【托福社会类】训练3
Trade And Early State Formation
Bartering（物物交换) was a basic trade mechanism（原理） for many thousands of years; often sporadic（零星分布的) and usually based on notions of reciprocity（互惠主义）, it involved the mutual exchange of commodities or objects between individuals or groups. Redistribution of these goods through society lay in the hands of (由……掌控)chiefs, religious leaders, or kin groups. Such redistribution was a basic element in chiefdoms（酋长权力）. ///物物交换和酋长权利The change from redistribution to formal trade—often based on regulated commerce /that perhaps involved fixed prices and even currency/—was closely tied to growing political and social complexity and hence to the development of the state in the ancient world.///引发社会形态变革
In the 1970s, a number of archaeologists gave trade a primary role in the rise of ancient states.///商业对国家形成的第一个观点 British archaeologist Colin Renfrew attributed（归因于） the dramatic flowering（蓬勃发展） of the Minoan civilization on Crete and through the Aegean to intensified（集中化的） trading contacts and to the impact of olive and vine cultivation on local communities. ///As agricultural economies became more diversified and local food supplies could be purchased both locally and over longer distances, a far-reaching economic interdependence resulted./// Eventually, this led to redistribution systems for luxuries and basic commodities, systems that were organized and controlled by Minoan rulers from their palaces. ///As time went on, the self-sufficiency of communities was replaced by mutual dependence. Interest in long-distance trade brought about some cultural homogeneity(同质化) from trade and gift exchange, and perhaps even led to piracy(盗版). Thus, intensified trade and interaction, and the flowering of specialist crafts, in a complex process of positive feedback, led to much more complex societies based on palaces, which were the economic hubs（中心） of a new Minoan civilization.
Renfrew’s model made some assumptions that are now discounted. For example, he argued that the introduction of domesticated vines and olives allowed a substantial expansion of land under cultivation and helped to power the emergence of complex society. Many archaeologists and paleobotanists now question this view, pointing out that the available （已有的）evidence for cultivated vines and olives suggests that they were present only in the later Bronze Age. Trade, nevertheless（无论如何）, was probably one of many variables that led to the emergence of palace economies in Minoan Crete.
American archaeologist William Rathje developed a hypothesis that considered /an explosion in long-distance exchange/ a fundamental cause of Mayan civilization in Mesoamerica. (consider a /b)He suggested that the lowland Mayan environment was deficient in many vital resources, among them obsidian, salt, stone for grinding maize, and many luxury materials. All these could be obtained from the nearby highlands, from the Valley of Mexico, and from other regions, if the necessary trading networks came into being./// Such connections, and the trading expeditions to maintain them, could not be organized by individual villages. The Maya lived in a relatively uniform environment, where every community suffered from the same resource deficiencies. ///Thus, argued Rathje, long-distance trade networks were organized through local ceremonial centers and their leaders. In time, this organization became a state, and knowledge of its functioning was exportable(运作模式可以输出了), as were pottery, tropical bird feathers, specialized stone materials, and other local commodities.///
Rathje’s hypothesis probably explains part of the complex process of Mayan state formation, but it suffers from the objection（异议反对） that suitable alternative raw materials can be found in the lowlands.(专家们的新解释→)It could be, too, that warfare（战争） became a competitive response to population growth and to the increasing scarcity（不足） of prime agricultural land, and that it played an important role in the emergence of the Mayan states.
Now that we know much more about ancient exchange and commerce, we know that, because no one aspect of trade was an overriding(高于一切的) cause of cultural change or evolution in commercial practices, trade can never be looked on as a unifying factor or as a primary agent of ancient civilization. Many ever-changing variables affected ancient trade, among them the demand for goods. There were also the logistics of transportation, the extent of the trading network, and the social and political environment. Intricate market networks channeled supplies along well-defined routes. Authorities at both ends might regulate the profits fed back to the source, providing the incentive for further transactions. There may or may not have been a market organization. （有，也有能没有）Extensive long-distance trade was a consequence rather than a cause of complex societies.
