Gift and Commodity in Archaic Greece Author(s): Ian Morris Source: Man, New Series, Vol. 21, No.

1 (Mar., 1986), pp. 1-17 Published by: Royal Anthropological Institute of Great Britain and Ireland Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2802643 . Accessed: 24/05/2011 02:26
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use. Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at . http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=rai. . Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed page of such transmission. JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Royal Anthropological Institute of Great Britain and Ireland is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Man.

http://www.jstor.org

GIFT

AND

COMMODITY

IN ARCHAIC

GREECE

IAN MORRIS

UniversityCambridge of
The roles of the giftand the commodityin Greece c. 800-500 B.C. are analysedfromthe primary literary sources,and it is suggestedthatcurrent anthropological models of the interof relationships forms of production,exchange and social organisationare too simplistic. the Historicalevidencecan be used to supplement ethnographic record,and to show the great importance giftexchangecan have in stateand even imperialcivilisations. Further, great the importance the giftin ArchaicGreecewas not unusualin earlyEurope. It is arguedthatthe of archaeologist can attempt identify to spheresof exchangeand a gifteconomyin the material of recordofthedeliberate consumption wealthin prehistory.

Over thelastsixtyyears,thestudyof gift exchangehas been one of thecentral of in fields research economicanthropology. based modelsof Ethnographically giftexchange,particularly evolutionary the schemesof relatedformsof exand social organisation change,technology, production developedby Mauss, Sahlinsand most recently have had a profound Gregory, impactin therelated of In I and disciplines history archaeology. thisarticle, will arguethat historians in particular in a positionto repaysome ofthegifts are have received from they evidencefrom case studies whichmight lead to a anthropologists, providing by of the modification thesewidely used models. Historicaldata can illuminate in no and thecommodity socialformations longeravailablefor rolesof thegift or timein anthropological sociologicalstudy,and can show changesthrough of therelative positionsand importance thetwo exchangeforms. I In thisarticle, will concentrate thespecific on case ofArchaicGreece,in the eighthto sixth centuries B.C., arguingthatthe dominantethnographically derivedmodelsof thesocial correlates thegift of economyare over-simplified: in particular, theanthropologists' that is positionthat exchange a dominant gift feature 'clan' societiesalone is of dubious value. A rangeof ancient in literary evidence will be consideredwhich, I will argue, indicatesthat the relative of and commodity forms exchangedo as of positionsand importance thegift is classand state but there no reasonto suggest that the varywithin societies, that 1 can mechanism gift be a primary onlyin kinship-based, non-state societies. A number of anthropologists have argued that a closer rapportbetween and is anthropology history necessary (e.g. Godelier1977a:25-9; Lewis I968; from ancient Copans & Seddon 1978), andsomehaveevenmadeuse ofevidence Greece (Goody 1976: 71-2; Godelier 1977b). Too few ancienthistorians, fromtheirparticular fieldsto contribute to however,have triedto generalise models of widerrelevanceto anthropologists archaeologists Godelier and (cf.
1977b: I s). Man(N.S.)21,
1-17

IAN MORRIS

modelsof gift Anthropological exchangehave been widelyemployedin the of interpretation the archaeologicalrecord of the complex societies of the European LaterBronze Age and EarlyIronAge, often roughly contemporary withtheGreekmaterial discussed here(e.g. Kromer1982; Championetal. 1984: 292-5), even thoughtheverymodelsused would excludethepossibility gift of societies.The exchange playing a major role in such complex, hierarchical is modelscanbe constructed positionadoptedin thisarticle thatmoreuseful by of of theinclusion historical of evidence, showingthepossiblerelevance theories thegift a widerrangeofsocial and economicformations. to of This framework suggeststhe significance giftexchangeforthe studyof I complex prehistoric societies,and in thefinalpartof thisarticle will discuss seekto identify presence gift the of in how thearchaeologist might exchange the of material record. Giftexchangeis itself coursean ephemeral phenomenon, archaeologically invisible,for most social contextsof prestation produce no residue.The onlycontact archaeologist hope forwiththe the can archaeological of is the of of circulation gifts through activity deliberate disposalor destruction one wealth.I will arguethatit may be possibleto identify of thecharacteristic of features thegift of economy-the existence restricted 'spheresof exchange' this -in thearchaeological record,and will illustrate withevidencefrom Early

IronAgeGreece I000-500 B.C.). (c.

and Gifts commodities Any discussionof gifts and commodities muststart withMarx. For him, the commoditywas an alienableobject exchangedbetweentwo transactors a in state of mutual independence(Marx 1976 [I867]: 178): to a large extentits exchangeuse was seen by Marx as definitional. appearance Its was treated a as consequenceof theriseof private property. This was because of his view that therewas no exchange otherthan throughthe commodity;he held thatin primitive, Asiaticand Classical modes of production commodityexisted the societiestherewas no exchangewithinthe community (1976: I82). Marx's positionon thisseemsnaivein thelightofmodern anthropological research (see Firth1975: 37; Gregory1982: 12; Bloch 1983: 63-94), but his conceptof the nevertheless forms indispensable commodity the background againstwhichto studythegift.
(I969

in primarily the interstices communities of (1976:

172),

and in primitive

canbe described one of'alternating as disequilibrium', wheretheaimis neverto havedebts'paid off',butto preserve situation personal a of indebtedness. Mauss placed societies on an economic evolutionaryscale, from total prestation to through economy commodity gift exchange (1954: 9I, n. 68), and both

actors strive maximise to outgoings Gregory (see I980;

callydependent transactors.2 aim of thegift The economyis accumulation for the de-accumulation; gifteconomy is above all a debt-economy, where the
1982; 1984).

Thetheory the hasowedmost Mauss(1954 [1925]) andLevi-Strauss of gift to an inalienable [1949]): or thing person exchanged between reciprotwo Thesystem

Sahlins(1974:

I86-7)

and Gregory (1982:

I9)

havefollowed this,distinin

IAN MORRIS

guishingbetweenthe clansociety,wherethe giftpredominates, the class and and the commodityare the norm. Gregory society,where privateproperty elaboratesthissimplebipolaroppositioninto a continuum related of formsof and technology, distribution exchange(1984: 17), ofwhichhe writes3
is At one end of thecontinuum there themoietyor dual-clan system organisation, theother of at end theproletarian capitalist or systemof organisation. one moves fromone extreme the As to other,equalityand unity give way to inequality separation and (Gregory I982: 37).

Gregoryhas been at pains to point out thathis approachprovidesa logical and rather thana carefully constructed tested modelforthe history evolutionary prehistorian, thatmuch studywill be necessary and beforeits validity can be assumed (1984: I9). Nevertheless, potentialof Gregory'smodel for the the prehistorian immediately is obvious, and his approachhas already beenapplied in in the studyof consumption thecomplexsocietiesof theEuropeanBronze I Age (Bradley1982; 1984: 96-I06). In thenextsection, will ask how useful the in clan:class::gift: commodityformula assessingits validity thelightof the is, earliest sourcesfrom Greekworld. the literary in Greece Gift exchange Archaic of To the historian ancientGreece,Gregory'sspectrum exchangeformsis of of reminiscent the fruitless debate of the disturbingly primitivist/modernist In 1928,Johannes Hasebroekpublished book Staat Handelimalten his und 1930's. Griechenland (English translation 1933), arguingthatthe economyin ancient of Greecehad to be studiedin thecontext itslinkswiththepoliticallifeof the Greek citystate.He pointedout thatcapitalist conceptscould not be applied to directly the Greek economy; therewas no nationaleconomyin the Greek in state,and the only 'political'interest 'economic' problemswas to insurea wherethesecouldnotbe obtained flowoflife-giving steady necessities, locally. in The citizenswere important theirrole as consumers, not producers,and was dominated free industrial commercial and resident activity almosttotally by aliens(metics) slaves. and This important workunfortunately servedto renewan old controversy only domesticmode of producas to whether Greekeconomywas a 'primitive' the The primitivists, the tion,or a 'modern'mercantile system. following tradition heldthat Hasebroek'spositionwas sound,butthat ofRodbertus Buicher, and he of the exaggerated unimportance tradein theeconomy;whilethe'modernists' the stressed gaps in Hasebroek'sknowledgeand his excessiveschematisation. The modernists tracedtheirpositionmainlyfromthelate nineteenth century of German historian EduardMeyer,buttheir is writings thegreat argument best knownin theEnglishspeaking worldfrom W. Gomme'sreply Hasebroek A. to of Adam Smith' (Finley I965: 12). The essence of the debate is caught in in the Rostovtzeff's classicstatement, published 1932, that issuewas 'notone of and Hellenistic wordsand concepts, offacts' that but to Greece,in thelatefourth mid-second centuries B.C., 'differedfrom the modern economy only not quantitatively, qualitatively' (citedfrom FinleyI965: 12).

(Gomme1937:

42-66),

as version stigmatised Moses Finley 'a schoolboy by

IAN MORRIS

The debateis now largely to rest(see Will 1954: FinleyI965: II-I3; 1973; laid Austin& Vidal-Naquet1977: 3-8; Cartledge1983), butshouldreally neverhave that the ancient begun. As early as I909, Max Weber had demonstrated from modern onlyquantitatively also qualitatively the not but economiesdiddiffer (Weber 1976). Ancient Greek and Roman society cannot be placed on a scalelikeGregory's all. at simple-complex One veryusefulway oflookingat theancient Greekworldis to conceivethe as relations production notbased in kinship capital, inpolitics. of or but Political of citizen and alien,rather thankinship objectified or statuses 'free'and unfree, a 'economic' relations,were decisive in determining household's position relativeto the means of production,the allocationof social labour, and the of distribution products(VernantI980: I-I8; Godelier1977b: i9; and particularly Finley 1973; 1981: 129). Both kinshipand class in Marx's sense could of contribute decidingthe membership thesepoliticalgroups,4 to but ancient the Greece belonged to neither clan nor the class end of the scale, nor to any intermediate positionbetweenthetwo. B.C. is a particularly Greece in the eighthto sixthcenturies good place to of and thecommodity an earlystatesociety. in studytherelationships thegift in Thereareveryclearreferences theimportance gift to of exchange theliterary as sources, althoughthereis oftenambiguity to theirpreciseinterpretation. During thisperiod the Greek city-state emerged,based on the ideology of a of defined notionalequalityof all members a politically citizen estate;and with theGreekstatecame theworld's first trueslave economies,Marx's 'Classical' mode of production(Marx I964: 82, 94). As Finleyputsit, therewas a move of to a away from continuum statuses an idealoftwo sharply demarcated orders, thefreecitizens and theslaves (Finley1973: 62-84, 95-122; I980: 67-92; 1981: It is difficult place ArchaicGreecein any way on Gregory'sclan to class to scale. Even beforetheevolutionof theslave economy,ancient Greecewas to a extent 'class' society Gregory a as uses theterm(1982: 36-7), with considerable limitedslaveryand unfree labourers a positionanalogous to a serf:landlord in relationship. Eighth- and early seventh-century literary sources seem to be describinga situationin the Aegean where nascentstate communities with and a complexdescriptive had slavery, private ownership kinship terminology of existed for generations.5 Many features the 'clan' societyare, however, in hierarchical equallyapparent thisworld.AmongtheKachin,Leachnotedthat were personified relationships throughthe medium of the gift:the chiefs' to extractions beingreferred as gift giving(Leach 1954: 142-3). The samecanbe in eighth-and seventh-century Greece: in Homer's Iliad, Agamemnon seen offered cities. . . who willhonourhimlikea god Achilles'Seven well-situated withgifts'(9.149-55; at whileHesiod spokeof 'gift-eating repeated 9.291-97), and chiefs'(Works Days 38-9). The land,thecentre Archaic and thecentre anyinquiry, of of life shared many features with land in the 'clan' societies.It could be alienatedunder certain in circumstances theeighthcentury, probablyonlywithinthecommunity but in normalsituations. Hesiod urgedhis brother workhardand to honourthe to and not anotheryours' gods, 'so you mightobtain another'sholding(kleros)
97-I66).

IAN MORRIS

a in normally commodity theArchaic period (Finley 1970: I968; Walcot

and (Works Days 341). ThroughoutGreekhistory, however,theland generally remainedthe subject of what Gregoryhas called 'overlappingstewardship', owned-in so faras thisconceptapplies-at severallevelsfromthehousehold up to thestate(Gregory1982: 44; cf.Goody I962: 297). The Greekevidenceis complex,and thisis ofcoursean over-simplification, landwas certainly but not
14).

Agriculture was explicitly linkedwithsacrifice, cooking,fertility, family the and culture a central as symbolofsocial reproduction-againfeatures notedby Gregoryfor the clan, gifteconomy (Detienne I963; Vernant I98I; VidalNaquet I98I; see Gregory1982: 40, 77-9). of This mixture features the clan and class economiesis paralleledin the of importanceof the giftin the eighthcentury. Sahlins documented,most As a own group communities practise formof commodity exchangeoutsidetheir
(1974: 185-314);

the of formsof inter-community exchangewere also through mechanism the of gift.It was socially acceptablefor an aristocrat this period to engage in overseasexchangeofbulkitems,buttheexchanges were,itseems,preceded by the establishment guest-friendship throughcommensality of ties and gift giving.A passage fromthe Odyssey perhapsillustrates this.Athenachooses to pose as a certain Mentes, chiefof a tribecalled theTaphians,on a missionto in exchangeiron forcopper. Arriving Ithaca,she is greetedby the cry 'Wel. come, sir,to our hospitality! . . You can tellus whathas brought you when you have had some food' (Odyssey 1.123-4). First,the personalrelationship; then,when thishas been established, exchangesthatare desiredcould take any of and thepersonification the of place withina framework mutualdependence transaction. of At thispointa shortaside on thenature theliterary evidenceis calledfor. from aristocratic an Our poems arealwayswritten vantagepoint,and theymay providea veryunbalancedview of exchange.It has even been suggestedthat both Homer and Hesiod were polemicising againstnon-aristocrats becoming involved in inter-community trade,and particularly againstthe rise of proof fessional and the 'commodification' exchange(Mele 1979). Thereis traders evidenceto supportMele's perhapsexaggerated littlein the primary reading of of (Cartledge1983; Millett1984: 88) butthegravity theproblems thesources remains.We are largelyin thedarkas to how farthearistocratic exchange gift was underpinned a stratumof commoditytrade,and the importance of by suchas thePhoenicians particularly to assess.Thereis is hard non-Greek traders a evidencethat thelatesixth trade was often conducted certainly little by century The volume of transactors. among Greeksas betweenmutually independent in tradeinvolvingGreeksincreaseddramatically the second halfof the sixth and was gaininggroundin this century, it is perhapslikelythatthecommodity period(FinleyI980: 87-8). Coined money probably appeared in Greece early in the sixth century (Robinson i95i; i956; Kraay 1976; Waggoner1976). There have been movethe ments towards recently raising dateto c. 700 B.C. (Kagan1982), butthese of have not been successful(Kroll & Waggoner 1984). The significance the appearance of coinage for the developmentof commoditytrade in Greece

in literaturethe of eighth seventh and the but the centuries, ideal

IAN MORRIS

Most of theearlyGreekcoins were should not, however,be over-estimated. to ofverylargedenominations, their and distribution on thewholelimited was bestto thecityoftheir origin(Will I955; Cook i958; Kraay i964). Itis probably of view earlyGreekcoinage as theincorporation a novel formof wealthinto pre-existing channelsof exchangeand as a symbolof politicalindependence, of ratherthan as an indicationof the appearanceof the pre-requisites wage described Gregory labour(Marx i964: 67).6 The situation by (ig80) in contemintothetraditional porary Papua New Guinea,wherecashhas beenassimilated of framework the agonisticdestruction wealth may have some points of of similarity. restricted theattitudes to of The value of our literary evidenceis necessarily audiences.For them,at theGreekpoets and their probablylargelyaristocratic on was least,commodity exchange,even when carried betweencommunities, not consideredan acceptablepracticefor a Greek. On the whole, it seems value system (Austin & unlikelythat therewas any rival, anti-aristocratic Vidal-Naquet 1977: i5-i6; Donlan ig80), althoughthe point should not be formulated democratic in pressedtoo hard.Therewas no clearly theory Athens B. neverthein thefifth fourth and centuries C. (Finley1983), butthedemocracy less existed. to Tradersstandingin no personalised relationship those with whom they in In were exchangingobjectsappear as peripheral theearlyGreekliterature. traderis a marginalfigure,while Hesiod seems to Homer, the professional as drivento theactivity necessity by regardthe small farmer a typicaltrader, (Worksand Days 691-4). There is from an economics point of view little of such as the Phoeniciansor traders difference betweenthe activities traders but withinthesystem two wereworlds the such as theGreekaristocrats, from was at apart.Odysseus, thearistocrat excellence, veryinsulted beinglikened par to 'some skipperof a merchant crew,who spendshis lifeon a hulkingtramp, or about his outwardfreight, keepingan eye on the cargo when he worrying he comes home with theprofits has snatched'(Odyssey 8.I59-64): and it was no In meantto offend. fact, one keptsuchan eagleeyeon hisgainsas Odysseus; not and butthesewerethegainsofthegift, ofcommodity trade, so boththepoet and thegoddessAthenaheartily approved(Odyssey 13.208-3 IO). has 'Littlebut an ideologicalhairline' This is not, as one historian written, feature thesocialstructure early in of (Humphreys 1978: I67), buta fundamental volume of commodity Greece. After B.C., in spiteof theincreasing trade 700 which was probably takingplace, the ideal still remainedpersonalisedgift of conductedmuch of exchange. The tyrants the seventhand sixthcenturies their diplomacy throughsuch channels,and around 6oo B.C. Solon the in Athenianwrote 'Happy is he . . . who has a (guest-)friend foreign parts' (frag.23).' Even in thefourth century, commodity exchangewas not wholly Politics 1256 b 26-1257 b 39), and Aristotle that 1. felt approvedof (Aristotle, and boththeindividual thestateshouldtakepartin suchexchanges onlyinso far as it was essentialforsurvival(Politics 1326 b 39-1327 a 40; cf. Plato, Laws 7. be 12.952d-953e).8 An area of the cityshould,he suggested, set aside forthe purpose of the commodityexchangeso thatit should not taintthe citizens (Politics 7.133I a 30-b 3); and Aristotle again tellsus thateven in the fourth

IAN MORRIS

The ArchaicGreekcase,then, suggests that a political in society exchange gift as can stillflourish a primary even within statesystem.As the a exchangeform of scale and complexity the stategrows, the relative positionsof the giftand commodityare likely to change, but personification transactors of and the transacted social relationships and the giftis not objects throughlong-term of purelya primaryfeature clan societies.The Greek type of economy was and ancientEurope; anothergood probably not uncommon in prehistoric in written A.D. 98. exampleis furnished Tacitus'saccountof theGermans, by Their politicisedsociety,definedby Runcimanas a 'proto-state'(1982), indebtbondage,sympotic cludedslavery, groups,a law code andincremental gift of of exchange(Tacitus, Germania 11-26): again we see a combination features the clan and class societiesin associationwith thegiftas the primary formof exchange. The received wisdom on the evolution of exchange formsseems to be Numerouscases can be citedfrom too laterhistory the of altogether simplistic. of within state evenimperial and In verygreat importance thegift systems. early Medieval Byzantium,giftexchangeco-existedwiththemarket, and has even as to beendescribed a stimulant production (Patlagean1977: 181-203). Georges Duby (1974) has argued thataristocratic exchangein the class systemof gift feudalwestern Europe in theMiddle Ages was only gradually replacedby the of as in commodity war and theeconomybecameseparate spheres activity the A.D. eleventh century shouldfeelconstrained the There seems to be no reasonwhy researchers by approaches of Mauss, Sahlins and Gregoryto exclude the possibilityof a classand evenearlystatesocieties.The role significant forgift exchangewithin case of Archaic Greece suggests that models based on both historicaland in data ethnographic mayproveto be moreuseful studiesofexchange.

see recently, Finley 1970; Meikle 1979).

in in feature thedefinition a of century generosity gift givingwas stilla central nobleman(Nicomachean Ethics 1123 a 4-5). Marx's and Polanyi'streatments of of attitudes the'economy'have made thisfeature Classical Greek to Aristotle's societyknown to a wide audience (Marx 1976: I5I-2; Polanyi 1957; more

correlates exchange Archaeological ofgift for The use of gift of exchangeas an explanation thecirculation material objects of in thecomplexprehistoric societies central northern and Europein theperiod withArchaicGreececannotbe ruledout. In thissection,I will contemporary considerthequestionof how farit is possibleto documentthepresence gift of in economic strategy the empiricalevidenceavailable exchangeas a primary societies. from prehistoric is The mainproblemforthearchaeologist ofcoursetheinvisibility mostof of the social contextsof giftexchange. Giftgivingat weddings,initiation cerof emonies of various kinds and the establishment ties of guest-friendship cannot be expectedto produce a recognisablematerialresidue.Hodder and of the Orton(I976: 146) discussed possibility recognising in reciprocal exchange

IAN MORRIS

of of but thepattern dispersal artefacts, coulddrawno very positiveconclusions. different Here I will suggesta rather approach. includethedeliberate Gift often destruction wealth.It is of exchangesystems these contextswhere materialobjects are deposited and so removed from circulation whichhave thegreatest for potential thearchaeological observation of oftheprinciples gift exchange.Gregory (I980; 1982: 60-i) has arguedthat the of destruction wealth is the simpleststrategy available to an individualwho in wishes to achieve pre-eminence a giftsociety,althoughthereare perhaps equallyvalid alternative explanations (e.g. FirthI965: 344-7; forgravegoods, et Rosenblatt al. 1976: 67-75). How is thearchaeologist identify to of patterns giftexchangefromthesedepositsof deliberate disposal?This is an important nebulousfieldof economic question,which has a greatbearingon the rather archaeology.I will suggestone approachwhichmightshed some lighton the it problem,and will illustrate withevidencefrom EarlyIronAge Greece. studiessince Mauss have produced a numberof widely Anthropologists' relevantcross-cultural about the workingsof gifteconomies. generalisations Two of thesecan be used in thiscontext.First,theobservation thatgift items have 'exchange-order' rather than'exchange-value' generally (Firth I965: 33644; I967: I8). Giftobjectsdivideup intowhatwe can call 'spheres exchange', of into a hierarchical with objects classified sequence of ranks,and valued not Such spheres exchangeareveryfrequently of but cardinally ordinally. foundin and primitive peasantsocieties(Firth I964: 25). In some cases,objectscan never be exchangedbetweenspheres(e.g. Firthi965: 340-4), whilein other casesitis but possibleto crosstheboundaries, onlyunderexceptional circumstances g. (e. Bohannan 1955: 65; BarthI967: I64-5). Such a system obviouslypre-supposes theabsenceofmoney,and indeedone ofthemostcelebrated casesofa primitive currency-theRossel Island 'shellmoney'-has been shown to be an example of withspheres exchange, ofa system wheretheshellsdo notreally function a as mediumof exchange,since shellsof highrankcannotbe exchangedagainsta numberof shellsof a lowerrank(Baric I964: 42). larger oftenincludethoseobjectsmostdifficult obtain(Gregory Top rankgifts to is theranking of courseculturally I980: 646), although and specific, sometimes of contrasts ranking the systems the Tiv of Nigeria,theMae-Enga of Papua New Guinea and theMelanesiansof Kiriwina.Whiletheactualobjects of and monopolydo have some validity used vary,the principles scarcity in rankorder,and a littleempirical determining supportcan be foundforLeviStrauss'sobservation (I969: 65) thatwomen are 'thesupreme gift among those thatcan onlybe obtainedby reciprocal gifts'. is The secondobservation thateach rankofgifts has normally an appropriate in social context whichit is used. These too will differ fromsocietyto society, but rites of passage and institutionalised competition normallyprovide the for acceptedsituations theexchangeof top rankedgifts (Gregory 1982: 50). On Rossel Island,forexample,it was notpossibleto conducta weddingceremony a without numbereighteen ndapshell(Baric I964: 44). Spheresof exchangecan act as a verypowerfulmeans of exercising social control.Wherestatusdependsupon beingable to give away top ranked a gifts,
49-50)

otherthanscarcity important are factors (Firth I965:

342).

Gregory (1982:

IAN MORRIS

a cannot be used to obtain those of a higherrank,if one group establishes it monopolyoverpossessionofthetop rankofgifts, canbe verydifficult indeed forthoseoutsidethisgroupto enter (MacCormack I98I; Gregory it 1982: 53). The Tiv provide a good example of this:men aim to gain prestige 'conby to verting'items of low rank for those of high rank. This is very difficult achieve,and anyonewho is guiltyof converting 'downwards'suffers disgrace (Bohannan1955: 64). In Homer, women, cattle,and finished objectsof metalformthetop rank group (e.g. Iliad 6.234-36; 23.257-886: see Finley 1978: 6i-8; 1981: 233-45).9 Hesiod's mythof the Ages of Man (Worksand Days 109-20I) has been interpreted a complexstructural as homologyassociating different groupsin the worlds of men, spirits and gods with gold, silver,bronze and iron in a rank sequence (Vernant1983: 3-72). Vernant'ssophisticated readingof Hesiod is not but doesprovidea certainly accepted all ancient by historians, Hesiod's story striking parallel for Firth'ssimile describingspheresof exchange in a gift economy:

rules(Service1971:

group withinsocietycan attempt perpetuate to itself limiting by access to the the vital items,eitherthroughcontrolling supplyor else through sumptuary
145-6).

Becauseitemsof one exchange ranknormally

in and copperwereused as It is as if,allowingfortheobvious differences, our society gold, silver but meansof rendering media of exchangein threeseriesof transactions therewas no accurate of themin terms each other.(FirthI965: 341)

From Homer, the primary contextsfor gift-giving seem to have been marriages, funeralgames and within guest-friendship arrangements, although of for The manyotheroccasionsalso providea pretext prestations. destruction is in wealthand competitive consumption less prominent theepics,but can be observedin burialand sacrificial practices (Morris1985). of the Deliberatedisposalofwealthcanactas an important method preserving of If exclusivity toprankgifts. objectsbecometoo common,they maylose their prestige value (Meillassoux I968; Bradley 1984: 46-57), and changesin what the of constitutes highestrank of giftmay alterthe membership the highest tend social statusgroup,and will therefore to be resisted theelitegroupas a by For of basic tacticof social reproduction. thisreasonthedestruction wealth,as well as being the only dimension of gift-related behaviour with a direct in manifestation the archaeologicalrecord, can be of great value for the of understanding an ancient society. The archaeological evidencefromIron Age Greececan now be considered. Finishedmetal objects are the only class of objectsin the top rankwhich are and on to have likely be directly observable, I willconcentrate these.Metalfinds on a verylimiteddistribution sitesof thisperiod.This was theEarlyIronAge, is to of but there nothing comparewithChilde's 'democratization iron' model whether gold, silver,bronzeor iron,are keimelion, treasure Gray1954: 2); (see and while metalobviouslyhad use value, to theHomericheroesthejoy of the possessionof metallay perhapsas muchin givingit away as in usingit (Finley

(Childe1942:

I4I;

seeSnodgrass 1971:

239;

inpress). Homer, In metal objects,

io

IAN MORRIS

in has clear manifestations the archaeologicalrecord. This giftmentality disposal Metal objects come almost exclusivelyfromcontextsof deliberate However, a problemhereis the -graves, and after 750 B.C., sanctuaries.10 sites,(see relatively small numberof well excavatedand publishedsettlement the is fig. i) but theevidencethatthere seemsto support idea of a verylimited 11 of of EarlyIron distribution themetalartefacts. Quite a number theexcavated and the were abandonedpeacefully, thistoo will have affected Age settlements of distribution metal. The largestexcavationhas been at Karphiin Crete,a hilltopsiteabandoned in aroundIOOOB.C. Here all housescontained stoneand bone tools,often large generally numbers, veryfewhad anymetal.Wherescrapswererecovered, but in fragments brokenornaments, of theytendedto be concentrated one room were withina house (e.g. rooms 12, 17, 26 and io6), whichwe mightsurmise thanactivity the quantity of storerooms rather rooms. Significantly, greatest rooms 12 and 17, bothwithin complexknownas the a metalscrapscame from as 'Great House', which the excavatorinterpreted the chief'sresidence(Penyearsat theeighth-century dlebury193 7/3 Large-scale 8). excavations recent in sites of Zagora on Andros and Koukounarieson Paros have producedlittle metal from the settlements but in both cases rathermore from associated

sixth centuries (Gallant 1982:

1978:

seem to surface thepoetryof theseventh in and 6i). The same attitudes

117-18).

Ithaca
d

Delphi
>

Lef andi
<tria )

3~~~~ Old

Smyrna

Asine

Afl~~~~Er;e gr rS ~~a

Sparta Nichoria

Koukounaries

Metos

100

200

KILOMETRES
K arh Vrokastro
FIGURE I.

in Sitesmentioned thetext.

IAN MORRIS

II

of templesto Athena;and in both cases large quantities stone and bone tools havebeenfound,and obsidianflakes, bladesand coresfrom nearby the islandof and Melos in sealedeighth seventh century deposits(CambitoglouI98I: 70-8I; fora summary workat Koukounaries, Schilardi of see I983). a The evidencefromdestroyed settlements, presumably representing more A groupoflateninth-century is roomsat direct testimony, evenmorevaluable. a Thorikosin Atticawere probablyabandonedafter landslide(Bingen I967a: One of theseroomshad beenused forthe 25-36; i967b: 3I-49; I984: I44-49). cupellationof silver,but neithersilvernor lead nor any othermetalswere in blades represented the floordeposits. A stone grinder(room X) and flint (room III) were,however,found. house destroyedby firehas been excavated at Part of an eighth-century A singleiron knifewas in Euboea (Popham et al. I979/80: II-25). Lefkandi late eighth-century with a largenumberof stonetools. Another found,along firewas excavatedat Asine in the Argolid.Along with a house destroyed by it large numberof closed vases, suggesting may have been a storeroom,it includeda flint scraperand a clay weight.An iron knifewas found,but was intrusive probably (Hagg I978: 93-I20). to centuries have been excavatedat Old Severalhouses of thetenth seventh on of Smyrna, apparently destroyed fire a number occasions.The published by account is not very thorough,but makes no mentionof any metal finds (AkurgalI983: 22-33). The onlysubstantial a was depositfrom settlement a smallcup containing I0 5 or grammesof gold buriedundera late eighth- seventh-century house floorat in Eretria Euboea (ThemelisI980; I983). Unfortunately, mostofthissmalloval in or apsidalhouse was destroyed thethird B.C. (ThemelisI98I), and century itsfunction unclear.The hoardconsists is of largely scrap,andis probably be to thanas a ritual rather seenas a response an emergency to depositlikethoseofthe CentralEuropeanBronzeAge (BradleyI982). We cannotestablish whether the but In elsewhere. gold belongedto a richman or a smith, itis quiteunparalleled horns(Odyssey Homer, Nestor providedthegold fora smithto gild a heifer's of from areaaround storeroom. Therewereno traces metalworking the activity thehouse. 12 is use The general pattern perhapsone oflittle ofmetalin everyday activity. metals wereonlyjustbeginning be Thereis some archaeological evidencethat to used in industrial with the pursuitsin the late eighthand seventhcenturies,
3.430-37),

and quitepossibly Eretria the a depositcame from richman's

within settlement wherequantities metalhavebeen sites The onlycontexts of found are very probably related to shrinesand deliberatedisposal. Both Nichoria Univ IV-i (MacDonald et al. I983: 32, 37, 39) and seventhcentury structure at Perachora(TomlinsonI969: I72-90) have beenso interpreted. B-II At Vrokastroin Crete,probablyabandonedin theeighth century, such metal in wereconcentrated rooms8, I I, 13 and in objectsas werefound thesettlement I7 (Hall I9I4: 99-I09; see Hayden I983: 370, 372). The excavatorsuggested room I7 was a shrine,and the objects were dispersedaround it by post-

of on appearance toolmarks stone (Adams I978; Brookes I98I).

disturbance I9I4: depositional (Hall

I09).

I2

IAN MORRIS

the The evidencefromthesettlements seemsto complement literary sources Eumaeus uses wooden mixingbowls forhis well: in Homer, the swineherd wine wheretheeliteuse metal(Odyssey I4.78; i6.52), and Hesiod's description of how to make a plough does not mentiona metal share (Works and Days 427-36). FromthisevidenceI would suggest thatmetalobjectswereused little beforetheend of theeighthcentury, when there in everyday life,particularly in seems to have been some increase suppliesof metal;and metalobjectswere in notevenstoredas potential gifts morethana veryfewhouses. As theliterary to sourcesindicate,metalmay have been seen above all as something be given foundin contexts deliberate of thanin away, and it is therefore disposalrather thedomesticsphere. and the narrow range of The identification the limited distribution of in itemsoccurmay,then, interpreted be as archaeological deposits whichcertain and evidenceforthe existenceof giftexchangeas an integrative competitive us even in earlystatesocieties.The Greekevidencealso offers a mechanism, second line of approachto thearchaeological studyof thegift.Changesin the of contextsof the deliberatedestruction wealth oftenoccur in prehistoric archaeology,and ArchaicGreece is no exception.In the late eighthcentury, sanctuaries began to receivemetal votives on a huge scale (Snodgrass I980: 54-5). Just thesame time,around700 B.C., gravegoods began to declinein at not manyareas(although all) wherethecitystatewas appearing. in This is a fineexampleof a changefromgifts-to-men gifts-to-gods the to of contextof the destruction wealth (see GregoryI980). Placing objects in sanctuariesin the eighth centuryvery obviously did have the functionof placating flattering gods (e.g. Odyssey or the 3.273-5; I2.335-7; i6. I84-5), but was also an unbrokencontinuation competition of throughincremental gift of exchange.A clueis providedbytheetymology thewordagalma (Gernet I: I98 i i 5). In the eighthcentury, agalmawas anything an preciouswhich could be but in used in gift exchange, above all peopleandhorses-items presumably the first rank.This noun comes from verbagallein, adorn'or 'to honour'.In the 'to and cameto meanonlyan offering the thefifth to century later,though, agalma In and above all a statueplaced in a sanctuary. modernGreek,toacgalma gods, meanssimply'statue'.Here thelinguistic evidence the veryclearly supports idea than a changein the of a changed contextfor the disposal of wealth rather withvaluableobjects.The inscriptions withdonors'names function parting of in further thatdisplay foundon some oftheofferings Greeksanctuaries suggest and conspicuous consumptionremainedan important element.Herodotus, in B. writing thefifth century C., tellsus how in themid-sixth century Croesus, the to kingofLydia,soughtto impress Greeksby sending gifts thesanctuary of Apollo at Delphi; and even that a particular Delphian, eager to please the inscribed 'Given by theLacedaimonians' a gold vesselin factsent on Spartans, by Croesus (HerodotusI .50-5 I). Some oftheobjectsfoundin thesanctuary of at Artemis Ephesus on theAegean coast of Turkeyhad partsof theinscription BasileusKroisos anetheken ('King Croesus dedicatedthis')preserved (Tod I933: as that #6;FornaraI979: #28). Herodotus(I.92) actually goes so far to mention thepillarsfrom whichtheseinscriptions camewereprovidedbyCroesus,along withoxen made of gold.

IAN MORRIS

I3

In Greece, the changeoverin the eighth centuryfrom gifts-to-men to the the gifts-to-gods (and particularly stateand inter-state gods) did not affect destruction wealthas a meansof ranking of householdsand use of competitive of and even states, just as changesin theoutwardforms theKwakiutlpotlatch on of Papuan gift givingfollowing thepenetration wage labourandcashdidnot altertheunderlying of principles theseinstitutions (GregoryI980: 648-9). as for Itis veryprobablethat changeto thesanctuary a context thedisposal the aristocratic as of wealthwas linkedto a need to represent competition havinga were wider communalvalue at a timeof greatsocial stress,when aristocrats inlegitimising seriousproblems their facing privileged positions(MorrisI985). As oftenhappens in such periods, the materialrecord undergoesa radical transformation Kristiansen (cf. I984: 96, n. i). In the case of ArchaicGreece, of wealthmayhave beenlinkedto changesin thecontext thedestruction gift of in society,and in particular 'bursting the structural profound changes open' of an unstable,competitive culturethroughthe appearanceof new wealth and in incorporation largereconomicsystems theeighth sixthcenturies into to (cf. Qviller I98I; Rowlands I980: 20). Summingup, I have arguedthattheliterary evidencefromArchaicGreece suggeststhatsome of theethnographically derivedmodelsof therelationships offorms subsistence socialorganisation exchange of and to needto be modified in thelight historical of data. Gift exchange couldbe very important evenwithin statesocieties.I have further suggestedthatwhile the archaeologist only can observegift exchangeindirectly, through contexts thedestruction wealth, of of itis nevertheless possibleto infer presence thegift restricted the of and spheres of exchangefromthe distribution artefacts, to attachvery considerable of and importance changesin thecontexts thedeliberate to of disposalof high-ranked gifts.
NOTES

This articleis based on a paper read at the Annual conference the Theoretical of Archaeology Group at Cambridge,on I4th December I984, in thesession'Fetishand phantasm: value,prestige and consumption'.I shouldlike to thankthesessionorganisers, Mike ParkerPearsonand Richard Bradley,fortheiradvice and encouragement; Paul Cartledge,Moses Finley,Anthony and Snodgrassand Robin Torrenceforreadingearlierdrafts. They are not, of course,responsible any for errors fact fancy of or whichappearin thetext. Translations all theancient of authors citedareeasilyavailablein thePenguinClassicsseries. 1 By 'primary mechanism' meantheexchangeform I whichis structurally dominant. Structural dominance notnecessarily matter theabsolutenumbers gift is a of of or exchanges eventherelative proportions giftand commodity of exchanges(whichin any case cannotbe recovered ancient for societies),but thefunction location the practice.If the actorsconsideredthe giftthe most and of important way to exchangepeople and things, thenwe can speakin emicterms a gift of economy. 2 Mauss's argument thatthegift was ultimately inalienable inseparable and from personofthe the donorseemsto restabove all on hisaccountofthehauofthegift amongtheMaori (I954: 8-iO). The view thatthe Maoris saw the exchangeof gifts the exchangeof personshas been successfully as challenged (SahlinsI974: I49-68), as has thevalidity thisargument a cross-cultural of as generallsation(FirthI967: 9-IO). In theArchaicGreekevidencediscussed to here,theobligation return gifts as is presented social,political, economicand moral,and thegift nottreated an extension the of is as person. 3 The idea of a continuum also to be found thewritings RaymondFirth is in of (e.g. I 967: 6). 4 In Athens, membership the citizenestateseems to have been determined descentin the of by

I4

IAN MORRIS

of of B.C., and seventh century, havebeenchangedto a criterion wealthin Solon's reforms 594/3 to of in reforms 5o8/6 B.C. (see Davies I977/8). thenback to birth Cleisthenes's evidence in this period is the poetry of Homer. Many 5 The richestand earliestliterary thattheseorallycomposedpoems its has methodological problemssurround use. Finley suggested B.C. (I978: 48), while of represent memoryof the institutions the tenthand ninthcenturies a traditions thethirteenth of drawnfrom melangeofelements Snodgrasshas arguedforan ahistorical to eighthcenturies(I974). Both these views seem to me to be mistakenin theirassumptions (see to in of concerning relationship oralheroicpoetry thesociety whichitis performed Redfield the of for a source of social history any period,being rather complex transformation the poet's and mustbe in century (Morrisin press).The Iliad and Odyssey audience'slived experiences theeighth one worldview,butnevertheless a ideologically slanted represent particular handledwithcare;they whenused in lighton theperiod(cf.Rowlands I980: 2I-8), especially whichthrowsconsiderable withotherearlyGreekliterature. conjunction 6 Although,as Marx noted in a letterto Engels, Greek coined money did provide for the in the (Ste. Croix I98I: of largegroupof wage labourers history, mercenaries emergence thefirst
24-5).

I975;

as cannot treated a direct be I982). Thepoems I977; Ong I982; Henige Finnegan I977; Goody

7 Solon also wroteof 'one man,who ranges thefishy homegain,tossedby deepin a shipto bring to grievous winds, puttingno value on his life' (frag. I3, lines 44-46), which may well refer the however,to note thatSolon wrote thispoem to criticise commoditytrade. It is important, in exchangeand reciprocity of unrighteous pursuit wealth(lines7-32). On thepossibleroleof gift see Solon's career, Gallant(I982: I I2). to and Aristotle's views mayhave beenveryextreme, their relationship 8 It shouldbe notedthat to in is century likely be complexand subtle. behaviourand attitudes thefourth customary 9 The contextsforgivingeach typeof gift varied:cattleseem to have been largelyconfined to fr. i8.593; Hesiod, Catalogueof Women 7, line 9) and (Iliad II.242-43; bridewealth prestations consumption (Iliad23. I66). funerary 10 Whileawareness theunevendistribution metalfinds on theincrease in of is of (e.g. Snodgrass A sites some Classicalarchaeologists. fewsettlement areexamined press)thisclaimwillstillsurprise of of at length below, and I hope to pursuethequestion thesocialorganisation metalworking greater elsewhere. is there a strong the excavationssupports thisargument: 1 In particular, evidencefromrecent in thatbadly corrodediron findsmay have been ignoredin earlyexcavations Greece possibility (SnodgrassI97I: 2I6). 12 References Homer are relatively is in few(see GrayI954: 5), and their significance notalways to contexts, nineof and clear.Nine oftheeighteen references bronzetoolsarein divineor sacrificial references irontools are in factto thesingleepisodeof theironaxes used in the to Gray'sthirteen shouldnotbe exaggerated, and for competition Penelope'shandin Odysseus'spalace. The situation use. In one passage (Odyssey I4.4I8) thereferences metaltools in similessuggestat leastlimited to on handitshouldbe noted chopswood witha bronzeaxe; although theother Odysseus'sswineherd as to thatthe one verseofteninterpreted a reference iron farmtools (Iliad 23.834) in factmerely or iron,not of speaksof a noblemansendinghis shepherd ploughmanintotown in orderto fetch irontools as such.

REFERENCES

Greece. Oxford:British Crete sculpturesoft in limestonefrom andmainland Adams,L. I978. Orientalizing Reports. Archaeological I: und Ankara:Turk Tarih Kurumu Akurgal,E. I983. Alt-Smyrna Wohnschichten Athenatempel. Basimevi. Greece:an introduction. of and Austin,M. & P. Vidal-Naquet I977. Economic socialhistory ancient London: Batsford. economy(Rossel savingand investment a 'non-monetary' in Bari6,L. I964. Some aspectsofcredit, & in societies (eds) R. Firth B. S. Yamey. London: Island),in Capital,Savingandcredit peasant Allen& Unwin. anthropology R. Firth. (ed.) in Barth, F. I967. Economic spheresin Darfur. In Themes economic London: Tavistock.

IAN MORRIS

I5

Bingen,J. I967a. L'establissement IXe siecleet les necropolesdu secteurouest 4, Thorikos du II, 1964. Brussels:Comite des FouillesBelges en Grece. geometriqueet la necropoleouest, Thorikos 1965.Brussels: III, I967b. L'establissement Comite des FouillesBelges en Grece. i984. La necropolegeometrique ouest 4, Thorikos VIII, 1972/1976. Brussels:Comite des FouillesBelges en Grece. and Bloch, M. i983. Marxism anthropology. Oxford:Univ. Press. of Bohannan,P. i955. Some principles exchangeand investment amongtheTiv, Am. Anthrop. 57, 60-70. of Man (N.S.) 17, I08-22. Bradley,R. i982. The destruction wealthin laterprehistory, i984. Thesocialfoundations ofprehistoric Britain: themes variations the and in archaeology ofpower. Harlow: Longman. in Brookes,A. C. i98i. Stoneworking theGeometric periodat Corinth.Hesperia 285-go. 50, Museum Andros. Athens: Cambitoglou,A. i981 . Archaeological of ArchaicGreece.In Trade the Cartledge,P. A. i983. 'Trade and Politics'revisited: in ancient economy K. (eds) P. Garnsey, Hopkins& C. R. Whittaker. Cambridge:Univ. Press. Champion, T., C. Gamble, S. Shennan& A. Whittle i984. Prehistoric Europe.London: Academic Press. in Harmondsworth: Childe, V. G. I942. What happened history. Peregrine. on Cook, R. M. i958. Speculations theoriginofcoinage.Historia 257-62. 7, Copans, J. & D. Seddon I978. Marxism and anthropology: preliminary a survey.In Relations of production D. Seddon. London: Cass. (ed.) the Davies, J. K. I977/78. Atheniancitizenship: descentgroup and its alternatives, Class.J. 73:2, et chez Detienne,M. i963. Criseagraire attitudes religieuses Hesiode. Brussels:Latomus. ideal Greece. Lawrence:Kansas Univ. Press. Donlan, W. ig80. Thearistocratic inancient warriors peasantsfrom seventh the and the Duby, G. I974. The early growth theEuropean of economy: to Ithaca:CornellUniv. Press. twelfth century. Finley,M. I. i965. Classical Greece. In Second International Conference Economic of History, Vol. I. (ed.) M. I. Finley.Paris:Mouton. (Reprint I979), New York: ArnoPress. of Greece:a pointofview. Eirene 25-32. i968. The alienability land in ancient 7, and economicanalysis, PastandPresent 3-25. 47, 1970. Aristotle I973. Theancient London: Chatto& Windus. economy. I978. The worldof Odysseus(3rd edn). London: Chatto & Windus. (Reprint I979), Harmondsworth: Penguin. slavery and modern ideology. London: Chatto & Windus. (Reprinti983), ig80. Ancient Harmondsworth: PelicanBooks. and society ancient in Greece.London: Chatto & Windus. (Reprinti983), i98i. Economy Harmondsworth: PelicanBooks. in ancient world. i983. Politics the Cambridge:Univ. Press. R. Finnegan, I977. Oralpoetry. Cambridge:Univ. Press. Firth, R. i964. Capital, saving and credit in peasant societies: a viewpoint from economic in in societies anthropology, Capital,savingand credit peasant (eds) R. Firth& B. S. Yamey. London: Allen& Unwin. i965. Primitive Polynesian economy edn). London: Routledge& Kegan Paul. (2nd i967. Themes in economic anthropology:a generalcomment. In Themesin economic London: Tavistock. anthropology R. Firth. (ed.) Social anthropology Marxistviews on society.In and I975. The scepticalanthropologist? and Marxist analyses social anthropology M. Bloch. London: Tavistock. (ed.) to end times the ofthe war. Fornara,C. W. I979. Archaic Peloponnesian London:Johns HopkinsUniv. Press. land tenure and thereforms Solon. Ann. Brit.Sch. of Gallant,T. W. i982. Agricultural systems, Archaeol. Athens I I I-24. 77, and L. Gernet, i98i. 'Value' in Greekmyth.In Myth, religion society (ed.) R. Gordon. Cambridge: Univ. Press. in Godelier,M. I 977a. PerspectivesMarxist anthropology. Cambridge:Univ. Press.
I05-2I.

i6

IAN MORRIS

on thoughts theexampleof classical an I977b. Politicsas 'infrastructure': anthropologist's in of and Greeceand thenotionsofrelations production economicdetermination, Theevolution & social systems J. Friedman M. Rowlands. London: Duckworth. (eds) of and Oxford:Univ. Press. history literature. Gomme, A. W. I937. EssaysinGreek and ancestors. London: Tavistock. Goody,J. R. I962. Death,property the Cambridge:Univ. Press. and I976. Production reproduction. du la dans les societesavec et sans ecriture: transmission I977. Memoire et apprentissage 17, Bagre. Homme 29-52. in Gray,D. H. F. I954. Metalworking Homer,J.Hellen.Stud.74, I-I5. in Gregory,C. A. I980. Giftsto men and giftsto god: giftexchangeand capitalaccumulation contemporary Papua. Man (N. S.) i5, 626-52. Cambridge:Univ. Press. andcommodities. I982. Gifts of examination the ideas of Marx and LeviI984. The economy and kinship:a critical in in (ed.) perspectivesarchaeology M. Spriggs.Cambridge:Univ. Press. Strauss, Marxist in Barbouna and periods.In Excavations the Hagg, R. I978. Findsof theProtogeometric Geometric areaatAsineII (eds) I. Hagg & R. Hagg. Uppsala: Boreas. Publ.3:3, 79-I85. Crete,Vrokastro.Univ.Penn.Mus. anthrop. Hall, E. I914. ExcavationsinEastern Greece. London: Bell. and in Hasebroek, I933. Trade politics ancient J. Hesperia 367-87. 52, at Hayden,B. J. I983. New plansoftheEarlyIronAge settlement Vrokastro. Harlow: Longman. Henige, D. I982. Oral historiography. in Cambridge:Univ. Press. Hodder, I. & C. Orton I976. Spatialanalysis archaeology. and London: Routledge& Kegan Paul. S. Humphreys, C. I978. Anthropology theGreeks. 86, coins,Am.J.Archaeol. 52-73. Kagan, D. I982. The datesof theearliest of Kraay,C. M. I964. Hoards, smallchangeand theorigins coinage,J.Hellen.Stud.84, 76-9I. London: coins. andClassicalGreek I976. Archaic K. Kristiansen, I984. Ideology and materialculture:an archaeologicalperspective.In Marxist in (ed.) perspectivesarchaeology M. Spriggs.Cambridge:Univ. Press. coinsofAthens, Corinth Aegina.Am. and Kroll,J. H. & N. M. WaggonerI984. Dating theearliest 88, J.Archaeol. 325-40. courts.Inst.Archaeol. Bull. 19, 2I-30. Kromer,K. I982. Giftexchangeand theHallstatt Burma. London: Bell. systems highland of Leach, E. I954. Political Boston:Beacon Press. structures ofkinship. Levi-Strauss, C. I969. The elementary In and (ed.) Lewis, I. M. I968. Introduction. History socialanthropology I. M. Lewis. London: Tavistock. In archaeology A. Sheridan& G. (eds) MacCormack, C. I98I. Exchange and hierarchy. Economic Archaeological Reports. Bailey. Oxford:British at west Greece in MacDonald, W. A., W. D. E. Coulson &J. Rosser I983. Excavations Nichoria south III. Minneapolis:Univ. ofMinnesotaPress. London: Lawrence& Wishart. economicformations. Marx, K. I964. Pre-capitalist Penguin. I976. CapitalVol. i. Harmondsworth: London: Routledge& Kegan Paul. Mauss, M. I954. Thegift. and economyofthepolis.J.Hellen.Stud.99, 57-73. Meikle, S. I979. Aristotle thepolitical Soc. reproduction. E~con. 2, 760-72. destruction, Meillassoux,C. I968. Ostentation, ed Berard. Naples: Cahiersdu CentreJean arcaico:prexis emporie. Mele, A. I979. Il commerciogreco philol.Soc. 2I0, 84-II5. Millett,P. I984. Hesiod and his world. Proc.Cambr. c. Cambridge Morris,I. M. I985. Burialand SocietyatAthens, II00-500 B.C. Thesis(inprogress), University. in press.The use and abuse ofHomer. Class. Antiq. -~ and London: Methuen. Ong, W. J. I982. Orality literacy. d etpauvrete sociale Byzance, Paris:Mouton. 4e-7esiecles. e'conomique Patlagean,E. I977. Pauvrete in III: Ann.Brit. Sch.Archaeol. J. Pendlebury, D. S. I937/3 8. Excavations theplainofLasithi Karphi, Athens 57-I45. 38, the and in ancient discovers economy,in Trade markets the Empires (eds) K. Polanyi,K. I957. Aristotle & Polanyi,C. Arensberg H. W. Pearson.Chicago: Aldine. I: and Popham, M. R., L. H. Sackett& P. G. Themelis I979/80. Lefkandi theIronAge settlement London: Thames & Hudson. cemeteries.

IAN MORRIS

I7

of Qviller,B. I98I. The dynamics theHomericsociety.Symbolae Osloenses I09-55. 56, and in Iliad: the Redfield, M. I975. Nature culture the J. tragedy Hector. of Chicago: Univ. Press. the Hellen.Stud.71, Robinson,E. S. G. I95I. The coinsfrom EphesianArtemision reconsidered,J. 156-67. I956. The dateof theearliest coins.Numis.Chron.i-8. P. and Rosenblatt, C., R. P. Walsh& A. J.JacksonI976. Grief mourning cross-cultural in perspective. New York: HRAF Press. Rowlands, M. J. I980. Kinship,allianceand exchangein theEuropeanBronzeAge. In TheBritish Later Bronze Age (eds)J. Barrett R. Bradley.Oxford:British & Archaeological Reports. Runciman,W. G. I982. Originsof states:thecase of ArchaicGreece. Comp.Stud.Soc. Hist.24:3, London: Tavistock. Sahlins,M. D. I974. Stone Ageeconomics. D. settlement Koukounariesat Paros. In The of Schilardi, U. I983. The declineof theGeometric GreekRenaissance theeighth B.C. (ed.) R. Hagg. Stockholm:Skrifter of century Utgvina i 1 SvenskaInstitut Athen. socialorganization: evolutionary an New York: Random Service,E. R. I97I. Primitive perspective. House. A. Univ. Press. Snodgrass, M. I97I. TheDarkAgeofGreece. Edinburgh: I974. An historical Homericsociety?J. Hellen.Stud.94, II4-25. I980. Archaic Greece: ageofexperiment. the London: Dent. in press.The bronze/iron in transition Greece.In Thebronze/iron transitionEurope in (eds) R. Thomas & M-L. Stig-S0rensen. Oxford:British Archaeological Reports. in ancient Greek world. London: Duckworth. Ste. Croix, G. E. M. I98I. Theclass struggle the
35I-77.

I983. An eighthcentury goldsmith's workshopat Eretria.In The Greek Renaissance the of i eighth century C. (ed.) R. Hagg. Stockholm: B. Skrifter Utgvinai SvenskaInstitutAthen. Tod, M. N. 1933. Greek historical inscriptions. Oxford:ClarendonPress. Tomlinson,R. A. I969. Perachora: remains the outsidethetwo sanctuaries. Ann.Brit.Sch.Archaeol.

Themelis, G. I980. Anaskaphi P. Eretrias. Praktika 78-I02. I98I. Anaskaphi Eretrias. Praktika I4I-53.

and in Greece. Harvester Press. Vernant, J-P. I980. Myth society ancient Brighton: I98I. Sacrifice and alimentary codes in Hesiod's myth Prometheus. Myth, of In religion and society (ed.) R. Gordon. Cambridge:Univ. Press. andthought the I983. Myth among Greeks. in Vidal-Naquet, P. I98I. Land and sacrifice the Odyssey: a studyof religiousand mythical in and meanings, Myth, religion society (ed.) R. Gordon. Cambridge:Univ. Press. London: Greek Waggoner,N. I976. Archaic coinage. ancient modern. and Manchester: Univ. Press. Walcot,P. I970. Greek peasants, civilizations. London: New LeftBooks. Weber,M. I976. Theagrarian sociology ancient of sur Econ. Will, E. I954. Trois quartsde si&clede recherches l'economiegrecqueantique,Annales, Soc. Civilis.9, 7-22. et surles origines la monnaie.Rev. Numism. 5-23. de I955. Reflexions hypotheses 17,

atAthens I55-259. 64,