more mechanistic, Spencerian evolution of historical societies as quasi-
homogeneous units).^16 Although ancient historians have begun to
explore applications of natural selection at a metaphorical and at an
abstract level,^17 Darwin’s ideas have proved difficult to articulate in social
contexts, since natural selection applies to the reproductive capacity of
individuals, whilst simple biological models and metaphors of historical
societies have consistently been found wanting. Nevertheless, Veblen’s
concept of habitual propensities provides a moreflexible way of thinking
about the origins and evolution of institutions than the rule-based
definition adopted by North, whilst at the same time offering a direct
connection to Pierre Bourdieu’s notion ofhabitus.^18
The instinctive sentiment of ancient historians for the ideas of the
nineteenth-century German Historical School reflects a continuing
appreciation of the close connection between social and economic
factors in the ways in which ancient societies were organized. The
labour-intensive character of the complete spectrum of activities associ-
ated with subsistence drove an overwhelming preoccupation with man-
power (and womanpower), manifested in reproductive habits, the
acquisition of servile labour, and the ordering of functional groups to
maximize productive endeavour. The same drivers have powered other
historical societies. In order to define the distinctive features of econ-
omies in thefirst millenniumbcnorth Aegean, we need to take account
of the ecological context of the societies located here, and of the special-
izations that they displayed.
ECOLOGICAL VARIABILITY AND INTER-DEPENDENT
NETWORKS ACROSS THE AEGEAN
‘No other city [other than Athens, that is,] has even two of these
things: the same city does not even have timber andflax, but
wherever there isflax in abundance, the land is smooth and timber-
less. There is not even copper and iron from the same city, but there
is one product here and another there.’([Xen.]Ath. Pol.2. 12 tr.
G. W. Bowersock)(^16) Veblen 1899, 18 and 20–69; Veblen 1919, 1–81 (on the role of scientific thinking and
evolutionary thinking); 56-81 (‘Why is Economics not an Evolutionary Science?’[1898]).
(^17) See for example Morris 2009a and Scheidel 2009.
(^18) Veblen 1899, 190; Bourdieu 1990, 52–65, 66–79, 107–09; Hodgson 1998; Hodgson
2001, 289–92.
92 Societies and economies