Wicc
Auto-translated
For now, you've only illustrated with clear examples the thesis that I stated from the beginning. That is, the relationships within compact human communities are quite reliably studied by archaeology, but the relationships between these communities are not very well studied.
I can't think of any other explanation for your persistent evasion of a rather simple and clear question.
Okay, then I'll try to reason it out myself. Let's take the simplest question for analysis – the regular payment of tribute from state A to state B. To confirm this, at least a large number of household items that are produced only in A must be found on the territory of B. Let's assume that such finds exist, meaning that the flow of goods in one direction has been proven.
Now, we need to rule out the possibility of trade relations. To do this, goods characteristic of exports from B should not be found on the territory of A. Ideally, they shouldn't be found at all, as finding them in small quantities suggests that there may have been many, but not all of them have survived.
But that's not enough, as export goods may be among those that don't survive in the ground. Or they may be some kind of services that, in principle, cannot leave any traces. Therefore, it would also be desirable to show the presence of violent actions by B against A – traces of battles, mass burials, and, most importantly, traces of weapons used by B's warriors (otherwise, it could be attributed to internal conflicts). Ideally, it would also be desirable to show the absence or minimal number of casualties among B's warriors.
Another possible factor is to show the prevalence of slavery of residents of A on the territory of B. That is, the factor of their presence there and their low social status. And the absence of such finds from residents of B on the territory of A.
Am I reasoning correctly? Can you recall any A+B scenarios where these or similar conditions are met?
I can't think of any other explanation for your persistent evasion of a rather simple and clear question.
Okay, then I'll try to reason it out myself. Let's take the simplest question for analysis – the regular payment of tribute from state A to state B. To confirm this, at least a large number of household items that are produced only in A must be found on the territory of B. Let's assume that such finds exist, meaning that the flow of goods in one direction has been proven.
Now, we need to rule out the possibility of trade relations. To do this, goods characteristic of exports from B should not be found on the territory of A. Ideally, they shouldn't be found at all, as finding them in small quantities suggests that there may have been many, but not all of them have survived.
But that's not enough, as export goods may be among those that don't survive in the ground. Or they may be some kind of services that, in principle, cannot leave any traces. Therefore, it would also be desirable to show the presence of violent actions by B against A – traces of battles, mass burials, and, most importantly, traces of weapons used by B's warriors (otherwise, it could be attributed to internal conflicts). Ideally, it would also be desirable to show the absence or minimal number of casualties among B's warriors.
Another possible factor is to show the prevalence of slavery of residents of A on the territory of B. That is, the factor of their presence there and their low social status. And the absence of such finds from residents of B on the territory of A.
Am I reasoning correctly? Can you recall any A+B scenarios where these or similar conditions are met?