances and their dimensions of variability. We offer thoughts on how some of this variation might be explained, and we conclude with some hypotheses and suggestions for future research.
期刊介绍:
An innovative, international publication, the Journal of Anthropological Archaeology is devoted to the development of theory and, in a broad sense, methodology for the systematic and rigorous understanding of the organization, operation, and evolution of human societies. The discipline served by the journal is characterized by its goals and approach, not by geographical or temporal bounds. The data utilized or treated range from the earliest archaeological evidence for the emergence of human culture to historically documented societies and the contemporary observations of the ethnographer, ethnoarchaeologist, sociologist, or geographer. These subjects appear in the journal as examples of cultural organization, operation, and evolution, not as specific historical phenomena.