A Companion to Ethnicity in the Ancient Mediterranean

54 Thomas D. Hall

Strength of

Incorporation

Impact of Core on

Periphery

Impact of Periphery

on Core

Type of Periphery

World-System

Terminology

None

None

None

External Arena

External Arena

Strong Stronger Strongest

Low Moderate Significant

Contact Periphery

Incorporation Peripheralization

Full-Blown Periphery or

Dependent Periphery

Marginal Periphery or Region

of Refuge

Weak Moderate Strong

Figure 4.1 The Continuum of Incorporation (from Kardulias 2010: 59). Reprinted by permis-
sion of William Parkinson.

“luxury items” and “bulk goods” are more a consequence of its economic and techno-
logical context, than a property of the goods themselves. Allen (2005) suggests that these
are really poles of a continuum rather than opposites. This is an issue worthy of further
investigation (see, e.g., Kepecs 2005).
Wallerstein originally treated incorporation into a world-economy as one-sided, but
one must study the local conditions in each of the specific peripheral areas as well as
the capitalist economy in core states in order to understand the nature of incorporation.
Hall (1989) noted that incorporation into a world-economy is a matter of degree, and
that non-state societies in peripheral areas often play active roles in resisting and shaping
incorporation. This effect was particularly strong in antiquity when complete domination
of any peripheral area often was technologically and politically impossible (see Figure 4.1;
Kardulias 2010: 59). Others note that people in a peripheral area can at times negotiate
effectively, because they control access to a key resource (Kardulias 2007).
A major issue for archaeologists is the degree to which WSA applies to antiquity.
Unlike many modern technologies, ancient ones were often portable and could be
moved easily from core to periphery. This made it possible for some peripheral areas
to retain considerable autonomy and precluded some of the exploitation and under-
development characteristic of the modern world-system. “Barbarian” peripheries often
had a significant impact on how core regions developed. For instance, the dramatic
increase in tin bronzes in Transcaucasia between the Early and Late Bronze Age suggests
that the region had access to substantial amounts of tin from several sources, some at
great distances.
Chase-Dunn and Hall (1997) argued that change occurs not only within individual
societies, but in entire world-systems. They sought to provide a comparative matrix
within which to study contacts for all societies, even stateless foraging groups. They
define two kinds of core–periphery relationships: (1)core–periphery differentiation,
which involves groups of varying sociopolitical complexity engaged in active interchange;
and (2)core–periphery hierarchy, which refers to the situation in which one or more
groups dominates other groups in the system. They argued that this distinction is
necessary, because exploitation does not necessarily characterize all interactions between
cores and peripheries. The issue is when and how core–periphery differentiation—which
is quite common in pre-capitalist settings—becomes core–periphery hierarchy, which is
somewhat less common.