Incorporation The complex process whereby peripheral groups become members of a world-system dominated by a core. The core typically exerts pressure on peripheries in the attempt to extract raw resources and labor, but the level of involvement in the world-system varies on a continuum from weak to strong. ingot A block of metal produced by smelting of ore and cast into a shape that facilitates storage or transportation.
In the search for comprehensive explanatory models, archaeologists have turned to a number of different approaches. Overall, we can divide these approaches into those that espouse a broader, generalizing perspective that is applicable to many times and places and others that stress the particular ways that specific groups structured their lives in the past. World-systems theory is one of the former approaches. World-systems analysis covers a broad range of issues and topics, but this article concentrates on a basic definition of key terms, and some problems, and suggested alterations in the theory to accommodate the work of archaeologists, especially in terms of core/ periphery relations and the process of incorporation. World-systems theory shares with other models that emphasize intersocietal interaction the basic tenet that past cultures did not exist in pristine isolation; rather, constant contacts, both direct and indirect, affected groups involved in exchange networks. Where world-systems theorists differ with other interaction models is in the geographic extent they consider, the stress on the hierarchical nature of systems with a focus on economics, and for some, the desire to outline longterm cycles of expansion and contraction in system structure and intensity.
World-systems theory developed as a generalized approach to the study of intersocietal contact, and originated with the work of Immanuel Wallerstein, who studied the emergence of modern capitalism. According to him, world-systems ‘‘... are defined by the fact that their self-containment as an economic-material entity is based on extensive division of labor and that they contain within them a multiplicity of cultures.’’ He uses the term ‘world’ to refer to interacting politico-economic units, and not some global entity. Furthermore, he distinguishes between two types of world-systems; world empires and world economies; the difference is the presence in the former of a single political structure over a vast area. Furthermore, the operation of a world economy requires the presence of core-states and peripheral areas. Core-states possess complex political structures (stratified class systems with large bureaucracies) and, by means of superior technology, exercise control over the major facilities of production, transportation, and communication. Political organization in peripheral areas is at the pre-state or incipient state level and is relatively weak compared to that in core-states. Corestates incorporate peripheral areas into the capitalist world economy because these peripheral regions often contain important natural resources. Through political and economic control of the system, Waller-stein contends, core-states exploited the labor and material resources of peripheral areas and received a disproportionately large share of the surplus or benefits. He argues further that European nationstates, through colonization, competed among themselves for control or access to peripheral areas in order to increase profits. Interposed between cores and peripheries are semi-peripheries which often act as intermediaries between the two extremes of the system. Over the past three decades, various scholars have significantly augmented the original world-systems formulation in order to address a series of issues.
Wallerstein’s study of the relationship between core-states and peripheral areas provides an excellent model of European expansion in the early modern period. One problem, however, is his treatment of incorporation into a world economy as one-sided. Thomas Hall, among others, argues that one must study the local conditions in peripheral areas as well as the capitalist economy in core-states in order to understand fully the nature of incorporation. Hall notes that incorporation into a world economy is a matter of degree and that nonstate peripheral societies play a more active role than generally believed. This aspect is particularly true for various periods in antiquity when complete domination of a peripheral zone was technologically and politically impossible. As a result, incorporation was less encompassing in antiquity. Furthermore, some scholars note that people on the periphery can at times negotiate effectively because they control access to a key resource.
Peripheries exhibit variation. In general, peripheries tend to have decentralized political and economic systems, especially when compared to core regions. Furthermore, there are several types of peripheries.
One type is an extraction zone that supplies raw materials to core-states. In such places, indigenous populations perform most of the labor required to procure raw materials, and can be identified by the presence of quarry pits, but with minimal evidence of processing (e. g., metal quarries with initial processing of ores into ingots, but not finished products). Second, a fully incorporated periphery will have evidence of foreign installations that indicate the incursion of a core-state, complete with administrative structures and central storage facilities. A third type is the contested periphery between competing cores. In such areas, there may be fortified outposts facing each other in strategic locations; barrier walls may also be present.
A major issue for archaeologists is the degree to which the world-systems model applies to the ancient world. Wallerstein suggests the world-system was an outgrowth of capitalism and is thus a creation of the sixteenth century. Archaeologists have applied the approach to Mesoamerica, the American Midwest, and other regions. For the Old World, Philip Kohl has modified world-systems theory to fit ancient conditions. In a critique of the primitivist views of M. I. Finley and others, Kohl cites many examples of price fixing, inflation, and market mentality that demonstrate the complexity of ancient economies. He builds a strong argument for the existence of an intricate multicentered world system during the Bronze Age in Southwest Asia. Unlike many modern technologies, ancient ones were often portable and could be moved easily from core to periphery. This fact, along with the lack of major colonization, made it possible for peripheries to retain their autonomy and precluded the exploitation and underdevelopment characteristic of the modern world system. Kohl argues that the barbarian peripheries had a significant impact on how core regions developed. Gunder Frank argues that areas on the margins of the Near East, while important as regions of economic interaction, were subject to the influences of the ‘super powers’ of the time: Egypt, Assyria, the Hittites, and other states in Mesopotamia. Frank contends that an Afro-Eurasian world system has existed for 5000 years, since the origins of the state in Mesopotamia and Egypt. In addition to the long history of the world system, Frank lists five other theoretical premises: (1) the seminal importance of long-distance trade relations, (2) the accumulation of capital (‘cumulation of accumulation’) drives history, (3) core/periphery structure is a key trait, (4) shifting hegemony and rivalry characterizes the world system, and (5) economic development of the system occurs in long cycles of alternating ascending (or A) phases and descending (or B) phases.
Reviewing world-systems applications, Edward Schortman and Patricia Urban suggest the units of study should be society and ethnicity, which are connected by the flow of information. Their archaeological work in Mesoamerica stresses the role of elites (see Social Inequality, Development of) who used regional interaction to generate and sustain their elevated status. Christopher Chase-Dunn and T. D. Hall go further and argue that change occurs not within individual societies, but in world-systems. Their goal is to provide a comparative matrix within which to study contacts for all societies, even stateless foraging groups. Of special relevance is their definition of two kinds of core/periphery relationships. What they call core/periphery differentiation involves groups of varying sociopolitical complexity that engage in active interchange. Core/periphery hierarchy refers to the situation in which one or more groups dominate others in the system. They argue this distinction is necessary because exploitation does not necessarily characterize all interactions between cores and peripheries.
Chase-Dunn and Hall also propose a typology of world-systems based on societal complexity and mode of production: (1) kin-based mode dominant,
(2) tributary modes dominant (urban cultures),
(3) capitalist mode dominant, and (4) socialist mode dominant. Category 2 includes both primary empires and multicentered world systems in which peripheral zones, empires, and autonomous states interact. One important hypothesis derived from this model is that social innovation occurs readily in semiperipheral zones because they receive input from cores and peripheries and are not burdened by excessive core controls. Chase-Dunn and Hall have issued a call for case studies by archaeologists to provide the comparative database necessary to test this hypothesis. They also suggest that world-systems are multiscalar, providing a means to examine large empires and ‘small world-systems’ of foraging or horticultural societies, such as the Wintu of Northern California.
In addition, Hall and Chase-Dunn suggest that there are four types of boundaries in world-systems; these parameters rarely coincide. The boundaries are: (1) a boundary of information or cultural flows; (2) a boundary of luxury or prestige goods flows; (3) a boundary of political/military interaction; and (4) a boundary of bulk goods flows. Mundane materials, which often constitute the majority of bulk goods, are typically embedded in the information and prestige nets, yet are distinct from the military net.
Prehistorian Andrew Sherratt has used the term ‘margin’ to refer to a zone that does not interact directly with a core, but does provide materials that are critical to the operation of a world-system. He points to the role of amber from the Baltic region and various metals from Central Europe in the Mediterranean trade system. The urban core of the
Near East and the Aegean in the Bronze Age stimulated the exchange (see Exchange Systems) of many commodities through multiple links, without members from either geographical extreme ever coming into direct contact. Parts of this system go back to the Neolithic. Sherratt implies that the Bronze Age is aptly named, not simply because of the artifacts, but because this metal alloy fueled the economic expansion on which many early states depended. More recently, Mitch Allen has added the notion of contested peripheries, that is, those areas in the interstices between empires that the latter struggle to control (see above). On occasion, people in the contested region have the ability to negotiate with the contending parties to gain the best deal for themselves.
One of the important aspects of world-systems theory is its ability to crosscut disciplines in an attempt to determine the nature of cultural change over time. The approach brings together sociologists (Chase-Dunn, Hall, Wilma Dunaway), political scientists (David Wilkinson, William Thompson), historians (Richard L. Slatta), economists (A. G. Frank), archaeologists (Kohl, Sherratt), and others in the examination of intersocietal interaction, often with a focus on antiquity. In this way, world-systems theory acts as a bridge among the social sciences. Volumes that demonstrate this interdisciplinary nature include works by Chase-Dunn and Hall, Frank and Gills, Hall, and Kardulias.
See also: Exchange Systems; Social Inequality, Development of.
World History
