70 research outputs found

    The Egyptian, April 10, 1935

    Get PDF

    The Murray Ledger and Times, March 30, 1988

    Get PDF

    The Cedarville Herald, May 4, 1928

    Get PDF

    The Murray Ledger and Times, August 14, 1993

    Get PDF

    Eastern Progress - 11 Sep 1997

    Get PDF

    Albuquerque Evening Citizen, 05-23-1907

    Get PDF
    https://digitalrepository.unm.edu/abq_citizen_news/4602/thumbnail.jp

    The Early Christian period Church complex from Dmanisi

    Get PDF

    The Early Christian period Church complex from Dmanisi

    Get PDF

    The Early Christian period Church complex from Dmanisi

    Get PDF

    Bronze Age Human Communities in the Southern Urals Steppe: Sintashta-Petrovka Social and Subsistence Organization

    Get PDF
    Why and how exactly social complexity develops through time from small-scale groups to the level of large and complex institutions is an essential social science question. Through studying the Late Bronze Age Sintashta-Petrovka chiefdoms of the southern Urals (cal. 2050–1750 BC), this research aims to contribute to an understanding of variation in the organization of local communities in chiefdoms. It set out to document a segment of the Sintashta-Petrovka population not previously recognized in the archaeological record and learn about how this segment of the population related to the rest of the society. The Sintashta-Petrovka development provides a comparative case study of a pastoral society divided into sedentary and mobile segments. Subsurface testing on the peripheries of three Sintashta-Petrovka communities suggests that a group of mobile herders lived outside the walls of the nucleated villages on a seasonal basis. During the summer, this group moved away from the village to pasture livestock farther off in the valley, and during the winter returned to shelter adjacent to the settlement. This finding illuminates the functioning of the year-round settlements as centers of production during the summer so as to provide for herd maintenance and breeding and winter shelter against harsh environmental conditions. The question of why individuals chose in this context to form mutually dependent relationships with other families and thus give up some of their independence can be answered with a combination of two necessities: to remain a community in a newly settled ecological niche and to protect animals from environmental risk and theft. Those who were skillful at managing communal construction of walled villages and protecting people from military threats became the most prominent members of the society. These people formed the core of the chiefdoms but were not able to accumulate much wealth and other possessions. Instead, they acquired high social prestige that could even be transferred to their children. However, this set of relationships did not last longer than 300 years. Once occupation of the region was well established the need for functions served by elites disappeared, and centralized chiefly communities disintegrated into smaller unfortified villages
    • …
    corecore