Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 88

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Production Systems, Inheritance, and Inequality in Premodern Societies: Conclusions

Smith, Eric Alden, Borgerhoff Mulder, Monique, Bowles, Samuel, Gurven, Michael, Hertz, Tom, Shenk, Mary K.·2010·Current Anthropology
DOI 10.1086/649029
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Premodern human societies differ greatly in socioeconomic inequality. Despite much useful theorizing on the causes of these differences, individual‐level quantitative data on wealth inequality is lacking. The papers in this special section provide the first comparable estimates of intergenerational wealth transmission and inequality in premodern societies, with data on more than 40 measures of embodied, material, and relational wealth from 21 premodern societies representing four production systems (hunter‐gatherers, horticulturalists, pastoralists, and agriculturalists). Key findings include (1) the importance of material, embodied, and relational wealth differs significantly across production systems, with material wealth more important in pastoral and agricultural systems; (2) the degree of wealth transmission from parent to offspring is markedly higher for material wealth than embodied and relational wealth; (3) aggregate wealth is transmitted to a higher degree among pastoralists and agriculturalists; (4) the degree of inequality is greater for material wealth; and (5) the degree of intergenerational transmission of wealth is correlated with wealth inequality. Surprisingly, horticulturalists exhibit no greater wealth inequality or intergenerational wealth transmission than do hunter‐gatherers, while pastoralists are very similar to agriculturalists. We discuss how these trends may have favored the emergence of institutionalized inequality, as intensified forms of product…

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1086/649029

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cites

Show all 1 references

Research works printed but not linked: 40

  1. Ames Kenneth, Handbook of archaeological theories
  2. Björklund Anders, Oxford handbook of economic inequality
  3. Boehm Christopher, Hierarchy in the forest
  4. Boone James L, Evolutionary ecology and human behavior
  5. Borgerhoff Mulder Monique, 1990, Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology, 27, 255
  6. 10.1126/science.1178336 · DOI
  7. 10.1086/648561 · DOI
  8. 10.1086/649206 · DOI
  9. 10.1126/science.169.3947.733 · DOI
  10. Cashdan Elizabeth, Evolutionary ecology and human behavior
  11. 10.1086/378526 · DOI · Paper page
  12. 10.1525/aa.1978.80.1.02a00020 · DOI · Paper page
  13. Fisher Ronald A, The genetical theory of natural selection
  14. 10.1086/517592 · DOI
  15. 10.1086/648587 · DOI
  16. Harrell Stevan, Human families, 10.4324/9780429499975 · DOI
  17. 10.1086/202775 · DOI
  18. Hayden Brian, Key issues in hunter‐gatherer research. Ernest S. Burch Jr
  19. 10.1016/S1090-5138(02)00122-8 · DOI
  20. Johnson Allen W, The evolution of human societies: from foraging group to agrarian state
  21. Jorgensen Joseph G, Western Indians: comparative environments, languages, and cultures of 172 Western American Indian tribes
  22. Kelly Robert L, The foraging spectrum: diversity in hunter‐gatherer lifeways
  23. Luttbeg Barney, 2000, Monique Borgerhoff Mulder, and Marc Mangel
  24. Mace Ruth, Adaptation and human behavior: an anthropological perspective
  25. Milanovic Branko, 2007, Williamson
  26. Murdock G. P., Atlas of world cultures, 10.2307/jj.13110803 · DOI
  27. Murphy Michael, 2007, Social Biology, 46, 122
  28. 10.1073/pnas.0406709102 · DOI · Paper page
  29. 10.1017/S0003598X00059196 · DOI
  30. Price T. Douglas., Foundations of social inequality
  31. Price T. Douglas, 1985, New York: Academic Press.
  32. Pryor Frederic L, Economic systems of foraging, agricultural, and industrial societies
  33. 10.1086/515800 · DOI
  34. Schneider Harold K, Livestock and equality in East Africa: the economic basis for social structure
  35. 10.1086/648530 · DOI
  36. 10.1017/S0003598X00076857 · DOI
  37. UNDP (United Nations Development Program). 2009., 2009, Development Report
  38. 10.1016/j.jaa.2005.01.001 · DOI
  39. World Bank, World development indicators, 10.1596/978-1-4648-0484-7_world_development_indicators · DOI
  40. Wright Henry T, Origins of the state: the anthropology of political evolution

Cited by

See all 88

Metadata

Authors
Smith, E. A., Borgerhoff Mulder, M., Bowles, S., Gurven, M., Hertz, T., & Shenk, M. K.
Venue
Current Anthropology
Publisher
University of Chicago Press
Published
2010-02
Volume
51
Issue
1
Pages
85-94
ISSN
  • 0011-3204
  • 1537-5382
DOI
10.1086/649029
Cited by
88
References
1
Language
en

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Production Systems, Inheritance, and Inequality in Premodern Societies: Conclusions. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1086/649029
The paper
Smith, E. A., Borgerhoff Mulder, M., Bowles, S., Gurven, M., Hertz, T., & Shenk, M. K. (2010). Production Systems, Inheritance, and Inequality in Premodern Societies: Conclusions. Current Anthropology. https://doi.org/10.1086/649029