Archaeological studies of political life have often assumed that the control of territory is an inherent aspect of social power, particularly within complex polities. Frustration with the rigid territorialism of archaeological approaches to politics has fostered enthusiasm for alternative models of political space, including networks. While we concur with this frustration, we argue that territorial models should still be integral to archaeological studies of political landscapes. However, archaeologists should reframe the control of territory as one of many modalities through which authority can be claimed and reproduced and focus attention on variability in territorial patterns and processes. In this introduction, we review previous approaches to territoriality in anthropology and corollary fields, outline dimensions of variability in territorial behaviors and institutions, and provide a foundation for the series of essays in this volume, which collectively seek to invigorate the study of territoriality in anthropological archaeology. [territoriality, archaeological theory, landscape archaeology]
If you can't find a tool you're looking for, please click the link at the top of the page to "Go to old article view". Alternatively, view our Knowledge Base articles for additional help. Your feedback is important to us, so please let us know if you have comments or ideas for improvement.