elucidate it. Strict theoretical positions may be interesting intellectual con-
structs to those smitten by the logic or beauty of an idea, but too often they
don’tfit the empirical evidence and thus don’t help if our goal in studying
history is to try to determine what really happened in the past. Second,
models don’t have to be universally applicable or completely right (no matter
what their advocates say) to be useful when trying to determine general
trends or in examining history in a conceptual way. Anyone studying the
history of trade can learn much from the ideas of Polanyi and Wallerstein or
for that matter from earlier theorists such as Marx and Adam Smith, keeping
in mind that history is always sloppier than theorists would like it to be;
that’s why it’s not a science.
No doubt, there were different kinds of exchange networks working in
different ways, each with its own particular set of quirks. However, in the
larger picture, over the course of millennia, commodities increasinglyflowed
ever farther afield. Slowly but irreversibly, as different ecological niches were
absorbed and smaller trading systems became intermeshed, an inter-
dependent Afro–Eurasian trade zone emerged, spatially connected even if its
internal dynamics were not always structurally uniform. This system would
continue, with many starts and stops, until the onset of the modern era.
A closer look: how we know
Reconstructing a picture of long-distance trade in the premodern world is
done through a combination of ways. The two most important sources of
information are archaeology and written material. Archaeology must begin
with common sense. If we know that a certain people used a substantial
amount of bronze but did not have local access to copper and tin deposits,
we must question how this society got its bronze. Where did the raw
materials come from? If we are able to discount warfare and plunder, what
was exchanged in return?
Archaeology can indicate the movement of goods and sometimes provide
enough information to make estimates of the quantity and frequency
involved. Archaeological evidence is a good place to start looking for pat-
terns since long-distance trade that is historically important should show
consistency. In their excavations, archaeologists look for indicators of trade.
Pottery from the Ubaid culture of Mesopotamia (5300– 4000 BCE) has been
found scattered across northern Syria up into Anatolia (Turkey) to areas
where metal deposits were abundant. This likely signifies a trade route. Seals
made from stone or metal to indicate ownership and the presence of lead
weights and scale pans used for measurements are indicators of trade even
when the products they were used for are long gone.
Important sites for archaeological excavations begin with tombs and
hoards. Tombs often contain grave goods intended to accompany their
inhabitants into the next world whereas hoards usually consist of valuable
Some introductory musings 7