Hostname: page-component-84b7d79bbc-dwq4g Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-27T18:39:27.704Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Honk If You Know Darwin: Brief Reply to Dunnell and Wenke

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

Norman Yoffee
Norman Yoffee*
Affiliation:
Department of Anthropology, University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ 85721
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Having previously responded to one anguished claim that societal evolutionism is so a subset of biological evolution, it is interesting now to consider the position that societal evolutionism owes nothing to the natural sciences. Dunnell and Wenke's schoolmasterly comment, while properly underscoring the independent idea of evolution as part of social philosophy, curiously adumbrates a number of biological issues that by their own standards are not wholly relevant to the matter at hand. Their slight understanding of the content of ancient documents—the nature of these documents as archaeological artifacts and their value in explaining the past-betrays an unfortunate tendency toward archaeological solipsism.

Type
Comments
Information
American Antiquity , Volume 45 , Issue 3 , July 1980 , pp. 610 - 612
Copyright
Copyright © Society for American Archaeology 1980 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

References Cited

Bock, K. 1978 Theories of progress, development, evolution. In A history of sociological analysis, edited by Bottomoreand, T. Nisbet, R., pp. 39-79. Basic Books, New York.Google Scholar
Gibson, M. 1972 The archaeological uses of cuneiform documents: patterns of occupation at the city of Kish. Iraq 34:113-123.Google Scholar
Kamp, K., and Yoffee, N. 1980 Ethnicity in ancient western Asia during the early second millennium B. C. : archaeologicalassessments and ethnoarchaeological prospectives. To appear in Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research.Google Scholar
Kohl, P. 1978 The balance of trade in Southwestern Asia in the mid-third millennium B. C. Current Anthropology 19:463-492.Google Scholar
Nisbet, R. 1970 Developmentalism: a critical analysis. In Theoretical sociology: perspectives and development, edited by McKinney, J. C. and Tiryakian, E. A., pp. 167-204. Appleton-Century-Crofts, New York.Google Scholar
Schiffer, M. 1978 Methodological issues in ethnoarchaeology. In Explorations in ethnoarchaeology, edited by Gould, R. A., pp. 229-247. University of New Mexico Press, Albuquerque.Google Scholar
Stone, E. 1977 Economic crisis and social upheaval in Old Babylonian Nippur. In Mountains and lowlands: essaysin the archaeology of Greater Mesopotamia, edited by Levine, L. D. and Young, T. C. Jr. , pp. 267-289. Bibliotheca Mesopotamia, vol. 7, Undena Publications, Malibu, California.Google Scholar
Stone, E. 1979 Texts and archaeology: the ownership history of the Old Babylonian House I from the TA area of Nipper. Paper delivered at the annual meeting of the American Oriental Society, St. Louis, Missouri.Google Scholar
White, L. 1947 Evolutionary stages, progress, and the evaluation of cultures. Southwestern Journal of Anthropology 3:165-192.Google Scholar
Yoffee, N. 1975 Weltschmerz meets the werewolf: social history and historical method in the Oid Babylonian period. Paper delivered at the annual meeting of the American Oriental Society, Columbus, Ohio.Google Scholar
Yoffee, N. 1977 The economic role of the crown in the Old Babylonian period. Bibiiotheca Mesopotamica, vol. 5. Undena Publications, Malibu, California.Google Scholar
Yoffee, N. 1979 The decline and rise of Mesopotamian civilization: an ethnoarchaeological perspective on the evolutionof social complexity. American Antiquity 44:5-35.Google Scholar