Regarding the Concepts of Exchange and Trade

Societies (not only in pre-historic periods) need to ensure a smooth production - distribution - consumption chain, regardless of their mechanism. Distribution is carried out through exchange and trade. Exchange/trade, within and between human communities, is conducted in many ways and involves many economic, cultural, social, political, ideological and religious aspects. Visibly, the forms of exchange all have important economic, social, political and environmental factors and motivations for the social participants. (Braun, D. P. and Plog, S., 1982: 504-525).

Trade runs alongside political, religious and social processes and is one of the most important factors influencing human evolution. Archaeologists have accumulated a huge volume of information and scientific records of prehistoric human interactions. One of the greatest existing data is the global distribution and exchange of materials and goods. However, there are still many unresolved issues in the studies of interactions and their impact on the pre-protohistoric societies.

When examining exchange/trade activities, first of all, it is necessary to clearly define the two concepts of exchange and trade. Exchange can be generalized as an interactive process that is specifically a part of almost biotic and abiotic systems. While trade is the economic-physical component of exchange, and therefore a necessary part of any social exchange. Trade has been identified as an important and constant aspect of exchange. The analysis of trading behavior concerns the infrastructure of the exchange and even the social relationships and negotiations before, during and after the exchange (Rahul Oka, Chapurukha M. Kusimba, 2008). Therefore, the concepts of "exchange" and "trade" have different connotations. While trade focuses on the near and far circulation of goods, exchange considers the transfer of people and ideas (Hirth, Kenneth G., Pillsbury, Joanne 2013). The details of trade also consists of different interpretations. In modern economics, trade is defined as the mutual movement of goods between two owners (people). However, in terms of archaeology, the archaeological data only shows the movement of the goods themselves, without association of who owned or possessed them. From an anthropological perspective, anthropologists seek to create a cultural resume for these goods, beginning with the procurement of raw materials and ending with the processing of the finished product. The exchange of goods is not simply an economic transaction, but also involves social relationships. In many cases, these social relationships served as the main goal of those exchange activities.

Methods of exchange/trade in pre- and protohistoric societies

As mentioned above, trade is only one form of exchange. Material wealth can be distributed by exchanging gifts between rulers or the society as a whole, whether by tribute (pirates and kingship), through a marriage alliance, etc. Anthropologists have identified three patterns of exchange including: (i) Gift giving between partners, (ii) redistribution between the center and periphery communities and vice versa, and (iii) market transactions that occurs in the marketplace. Gift giving refers to a balanced exchange between relatively equal individuals, even though if it involves everyday items or a gift that creates an obligation for a later reciprocal gift. This exchange occurs in all societies. Unlike gift giving, distribution requires a centralized organization in the repurchase of goods and is often associated with an authoritative regime or state-type societies. A centralized authority can acquire goods through the control of production or taxation. Market exchange is associated with the existence of a central location where trade can take place with a socio-political system in which bargaining is possibly free.

The anthropologists that are represented by Polanyi have given two different definitions of trade. The first, from an institutional point of view, states that trade is a method of repurchasing goods that are not locally available. The second definition is that trade is the movement of goods whose path is through the market, that is, an entity including a mechanism of supply - demand - price (Polanyi, M., 1975). However, when referring to ancient societies, Polanyi argues that in early societies different communities met to exchange goods, even though their meetings did not create exchange rates. In fact, they presupposed prices in which there was no personal motive for profit. Therefore, there are differences in the connotation of the concept of trade, commerce, and exchange between pre-historic periods and later ones.

C. Renfrew, an archaeologist, suggested that professional trade was probably absent in [ST1] almost all prehistoric communities. In his view, trade was understood in its broadest sense as the back-and-forth exchange, or movement of materials or goods through a peaceful human mission. In some studies, Renfrew has written that trading is the remote procurement of materials, by whatever mechanism. The key point is the ownership change of the goods (Renfrew, C.M., 1969).

During the prevailing period of indoctrination theory, especially in the 1920s and 1930s, the similarity of sites and artifacts, spatially, was explained by this theory. [ST2] Diffusion and migration are used to explain the increase of urbanization, domestication of crops and livestock, and metallurgy as well as the influence of style, religion, politics, and economic ideas in the Old Continent. In the 1950s and 1960s, with the influence of unilinear, polylinear and neoevolutionary theories of evolution, some popular views of propagation theory began to be reviewed. New concepts were formed, such as the concept of the “interaction zone,” where approaches such as single and multiline evolutionary approaches, material culture approaches, eco-cultural approaches, and neo-evolutionary ones – the sociopolitical and technological aspects – and the basic social economy and other sub-aspects such as ideology, religion, aesthetics, and exchange are identified as the result of human cultural responses to their particular environments. In this period, the strong influence of Marxist materialism led to the identification of the main cause of the development of social complexity which depends on the control of the labor force and raw materials (Rahul Oka, Chapurukha M. Kusimba 2008). After the 1960s, the topic of trade and exchange began to receive more attention in archaeological research and served as the premise for the formation of trade/commerce archeology. The studies in the 1970s and 1980s focused on the issues of exchange and trade in prehistoric and historical societies, some of which strongly influenced some of the regional studies. Plog thinks that these studies have developed theoretical and methodological [ST3]discussions on the content/type, quantity and variety of goods and their sizes, the duration, the direction, the symmetry, the concentration, and the complexity of the exchange system (Plog F. 1977).

In many studies on the relationship between trade and other social aspects, the one that stands out is Renfrew's thesis where he argues that increasing social complexity leads to an increase in distributional efficiency, and in [ST4]proto-states, this is seen in the tendency to centralization, [ST5]regardless of primary or secondary production. (Renfrew, C. 1975). In general, studies in the middle of the twentieth century show an opposing trend between the economic and social aspects of trade in pre-industrial societies as an exclusive pattern for the aristocracy only. The wealthy could be distinguished from the common people on the basis of the presence of exotic objects (gold bowls, turquoise necklaces, etc.) found at home or in graves. Such studies help to realize that material culture is directly related to contemporaries who share different approaches to the means of production. This process is often interpreted as follows: the trade of luxury goods has the function of upgrading the wealthy elite from the commoners, and thus accelerating the social stratification (Philip Kohl 1975). However, there are many criticisms and questions about this approach as well as questions about the role of trade in changing social structures and organizations.

The period between 1978 and 1987 is considered a turning point by researchers where structuralist perspectives played an important role in the studies of exchange in pre-modern societies. This is due to the appearance of a world system theory and dependencies in the late 1960s and early 1970s and its gradual application in archaeology. Many studies in Central America, East Africa, and Southeast Asia on the exchange of ceramics, local products, exchanges between collectors and farmers, etc., were conducted based on the social-structural approach. A typical example is Hodder's research when he explicitly states that the lack of commercial aspects of modern money exchange minimizes the role of "import, market, merchants, middlemen, and profits" and that primitive exchange is socially and politically integrated, and therefore it is structurally cohesive. Thus, trade is an important but secondary part of the political economy (Holder I., 1980).

Approaches to the study of trade interaction in archaeology and the formation of archaeological exchange and trade

Trade and exchange archaeology is a sub-discipline of archaeology that defines the way in which material goods and ideas move through populations. One of the archaeological problems in general, and exchange and trade archaeology in particular, is the ability to identify and understand the causes and dynamics of product distribution from the production chain to the supply chain and vice versa. Archaeological competence in identification of production sites and the formation of the cultural layers containing artifacts has led to a natural interest in the movement of these artifacts in space (Dagfinn Skre 2007). Within archaeological studies, pre-modern societies, markets, currency, craft production, property rights, and concepts like buying and selling, all have different meanings in each society. The economies in these societies are clearly identified by religious, ethnic, and geographical ties, and exchanges can be used to strengthen social ties rather than merely create property. Therefore, the archaeology of exchange and trade includes the transfer of social ideas and practices in addition to the exchange of physical goods, and it examines the role of exchange and trade as well as their impact on social development, such as changes in the social structure and power structure.

Archaeologists have been interested in trade very early on and there have been many studies on trade or the exchange of raw materials and finished products. For example, the studies on the origin of flint and its movement from a raw material to the organization of its production, and the distribution of the finished product to prehistoric Western European societies. Flint, pottery, amber, copper, etc., were some of the main raw materials in prehistoric periods, and also the main goods used for exchange and trade among these prehistoric communities. Of course, other commodities, such as salt, textiles, gems, gold, etc., in the role of raw materials and finished products are equally important. For modern archaeology, the study of the exchange and trade of early societies has become an important field of study of archaeology (Renfrew C. 1969, Bahn P. 2016).

Archaeologists note that trade is just one form of exchange and that there are many other ways in which goods can be transferred in a space. The problem in archaeology is to understand which criteria to differentiate traded goods from goods that were exchanged through other forms¹. In early archaeological research, this issue was not studied systematically and now there almost no criteria that have been developed. Although in some case studies, a way to distinguish traded goods from goods that were exchanged through other forms were mentioned (Incifer Banu Dogati, Anna Michailidou, 2008).

Kohl Philip, in one of his studies, analyzed three archaeological approaches (Philip Kohl, 1975). The first and most popular approach completely ignores the problem and studies the spatial distribution of artifacts as a way to present alternative explanations for cultural interactions such as trade, political conquest or migration. If there is no interruption in time and evidence of destruction, and if the raw materials demonstrate an external origin while the quantity and other characteristics are appropriate, the relationship is considered trade. Trade here is understood as a form of peaceful exchange that is irrelevant to frequent [ST6]in people or culture. In this case, trade is not distinguished with other forms of exchange such as reciprocity or gifts. The second approach is in fact one from an anthropological perspective that uses anthropological patterns of distribution of material goods. This approach typically proceeds as follows: (i) present the distribution, (ii) acknowledge the lack of understanding the mechanism and organization of the form of distribution exchange, and (iii) a speculative but general reconstruction based on ethnographic analogies that are considered appropriate. A typical example of this approach is from Graham Clark in the trade of flint blades, axes, and adzes, etc. A third approach is hypothesis-testing. When different distribution patterns are established and corresponds with archaeological evidence that are sought to identify the most likely means of exchange. The confirmation can be set up with the well-known method of forming multiple hypotheses on the basis of independent data and obtaining meaningful associations and consistency with the original premise. This approach derives from Hole and Heizer's argument in their study of the trade "subsystem" when they started their work. They emphasized that prehistoric trade is different from capitalist trade, and it was easy to realize “exotic objects” at a site, but much more difficult to identify whether they were traded and what their origin was (Philip Kohl, 1975).

In fact, there are many theoretical models in combination with countless approaches to explain the important aspect of human - trade interaction and its role and position in forming humanity. Trade alongside political, religious and social processes is one of the most important factors influencing our evolution. The archaeological approaches to trade that is both primitive and modern, are the discussions about Marxism, formalism, and substantialism. Polanyi introduced the idea of substantialism. Those who follow this theory argue that economies operate within culturally distinct contexts, rather than operate separately from culture. These approaches such as the substantive approach and the formalist approach are applied in the economic study of pre-industrial societies, in which the former is more common.

Substantive Approach

The substantive approach was introduced by Polanyi in his research when the formal approach was the dominant approach in archaeological studies at the time. According to many economic researchers, Polanyi's approach has new elements, of which he argued that long-distance trade is the root of market trade, and this is opposite to the Neoclassicalists who generally believe that trade started locally and gradually expanded in scale. His other view is that pre-industrial societies are not subjects of relevant classical economic law. The determination of prices, for example, is based on the laws of supply and demand because all of their economic transactions are basically associated to the social relations. Therefore, production, exchange and consumption can never be independent of social control. The price of a product is fixed by social convention without being affected by supply and demand (Polanyi M. 1975).

Systematic approach

For archaeologists, approaches to the studies of different aspects of past societies are considered very important, but due to the nature of the physical data and the lack of the documents for interpreting and illustrating it, the physical data is always incomplete. The aspects of technology, economy, and physical culture are always demonstrated or more dominant than other aspects such as social structure, organization and social mechanisms, religions, beliefs, spirits, symbolism, etc. Nevertheless, it is necessary to study and approach the society as a whole in which there are multiple components. Approaches to the economic aspect where trade is an important component is also the current popular approach, which is the systematic approach. Renfrew proposes to analyze the interaction between trade and other sub-cultural systems. He identifies five subsystems: (1) technology, (2) livelihood, (3) symbolic or directional, (4) social, and (5) trade or communication.

Trade, according to Renfrew, includes the reciprocal exchange, exchange or movement of materials or goods by a peaceful human mission. Trade must contain what is traded (Renfrew, C., 1969). The archaeologists use the systematic approach to examine the broader effects of trade by considering trade as a subsystem that fits into other systems within the overarching cultural system. This approach can also be called the Approach of Economic Anthropology. Economic anthropology is the study of the social context of the economic transactions to explore the diverse relationships between the culture and economy. Economic anthropology focuses on three main research topics: production, exchange, and consumption. Historically, exchange is the first and most popular field of interest and there are many studies related to different forms of economic and non-economic exchange. The approach of economic anthropology is to examine the economic activities and behaviors in a close association to the typical cultural context of every region and every ethnic group (Lâm Minh Châu 2020). From this viewpoint, the study of pre- and protohistoric trade comes from the cultural characteristics of each human community in a certain space and time.

The representative of the systematic approach in archaeological research is Colin Renfrew. He believes that trade plays an important role in the development and appearance of the civilization in the Aegean, which occurs as the initial driving force or imbalanced subsystem, and when it changes, it causes a significant change in the whole cultural system (Renfrew, C., 1969). When the neo-evolution in social anthropology is popular, Polanyi's various forms of exchange were associated with distinct socio-political forms. The gift exchange, for example, is often associated with primitive societies, whereas market trade is related to a modern society.

Interdisciplinary or Holistic approach

Prehistoric trade and exchange approaches focus on the identification of exchange which is central to maintaining and changing cultural systems. Currently, technological innovations enable a more detailed and complete quantitative study of the manner, process, and origin of goods. The archaeological studies of prehistoric exchange nowadays focuses on analysis of the chemical composition of products. This provides consistent patterns in product descriptions, comparative ethnographic and histological studies, and modelling of the exchange system. Recent developments in quantitative research, with the use of prehistoric raw materials, have been made by scientific and technological innovations in the description of raw materials. [ST7]When describing the chemical characteristics of any raw materials, the basic procedures are the same regardless of the analytical techniques used. The data collected from the chemical properties reflect two main traits. These traits are (1) the absolute or relative abundance of a particular source material at each site and (2) the spatial and chronological distribution of these sites. This data forms the basis for descriptive patterns of prehistoric exchange systems and their chronological development (Timothy K.Earlejonathon, E.Ericson 1977). The materials for making artifacts become a better guide than their stylistic and formative features in finding the origin of the artifact and the sites where these kinds of artifacts are being produced.

To restore the entire system of exchange, or at least identify the transportation routes of the goods, the most important thing is to determine the origin of the goods themselves. Methods, such as chemical analysis, will help to accurately identify the type of material, the source of the material, and enable us to identify the finished product as a result. (Renfrew C., Bahn P. 2016). In fact, studies for trade and exchange to find these routes through an interdisciplinary or holistic approach are now available in Southeast Asia and significantly contribute to the identification of the increased social complexity, forming interregional exchange networks, and changing social structures² .

Research on the effects of exchange and trade

- Social connection promotion

Social 'connection' in time is now considered to be one of the main driving forces of cultural transmission and evolution. Within this framework, the interactions within and between groups are influenced by individuals' discrimination towards social relationships. These changes can occur due to the flexibility of cognitive mechanisms to meet behavioral requirements following the trajectory of the human social evolution (Anna Belfer-Cohen and Erella Hovers 2020). Trade boosts human interactions raising ßcultural interactions to a completely new level.

- Diplomatic Development

An important factor in the diplomatic development is the appearance of trade. Both economic and diplomatic activities require the participation of members that perform the negotiation and confidence building are not a part ò the same groups. The archaeological studies on prehistoric trade (including all forms) indicate that trade negotiations and meetings were crucial to the development of more complex forms of diplomacy. (Jovan Kurbalija 2021).

- Economic effects

Economic behavior is regulated by two sets of conditions: (1) environmental and technological factors and (2) conditions of social organization and social relations. The relationship between economic and social conditions appears so dramatically and evidently that some of the scientists advocated to analyze all social interactions within the framework of exchange relationships: exchanges of goods, services, personnel and information (Hutterer Karl ed., 1977).

- Social effects (interactions and social structure)

Exchange and trade has direct and indirect effects on the acceleration of social complexity and the formation of state-like political structures. One of the driving forces of social change and state formation in Southeast Asia was the development of a regional trade system, and its involvement in a long-distance trading network from east to west and from north to south. Studies on Metal Age societies and the shift from [ST8] chiefdom societies to early states and finally becoming a developed state in Southeast Asia has confirmed that trade, especially sea trade, is an important method that spreads not only goods but also ideas, religions, technologies and people which can all lead to radical changes in social structures. The important difference here is that previous studies absolutized the role of exogenous factors as a driving force for state formation, whereas later studies, based on new archaeological data, pay more attention and more objectively assess the position and role of endogenous factors in this process.

Central Việt Nam, with its complex and diverse geo-economic and geo-cultural position since the prehistoric period, participated in a multi-dimensional, multi-use regional and inter-regional exchange/trade network. The research on the effects of trade in pre-and protohistoric periods on the coastal areas of Central Việt Nam, first of all, needs to identify the structure and nature of exchange and trade, the fields affected by trade, and the level of its effects from which to evaluate the consequences of those effects. Studies so far have shown that exchange and trade as a whole system has a multifaceted impact on the economy, culture, and society. This holistic system resulted in cultural changes, economic development, and promoted the increase of social complexity that led to the formation of complex social structures typically being early states and developed states.  

To solve these problems, it is necessary to combine traditional approaches of archaeology and holistic approaches of modern archaeology. The traditional archaeological approach, such as mapping the distribution of the sites based on the appearance of the type of artifacts, sketches a process of domestic and inter-regional trade. Identifying ancient harbors and the related burial settlement systems to establish upstream - downstream exchange networks in the west-east direction and the relationship between ancient harbors at estuaries in the north-south direction based on Bronson's river-sea exchange model verify the accuracy of this model in practice in different river basins and periods based on the collected archaeological data.

Using the holistic approach, special attention should be paid to advanced methods and techniques in analyzing the physiochemical composition and technical traces of the materials to search for the origins of the raw materials used for artifacts. The results of chemical composition analysis and technical traces make it possible to identify the origin of artifacts located in studied sites (in addition to the geometrical and traditional comparison methods). The identification of patterns and of trade routes of an artifacts, based on the geographical distribution, quantity, and frequency of occurrence (uniqueness or popularity) of the goods in one site or in a site group, can predict whether they are common goods or family heirlooms or gifts, etc., and determine different forms of exchange and trade. The chain from production to distribution and consumption of goods, to which the holistic approach is applied to, includes all the links closely related to and affected by each other and the structure of trade. The holistic approach needs to place the Central region in the context of not only the region itself, but the whole world. Especially the world systems of exchange formed in the Early Iron Age (Andre Gunder Frank and William R. Thompson, 2004) and the strong migrations across all the continents.

The Sa Huỳnh culture originated from the Pre-Sa Huỳnh culture (Bàu Tró, Bàu Trám, Bình Châu, Long Thạnh, Xóm Cồn), dated at more than 3,000 BP, has always been the center of receiving and transmitting goods from both far and near[ST9]. The advantages of the environment and topography most likely made this area an essential location connecting and transferring many different cultures of East Asia, Northeast Asia, Southeast Asia (inlands, islands), and South Asia. Apart from factors relating to the natural environment, human factors are also significant to this. It is the dynamic and mobile feature of Austronesian speakers, especially the pasisir-type coastal groups [ST10](Ian Glover 2009). Together with these communities is the equally important role of South Asian communities living in the western mountainous areas. By exploiting the rich and diverse natural resources, South Asian communities were able to supply goods and services for the outside markets that craved for [ST11] spices, strange and rare specialties, etc., for the emerging empires and for the contemporary vibrant religious activities. It is possible to see that the Sa Huỳnh-culture inhabitants resemble the coastal communities of other Southeast Asian coastal polities with the port cities acting as hubs, which became the inevitable crossroads of the three important regions: the two regions that are economically and culturally dominant, which were China and South Asia, and a number of the mainland and island Southeast Asian ecosystems where communities of different origins lived (Manguin Y.P. 2016).

Notes:

The article is within the framework of a ministerial-level project: The trade effects in Pre-and protohistory on the coastal areas of Central Việt Nam.

(1). For example, how to identify the accompanied goods in a grave are those from trade/exchange or those are carried by a merchant when trading somewhere, what can be based on to realize whether the goods are from trade or carried by sailors on merchant ships, etc.

(2). It is possible to refer to Bellina Berenice's research on the exotic artifacts from many protohistoric sites in Thailand, typically in the two town ports of Khao Sam Keo and Khao Sek; Ian Glover and Bennet’s research on groups of bronze bowls containing high percentage of tin, carnelian beads from Ban Don Ta Phet; the research by Hung Hsiao-Chung et al on the origins and paths of jade jewelry from raw materials to finished products from Taiwan to some Southeast Asian regions. The lead isotope analyzes of bronze artifacts in South China and Southeast Asia by Pryce Oliver et al, etc., and more recently, the analyses of early Southeast Asian gold artifacts by Reinecke Andreas et al. The studies on the material origins and production of jade jewelry in Việt Nam and Southeast Asia by Nguyen Kim Dung et al.; Nguyễn Trường Kỳ’s research on glass artifacts from the protohistory in Việt Nam; Trịnh Sinh’s research on the chemical composition of the Đông Sơn bronze drums; the application of artificial intelligence in the study of the Óc Eo-culture beads by Nguyễn Khánh Trung Kiên et al, etc.; Nguyễn Quang Miên’s research with the use of the results of multivariate statistical analysis and X-ray fluorescence in stone material subgroups of 13 stone artifacts (statues, stelea) of the Museum of Hồ Chí Minh City. These studies are a continuation and complement of the previous studies using an archaeological - historical - economic - linguistic interdisciplinary approaches of the previous generations of scholars such as Wang Gungwu,  Solheim, Blust hay Kenneth R. Hall, etc. In the studies of trade, based on an interdisciplinary approach, Bronson outlines a multi-level exchange process through a fishbone model, in which thank to their own location, the coastal centers might have been able to control the access of domestic or dispersed groups to foreign traders and vice versa. As a result, the elites of these trade centers were able to find rare and high-quality ingredients for themselves and sent their regulated quantities as well as locally produced products instead of imported ones (Bronson 1978). Bellina Berenice has shown the multifaceted trade effects on the development of indigenous crafts through the appearance of foreign workers and the demand for the goods produced as the models of the imported goods and the formation of production - trade centers at the coastal estuaries. The increased demand for domestic consumption activated an inter-regional exchange network from raw materials to finished products together with the industries, the ideas and the people, etc., which are shown in the research of Hung Hsiao Chung, Lê Thị Liên, Lâm Thị Mỹ Dung, Nguyễn Kim Dung and many other Southeast Asian authors.

REFERENCES

ANDRE GF., AND WILLIAM R. THOMPSON, 2004. Early Iron Age Economic Expansion and Contraction Revisited. Paper prepared for delivery to the annual meeting of the American Institute of Archaeology, San Francisco, Ca., January.

ANNA B. C., AND ERELLA H.S., 2020. Prehistoric Perspectives on “Others” and “Strangers”, Front. Psychol., 21 January 2020. | https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.03063

BENNETH B., 1977. Exchange at the upstream and downstream ends: Notes toward a functional model of the coastal state in Southeast Asia. In Economic exchange and social interaction in Southeast Asia - Perspectives from prehistory, history, and ethnography, edited by Hutterer Karl 1977. Michigan papers on Southeast Asian studies, The University of Michigan, number 13: 39-52.

HIRTH, KENNETH G., PILLSBURY, JOANNE, 2013. Merchants, Markets, and Exchange in the Pre-Columbian World. Dumbarton Oaks Research Library and Collection. ISBN 978-0-88402-386-9.

HUTTERER KARL (ed) 1977. Economic exchange and social interaction in southeast Asia: Perspectives from Prehistory, history and Ethnography. Ann Arbor, Center for South and Southeast Asian Studies. The University of Michigan.

IAN GLOVER  2009. Sa Huynh - A Sociocultural Type: An attempt to develop an interpretative framework for a late prehistoric society drawing on archaeology, ethnography and analogy. The paper presented at the international conference “100 năm phát hiện và nghiên cứu văn hóa Sa Huỳnh” (100 years of discoveries and studies of Sa Huỳnh culture), Quảng Ngãi.

JOVAN KURBALIJA 2021. Prehistory: Origins of diplomacy and early technologies, Diplomacy and Technology: A historical journey, DiploFoundation, https://www.diplomacy.edu/histories/prehistory-origins-of-diplomacy-and-early-technologies

LÂM MINH CHÂU 2020. Nhân học Kinh tế (Economic Anthropology). In Nhân học ngành khoa học về con người (Anthropology as a scientific discipline of Human). Publishing House of National University in Hà Nội: 54-61.

MANGUIN  Y.P., 2016. Austronesian Shipping in the Indian Ocean: From Outrigger Boats to Trading Ships. In Gwyn Campbell (ed.) Early Exchange between Africa and the Wider Indian Ocean World, Palgrave Macmillan Springer: 52.

POLANYI M., 1975. Traders and trade. In Sabloff, J. A., and Lamberg-Karlovsky, C. C. (eds.) Ancient Civilization and Trade. University of New Mexico Press, Albuquerque.

RAHUL OKA, CHAPURUKHA M. KUSIMBA, 2008. Journal of Archaeological Research, 16: 339-395, DOI 10.1007/s10814-008-9023-5.

RENFREW C., BAHN P., 2016. Archaeology: Theories, Methods and Practice. Thamé & Hudson,  ; Current Anthropology 10, no. 2/3 (1969): 151-69. http://www.jstor.org/stable/2740471

RENFREW COLLIN 1969, Renfrew, C. M. 1969. Trade and culture process in European prehistory. Current Anthropology, 10: 151-169.

RENFREW COLLIN 1977. Trade and Culture Process in European Prehistory.

TIMOTHY K.EARLEJONATHON E.ERICSON 1977. Exchange Systems in Prehistory, Academic Press:  3-12.