![]()
The study of social change, that is, how human societies transform over time, remains central to archaeological research. The time depth of the archaeological record provides a perspective on the kinds of long-term processes we are unable to observe in our own lifetimes. Our study of the deep past through the material record allows us to examine processes that unfold over generations, centuries, and millennia, which we refer to as âtransformative change.â Generally, change can be described along a continuum as more gradual/micro evolutionary or abrupt/macro evolutionary. While the changes discussed by authors in this volume unfold at different rates and spatial scales, all involve transformations of existing systems, structures, and institutions that result in qualitative shifts. We often think of transformative change as taking place on the largest temporal and spatial scales: migration/colonization or the rise/collapse of centralized territorially expansive polities. However, the majority of the archaeological record is composed of the remains of the routines of daily life and domestic activity. This volume takes a comparative perspective to explore how households participate in transformative change through analyses of the material evidence of the interactions, relationships, and networks of daily life that are visible in the archaeological record across a diverse array of case studies. Households have much to contribute to our understanding of transformative change because they are so interconnected with one another and broader societal structures and institutions.
Households are important contexts for the study of change because they are interconnected via their membersâ ties to a variety of individuals and institutions. Households have previously been described as fundamental building blocks of larger communities, the social unit from which other institutions are constructed. A focus on the dwelling as a material expression of a co-residential group that pools labor and resources reinforces the idea that households are distinct units and separate from larger-scale societal institutions. However, this perspective segments households and makes them appear self-contained. Relationships based on kin ties or other significant social connections serve as the basis for households. These relationships create the context in which leadership positions and supra-household institutions emerge and develop. The authors in this volume incorporate a variety of theoretical concepts including kinship models and house society perspectives, but they all frame households as inherently interconnected, which provides an important starting point for analyses of household roles in social change. We acknowledge that concepts of households, dwellings, and families are neither equivalent nor interchangeable. The household is a social institution, and the dwelling is only one material expression.
Change operates at multiple scales simultaneously, and the household perspective provides a context for investigating the articulation between micro- and macro-evolutionary processes. These processes involve the interplay between change caused by a range of phenomena including the accumulation of individual choices and decisions and the emergence of larger-scale social and ecological constraints and opportunities. The authors in this volume address changes in their respective research areas by finding ways to observe the articulation of individual and small-group strategies with the larger group or, in some cases, polity. To identify change, we examine contexts with long occupation histories. A diachronic perspective allows us to identify stability or continuity in some lines of evidence and contrast it with change in others. Change in long-distance exchange networks may not coincide with changes in domestic production or local exchange. A diachronic perspective also highlights the importance of accurately characterizing the pace, timing, and tempo of change. Phases, typically defined as cultural signatures within or artificial blocks of time, can exaggerate or obscure changes, homogenizing events throughout the phase and emphasizing discontinuities or ruptures at the endpoints. Finally, a diachronic perspective takes historical context into account by examining the social and environmental conditions in which change took place.
Household archaeology flourished in the context of historically specific research, and many studies of the social dimensions of households have focused on social memory, ancestors, and commoner identities (Carballo 2011; Kahn 2016; Nash 2009; Pluckhahn 2010; Robin 2003). We build on these studies by examining cases firmly grounded in long-term local histories. Similarly, we also join these scholars in analyzing the ways people forged social connections and shaped shared identity through a broad range of domestic activities within and between co-residential groups. However, we also employ a comparative perspective in order to reconnect household studies with the broader context by situating households in regional-scale perspectives and as major drivers of larger social change. In our discipline, archaeologists have and continue to identify key research questions that benefit from comparative conversations, which allow investigators to learn from the diversity of expressions of human social behavior. We have long recognized the importance of topics like the development of inequality, craft production and specialization, major shifts in sedentism/mobility, changes to subsistence systems/strategies, conflict and warfare, and many others. The goals of comparative perspectives are not to find universal explanations but to learn from other researchers about the diversity of what has been and what is possible. Our interpretations of the past are dependent on our exposure to a broad array of examples and potential explanations. The authors in this volume consider broader patterns and points of comparison for household research across many different world areas (e.g., the challenges of living in large, dense settlements, houses as monumental spaces, ancestors, and multigenerational houses). We do so to examine the many forms processes of change can take and the different ways they may articulate under distinct historical and cultural circumstances. We focus on the social dimension of household activities, which foregrounds the dynamic nature of household composition, positions households as drivers of many different kinds of change in a number of world regions, and moves away from a more static and reactive perspective on households.
A comparative approach also allows us to break out of region-specific constraints. Within the subfield of household archaeology, each area of study has developed its own set of important questions and research methodologies tailored to the archaeological record and environmental conditions of that zone. In the Pacific Northwest, large pithouses with long occupation histories lend themselves to questions about cooperation, use of space, and seasonal changes in occupation. In the U.S. Southwest, the pithouse to pueblo transition and the later construction of large pueblo complexes that include formal ritual spaces (Kivas) focus on interpretations of architecture that address restricted movement and access to better understand social tensions or relationships among the builders and occupants. In Mesoamerica, households have long been seen as a window into increasing political complexity and socioeconomic inequality with investment in architectural materials and the organization of domestic craft production as key lines of evidence. In the Southeastern U.S., extensive trade networks and elaborate traditions of craft production lead to questions about the nature of relationships and shared belief systems. In Oceania, the notion of a house applies to far more than residential or domestic space and results in a need to closely examine the association between structures and assemblages and artifact spatial patterning. In the Andes, residential burials and ancestor veneration link generations of semi-mobile people in a rugged landscape through extended family dwellings that endure for generations. In the Near East, the appearance of densely populated villages raises questions about the nature of the family unit and their relationship to the settlement as a whole. To answer the questions posed in each region, techniques and methodologies like geophysical survey, space syntax analysis, soil chemistry, chemical sourcing studies, iconographic analyses, and architectural analyses have been marshaled to generate relevant data. We have a great deal to learn from each other about the kinds of questions we can ask in our respective areas and the sorts of technology we may use to broaden our understandings of our own regions.
More importantly, through conversations and regional comparisons, we also begin the work of creating shared vocabularies, defining areas of mutual interest, and laying the foundation for future work that is both grounded in regional histories and in questions of broad interest and importance in archaeology and anthropology. As part of that endeavor, we outline three major themes that look to the long history of household archaeology in a variety of world regions and to its future. All the authors touch on these themes in some way through their individual cases and collaboratively in the âPerspectivesââChapters 2, 6, and 10. These themes are (1) concepts of the household that encompass existing definitions based on co-residentiality, household membership, and the activities associated with domestic life; (2) the spaces and connections between houses and households; and (3) change and the roles that households play in transforming social structures and systems.
Defining the household
A household-centric perspective on social change begins with a definition of the household as a multiscalar rather than foundational unit. The material signatures of domestic life provide evidence of relationships within and beyond the household. This is not limited to architecture or activities associated with domestic structures, which have often been analyzed through an economic lens. Domestic contexts contain evidence of a wide array of activities from subsistence and food production to crafting and ritual. These same artifacts and features are also evidence of social, economic, political, and ideological ties at multiple scales. These can be as close alliances between households in the same settlement or indirect, down-the-line trade partnerships with far-flung regions. Domestic assemblages are the result of diverse set of choices and behaviors that provide insight into the range of relationships or networks operating simultaneously within a household and an entire region of study. Changes in the way people create and reproduce different kinds of relationships can generate internal tensions or opportunities. The authors in this volume consider these sorts of pressures in concert with circumstances created by external environmental and social factors. A household-centric approach allows us to explore the variety of catalysts and mechanisms of change by comparing the nature and pace of chan...
