By: David B. Small

David B. Small — Thu, 06 Aug 2020 13:52:56 +0000

Adding some Clarity
I would like to thank professor Murray for her detailed review of my book. My purpose in adding a comment is to highlight an important part of the book, which is not mentioned in the review and which adds clarity to several of the issues that professor Murray has raised. The review does a nice job of describing complexity theory which I use in my analysis of social change in ancient Greece. But complexity theory is only one of two theoretical frameworks, and the lesser one at that, which I employ in my treatment of ancient Greek culture. The other framework is the use of institutions as units to provide a window into social complexity in ancient Greece. Complexity is seen as the number and structural association of institutions in ancient Greece at specific places and times. Thus, a community’s complexity is seen as the nature, number, and structural connections of its institutions, such as I describe for ancient Azoria (194-196). This approach is not new, having been introduced by S. Humphreys (Humphreys 1978) in her work on social evolution and social articulation, and it is currently seeing attention in archaeological research (Holland-Lulewicz et al. 2020; Bondarenko, Kowalewski, and Small 2020).
As I explained in my introduction, my use of this theoretical framework produces a book with an unusual pacing. Focus on different periods is determined by the ability to apply this framework. The late Iron and Archaic periods in Greece provide an excellent context for this type of analysis. This does not, as argued by the reviewer, imply that the earlier periods in Greece were less important or “static”. This period is highlighted because it supplies a great deal of data, both archaeological and textual at a critical evolutionary period. If the same amount of data were available for important periods of transition in earlier Greece the pace of the book would have been different.
I bring up this theoretical viewpoint, because it is the major armature of the book, and explains many of the points raised by Murray. For example, it is true that I see many similarities in Greek communities after the 8th century, but my attention to institutional social structure has allowed me to focus in on differences as well. Not mentioned in the review is chapter 10, “The Cretan Difference” in which I use institutional social structure to highlight the differences between Greek communities on Crete and elsewhere. My use of social structural analysis is also the reason for chapter 9, “Developments after the Rise of Macedon” in which I demonstrate that the social structure engendered in the 8th century continued very actively into the middle years of the Roman Empire. Although I do use the word “addendum” in the summary of this chapter, in no way does its use mean anything more than the fact that a structural transformation did not occur until the 3rd century CE. My use of social structure in analysis also allowed me to meet an important requirement of the Case Studies series: to compare ancient Greece to other past cultures. Not mentioned in the review is the last chapter, Greece is Not Alone: The Small Polity Evolutionary Characteristics of the Ancient Greeks and other Past Cultures. Rather than deem ancient Greek culture as something unique as stated in the review, I argue that the similarities between small polities can be used to understand larger issues in their particular developments.
Introducing my use of institutional social structure therefore adds clarity to several points raised by the reviewer, and will hopefully give a clearer picture of what the book is actually about. I do not want to begin to refute smaller issues raised by the reviewer. We all have particular viewpoints on publications. I will say one thing however. Having taught Homer in the original for many years, I am well aware that Helen was not the wife of Agamemnon. Somehow the original sentence became corrupted in the numerous rewrites of the text, and I did not notice it. I take full responsibility for this error.
I thank you for this opportunity to add some clarity to the framework of my book.
Yours sincerely,

David B. Small
Professor of Archaeology
Department of Anthropology
Lehigh University

Humphreys, S. 1978. “Evolution and History: Approaches to the Study of Structural Differentiation.” In Anthropology and the Greeks, edited by S. Humphreys, 242–75. London: Routledge and K. Paul.

Holland-Lulewicz, J., M.A. Conger, J. Birch, and S.A Kowalewski. 2020. “An Institutional Approach for Archaeology.” Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 58: 1–15.

Bondarenko, D., S.A. Kowalewski, and D. Small, eds. 2020. The Evolution of Social Institutions: Interdisciplinary Perspectives. London: Springer Nature.

Comments on: Ancient Greece: Social Structure and Evolution

By: David B. Small