Introduction
$B!!!!!!(JThe aim of this paper is to review some of the theories applied to pre-Roman state formation in Europe. This I define as state formation of the last two millennia BC although it contained as one of its most important examples the pre-imperial origins of the Latin state which, in time, gave birth to the Roman empire itself. For most of the first millennium BC, the Latin states were less powerful than their Etruscan neighbours, and, therefore, the term pre-Roman can be applied to the Latins in this limited sense.
$B!!!!!!(JIn the second millennium BC, the Minoan and Mycenaean states, in modern Greece, were the only examples of possible state formation in the area defined as Europe today. During the course of the first half of the first millennium BC, state formation had affected most of the Mediterranean coastal area including much of Greece, Italy, Spain and southern France. Of these areas, only Greece and central Italy (the Etruscans and Latins) was zones of indigenous state formation. All the other areas were infiltrated by colonies from the Greek, Phoenician and Etruscan world. In the course of the second half of the first millennium state formation, permeated into the uplands and at the end of the millennium deep into temperate Europe immediately prior to the take-over by the Roman Empire. This is a fundamental period in defining the foundations of the later history of Europe. History is never far from the surface of modern European politics, and much of that history has to be explored through archaeological evidence.
$B!!!!!!(JThe state has not always been the preferred unit of analysis in Europe, as it has been in the United States. Alternative frameworks of urbanism and/or civilisation have often been preferred as the categories of analysis. In this paper, the term state formation will be used, since it can allow study at a level of abstraction that is not tied to each cultural context (Stoddart 1999a). The paper will also make some examination of the margins of states, both to examine social stratification before the onset of the state and to examine relations between established states and less stratified groups.
$B!!!!!!(JTrends in the study of state formation have tended to move from an appeal to external influence towards a deeper understanding of the internal dynamics of society. This trend can be explicitly traced in Renfrew's 1972 study of the Aegean compared with previous studies that he reacted against: "the fundamental preliminary conclusion that Aegean civilisation was not brought ready-made to the Aegean, nor transplanted either by migration or diffusion from other lands." (1972, 476). Theoretically informed modern studies (Stoddart 1999b) today are beginning to give explicit emphasis to the indigenous in a way that was already starting to happen in more traditional studies (Pallottino 1975)

Traditional views
$B!!!!!!(JThe traditional approach to state formation was strongly related to diffusion: taking various forms of ex oriente lux (from the East, Light) as the mechanism of change. All that was civilised - and synonymous with the state - came from the East, often in some fully formed shape. In this view, the civilisations of Europe were secondary, lacked originality and took on a degraded form of the original: "These secondary and tertiary civilisations are not original, but result from the adoption of traditions, ideas and processes received by diffusion from older centres ... in this process of diffusion, culture was degraded." (Childe 1948, 177). Nevertheless, the course of the first millennium BC did bring about a process of positive expansion of civilisation even in the eyes of Childe. The result is as Childe (1946: 167) again puts it, "An educated Persian or Greek, however vague and inaccurate his knowledge of its extremities, could feel himself an inhabitant of a humanely populated world ... four times as large as an Egyptian or Babylonian could have dreamed of a thousand years earlier." At a more particular level, Etruscan state formation has been envisaged as a series of external interventions of varying intensity (Pallottino 1975): movement from the north, movement from the east. The traditional approach gave no credence to internal developments, but removed the process of state formation to some distant and more civilised source.

Myth and reality
$B!!!!!!(JMyths tended to reinforce this external origin of state formation. States often created myths to justify their own origins, myths which emphasised the exotic and external because they provided sources of ideological power.
$B!!!!!!(JUnfortunately, some archaeologists have frequently interpreted these myths as straightforward statements of historical reality. This tendency was until recently concentrated amongst more traditional archaeologists, trained in various forms of classical archaeology (Holloway 1985; Bernabo Brea, L. 1985), but there has now been a surprising and powerful resurgence amongst some of the most avantguarde of archaeologists. The most prominent case of this type is that of Andrea Carandini. This important figure made his reputation in Marxist analyses of the Roman economy, based in part on the important excavation of a Roman villa at Sette Finestre. More recently, however, he has been engaged in the excavation of key areas of early Rome, and this has led him to a reconstruction of the early origins of the most important "pre-Roman" state, that of Rome itself (Carandini 1997). Amazingly Carandini has given academic weight to popular mythological history in a manner which has stirred up much controversy over the correct method for combining text and material culture (Fentress and Guidi 1999). The 766 pages contained in the recent book by Carandini (1997) are a fine source of archaeological data, but the interpretation is considered flawed by many in terms of its "evocative application of antiquarian assertions" (Fentress and Guidi 1999, 464).

Core periphery theory
$B!!!!!!(JA modified, theoretically modernised, version of diffusion has appeared as World Systems Theory. The work of Wallerstein (1974), originally employed to interpret the development of modern European Empires, has recently been deployed to understand the pre-industrial states of the first millennium BC. Core periphery theory is underwritten by the same simple duality as that which is implicit in diffusion. A civilised (developed) core interacted with a barbarian (underdeveloped) periphery. Net consumers at the centre constrained and governed net producers on the periphery by a process of unequal exchange and exploitation. The original authors (e.g Wallerstein 1974) were guarded about the comparison of modern large-scale world systems to early empires., but this has not prevented archaeologists from applying the principles, in spite of strong contrasts between industrial and pre-industrial economics and politics. For instance, much of the evidence for exchange in pre-industrial economies involves luxury goods, whereas the greatest proportion of exchange in modern colonial systems has involved bulk utilitarian goods. Often the inequalities are not nearly as marked as classical authors would lead us to believe and the relationships between the indigenous and the colonisers were much more subtle and complex. Nevertheless, the examples of the application of this type of theory are numerous. In pre-Roman Europe, the interpretative framework has been applied - with various levels of critical awareness, acceptance and theoretical elaboration to Etruria (Stoddart 1989), southern Italy (Whitehouse and Wilkins 1989), Gaul on the Roman frontier (Nash 1987; Cunliffe 1988) and the Mediterranean as a whole (Sherratt and Sherratt 1993). Stoddart emphasised that the core and periphery was as much internal to the Etruscan civilisation as it was external in terms of its relationship to the Mediterranean World. The other authors analysed more classic cases of core and periphery, where established states (Middle Eastern, Greek and Latin) were in contact with non-state organised societies, and envisaged this relationship as the cause of the transformation of the periphery. Many of the complex societies of central Europe in the first millennium BC did not achieve the status of states (removing them from discussion here), and there is much discussion about the nature of their urban and political status (Wells 1995; Brun 1995)

Systems theory
$B!!!!!!(JSystems theory has not been extensively applied to the study of state formation in Europe. It has had much more influence in the United States, with applications to the major primary civilisations. Some studies of social complexity in western central Europe have been influenced by the systems approach, but not used it explicitly (Crumley and Marquardt 1987). The study by Renfrew (1972) of the Aegean region remains an almost isolated instance of its explicit application. Renfrew replaced diffusion as an explanation by a series of internal processes (Renfrew 1972: 479-504). These included: the development of a new spectrum of food plants, especially tree crops (olive and vine) which enabled redistribution and, in turn, population increase; the impact of metallurgy and trade. Various multiplier effects, encompassed in social drinking, linked to religion, and new commodities (e.g.daggers), linked to trade, led to changes in society. An important aspect of this study is that its conclusions could be measured and, if found to be wanting, in time rejected. Recent studies (e.g.Halstead 1994) have substantially re-assessed the empirical evidence for the subsistence changes underwriting other changes. Halstead and other authors have also questioned the theoretical basis of subsistence/redistribution and other concepts such as the positive qualities of elites. In the Aegean, Renfrew's study has become the model against which alternative explanations are measured. Van Andel and Runnels (1988) replaced tree crops with livestock as the underlying subsistence innovation; more recent evidence has also questioned this alternative approach. More recent authors, including Renfrew, have stressed the exploitative abilities of elites rather than their positive managerial qualities (Cherry 1984; Gilman 1981; Renfrew 1982). Finally, Halstead and O'Shea (1982) have developed the term social storage, where local subsistence uncertainty is overcome by setting up networks of tokens convertible over a region into subsistence products, labour or other resources.. A consequence of this storage network would have been its potential for exploitation and social control, and hence the development of complex society.

Peer polity interaction
$B!!!!!!(JAn alternative approach has given much more credence to the relative equality of interacting political units. Renfrew noted that socio-political change did not occur in isolation. Polities have tended to form in groups. There are cradles of civilisation. This pattern was first noticed by Renfrew in the Aegean and then transferred to elsewhere in Europe and other earlier city states. Renfrew (1972) had already developed the concept of "pecuniary emulation" in the Emergence of Civilisation. This concept was combined with the spatial pattern of replicated units, or Early State Modules (Renfrew 1975) to produce a new theory of state origins. The result was a process of interaction between polities of similar size and political power. Many interchanges (including imitation, emulation, competition, warfare, and the exchange of material goods and information) took place, which led to development of polities in a competitive relationship to one another. The basic proposition is that polities of equal rank compete amongst each other and create a dynamic for parallel political change in each polity.
$B!!!!!!(JGreece, Etruria and, at a later date, the centres of central Europe formed clusters of polities. In the edited volume where Renfrew and Cherry (1986) developed this concept, three papers fall within the first millennium BC of Europe (Cherry 1986; Snodgrass 1986; Champion and Champion 1986). The work of Cherry (1986) on Minoan "states" (more generally called palaces) in Crete is particularly useful in defining some of the operational problems of the peer polity approach. A primary problem is that without specific documentary records, it is difficult to establish that individual centres (or polities) are independent and politically equivalent. He underlines the paradox implicit in interaction between like units. Interaction both accentuates resemblance and enhances difference. It is, therefore, difficult to appreciate political difference from within a pattern of cultural similarity. He, nevertheless, concludes that each palace with an archive was likely to have been politically independent for at least part of its history. If this assumption is accepted, then homologies (similarities) can be noted amongst peer polities in a number of areas: palatial design and layout, the construction of peak sanctuaries, writing systems and elite pottery styles. He also analyses the alternative explanation, namely that external contact with the Eastern world might have provided the cause of change. He maintains that, in the light of peer polity interaction, this outside contact can be reworked as the medium for competitive display rather than the cause of change. The most severe criticism that Cherry raises is that peer polity interaction can explain the development of states, but not their initial origin. Once the polities are in place, the theory explains the processes of increasing complexity, but it does not explain how the polities came into being in the first place.
$B!!!!!!(JThe other two case studies on Archaic Greece (Snodgrass 1986) and Central Europe (Champion and Champion 1986) are less critical and simply attempt to operationalise the concept in their particular regions. Snodgrass examined some of the problems of the approach: the difficulty of analysing emergence of polities and the variable territorial size of early polities. He also analysed the clear evidence for polity rivalry: warfare, codified law, inter-state sanctuaries, temple construction, craftsmanship. The distinctiveness of the Greek case is that it was a conscious process, so conscious that it has ostensibly provided a backdrop for much of European civilisation. Champion and Champion discuss the barbarian end of the spectrum. Only their third case study (Champion and Champion 1986, 64-68), the final phase of the Iron Age, the La Tene $B-7(J period of the late second and early first century BC is strictly related to state formation. In this later phase where historical sources allow the definition of polities on the frontiers of Roman expansion (Arverni, Lernovices, Pictones, Bituriges, Aedui, Lingones, Sequani and Helvetii), inter polity rivalry appears to have been significant in providing a dynamic quality for political development.

Marxist approaches
$B!!!!!!(JThe most influential and cited Marxist analysis did not reach the critical threshold of state formation (Gilman 1981). The clarity of the argument can be expressed in a flow diagram where the importance of technological change as a driving force is emphasised, leading to social changes to protect the security of the new and accumulated technologies. This is what is often defined as a vulgar materialist form of Marxism, which, although expressed in a much more sophisticated manner, has similarities with some of the Marxist approaches of Childe. Gilman's model worked well in Spain (his study area) where new high investment technologies required protection, but worked much less effectively in Central Italy where the Bronze Age lacked the same sophistication.
$B!!!!!!(JThe most developed Marxist approaches to state formation are to be found in Spain after the liberation from the Fascist regime of Franco. A number of Italian scholars express left-wing sympathies, but Marxist implementation is not to be found so explicitly in their work except as a form of materialism (Peroni 1969). A recent Spanish volume (Ruiz and Molinos 1998) addresses the important question of the development of the indigenous Iberians in contact with coastal Greek and Phoenician colonies. There is much of value in this work, in terms of data and ideas, but its impact (at least in its English translation) will be marred by the complexity of language and the difficulties of translation. One underlying Marxist principle is the appropriation of land, but it is difficult to see how this is analysed archaeologically. On the other hand there is much to be commended in the method visible in the illustrations which is to look for hierarchies in settlement and funerary remains, including the magnificient iconography that defines Iberian culture.

Post-colonial approaches
$B!!!!!!(JA significant body of scholars are trying to move away from the colonialist preconceptions of the past (Snodgrass 1994; Rowlands 1998). Many of these are working on the reception of barbarians by colonial masters, but some are applying arguments relevant to state formation. One such recent work is a study of Sardinia, one of the major Mediterranean islands, by Van Dommelen (1998). This work studies the interaction of indigenous and coloniser in three phases: Phoenician, Punic and Roman. The leading concept in Van Dommelen's approach is hybridisation which he had already developed elsewhere (Van Dommelen 1997). There is also a Braudelian subtheme that evenements of imperial take-over did not immediately affect the conjuncture of local identity. This is an approach which rejects the dualism of the colonisers and the colonised, and seeks to explore the complex grades of the autochtonous through three phases: Phoenician, Punic and Roman. The key to this analysis is unlocking of material culture which is sensitive to disentangling and then providing a methodology for distinguishing identities. It is a procedure which seeks to escape dualism, but often has to resort to distinguishing the indigenous from the exotic in a particular artstyle or context. For the Phoenician phase, the Monte Prama statuary provides such an opportunity to study the "creative combination" of both indigenous and colonial features (Van Dommelen 1999, 110), the material foundations of new identities. For the Punic phase the sanctuary of Genna Maria provides another "complex situation of varying degrees of mutual influence, imitation and creative subversion of the 'high' Punic culture by the local inhabitants ..." (Van Dommelen 1999, 155) to enable the creation different local identities (Van Dommelen 1999,. 156). The analysis of surface remains (with its restricted survival of material culture) can, however, be more difficult. Van Dommelen was able to identify two landscapes in a manner which perhaps suggests that dualism continued to have more impact on landscape processes: a coastal pattern of central place and dispersed rural settlement and an inland pattern of dispersed larger agglomerations.

The reality of complexity: the case study of Etruria
$B!!!!!!(JWork in Etruria (Stoddart 1987) has shown that civilisation does not precisely fit the leading models. Peer polity interaction appears superficially to provide a good model. However, closer attention to the data reveals that although sub-regions behave as clusters of interacting polities, the region as a whole shows a number of different trajectories. South Etruria (between the Albegna valley and the Tiber valley) has five large packed primate centres which all developed prominently in the first part of the first millennium BC, but even these show a variation between 80 and 200 ha in size: Vulci, Tarquinia, Cerveteri, Veii and Orvieto. North Etruria has a more dispersed set of centres which vary even more in size and rate of development. Furthermore, other communities, some more easy to define ethnically than others, the Faliscans, the Latins, the Umbrians, the Sabines and the Picenes, all have varied settlement organisation and identities in terms of material culture. In spite of these problems in implementing peer polity interaction, there are some interesting insights by comparison with Cherry's analysis of Minoan palaces. Firstly, most of the cities are identified as independent by authors such as Livy, although I would argue that this independence could have been established from their primate nature without this confirmation. Secondly, there are both homologies (similarities) between and distinctive identities within each Etruscan centre. Etruscan inscriptions, temples and bucchero pottery provide examples of homologies. These homologies can also be explored at a more structural level: each city had broadly similar zones of political, funerary, productive and then ritual space around it (Riva and Stoddart 1996). Against this, funerary ritual provides examples of distinctive identity. Each city (and thus its citizens) can be identified from the rites of passage in its cemeteries, where difference was highlighted. In fact, the Etruscan case, provides a useful illustration of similarity and difference in a developing cluster of states.
$B!!!!!!(JA similar problem faces any application of core-periphery models in Etruria (Stoddart 1989); it is not possible to reduce Etruscan development to a reaction to outside impact. Scholars have increasingly emphasised the indigenous contribution in central Italian state formation, on the basis of both settlement and cultural continuity. The discovery of Late Bronze villages (late second millennium BC) under almost all later city states is significant. At last urban excavations are sufficiently elaborate to register these early levels. Furthermore the work at Murlo in Northern Etruria has provided a welcome counterbalance to the emphasis on Hellenic (Greek) influence which has dominated work in the south (Stoddart 1995).
$B!!!!!!(JWork in Etruria is beginning to draw together that important combination of material culture, burial evidence and settlement organisation that forms the basis of any effective study of state formation. Material culture has tended to be dominated by art historical studies positioned in the shadow of the Greek world. The concept of hybridity is beginning to be applied to Etruscan studies (Riva pers. comm.), pointing out that Etruscan material culture draws both on the local and the exotic to maximise social and political impact. Burial studies have been plagued by illegal excavations and lack of integrated examination of grave goods and human remains. New work (Bietti Sestieri 1992) is beginning to provide a more comprehensive approach, although care has to be taken to avoid over-interpreting anthropological data from cremations. Good human osteologists are relatively rare in the Mediterranean world and, therefore, there is not always the peer review which would be present in other academic communities. Finally, regional survey, which has a long tradition in central Italy, is starting to have a major impact on state formation studies (Stoddart 1987). The challenge will be to integrate the various dimensions of the landscape: the new evidence from urban excavations, surveys - old and new - of rural settlement and landuse and cemeteries. Although writing accompanies state formation, it is time that archaeological evidence has primacy over textual evidence in the interpretation of states.

Conclusion
$B!!!!!!(JA dualism still remains in the pre-Roman geography of Europe. This continues to influence studies of state formation: the urban states of the Mediterranean as against the more poorly defined political entities of central and Northern Europe. To this we should add the new explorations of the nomadic states of the steppes of Eastern Europe. Although the extreme core periphery models of the past are being moderated in a post colonial atmosphere, the spatial trend of complexity from the Eastern Mediterranean towards North Western Europe still remains a fact. Indigenous communities had to be receptive, but nevertheless in the European sequence, opportunities offered from outside facilitated social and political transformations.
$B!!!!!!(JMany studies remain dominated by the primacy of the written sources. The Classical tradition in European academic circles still remains strong. Ancient historians perceive material culture as a subsidiary source of information which fits into the framework provided by the literary record (Lomas 1996). Other ancient historians perceive archaeologists as merely the gatherers of data, the footsoldiers in the battle of interpretation, directed by the literary generals (Garnsey et al. 1983, ix). The literary record in these periods of state formation is restricted in its scope. It is the material culture of an urban, and often conquering, elite, whereas state formation is a widespread process which covers a whole landscape. The future of studies of state formation must involve the primacy of landscape into which the incipient literary records of the period can be introduced to assess their level of validity. It is only this way that the indigenous and the "others" (for which read Greeks, Phoenicians and later Romans) can be be appreciated on comparable ground. The Europe of the first millennium BC is now beginning to be appreciated from this landscape perspective, so that a Greek polis can be compared with an Etruscan city or with a Burgundian stronghold.

References
Bernabo Brea, L. 1985. Gli Eoli e l'inizio dell'eta del bronzo nelle isole Eolie e nell'Italia meridionale: archeologia e leggende.
$B!!!!!!(J(Annali dell' Istituto universitario orientale. Quaderno 2). Napoli : Istituto universitario orientale, Dipartimento di studi del
$B!!!!!!(Jmondo classico e del Mediterraneo antico.
Bietti Sestieri, A.M. 1992. The Iron Age community of Osteria dell'Osa. A study of socio-political development in central
$B!!!!!!(JTyrrhenian Italy. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.
Brun, P. 1995. From chiefdom to state organisation in Celtic Europe. In Arnold, B. and Gibson, D.G. (eds.) Celtic Chiefdom,
$B!!!!!!(JCeltic State. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 13-25.
Carandini, A. 1997. La nascita di Roma. Dei, Lari e uomini all'alba di una civilita. Torino: Giulio Einaudi.
Cherry, J.F. 1984. The emergence of the state in the prehistoric Aegean. Proceedings of the Cambridge Philological Society
$B!!!!!!(J30: 18-48.
Cherry, J.F. 1986. Polities and palaces: some problems in Minoan state formation. In Renfrew, A.C. and Cherry, J.F. (eds.) Peer
$B!!!!!!(Jpolity interaction and socio-political change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Champion, T. and Champion, S. 1986. Peer polity interaction in the European Iron Age. In Renfrew, A.C. and Cherry, J.F. (eds.)
$B!!!!!!(JPeer polity interaction and socio-political change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 59-68.
Childe, V.G. 1946. What Happened in History. Harmondsworth: Penguin.
Childe, V.G. 1948. Man Makes Himself. London: Watts & Co.
Crumley, C. and Marquardt, W. 1987. (eds.) Regional dynamics: Burgundian landscapes in historical perspective. San Diego,
$B!!!!!!(JAcademic Press.
Fentress, L. and Guidi, A. 1999. Myth, memory and archaeology as historical sources. Antiquity 73 (280), 463-467.
Garnsey, P., Hopkins, K. and Whittaker, C.R. 1981 (eds.) Trade in the Ancient Economy. London, Chatto and Windus.
Gilman, A. 1981. The development of social stratification in Bronze Age Europe. Current Anthropology 22: 1-8.
Guidi, A. 1985. An application of the rank size rule to protohistoric settlements in the middle Tyrrhenian area. In Malone,
$B!!!!!!(JC.A.T. and Stoddart, S.K.F. (eds.) Papers in Italian Archaeology IV. Vol. 3. Patterns in Protohistory. (B.A.R. International
$B!!!!!!(JSeries 245) Oxford, British Archaeological Reports, 217-242.
Halstead, P. 1994. The North-South Divide: Regional paths to complexity in Prehistoric Greece. In Mathers, C. and Stoddart,
$B!!!!!!(JS. (eds.) Development and Decline in the Mediterranean Bronze Age. (Sheffield Archaeological Monographs 8) Sheffield,
$B!!!!!!(JJ.R. Collis Publications, 195-219.
Halstead, P. and O'Shea, J. 1982. A Friend in Need is a Friend Indeed.: Social Storage and the origins of Social Ranking. In
$B!!!!!!(JRenfrew, A.C. and Shennan, S. (eds.) Ranking, Resource and Exchange. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 92-99.
Holloway, R.R. 1985a. Synoicism in Bronze Age Sicily. In Malone, C.A.T. and Stoddart, S.K.F. (eds.) Papers in Italian Archaeology
$B!!!!!!(JIV. The Cambridge Conference. Part iii. Patterns in Protohistory. (B.A.R. International Series 245) Oxford, British
$B!!!!!!(JArchaeological Reports, 389-398.
Lomas, K. 1996. Greeks, Romans and others: problems of colonialism and ethnicity in southern Italy. In Webster, J. and
$B!!!!!!(JCooper, N. (eds.) Roman Imperialism. Post-colonial perspectives. (Leicester Archaeology Monographs 3) Leicester,
$B!!!!!!(JSchool of Archaeological Studies, University of Leicester, 135-144.
Nash, D. 1987. Imperial expansion under the Roman Republic. In Rowlands, M., Larsen, M. and Kristiansen, K. (eds.) Centre and
$B!!!!!!(Jperiphery in the Ancient World. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 87-103.
Pallottino, M. 1975. The Etruscans. London, Allen Lane.
Peroni, R. 1969. Per uno studio dell'economia di scambio in Italia nel quadro dell'ambiente culturale dei secoli intorno al mille
$B!!!!!!(Ja.C. Parola del Passato 24, 134-160.
Renfrew, A.C. 1972. The emergence of civilisation: the Cyclades and the Aegean in the Third Millennium BC. London:
$B!!!!!!(JMethuen.
Renfrew, A.C. 1975. Trade as Action at a distance: questions of integration and communication. In Sabloff, J.A. and
$B!!!!!!(JLamberg-Karlovsky, C.C. (eds.) Ancient Civilisation and Trade. Albuquerque: University of New Mexico Press, 3-59.
Renfrew, A.C. 1982. Polity and Power. In Renfrew, C. and Wagstaff, M. (eds.) An island polity. The archaeology of exploitation in
$B!!!!!!(JMelos. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 264-290.
Renfrew, A.C. and Cherry, J.F. 1986. (eds.) Peer polity interaction and socio-political change. Cambridge: Cambridge University
$B!!!!!!(JPress.
Riva, C. and Stoddart, S. 1996. Ritual landscapes in Archaic Etruria. In Wilkins, J.B. (ed.) Approaches to the Study of Ritual. Italy
$B!!!!!!(Jand the Ancient Mediterranean. (Accordia Specialist Studies on the Mediterranean 2) London, Accordia Research Centre,
$B!!!!!!(J91-109.
Rowlands, M. 1998. The archaeology of colonialism. In Kristiansen, K. and Rowlands, M. (eds.) Social Transformations in
$B!!!!!!(JArchaeology. Global and local perspectives. London, Routledge, 327-333.
Ruiz, A. and Molinos, M. 1998. The archaeology of the Iberians. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Sherratt, S. and Sherratt, A. 1993. The growth of the Mediterranean economy in the early first millennium BC. World
$B!!!!!!(JArchaeology 24 (3), 361-378.
Snodgrass, A. 1986. Interaction by design: the Greek City state. In Renfrew, A.C. and Cherry, J.F. (eds.) Peer polity interaction
$B!!!!!!(Jand socio-political change. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 19-46.
Snodgrass, A. 1994. The nature and standing of the early Western colonies. In Tsetskhladze, G. and De Angelis, F. (eds.) The
$B!!!!!!(JArchaeology of Greek Colonisation. Oxford: Oxbow Books.
Stoddart, S.K.F. 1987. Complex polity formation in Northern Etruria and Umbria. 1200 - 500 BC. University of Cambridge,
$B!!!!!!(JUnpublished PhD dissertation.
Stoddart, S.K.F. 1989. Divergent trajectories in Central Italy. 1200-500 B.C. In Champion, T. (ed.) Centre and Periphery.
$B!!!!!!(JComparative Studies in Archaeology. London, Allen and Unwin, 88-101.
Stoddart, S. 1995. The domestication of the proto-villanovan mind. Antiquity 69 (263), 411-14.
Stoddart, S. 1999a. Urbanism and State Formation. In Barker, G. and Grant, A. (eds.) Encyclopedia of Archaeology. London,
$B!!!!!!(JRoutledge, 908-949.
Stoddart, S. 1999b. Redirected light on the indigenous Mediterranean. Antiquity 73 (281), 703-5.
Van Andel, T. and Runnels, C. 1988. An essay on the 'Emergence of Civilisation' in the Aegean World. Antiquity 62: 234-247.
Van Dommelen, P. 1997. Colonial constructs: colonialism and archaeology in the Mediterranean. World Archaeology 28:
$B!!!!!!(J305-323.
Van Dommelen, P. 1998. On colonial grounds. Leiden: Leiden University, Faculty of Archaeology
Wallerstein, I. 1974. The modern World-System: Capitalist Agriculture and the Origins of the European World-Economy in the
$B!!!!!!(JSixteenth Century. Vol. 1. New York: Academic Press.
Wells, P. 1995. Settlement and social systems at the end of the Iron Age. In Arnold, B. and Gibson, D.G. (eds.) Celtic Chiefdom,
$B!!!!!!(JCeltic State. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 88-95.
Whitehouse, R. and Wilkins, J. 1989. Greeks and natives in south-east Italy: approaches to the archaeological evidence. In
$B!!!!!!(JChampion, T.C. (ed.) Centre and Periphery. Comparative Studies in Archaeology. London: Unwin Hyman, 102-126.