State Building in the Americas
| English | Chinese | Pinyin |
|---|---|---|
| city-states | 城邦 | chéng bāng |
| tribute | 贡赋 | gòng fù |
The same sentence, a different hemisphere
- In the Americas, as in Afro-Eurasia, state systems demonstrated continuity, innovation and diversity, and expanded in scope and reach.
- The CED writes as in Afro-Eurasia deliberately: the same analytical frame applies.
- So American states are not an exception chapter — they are the same question asked of a separate world.
The CED writes "as in Afro-Eurasia" in order to signal that...
American states are the same question asked of a separate world.
Six named systems, three kinds
- The CED lists Maya city-states, the Mexica, the Inca, Chaco, Mesa Verde and Cahokia.
- Maya are city-states 城邦 — many centres, shared culture, no single ruler.
- Mexica and Inca are large tributary empires; Chaco, Mesa Verde and Cahokia are large settlements without empire-scale states.
City-states, tributary empire, or large settlement?
Sort each of the CED's American examples.
Select all the American state systems the CED names.
Chaco, Mesa Verde and Cahokia complete the list; Songhai is in Africa.
Tribute instead of tax
- The Mexica ran a tribute 贡赋 system: conquered communities delivered goods and labour on a schedule.
- The Inca ran the mit'a labour obligation, moving workers to state projects rather than collecting coin.
- Neither used money the way Song China did — which is a diversity point, not a deficiency.
The Mexica extracted goods and labour from conquered communities through a ____ system.
The Inca used the mit'a labour obligation instead of collecting coin.
Different is not less developed. The CED puts American states in the same sentence as Afro-Eurasian ones and applies the same three words. A tribute system without coinage is an answer to the same problem — how a centre extracts from a periphery — not a stage on the way to one.
"Scope" and "reach" differ in that reach describes...
Inca roads and storehouses extended reach without necessarily extending scope.
"Expanded in scope and reach"
- The CED's phrase covers two different things: how much territory, and how deeply a state reached into it.
- Inca roads and storehouses extended reach without necessarily extending scope.
- Distinguishing the two is the easiest way to write precisely about a state's growth.
A tribute system without coinage shows a state was less developed.
It is a different answer to the same problem — how a centre extracts from a periphery.
Comparison is what this is for
- This subtopic exists so that unit 1's final comparison has a second hemisphere to work with.
- The most useful pairing is Inca and Song: both large, both bureaucratic, and one had no writing system of the same kind and no coinage.
- A comparison that names a shared problem — controlling distance — is stronger than one that lists differences.
Both the Inca and Song China had to move value across long distances. Song used coin, canals and a paid bureaucracy; the Inca used roads, storehouses and the mit'a labour obligation. Same problem, two solutions — which is exactly what "continuity, innovation and diversity" is asking you to notice.
In the Americas, as in Afro-Eurasia, state systems demonstrated continuity, innovation and diversity, and expanded in scope and reach. Maya city-states, the Mexica and Inca tributary empires, and Chaco, Mesa Verde and Cahokia. Distinguish scope (territory) from reach (depth of control).