Systematic comparative approaches to the archaeological record

Abstract

Increasingly, interdisciplinary research teams are coming together totry to establish regularities, over space and time, in the complexsystem that is the human phenomenon. Although vocabulary and toolshave changed, the questions that animate this research program bearstriking similarity to those pursued by nineteenth-centuryintellectuals in a quest to establish universal laws shaping humanaffairs. In fact, that very quest provided the impetus for theemergence of what would later become distinct disciplines in thesocial and historical sciences, including anthropology and sociology.Why, then, is this interdisciplinary research program often met withskepticism, or even outright resistance, within anthropology?In this chapter I provide a brief outline of developments in thehistory of anthropology leading to this state of affairs, in the hopeof alleviating misunderstanding between those who support theinterdisciplinary research program and those who oppose it. As apractical contribution toward this end, I then provide an overview ofkey established resources for systematic comparative approaches to thearchaeological record. I conclude by discussing challenges andopportunities in this area at the interface with recent developmentsin related archaeological practice.

Lineal kinship organization in cross-specific perspective

“…do changes in descent drive changes in residence, or vice versa?). Within the prevailing theoretical paradigm of the late nineteenth century, now known as 'classical evolutionism', the aim was to establish specific historical sequences, leading to the discovery of general laws of cultural development (see [26,28] for related discussion). I do not intend to rehash these debates here.…”

“…compared to estimates based on equivalent data for its 'parent' sample, the Ethnographic Atlas; [30,31]). The increase in accuracy derives from (i) specific considerations underlying the sampling strategy, (ii) explicit criteria for the inclusion of societies, based on the quality of the ethnographic materials, and (iii) refinement of the code definitions and corresponding data (see [28,32] for related discussion).…”

Insights From Evolutionary Anthropology on the (Pre)history of the Nuclear Family

“…Tylor’s contribution has been described as “[p]erhaps the greatest anthropological paper of the nineteenth century” (Harris, 2001, p. 158). Yet a different view of comparative approaches has come to prevail within anthropology—seemingly a reaction to the excesses of its 19th-century forebear, cultural evolutionism, and its abuse of ethnographic material (see discussion in Fortunato, 2016). As a result, the majority of “mainstream” anthropologists today are wary of, if not outright hostile to, cross-cultural approaches to the ethnographic record.…”

“…However, efforts to formalize this line of enquiry typically involve focusing on variation across societies in a small number of traits, isolated from their context, so that the data are amenable to systematic analysis. To many anthropologists, this approach is, at best, too reductionist and, at worst, too close to the comparative method of evolutionism (see discussion in Fortunato, 2016). For example, as we shall see below, Murdock dedicated a substantial part of his 50-year career, between the early 1930s and the early 1980s, to addressing some of the key conceptual and methodological issues with cross-cultural research.…”

“…Increasingly, cross-cultural databases developed in anthropology are being used in empirical research across the social sciences (e.g., Alesina, Giuliano, & Nunn, 2011). This paradoxical situation has one unfortunate consequence for practitioners: the extensive discussions surrounding the approach that occurred within anthropology since the late 19th century have been lost to contemporary practice—including discussions about subtle conceptual and methodological issues, such as definition of the units of analysis (e.g., Naroll, 1964), that anthropologists are best placed to resolve (Fortunato, 2016).…”