Advertisement

The Political Agency of Royal Women: A Comparative Analysis of Eight Premodern States According to Societal Rules and Roles

  • Paula L. W. SabloffEmail author
Article

Abstract

Comparative analysis of women rulers and main wives of kings in eight premodern states around the globe reveals similar patterns of political agency, or the opportunity and ability to take political action. Queen rulers, regents, and main wives substituting for their husbands in their absence made policy, but they had somewhat less political agency than male rulers. Main wives’ political agency took the forms of influencing policy and people’s behavior (sometimes through their role as patron to others), interceding between their kin and their husbands, advocating for one party or the other, spying, and conspiring. Therefore, women’s political agency ought to be part of any political study. This study builds on the anthropological/archaeological study of agency by drawing attention to royal women’s political agency and showing how the analysis of structural rules and the roles of kings, queen rulers, and main wives illuminates the societal structure in which agency is embedded. By analyzing premodern societies this way, we learn that there is remarkable similarity of agency behaviors among royal women in the eight sample societies, even though the societies emerged independently of one another.

Keywords

Agency Political agency Premodern state Royal women Women’s agency Patron–client relations 

Notes

Acknowledgments

This project was initiated under the John Templeton Foundation grant to the Santa Fe Institute (“The Principles of Complexity: Revealing the Hidden Sources of Order among the Prodigies of Nature and Culture,” Grant No. 15705). With this support, a new database on eight premodern states was developed under the guidance of leading archaeologists Jeremy Sabloff, Henry Wright, Timothy Kohler, and Charles Stanish. Researchers Robert Weiner, Kong Fai Cheong, and Jonah Nonomaque, as well as citizen scientists Jeffrey Cohen, George J. Haddad, Jack M. Jackson, and Shelley Waxman helped develop the original database. This database was then checked by Laurel Bestock, Gary Feinman, Michael Galaty, Abigail Holeman, Peter Peregrine, Patrick Kirch, Gideon Shelach-Lavi, Adam D. Smith, Michael E. Smith, Charles Stanish, Stephen Tinney, and John Ware. Following this process, I tripled literature search to find answers to questions about royal women’s roles and behaviors in their societies. Therefore, the errors are my own. When constructing the tables and attempting to place the data in statistical format, I consulted several colleagues at the Santa Fe Institute: Aaron Clauset, Mimi Kohl, Cris Moore, and Van Savage. It was Michael Lachmann who finally convinced me that statistical analysis of this particular database was fruitless and Laura Fortunato who recommended the format used in the tables presented here. My special thanks go to Jeremy Sabloff. I could not have written this without his support, his love, and his library.

References Cited

  1. Ahearn, L. (2001). Language and agency. Annual Review of Anthropology 30: 109–137.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Ardren, T. (2002). Women and gender in the ancient Maya world. In Ardren, T. (ed.), Ancient Maya Women, Altamira, Walnut Creek, CA, pp. 1–11.Google Scholar
  3. Ardren, T. (2008). Studies of gender in the Prehispanic Americas. Journal of Archaeological Research 16: 1–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Baines, J., and Yoffee, N. (1998). Order, legitimacy, and wealth in ancient Egypt and Mesopotamia. In Feinman, G., and Marcus, J. (eds.), Archaic States, School of American Research Press, Santa Fe, NM, pp. 199–260.Google Scholar
  5. Banning, E. (2010). Houses, households, and changing society in the Late Neolithic and Chalcolithic of the Southern Levant. Paléorient 36: 49–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Barnes, G. (1999). The Rise of Civilization in East Asia: The Archaeology of China, Korea and Japan, Thames and Hudson, London.Google Scholar
  7. Barrett, J. (2000). A thesis on agency. In Dobres, M., and Robb, J. (eds.), Agency in Archaeology, Routledge, London, pp. 61–68.Google Scholar
  8. Bauer, B. S. (1998). The Sacred Landscape of the Inca, University of Texas Press, Austin.Google Scholar
  9. Bell, E. (2002). Engendering a dynasty: A royal woman in the Margarita Tomb. In Ardren, T. (ed.), Ancient Maya Women, Altamira, Walnut Creek, CA, pp. 89–104.Google Scholar
  10. Bell, J. (1992). On capturing agency in theories about prehistory. In Gardin, J., and Peebles, C. (eds.), Representations in Archaeology, Indiana University Press, Bloomington, pp. 30–55.Google Scholar
  11. Berdan, F. (1982). The Aztecs of Central Mexico: An Imperial Society, Holt, Rinehart and Winston, New York.Google Scholar
  12. Berdan, F. (2014). Aztec Archaeology and Ethnohistory, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Blanton, R., Feinman, G., Kowalewski, S., and Peregrine, P. (1996). A dual–processual theory for the evolution of Mesoamerican civilization. Current Anthropology 37: 1–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Blanton, R., Kowalewski, S., Feinman, G., and Finsten, L. (1993). Ancient Mesoamerica: A Comparison of Change in Three Regions, revised edition, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
  15. Blomster, J. (2008). Changing cloud formations: The sociopolitics of Oaxaca in Late Classic/Postclassic Mesoamerica. In Blomster, J. (ed.), After Monte Alban: Transformation and Negotiation in Oaxaca, Mexico, University Press of Colorado, Boulder, pp. 3–46.Google Scholar
  16. Boone, E. (1996). Manuscript painting in service of imperial ideology. In Berdan, F., and Smith, M. (eds.), Aztec Imperial Strategies, Dumbarton Oaks, Washington, DC, pp. 181–206.Google Scholar
  17. Borgatti, S., Everett, M., and Freeman, L. (2002). Ucinet 6 for Windows: Software for Social Network Analysis, Analytic Technologies, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
  18. Bourdieu, P. (1977). Outline of a Theory of Practice, Nice, R. (tr.), Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
  19. Bourdieu, P. (1985). The social space and genesis of groups. Theory and Society 14: 723–744.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Bourdieu, P. (1990). The Logic of Practice, Stanford University Press, Stanford.Google Scholar
  21. Bowles, S., and Gintis, H. (2011). A Cooperative Species: Human Reciprocity and Its Evolution, Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Bowser, B., and Patton, J. (2010). Women’s leadership: Political alliance, economic resources, and reproductive success in the Ecuadorian Amazon. In Vaughn, K., Eerkens, J., and Kantner, J. (eds.), The Evolution of Leadership: Transition in Decision Making from Small-scale to Middle-range Societies, School for Advanced Research Press, Santa Fe, NM, pp. 51–71.Google Scholar
  23. Brumfiel, E. (1991). Weaving and cooking: Women’s production in Aztec Mexico. In Gero, J., and Conkey, M. (eds.), Engendering Archaeology: Women and Prehistory, Blackwell, Oxford, pp. 224–251.Google Scholar
  24. Brumfiel, E. (1992). Distinguished lecture in archaeology: Breaking and entering the ecosystem—gender, class, and faction steal the show. American Anthropologist 94: 551–567.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Brumfiel, E. (2000). On the archaeology of choice. In Dobres, M., and Robb, J. (eds.), Agency in Archaeology, Routledge, London, pp. 249–255.Google Scholar
  26. Campbell, R., Li, Z., He, Y., and Jing, Y. (2011). Consumption, exchange and production at the great settlement Shang: Bone-working at Tiesanlu, Anyang. Antiquity 85: 1279–1297.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Chase, A., Chase, D., and Haviland, D. (2002). Maya social organization from a “big site” perspective: Classic period Caracol, Belize and Tikal, Guatemala. In Blos, V., Cobos, R., and Robertson, M. (eds.), La organización social entre los mayas prehispánicos, coloniales y modernos, Instituto Nacional de Antropología e Historia, Mexico, pp. 253–276.Google Scholar
  28. Chase, A., Chase, D., Zorn, E., and Teeter, W. (2008). Textiles and the Maya archaeological record. Ancient Mesoamerica 19: 127–142.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Chase, D., and A. Chase (2017). Caracol, Belize, and changing perceptions of ancient Maya Society. Journal of Archaeological Research 25: 185–249.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Childs-Johnson, E. (2007). Fu Zi, the Shang woman warrior. In Hong, L., and Stefanowska, A. (eds.), Biographical Dictionary of Chinese Women: Antiquity through Sui 1600 BCE618 CE, M. E. Sharpe, Armonk, pp. 19–25.Google Scholar
  31. Cieza de Leon, P. (1883). The Second Part of the Chronicles of Peru, 1653, Markham, C. B. (tr.), Hakluyt Society, London.Google Scholar
  32. Claassen, C. (1997). Changing venue: Women’s lives in prehistoric North America. In Claassen, C., and Joyce, R. (eds.), Women in Prehistory: North America and Mesoamerica, University of Pennsylvania Press, Philadelphia, pp. 65–87.Google Scholar
  33. Clendinnen, I. (1991). Aztecs, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
  34. Cobo, B. (1893). History of the New World, Imp de Rasco, Sevilla.Google Scholar
  35. Cobo, B. (1990). Inca Religion and Customs, Hamilton, R. (tr.), University of Texas Press, Austin.Google Scholar
  36. Collier, J. (1974). Women in politics. In Rosaldo, M., and Lamphere, L. (eds.), Woman, Culture, and Society, Stanford University Press, Stanford, CA, pp. 89–96.Google Scholar
  37. Conkey, M., and Gero, J. (1997). Programme to practice: Gender and feminism in archaeology. Annual Review of Anthropology 26: 411–437.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. D’Altroy, T. (2002). The Incas, Blackwell, Oxford.Google Scholar
  39. David, R. (1998). The Ancient Egyptians: Beliefs and Practices, Sussex Academic Press, Brighton.Google Scholar
  40. Diel, L. (2005). Women and political power: The inclusion and exclusion of noblewomen in Aztec pictorial histories. Res: Anthropology and Aesthetics 47: 82–106.Google Scholar
  41. Diel, L. (2007). Till death do us part: Unconventional marriages as Aztec political strategy. Ancient Mesoamerica 18: 259–272.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Dobres, M., and Robb, J. (2000). Agency in archaeology: Paradigm or platitude? In Dobres, M., and Robb, J. (eds.), Agency in Archaeology, Routledge, London, pp. 3–17.Google Scholar
  43. Dodson, A., and Hilton, D. (2004). The Complete Royal Families of Ancient Egypt, Thames and Hudson, London.Google Scholar
  44. Dornan, J. (2002). Agency and archaeology: Past, present, and future directions. Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory 9: 303–329.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Estrada-Belli, F., and Tokovinine, A. (2016). A king’s apotheosis: Iconography, text, and politics from a Classic Maya temple at Holmul. Latin American Antiquity 27: 149–168.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Feinman, G., and Nicholas, L. (2016). After Monte Albán in the Central Valleys of Oaxaca: A reassessment. In Faulseit, R. (ed.), Archaeological Perspectives on Resilience, Revitalization, and Transformation in Complex Societies, Occasional Paper No. 42, Center for Archaeological Investigations, Southern Illinois University, Carbondale, pp. 43–69.Google Scholar
  47. Feng, L. (2013). Early China: A Social and Cultural History, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Fiskesjö, M. (2001). Rising from blood-stained fields: Royal hunting and state formation in Shang China. Bulletin of the Museum of Far Eastern Antiquities 73: 48–191.Google Scholar
  49. Flannery, K. V. (1999). Process and agency in early state formation. Cambridge Archaeological Journal 9: 3–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Fowler, C. (2004). The Archaeology of Personhood. Routledge, London.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Fowler, W. (2006). Cacao production, tribute, and wealth in sixteenth-century Izalcos, El Salvador. In McNeil, C. (ed.), Chocolate in Mesoamerica: A Cultural History of Cacao, University Press of Florida, Gainesville, pp. 307–321.Google Scholar
  52. Fox, J., and Justeson, J. (1986). Classic Maya dynastic alliance and succession. In Spores, R. (ed.), Handbook of Middle American Indians: Ethnohistory, Supplement to Vol. 4, University of Texas Press, Austin, pp. 7–33.Google Scholar
  53. Frankfort, H. (1978). Kingship and the Gods: A Study of Ancient Near Eastern Religion as the Integration of Society and Nature, Oriental Institute, Chicago.Google Scholar
  54. Freidel, D., and Schele, L. (1997). Maya royal women: A lesson in Precolumbian history. In Brettell, C., and Sargent, C. (eds.), Gender in Cross-Cultural Perspective, Pearson/Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ, pp. 74–78.Google Scholar
  55. Gardner, A. (2007). Introduction: Social agency, power, and being human. In Gardner, A. (ed.), Agency Uncovered: Archaeological Perspectives on Social Agency, Power, and Being Human, Left Coast Press, Walnut Creek, CA, pp. 1–15.Google Scholar
  56. Gero, J. (1990). Archeology: Women in prehistory. American Anthropologist 94: 1033.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Gero, J. (2000). Troubled travels in agency and feminism. In Dobres, M., and Robb, J. (eds.), Agency in Archaeology, Routledge, London, pp. 34–39.Google Scholar
  58. Giddens, A. (1979). Central Problems in Social Theory, University of California Press, Berkeley.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Giddens, A. (1984). The Constitution of Society, University of California Press, Berkeley.Google Scholar
  60. Gillespie, S. (1989). The Aztec Kings: The Construction of Rulership in Mexica History, University of Arizona Press, Tucson.Google Scholar
  61. Gillespie, S. (2001). Personhood, agency, and mortuary ritual: A case study from the ancient Maya. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 20: 73–112.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Gillespie, S., and Joyce, R. (1997). Gendered goods: The symbolism of Maya hierarchical exchange relations. In Claassen, C., and Joyce, R. (eds.), Women in Prehistory: North America and Mesoamerica, University of Pennsylvania Press, Philadelphia, pp. 189–207.Google Scholar
  63. Guenter, S. (2014). The Queen of Cobá: A reanalysis of the Macanxoc stelae. In Stanton, T. (ed.), The Archaeology of Yucatan: New Directions and Data, Archaeopress Archaeology, Bilingual edition, Oxford, pp. 395–421.Google Scholar
  64. Guenter, S., and Freidel, D. (2009). Warriors and rulers: Royal women of the Classic Maya. In Brettell, C., and Sargent, C. (eds.), Gender in Cross-Cultural Perspective, Pearson/Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ, pp.74–80.Google Scholar
  65. Hamann, B. (1997). Weaving and the iconography of prestige: The royal gender symbolism of Lord 5 Flower’s/Lady 4 Rabbit’s family. In Claassen, C., and Joyce, R. (eds.), Women in Prehistory: North America and Mesoamerica, University of Pennsylvania Press, Philadelphia, pp. 153–172.Google Scholar
  66. Harrison-Buck, E. (2017). The coin of her realm: Cacao as gendered goods among the pre-hispanic and colonial Maya. In Matthews, J., and Guderjan, T. (eds.), The Value of Things: Commodities in the Maya Region from Prehistoric to Contemporary, University of Arizona Press, Tucson, pp. 104–123.Google Scholar
  67. Harrison-Buck, E., and Hendon, J. (2018). An introduction to relational personhood and other-than-human agency in archaeology. In Harrison-Buck, E. and Hendon, J. (eds.), Relational Identities and Other-Than-Human Agency in Archaeology, University Press of Colorado, Louisville, pp. 3–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Hassig, R. (2016). Polygamy and the Rise and Demise of the Aztec Empire, University of New Mexico Press, Albuquerque.Google Scholar
  69. Hommon, R. (2013). The Ancient Hawaiian State: Origins of a Political Society, Oxford University Press, Oxford.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Houston, S., and Inomata, T. (2009). The Classic Maya, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
  71. Houston, S., and Stuart, D. (1996). Of gods, glyphs, and kings: Divinity and rulership among the Classic Maya. Antiquity 70: 289–312.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Hubert, E. (2016). Figuring identity in everyday life. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 44: 1–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Isbell, W. (1997). Mummies and Mortuary Monuments, University of Texas Press, Austin.Google Scholar
  74. Jenkins, D. (2001). The Inka conical clan. Journal of Anthropological Research 57: 167–195.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Johnson, A., and Earle, T. (2000). The Evolution of Human Societies: From Foraging Group to Agrarian State, 2nd ed., Stanford University Press, Stanford, CA.Google Scholar
  76. Johnson, M. (2000). Self-made men and the staging of agency. In Dobres, M., and Robb, J. (eds.), Agency in Archaeology, Routledge, London, pp. 213–231.Google Scholar
  77. Josserand, J. (2002). Women in Classic Maya hieroglyphic texts. In Ardren, T. (ed.), Ancient Maya Women, Altamira, Walnut Creek, CA, pp. 114–151.Google Scholar
  78. Joyce, A. (2000). The founding of Monte Alban: Sacred propositions and social practices. In Dobres, M., and Robb, J. (eds.), Agency in Archaeology, Routledge, London, pp.71–91.Google Scholar
  79. Joyce, A. (2010). Mixtecs, Zapotecs, and Chatinos: Ancient Peoples of Southern Mexico, Wiley-Blackwell, Chichester.Google Scholar
  80. Joyce, A., and Winter, M. (1996). Ideology, power, and urban society in prehispanic Oaxaca. Current Anthropology 37: 33–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. Joyce, R. (1993). Women’s work: Images of production and reproduction in prehispanic southern Central America. Current Anthropology 34: 255–274.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. Joyce, R. (1996). The construction of gender in Classic Maya monuments. In Wright, R. (ed.), Gender and Archaeology, University of Pennsylvania Press, Philadelphia, pp. 167–195.Google Scholar
  83. Joyce, R. (2000). Gender and Power in Prehispanic Mesoamerica, University of Texas Press, Austin.Google Scholar
  84. Joyce, R. (2008). Ancient Bodies, Ancient Lives: Sex, Gender, and Archaeology, Thames and Hudson, London.Google Scholar
  85. Joyce, R., and Lopiparo, J. (2005). Postscript: Doing agency in archaeology. Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory 12: 365–374.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  86. Keightley, D. (1979). The Shang state as seen in the oracle-bone inscriptions. Early China 5: 25–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  87. Keightley, D. (1983). The Late Shang state: When, where, and what? In Keightley, D. (ed.), The Origins of Chinese Civilization, University of California Press, Berkeley.Google Scholar
  88. Keightley, D. (1999a). The Shang: China’s first historical dynasty. In Loewe, M., and Shaughnessy, E. (eds.), The Cambridge History of Ancient China: From the Origins of Civilization to 221 BC, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp. 232–291.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  89. Keightley, D. (1999b). At the beginning: The status of women in Neolithic and Shang China. NAN NU 1: 1–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  90. Keightley, D. (2012). Working for His Majesty: Research Notes on Labor Mobilization in Late Shang China (ca. 1200–1045 BC), as Seen in the Oracle-Bone Inscriptions, with Particular Attention to Handicraft Industries, Agriculture, Warfare, Hunting, Construction, and the Shang’s Legacies, Institute of East Asian Studies, University of California, Berkeley.Google Scholar
  91. Kemp, B. (1992). Old Kingdom, Middle Kingdom and Second Intermediate Period, c. 2686–1552 BC. In Trigger, B., Kemp, B., O’Connor, D., and Lloyd, A. (eds.), Ancient Egypt: A Social History, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp. 71–182.Google Scholar
  92. Kirch, P. (2010). How Chiefs Became Kings: Divine Kingship and the Rise of Archaic States in Ancient Hawai’i, University of California Press, Berkeley.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  93. Kirch, P. (2012). A Shark Going Inland is My Chief: The Island Civilization of Ancient Hawai’i, University of California Press, Berkeley.Google Scholar
  94. Kolata, A. (2013). Ancient Inca, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
  95. Lafont, B. (2001). The women of the palace at Mari. In Bottéro, J. (ed.), Everyday Life in Ancient Mesopotamia, Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore, pp. 127–140.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  96. Li, M., and Zhu, Z. (1989). Zu Yi qian xing yu bu ci Jing fang (On ‘[King] Zu Yi moved to Geng’ and the tribe of Jing in the oracle bones), Chen, J. (tr.). Journal of Zhengzhou University (Philosophy and Social Sciences Edition) 6: 13–19.Google Scholar
  97. Linduff, K. (2003). Many wives, one queen in Shang China. In Nelson, S. (ed.), Ancient Queens: Archaeological Explorations, Altamira Press, Walnut Creek, CA, pp. 59–75.Google Scholar
  98. Linnekin, J. (1990). Sacred Queens and Women of Consequence: Rank, Gender, and Colonialism in the Hawaiian Islands, University of Michigan Press, Ann Arbor.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  99. Linton, R. (1936). The Study of Man: An Introduction, Appleton-Century-Crofts, New York.Google Scholar
  100. Maisels, C. (2010). The Archaeology of Politics and Power: Where, When and Why the First States Formed, Oxbow Books, Oxford, UK.Google Scholar
  101. Marcus, J. (1974). The iconography of power among the Classic Maya. World Archaeology 6: 83–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  102. Marcus, J. (1976). Emblem and State in the Classic Maya Lowlands: An Epigraphic Approach to Territorial Organization, Dumbarton Oaks, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
  103. Marcus, J. (1983a). The reconstructed chronology of the later Zapotec rulers, AD 1415–1563. In Flannery, K., and Marcus, J. (eds.), The Cloud People:Divergent Evolution of the Zapotec and Mixtec Civilizations, Academic Press, New York, pp. 301–308.Google Scholar
  104. Marcus, J. (1983b). Zapotec religion. In Flannery, K., and Marcus, J. (eds.), The Cloud People: Divergent Evolution of the Zapotec and Mixtec Civilizations, Academic Press, New York, pp. 345–351.Google Scholar
  105. Marcus, J. (1998). Women’s Ritual in Formative Oaxaca: Figurine-making, Divination, Death and the Ancestors, Memoirs 33, Museum of Anthropology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.Google Scholar
  106. Marcus, J. (2001). Breaking the glass ceiling: The strategies of royal women in ancient states. In Klein, C. (ed.), Gender in Pre-Hispanic America, Dumbarton Oaks, Washington, DC, pp. 305–340.Google Scholar
  107. Marcus, J. (2006). Identifying elites and their strategies. In Elson, C., and Covey, R. (eds.), Intermediate Elites in Precolumbian States and Empires, University of Arizona Press, Tucson, pp. 212–246.Google Scholar
  108. Marcus, J., and Flannery, K. (1983). The Postclassic balkanization of Oaxaca. In Flannery, K., and Marcus, J. (eds.), The Cloud People: Divergent Evolution of the Zapotec and Mixtec Civilizations, Academic Press, New York, pp. 217–226.Google Scholar
  109. Marcus, J., and Flannery, K. (1996). Zapotec Civilization: How Urban Society Evolved in Mexico’s Oaxaca Valley, Thames and Hudson, London.Google Scholar
  110. Martin, S., and Grube, N. (2008). Chronicle of the Maya Kings and Queens: Deciphering the Dynasties of the Ancient Maya, 2nd ed., Thames and Hudson, London.Google Scholar
  111. McAnany, P. (2013a). Artisans, Ikatz, and statecraft: Provisioning Classic Maya royal courts. In Hirth, K., and Pillsbury, J. (eds.), Merchants, Markets, and Exchange in the Pre-Columbian World, Dumbarton Oaks, Washington, DC, pp. 229–253.Google Scholar
  112. McAnany, P. (2013b). Living with the Ancestors: Kinship and Kingship in Ancient Maya Society, rev. ed., Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  113. Miller, M. (1993). On the eve of the collapse: Maya art of the eighth century. In Sabloff, J., and Henderson, J. (eds.), Lowland Maya Civilization in the Eighth Century AD, Dumbarton Oaks, Washington, DC, pp. 355–411.Google Scholar
  114. Moore, H. (2000). Ethics and ontology: Why agents and agency matter. In Dobres, M., and Robb, J. (eds.), Agency in Archaeology, Routledge, London, pp. 259–263.Google Scholar
  115. Moreno García, J. (1997). Estates (Old Kingdom): Abstract. In Frood, E., and Willeke, W. (eds.), UCLA Encyclopedia of Egyptology (UEE), http://digital2.library.ucla.edu/viewItem.do?ark=21198/zz001ndr97.
  116. Munson, J., and Macri, M. (2009). Sociopolitical network interactions: A case study of the Classic Maya. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 28: 424–438.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  117. Nelson, S. (2015). Shamans, Queens, and Figurines, Left Coast Press, Walnut Creek, CA.Google Scholar
  118. Ortner, S. (1984). Theory in anthropology since the sixties. Society for Comparative Study of Society and History 26: 126–166.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  119. Oudijk, M. (1998). The genealogy of Zaachila: Four weddings and a dynastic struggle. In Jansen, M., Krofges, P., and Oudijk, M. (eds.), In the Shadow of Monte Albán: Politics and Historiography in Postclassic Oaxaca, Mexico, Research School CNWS, School of Asian, African, and Amerindian Studies, Leiden, pp. 13–35.Google Scholar
  120. Oudijk, M. (2008). The Postclassic period in the Valley of Oaxaca: The archaeological and ethnohistorical records. In Blomster, J. (ed.), After Monte Alban: Transformation and Negotiation in Oaxaca, Mexico, University Press of Colorado, Boulder, pp. 95–118.Google Scholar
  121. Oudijk, M., and Jansen, M. (2000). Changing history in the Lienzos de Guevea and Santo Domingo Petapa. Ethnohistory 47: 281–331.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  122. Paddock, J. (1983). Comments on the Lienzos of Huilotepec and Guevea. In Flannery, K., and Marcus, J. (eds.), The Cloud People: Divergent Evolution of the Zapotec and Mixtec Civilizations, Academic Press, New York, pp. 308–313.Google Scholar
  123. Pauketat, T. (2001). Practice and history in archaeology. Anthropological Theory 1: 73–98.Google Scholar
  124. Pennock, C. (2011). Bonds of Blood: Gender, Lifecycle and Sacrifice in Aztec Culture, Palgrave Macmillan, London.Google Scholar
  125. Pohl, J. (2003a). Ritual ideology and commerce in the southern Mexican Highlands. In Smith, M., and Berdan, F. (eds.), The Postclassic Mesoamerican World, University of Utah Press, Salt Lake City, pp. 172–177.Google Scholar
  126. Pohl, J. (2003b). Royal marriage and confederacy building among the Eastern Nahuas, Mixtecs, and Zapotecs. In Smith, M., and Berdan, F. (eds.), The Postclassic Mesoamerican World, University of Utah Press, Salt Lake City, pp. 243–248.Google Scholar
  127. Pohl, M., and Pohl, J. (1994). Cycles of conflict: Political factionalism in the Maya Lowlands. In Brumfiel, E., and Fox, J. (eds.), Factional Competition and Political Development in the New World, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp. 138–157.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  128. Postgate, J. (1994). Early Mesopotamia: Society and Economy at the Dawn of History, Routledge, London.Google Scholar
  129. Pyburn, K. A. (2008). Shaken, not stirred: The revolution in archaeology. In Brumfiel, E., and Robin, C. (eds.), Gender, Households, and Society: Unraveling the Threads of the Past and Present, Archaeological Papers No. 18, American Anthropological Association, Arlington, VA, pp. 115−124.Google Scholar
  130. Richards, J. (2010). Kingship and legitimation. In Wendrich, W. (ed.), Egyptian Archaeology, Blackwell, Malden, MD, pp. 55–84.Google Scholar
  131. Robb, J. (2010). Beyond agency. World Archaeology 42: 493–520.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  132. Robin, C. (2003). New directions in Classic Maya household archaeology. Journal of Archaeological Research 11: 307–356.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  133. Rosaldo, M., and Lamphere, L. (eds.) (1974). Woman, Culture, and Society, Stanford University Press, Stanford, CA.Google Scholar
  134. Rostworowski de Diez Canseco, M. (1999). History of the Inca Realm, Iceland, H. (tr.), Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
  135. Rostworowski de Diez Canseco, M., and Murra, J. (1960). Succession, coöption to kingship, and royal incest among the Inca. Southwestern Journal of Anthropology 16: 417–427.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  136. Roth, S. (2009). Queen. In Frood, E., and Willeke, W. (eds.), UCLA Encyclopedia of Egyptology. UCLA, Los Angeles, http://digital2.library.ucla.edu/viewItem.do?ark=21198/zz001nf7cg.
  137. Rowe, J. (1946). Inca culture at the time of the Spanish Conquest. Bureau of American Ethnology Bulletin 21: 183–330.Google Scholar
  138. Sabloff, P. (2018). How pre-modern state rulers used marriage to reduce the risk of losing at war: A comparison of eight states. Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory 25: 426–452.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  139. Sabloff, P., and Cragg, S. (2015). Status and role in early states: A comparative analysis. Santa Fe Institute Working Paper 2015-06-018.Google Scholar
  140. Sahagún, F. B. (1961a). Florentine Codex: General History of the Things of New Spain, Dibble, C., and Anderson, A. (trs.), Part XI, Book 10, Monographs of the School of American Research and the University of Utah, Santa Fe, NM.Google Scholar
  141. Sahagún, F. B. (1961b). Florentine Codex: General History of the Things of New Spain, Dibble, C., and Anderson, A. (trs.), Part IX, Book 8, Monographs of the School of American Research and the University of Utah, Santa Fe, NM.Google Scholar
  142. Sasson, J. (1973). Biographic notices on some royal ladies from Mari. Journal of Cuneiform Studies 25: 59–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  143. Sasson, J. M. (1995). King Hammurabi of Babylon. In Sasson, J. M. (ed.), Civilizations of the Ancient Near East, Vol. 2, Charles Scribner’s Sons, New York, pp. 901–915.Google Scholar
  144. Sasson, J. M. (2015). From the Mari Archives: An Anthology of Old Babylonian Letters, Eisenbrauns, Winona Lake, IN.Google Scholar
  145. Schroeder, S. (1992). The noblewomen of Chalco. Estudios de Cultura Nahuatl 22: 45–86.Google Scholar
  146. Sharer, R., and Traxler, L. (2006). The Ancient Maya, 6th ed., Stanford University Press, Stanford, CA.Google Scholar
  147. Shelach-Lavi, G. (2015). The Archaeology of Early China: From Prehistory to the Han Dynasty, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  148. Shennan, S. (2007). An evolutionary perspective on agency in archaeology. In Gardner, A. (ed.), Agency Uncovered: Archaeological Perspectives on Social Agency, Power, and Being Human, Left Coast Press, Walnut Creek, CA, pp. 19−31.Google Scholar
  149. Sillar, B. (2007). Acts of God and active material culture: Agency and commitment in the Andes. In Gardner, A. (ed.), Agency Uncovered: Archaeological Perspectives on Social Agency, Power, and Being Human, Left Coast Press, Walnut Creek, CA, pp. 153–189.Google Scholar
  150. Silverblatt, I. (1987). Moon, Sun, and Witches: Gender Ideologies and Class in Inca and Colonial Peru, Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ.Google Scholar
  151. Silverblatt, I. (2015). Women. In Urton, G., and von Hagen, A. (eds.), Encyclopedia of the Incas, Rowman and Littlefield, Lanham, MD, pp. 301–304.Google Scholar
  152. Smith, M. (2003). The Aztecs, 2nd ed., Blackwell, Malden, MA.Google Scholar
  153. Smith, W. (1962). The Old Kingdom in Egypt, Vol. 1, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
  154. Spores, R. (1965). The Zapotec and Mixtec at Spanish contact. In Willey, G. (ed.), Handbook of Middle American Indians: Archaeology of Southern Mesoamerica, Part 2, University of Texas Press, Austin, pp. 962–987.Google Scholar
  155. Spores, R., and Flannery, K. (1983). Sixteenth-century kinship and social organization. In Flannery, K., and Marcus, J. (eds.), The Cloud People: Divergent Evolution of the Zapotec and Mixtec Civilizations, Academic Press, New York, pp. 339–342.Google Scholar
  156. Stol, M. (2016). Women in the Ancient Near East, Richardson, H., and Richardson, M. (trans.), Walter de Gruyter, Boston.Google Scholar
  157. Townsend, R. (2009). The Aztecs, 3rd ed., Thames and Hudson, London.Google Scholar
  158. Trigger, B. (2003). Understanding Early Civilizations: A Comparative Study, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  159. Troncoso, Francisco del Paso y (1579–1581). Papeles de Nueva España, segunda serie, geografia y estadistica, Vol. 4: Relaciones geograficas de la diocesis de Oaxaca, Manuscritos de la Real Academia de la Historia de Madrid y del Archivo de Indias en Sevilla.Google Scholar
  160. Turchin, P., Brennan, R., Currie, T., Feeney, K., Francois, P., Hoyer, D., Manning, J., et al. (2015). Seshat: The global history databank. Cliodynamics: The Journal of Quantitative History and Cultural Evolution 6: 77–107.Google Scholar
  161. Turchin, P., Currie, T. E., Whitehouse, H., François, P., Feeney, K., Mullins, D., Hoyer, D., et al. (2018). Quantitative historical analysis uncovers a single dimension of complexity that structures global variation in human social organization. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 115: E144-E151.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  162. Tyldesley, J. (2006). Chronicle of the Queens of Egypt, Thames and Hudson, London.Google Scholar
  163. Valeri, V. (1985). Kingship and Sacrifice: Ritual and Society in Ancient Hawaii, University of Chicago Press, Chicago.Google Scholar
  164. Valeri, V. (2014). Rituals and annals: Between anthropology and history. HAU: Classics of Ethnographic Theory Series, Vol. 2, Westwater, L. (tr.), revised by Elliot, A. https://haubooks.org/rituals-and-annals/.
  165. Van Zantwijk, R. (1994). Factional divisions within the Aztec (Colhua) royal family. In Brumfiel, E., and Fox, J. (eds.), Factional Competition and Political Development in the New World, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp. 103–110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  166. Wang, Y. (2004). Rank and power among court ladies at Anyang. In Linduff, K., and Sun, Y. (eds.), Gender and Chinese Archaeology, Rowman Altamira, Lanham, MA, pp. 95–114.Google Scholar
  167. Wengrow, D. (2009). The voyages of Europa: Ritual and trade in the eastern Mediterranean circa 2300–1850 BC. In Parkinson, W., and Galaty, M. (eds.), Archaic State Interaction: The Eastern Mediterranean in the Bronze Age, School for Advanced Research Press, Santa Fe, NM, pp. 141–160.Google Scholar
  168. Wenke, R. (2009). The Ancient Egyptian State: The Origins of Egyptian Culture (c. 80002000 BC), Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
  169. Westenholz, J. (1990). Review: Towards a new conceptualization of the female role in Mesopotamian society. Journal of the American Oriental Society 110: 510–521.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  170. Whitecotton, J. (1977). The Zapotecs: Princes, Priests and Peasants, University of Oklahoma Press, Norman.Google Scholar
  171. Whitecotton, J. (1992). Culture and exchange in Postclassic Oaxaca: A world-system perspective. In Schortman, E., and Urban, P. (eds.), Resources, Power, and Interregional Interaction, Plenum, New York, pp. 51–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  172. Ziegler, N. (1999a). A questionable daughter-in-law. Journal of Cuneiform Studies 51: 55–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  173. Ziegler, N. (1999b). La population féminine des palais d’après les archives royales de Mari: Le harem de Zimrî-Lîm, Memoires de N.A.B.U. (Nouvelles Assyriologiques Brèves et Utilitaires), No. 1 (Mari), Société pour l’étude du Proche-Orient Ancien, Antony.Google Scholar

Bibliography of Recent Literature

  1. Ayala Falcon, M. (2002). Lady K’awil, Goddess O, and Maya warfare. In Ardren, T. (ed.), Ancient Maya Women, Altamira, Walnut Creek, CA, pp. 105–113.Google Scholar
  2. Blanton, R. (1998). Beyond centralization: Steps toward a theory of egalitarian behavior in archaic states. In Feinman, G., and Marcus, J. (eds.), Archaic States, School of American Research Press, Santa Fe, MN, pp. 135–172.Google Scholar
  3. Bottéro, J. (2001). Women’s rights. In Bottéro, J. (ed.), Everyday Life in Ancient Mesopotamia, Nevill, A. (tr.), Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore, pp. 112–126.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Campbell, R. (2009). Toward a networks and boundaries approach to early complex polities: The Late Shang case. Current Anthropology 50: 821–848.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Campbell, R. (2015). Animal, human, god: Pathways of Shang animality and divinity. In Arbuckle, B., and McCarty, S. (eds.), Animals and Inequality in the Ancient World, University Press of Colorado, Boulder, pp. 251–273.Google Scholar
  6. Chase, D., and Chase, A. (2003). Texts and contexts in Maya warfare: A brief consideration of epigraphy and archaeology at Caracol, Belize. In Brown, M., and Stanton, T. (eds.), Ancient Mesoamerican Warfare, Altamira, Walnut Creek, CA, pp. 171–188.Google Scholar
  7. Conkey, M., and Gero, J. (1991). Tensions, pluralities, and engendering archaeology: An introduction to women and prehistory. In Conkey, M., and Gero, J. (eds.), Engendering Archaeology: Women in Prehistory, Blackwell, Oxford, pp. 3–30.Google Scholar
  8. Connell, S., and Silverstein, J. (2006). From Laos to Mesoamerica: Battlegrounds between superpowers. In Arkush, E., and Allen, M. (eds.), The Archaeology of Warfare: Prehistories of Raiding and Conquest, University Press of Florida, Gainesville, pp. 394–433.Google Scholar
  9. Fash, W. (2005). Toward a social history of the Copan Valley. In Andrews, E., and Fash, W. (eds.), Copan: The History of an Ancient Maya Kingdom, School for Advanced Research Press, Santa Fe, MN, pp. 73–101.Google Scholar
  10. Feng, L. (2008). Bureaucracy and the State in Early China: Governing the Western Zhou, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
  11. Fleisher, J., and Wynne-Jones, S. (2010). Authorisation and the process of power: The view from African archaeology. Journal of World Prehistory 23: 177–193.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Foias, A. (2002). At the crossroads: The economic basis of political power in the Petexbatún region. In Masson, M., and Freidel, D. (eds.), Ancient Maya Political Economies, Altamira, Walnut Creek, CA, pp. 223–248.Google Scholar
  13. Freidel, D. (2007). War and statecraft in the northern Maya Lowlands: Yaxuna and Chichen Itza. In Kowalski, J., and Kristan-Graham, C. (eds.), Twin Tollans: Chichen Itza, Tula, and the Epiclassic to Early Postclassic Mesoamerican World, Dumbarton Oaks, Washington, DC, pp. 345–375.Google Scholar
  14. Freidel, D., and Guenter, S. (2003). Bearers of war and creation. Archaeology Online Features, http://archive.archaeology.org/online/features/siteq2/.
  15. Gardner, A. (2007). Agency Uncovered: Archaeological Perspectives on Social Agency, Power, and Being Human, Left Coast Press, Walnut Creek, CA.Google Scholar
  16. Garrido, F., and Salazar, D. (2017). Imperial expansion and local agency: A case study of labor organization under Inca rule. American Anthropologist 119: 1–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Gero, J. (1994). Excavation bias and the woman at home ideology. In Nelson, M., Nelson, S., and Wylie, A. (eds.), Equity Issues for Women in Archaeology, Archaeological Papers No. 5, American Anthropological Association, Arlington, VA, pp. 37–42.Google Scholar
  18. Graeber, D., and Sahlins, M. (2018). On Kings, Hau Books, Chicago.Google Scholar
  19. Handy, E. (1999). Government and society. In Kamehameha Schools (ed.), Ancient Hawaiian Civilization: A Series of Lectures Delivered at the Kamehameha Schools, Mutual Publishing, Honolulu, pp. 31–42.Google Scholar
  20. Harrison-Buck, E. (ed.) (2012). Power and Identity in Archeological Theory and Practice: Case Studies from Ancient Mesoamerica, University of Utah Press, Salt Lake City.Google Scholar
  21. Harrison-Buck, E. and Hendon, J. (eds) (2018). Relational Identities and Other-Than-Human Agency in Archaeology, University Press of Colorado, Louisville.Google Scholar
  22. Hays-Gilpin, K., and Whitley, D. (eds.) (1998). Reader in Gender Archaeology, Routledge Press, New York.Google Scholar
  23. Hodder, I. (2000). Agency and individuals in long-term processes. In Dobres, M., and Robb, J. (eds.), Agency in Archaeology, Routledge, London, pp. 21–33.Google Scholar
  24. Hodge, M. (1996). Political organization of the central provinces. In Berdan, F., Blanton, R., Boone, E., Hodge, M., Smith, M., and Umberger, E. (eds.), Aztec Imperial Strategies, Dumbarton Oaks, Washington, DC, pp. 17–45.Google Scholar
  25. Hutson, S. (2017). Unanticipated Politics: Ancient Chunchucmil and Exclusive Maya Collectivities, University Press of Colorado, Boulder.Google Scholar
  26. Jones, P. (2003). Embracing Inana: Legitimation and mediation in the ancient Mesopotamian sacred marriage hymn Iddin-Dagan A. Journal of the American Oriental Society 123: 291–302.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Martin, S. (2003). In line of the founder: A view of dynastic politics at Tikal. In Sabloff, J. (ed.), Tikal: Dynasties, Foreigners, and Affairs of State: Advancing Maya Archaeology, School for Advanced Research Press, Santa Fe, NM, pp. 3–45.Google Scholar
  28. Mayerová, H. (2015). The queens of Lagash in the Early Dynastic period, especially the last three royal couples. In Dittmann, R., and Selz, G. (eds.), It’s a Long Way to a Historiography of the Early Dynastic Period(s), Ugarit-Verlag, Munster, pp. 259–265.Google Scholar
  29. Martin, S. (2008). Wives and daughters on the Dallas Altar. Mesoweb: www.mesoweb.com/articles/martin/Wives&Daughters.pdf.
  30. McCafferty, S., and McCafferty, G. (1994). Engendering Tomb 7 at Monte Alban: Respinning an old yarn. Current Anthropology 35: 143–166.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Meskell, L., and Joyce, R. (2003). Embodied Lives; Figuring Ancient Maya and Egyptian Experience, Routledge, London.Google Scholar
  32. Nichols, D., Berdan, F., and Smith, M. (eds.) (2016). Rethinking the Aztec Economy, University of Arizona Press, Tucson.Google Scholar
  33. Sabloff, P., and Cragg, S. (2018). Status, role and behavior in premodern states: A comparative analysis. In Sabloff, J., and Sabloff, P. (eds.), The Emergence of Premodern States: New Perspectives on the Development of Complex Societies, Santa Fe Institute Press, Santa Fe, NM, pp. 53–102.Google Scholar
  34. Sasson, J. M. (1998). The King and I: A Mari king in changing perceptions. Journal of the American Oriental Society 118: 453–470.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Smith, M., and Berdan, F. (1996). Introduction to Part II. In Berdan, F., Blanton, R., Boone, E., Hodge, M., Smith, M., and Umberger, E. (eds.), Aztec Imperial Strategies, Dumbarton Oaks, Washington, DC, pp. 109–113.Google Scholar
  36. Steadman, S., and Ross, J. (2016). Agency and Identity in the Ancient Near East: New Paths Forward, Routledge, London.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Sweely, T. L. (ed.) (1999). Manifesting Power: Gender and the Interpretation of Power in Archaeology, Routledge, New York.Google Scholar
  38. Wengrow, D. (2006). The Archaeology of Early Egypt: Social Transformations in North-east Africa, 10,000 to 2650 BC, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
  39. Wilkie, L., and Howlett Hayes, K. (2006). Engendered and feminist archaeologies of the recent and documented pasts. Journal of Archaeological Research 14: 243–264.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Wright, R. (2016). Cognitive codes and collective action at Mari and the Indus. In Fargher, L., and Espinoza, V. (eds.), Alternative Pathways to Complexity, University Press of Colorado, Boulder, pp. 225–238.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Santa Fe InstituteSanta FeUSA

Personalised recommendations