P. Nick Kardulias - Academia.edu (original) (raw)
Papers by P. Nick Kardulias
Journal of World-Systems Research, 1996
The papers in this thematic section were originally presented in two venues. Approximately half o... more The papers in this thematic section were originally presented in two venues. Approximately half of the contributions were delivered first in a session at the Annual Meeting of the Central States Anthropological Society in Indianapolis, Indiana in March, 1995. The full complement of presentations took place at the 94th Annual Meeting of the American Anthropological Association in Washington, D.C., in November, 1995. Two participants in the Washington symposium chose not to include their papers in this section. A number of the papers have thus benefitted from several stages of discussion and criticism. While anthropologists (and especially archaeologists) dominated both panels, the disciplinary breadth represented by the various members contributed to an invigorating discussion which we now bring to the pages of this journal. In this attempt to reach a broad audience, however, we realize there is the problem of disciplinary specificity, i.e., the particular approaches and data with wh...
The 82nd Annual Meeting of the Society for American Archaeology, 2018
BRILL eBooks, Nov 5, 2022
Climate Changes in the Holocene, 2018
The Ecology of Pastoralism, 2015
Hesperia: The Journal of the American School of Classical Studies at Athens
Society for Historical Archaeology, 2016
Antiquity, 2019
Recent archaeological survey on the Greek island of Kythera yielded prehistoric quartz that offer... more Recent archaeological survey on the Greek island of Kythera yielded prehistoric quartz that offers new information on the island's role in early Aegean occupation.
Historical Archaeology, 1994
During the past three decades, various techniques and theoretical approaches developed by anthrop... more During the past three decades, various techniques and theoretical approaches developed by anthropological archaeologists have made steady inroads into the study of Greek prehistory. Most Aegean prehistorians are now conversant with survey methods, absolute chronometric techniques, ecological models, and the issues raised by the New Archaeology. Scholars who deal with historical periods (Archaic through Early Modern, i.e., 8th century B.C. to 15th century A.D.) , however, have, with a few notable exceptions, been slower to adopt such innovations. For example, Late Roman and Byzantine archaeologists infrequently discuss issues of local subsistence, settlement hierarchies based on survey data, and theoretical models of social change. Chronologically, Aegean archaeologists largely ignore the period between the 16th and 20th centuries. This article reviews a series of recent efforts that attempt to introduce such theoretical and methodological approaches to historical archaeology in Greece. Among these developments are nonsite survey, geophysical prospecting, the use of Geographic Information Systems (GIS) for predictive modeling, and the application of various theoretical approaches as explanatory frameworks. This paper provides an historical overview of the forces that led historical archaeology along different paths in North America and Greece, respectively, points out recent trends that signal a convergence, and presents examples of such research from various projects in Greece.
Journal of Mediterranean Archaeology, 1995
Among the first questions that individuals ask archaeologists is, how do you know where to dig? T... more Among the first questions that individuals ask archaeologists is, how do you know where to dig? The answer to that query usually includes three typical ways of identifying sites. The first is accidental exposure that results both from natural events, such as erosion, the uncovering of remains by wind, and so forth, and from human activity, including construction and farming. Next is the use of informants who may have a detailed knowledge of local site locations and content. The third is systematic survey undertaken by trained archaeologists. The difference between the first two ways and the third way is that in systematic survey, researchers are able to devise a research design with explicit questions that can be addressed by particular methods of field investigation, rather than the serendipity of the other two forms of data collection. We have adopted a set of theoretical approaches that have guided both our techniques for collecting information in the field and its interpretation...
The Ecology of Pastoralism, 2015
Aegean Strategies: Studies of Culture and Environment …, 1997
This chapter in an edited volume deals with the late medieval settlement landscape in the Korinth... more This chapter in an edited volume deals with the late medieval settlement landscape in the Korinthia in the northeastern Peloponnesos, Greece. The focuses on work at the 13th century site of Agios Vasilios and incorporates insights from GIS analysis.
World Archaeology, 2008
Abstract Many archaeologists have criticized world-systems analysis (WSA) for being overly econom... more Abstract Many archaeologists have criticized world-systems analysis (WSA) for being overly economistic, ignoring individual actors and importing modern analyses to ancient settings where they are inappropriate. Those criticisms are directed largely at Immanuel ...
American Journal of Archaeology, 2012
Encyclopedia of Archaeology, 2008
In the search for an interpretive framework that has generalized applicability, scholars have had... more In the search for an interpretive framework that has generalized applicability, scholars have had recourse to various approaches. World-systems theory offers a model of human interaction that crosscuts economic, political, and social dimensions. In addition, world-systems theory is multiscalar, i.e., it assesses the connection between different levels in a regional and interregional system. The approach originated with the work of Immanuel Wallerstein and A. Gunder Frank, and has been adopted and adapted by anthropologists and archaeologists to describe the nature of integrated systems in the past as well as the present. The components of a world-system are typically referred to as cores, peripheries, and semi-peripheries. The interaction among these segments involves the process of incorporation. While cores tend to exploit peripheries, there is a level of flexibility or negotiation between the levels, especially in the periods of concern to archaeologists.
Pastoralism, 2016
This book presents a rich collection of case studies exploring the ecology of pastoralism. Its ai... more This book presents a rich collection of case studies exploring the ecology of pastoralism. Its aim is to examine the ways in which pastoralism operates as a highly flexible system, through the adaptations of both the domestic animals and the socioeconomic strategies of human groups to different environments and contexts. The volume achieves this through taking a comparative approach, drawing together a range of case studies from Asia, Europe, Africa and the Americas, and importantly through including both present and past perspectives on pastoral societies.
From Classical to Byzantine: Social Evolution in Late Antiquity and the Fortress at Isthmia, Greece, 2005
Population estimates for the Isthmian Fortress in Late Roman to Early Byzantine period. 7.2 Work ... more Population estimates for the Isthmian Fortress in Late Roman to Early Byzantine period. 7.2 Work rates based on timed experiments. 7.3 Energy expenditure in the central part of the Sanctuary of Poseidon at Isthmia during the Roman period. 7.4 Work estimates for the construction of the Isthmian Fortress. v PREFACE This book about social transformation has itself had a long evolution. The work began as a dissertation in the Department of Anthropology at Ohio State University in the mid 1980s. After completion of the degree in 1988 (Kardulias 1988), I revisited the dissertation and converted several of the chapters into articles after extensive revision. When I finally returned to the work as a whole, I had a more thorough grasp of both the opportunities to say something useful about social transformation in Late Antiquity and of the limitations of the data for doing so. It was at this time that I added the evolutionary framework, and many parts of the fragmentary mosaic of information on the Late Antique to Byzantine transition fell into place. A number of scholars had already made use of anthropological perspectives in the study of the Greek past. With a few exceptions, however, these studies focused on the prehistoric period. One point I wish to make with this book is that the anthropological lens can sharpen our image of historical eras as well. Specifically, evolutionary theory and several of its offshoots (for example, cultural ecology and cultural materialism) offer robust explanations of how and why change occurred in the Aegean world. It is my desire to bring the study of classical and medieval Greece into the stimulating debate on the use of evolutionary theory in archaeology. After all, there are few other places with such a wealth of documentary evidence to go along with a vast body of archaeological data, and it is just such conditions that allow us to make the best use of evolutionary (or any other) theory. Contrary to what some scholars suggest, the evolutionary perspective is still a highly productive source of interpretive statements. The revolution that Darwin and some of his contemporaries initiated rightly has become the reigning paradigm in the biological sciences. While there certainly have been problems in translating that success to the social sciences, the approach merits and continues to receive considerable attention. As Michael Schiffer has noted, "From the so-called unilinear evolutionists, through the Boasians and neo-evolutionists, to the selectionists of recent decades, evolutionary thinking in one guise or another has influenced archaeological explanations of behavioral change" (Schiffer 1997:vii). What does this mean for modern archaeology? Schiffer argues that "Today is a particularly opportune time for scientific archaeologists to renew and reconfigure their commitment to evolutionary theory" (Schiffer 1997:viii). The present book is in part an effort to meet this call to action, not just by using evolutionary theory as an explanatory framework, but also by applying it to an area of the world and a period often viewed as outside the realm of scientific anthropological archaeology. The rich material and literary record of Greece offers evolutionism a vast source of information on which to draw. In the succeeding pages I begin to tap this potential. As Colin Renfrew, Jack Davis, and others have noted, there exists a divide between classical archaeology and anthropological archaeology that has deep historical roots. While I explore this issue in some depth in Chapter 2, it is important to stress at the outset that both branches of the discipline share a crucial set of concerns and methods that academic departmental biases often mask. A talented cohort of scholars has worked assiduously over the past several decades to remove these barriers with some success. The present book is an attempt to enhance and perhaps expand this dialogue in some modest way. vi vii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS In undertaking this work, I have had the able assistance of a number of individuals. Foremost among these people is Prof. Timothy Gregory, Director of the Ohio State University Excavations at Isthmia (OSUEI). He provided invaluable guidance during the collection of data in the field and subsequently in reading various drafts of this document. Our many discussions about theoretical, chronological, and other substantive issues provided numerous insights.
Rethinking Mycenaean Palaces II, 2007
Journal of World-Systems Research, 1996
The papers in this thematic section were originally presented in two venues. Approximately half o... more The papers in this thematic section were originally presented in two venues. Approximately half of the contributions were delivered first in a session at the Annual Meeting of the Central States Anthropological Society in Indianapolis, Indiana in March, 1995. The full complement of presentations took place at the 94th Annual Meeting of the American Anthropological Association in Washington, D.C., in November, 1995. Two participants in the Washington symposium chose not to include their papers in this section. A number of the papers have thus benefitted from several stages of discussion and criticism. While anthropologists (and especially archaeologists) dominated both panels, the disciplinary breadth represented by the various members contributed to an invigorating discussion which we now bring to the pages of this journal. In this attempt to reach a broad audience, however, we realize there is the problem of disciplinary specificity, i.e., the particular approaches and data with wh...
The 82nd Annual Meeting of the Society for American Archaeology, 2018
BRILL eBooks, Nov 5, 2022
Climate Changes in the Holocene, 2018
The Ecology of Pastoralism, 2015
Hesperia: The Journal of the American School of Classical Studies at Athens
Society for Historical Archaeology, 2016
Antiquity, 2019
Recent archaeological survey on the Greek island of Kythera yielded prehistoric quartz that offer... more Recent archaeological survey on the Greek island of Kythera yielded prehistoric quartz that offers new information on the island's role in early Aegean occupation.
Historical Archaeology, 1994
During the past three decades, various techniques and theoretical approaches developed by anthrop... more During the past three decades, various techniques and theoretical approaches developed by anthropological archaeologists have made steady inroads into the study of Greek prehistory. Most Aegean prehistorians are now conversant with survey methods, absolute chronometric techniques, ecological models, and the issues raised by the New Archaeology. Scholars who deal with historical periods (Archaic through Early Modern, i.e., 8th century B.C. to 15th century A.D.) , however, have, with a few notable exceptions, been slower to adopt such innovations. For example, Late Roman and Byzantine archaeologists infrequently discuss issues of local subsistence, settlement hierarchies based on survey data, and theoretical models of social change. Chronologically, Aegean archaeologists largely ignore the period between the 16th and 20th centuries. This article reviews a series of recent efforts that attempt to introduce such theoretical and methodological approaches to historical archaeology in Greece. Among these developments are nonsite survey, geophysical prospecting, the use of Geographic Information Systems (GIS) for predictive modeling, and the application of various theoretical approaches as explanatory frameworks. This paper provides an historical overview of the forces that led historical archaeology along different paths in North America and Greece, respectively, points out recent trends that signal a convergence, and presents examples of such research from various projects in Greece.
Journal of Mediterranean Archaeology, 1995
Among the first questions that individuals ask archaeologists is, how do you know where to dig? T... more Among the first questions that individuals ask archaeologists is, how do you know where to dig? The answer to that query usually includes three typical ways of identifying sites. The first is accidental exposure that results both from natural events, such as erosion, the uncovering of remains by wind, and so forth, and from human activity, including construction and farming. Next is the use of informants who may have a detailed knowledge of local site locations and content. The third is systematic survey undertaken by trained archaeologists. The difference between the first two ways and the third way is that in systematic survey, researchers are able to devise a research design with explicit questions that can be addressed by particular methods of field investigation, rather than the serendipity of the other two forms of data collection. We have adopted a set of theoretical approaches that have guided both our techniques for collecting information in the field and its interpretation...
The Ecology of Pastoralism, 2015
Aegean Strategies: Studies of Culture and Environment …, 1997
This chapter in an edited volume deals with the late medieval settlement landscape in the Korinth... more This chapter in an edited volume deals with the late medieval settlement landscape in the Korinthia in the northeastern Peloponnesos, Greece. The focuses on work at the 13th century site of Agios Vasilios and incorporates insights from GIS analysis.
World Archaeology, 2008
Abstract Many archaeologists have criticized world-systems analysis (WSA) for being overly econom... more Abstract Many archaeologists have criticized world-systems analysis (WSA) for being overly economistic, ignoring individual actors and importing modern analyses to ancient settings where they are inappropriate. Those criticisms are directed largely at Immanuel ...
American Journal of Archaeology, 2012
Encyclopedia of Archaeology, 2008
In the search for an interpretive framework that has generalized applicability, scholars have had... more In the search for an interpretive framework that has generalized applicability, scholars have had recourse to various approaches. World-systems theory offers a model of human interaction that crosscuts economic, political, and social dimensions. In addition, world-systems theory is multiscalar, i.e., it assesses the connection between different levels in a regional and interregional system. The approach originated with the work of Immanuel Wallerstein and A. Gunder Frank, and has been adopted and adapted by anthropologists and archaeologists to describe the nature of integrated systems in the past as well as the present. The components of a world-system are typically referred to as cores, peripheries, and semi-peripheries. The interaction among these segments involves the process of incorporation. While cores tend to exploit peripheries, there is a level of flexibility or negotiation between the levels, especially in the periods of concern to archaeologists.
Pastoralism, 2016
This book presents a rich collection of case studies exploring the ecology of pastoralism. Its ai... more This book presents a rich collection of case studies exploring the ecology of pastoralism. Its aim is to examine the ways in which pastoralism operates as a highly flexible system, through the adaptations of both the domestic animals and the socioeconomic strategies of human groups to different environments and contexts. The volume achieves this through taking a comparative approach, drawing together a range of case studies from Asia, Europe, Africa and the Americas, and importantly through including both present and past perspectives on pastoral societies.
From Classical to Byzantine: Social Evolution in Late Antiquity and the Fortress at Isthmia, Greece, 2005
Population estimates for the Isthmian Fortress in Late Roman to Early Byzantine period. 7.2 Work ... more Population estimates for the Isthmian Fortress in Late Roman to Early Byzantine period. 7.2 Work rates based on timed experiments. 7.3 Energy expenditure in the central part of the Sanctuary of Poseidon at Isthmia during the Roman period. 7.4 Work estimates for the construction of the Isthmian Fortress. v PREFACE This book about social transformation has itself had a long evolution. The work began as a dissertation in the Department of Anthropology at Ohio State University in the mid 1980s. After completion of the degree in 1988 (Kardulias 1988), I revisited the dissertation and converted several of the chapters into articles after extensive revision. When I finally returned to the work as a whole, I had a more thorough grasp of both the opportunities to say something useful about social transformation in Late Antiquity and of the limitations of the data for doing so. It was at this time that I added the evolutionary framework, and many parts of the fragmentary mosaic of information on the Late Antique to Byzantine transition fell into place. A number of scholars had already made use of anthropological perspectives in the study of the Greek past. With a few exceptions, however, these studies focused on the prehistoric period. One point I wish to make with this book is that the anthropological lens can sharpen our image of historical eras as well. Specifically, evolutionary theory and several of its offshoots (for example, cultural ecology and cultural materialism) offer robust explanations of how and why change occurred in the Aegean world. It is my desire to bring the study of classical and medieval Greece into the stimulating debate on the use of evolutionary theory in archaeology. After all, there are few other places with such a wealth of documentary evidence to go along with a vast body of archaeological data, and it is just such conditions that allow us to make the best use of evolutionary (or any other) theory. Contrary to what some scholars suggest, the evolutionary perspective is still a highly productive source of interpretive statements. The revolution that Darwin and some of his contemporaries initiated rightly has become the reigning paradigm in the biological sciences. While there certainly have been problems in translating that success to the social sciences, the approach merits and continues to receive considerable attention. As Michael Schiffer has noted, "From the so-called unilinear evolutionists, through the Boasians and neo-evolutionists, to the selectionists of recent decades, evolutionary thinking in one guise or another has influenced archaeological explanations of behavioral change" (Schiffer 1997:vii). What does this mean for modern archaeology? Schiffer argues that "Today is a particularly opportune time for scientific archaeologists to renew and reconfigure their commitment to evolutionary theory" (Schiffer 1997:viii). The present book is in part an effort to meet this call to action, not just by using evolutionary theory as an explanatory framework, but also by applying it to an area of the world and a period often viewed as outside the realm of scientific anthropological archaeology. The rich material and literary record of Greece offers evolutionism a vast source of information on which to draw. In the succeeding pages I begin to tap this potential. As Colin Renfrew, Jack Davis, and others have noted, there exists a divide between classical archaeology and anthropological archaeology that has deep historical roots. While I explore this issue in some depth in Chapter 2, it is important to stress at the outset that both branches of the discipline share a crucial set of concerns and methods that academic departmental biases often mask. A talented cohort of scholars has worked assiduously over the past several decades to remove these barriers with some success. The present book is an attempt to enhance and perhaps expand this dialogue in some modest way. vi vii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS In undertaking this work, I have had the able assistance of a number of individuals. Foremost among these people is Prof. Timothy Gregory, Director of the Ohio State University Excavations at Isthmia (OSUEI). He provided invaluable guidance during the collection of data in the field and subsequently in reading various drafts of this document. Our many discussions about theoretical, chronological, and other substantive issues provided numerous insights.
Rethinking Mycenaean Palaces II, 2007