Wealth inequality began shaping human societies 10,000 years ago

Today, we live in a world where the gap between rich and poor seems to grow wider every year. But while economic inequality feels like a defining feature of modern life, a sweeping new archaeological study suggests it hasn’t always been this way – and more importantly, it doesn’t have to be.

Researchers who analyzed more than 50,000 ancient homes across six continents found that wealth inequality, while widespread throughout history, is not a guaranteed outcome of human development.

The study used house size as a proxy for wealth and compared the distribution of house sizes at over 1,000 archaeological sites, stretching back 10,000 years.

What the researchers uncovered offers a fresh and much more nuanced perspective on how inequality has ebbed and flowed through human history.

Digging into the past

Study lead author Gary Feinman is a curator of Mesoamerican, Central American, and East Asian Anthropology at the Field Museum in Chicago.

“This paper is part of a larger study in which over 50,000 houses have been analyzed to use differentials in house sizes as a metric for wealth inequality over time, on six continents,” said Feinman.

“This is an unprecedented data set in archaeology, and it allows us to empirically and systematically look at patterns of inequality over time.”

Tool to assess wealth inequality

The team used the size of ancient homes as a consistent and measurable indicator of wealth. This allowed them to calculate Gini coefficients – a standard economic tool for assessing inequality, where 0 represents perfect equality and 1 represents maximum inequality – for over 1,000 ancient communities.

These coefficients were then compared across time, geography, population size, and types of political organization. The results defy the long-held assumption that inequality steadily grows as societies become more complex or as their populations increase.

“While there is not one unilinear sequence of change in wealth inequality over time, there are interpretable patterns and trends that cross-cut time and space. What we see is not just noise or chaos,” Feinman said.

The myth of economic inequality

For centuries, historians and economists have assumed that the rise of agriculture, the development of formal leadership, or the emergence of large population centers would naturally lead to greater inequality.

Ancient Greece and Rome, or medieval Europe, have often been treated as stand-ins for the human past as a whole. But this study throws that assumption into question.

“There are a lot of things that have been presumed for centuries – for example, that inequality rises inevitably,” Feinman explained.

“The traditional thinking expects that once you get larger societies with formal leaders, or once you have farming, inequality is going to go way up. These ideas have been held for hundreds of years, and what we find is that it’s more complicated than that.”

High levels of economic inequality, the researchers argue, are not a built-in feature of civilization. They are outcomes that depend on decisions people make, systems of governance they build, and social structures they maintain or resist.

“There are factors that may make it easier to happen or increase to high degrees but these factors can be leveled off or modified by different human decisions and institutions,” Feinman said.

House size: Clues to ancient wealth

You might wonder how the size of ancient homes can reveal so much about wealth. Archaeologists have long known that bigger homes are often linked to more elaborate construction, sturdier materials, and special architectural features – all signs of greater resources and social standing.

“Variability in the sizes of houses may not be the full extent of wealth differences, but it’s a consistent indicator of the degree of economic inequality that can be applied across time and space,” Feinman said.

“I know from my own archaeological fieldwork in the Valley of Oaxaca, Mexico, that almost always, the larger the house, the more elaborate the house, with special features and thicker walls.”

By comparing house sizes across such a massive sample, the team could track inequality at different stages of societal development. Some communities showed steep differences in wealth. Others, even large or politically complex ones, had surprisingly low levels of inequality.

It’s about structure, not population size

One of the most important takeaways from the study is that population size or technological advancement alone doesn’t determine how unequal a society will be. Instead, the research highlights the role of governance, cooperation, and social norms.

“The measure of inequality we found in these sites is quite variable, which suggests that there’s not one homogenized pattern,” Feinman explained. “In other words, contrary to traditional scholarly thinking, there’s no one-size-fits-all explanation for why societies become economically unequal.”

At some points in history, communities developed systems that helped mute or manage inequality. In other places, those leveling mechanisms may have broken down or never developed.

What made the difference, according to the researchers, were decisions made by people – through cooperation, leadership, and collective choices about how to structure society.

“Human choice and governance and cooperation have played a role in damping down inequality at certain times and places. And that is what accounts for this variability in time and space,” Feinman noted.

Rethinking the past and the future

This study doesn’t just reshape how we think about the past – it also has implications for how we view the present.

As debates about rising wealth gaps, housing crises, and the concentration of economic power continue around the world, this archaeological perspective offers a valuable counterpoint to fatalism.

“If inequality isn’t inevitable when human aggregations get larger and governmental structures get more hierarchical, then there is a suite of implications for how we view the present and how we look at the past,” Feinman said.

Inequality is not inevitable

Yes, there are moments in history when population booms or new technologies created the conditions for inequality to rise. But that rise wasn’t automatic. People had options. And they still do.

“The often-expressed views that certain economic, demographic, or technological conditions or factors make great wealth disparities inevitable simply are not borne out by our global past,” Feinman argued.

In other words, history shows us that inequality can be shaped, resisted, or redirected – depending on how we choose to govern, collaborate, and structure our societies.

As we grapple with inequality today, the homes of the past may serve as a quiet but powerful reminder: our present isn’t predetermined. The architecture of a more equitable future is, in part, ours to design.

The study is published in the journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

—–

Like what you read? Subscribe to our newsletter for engaging articles, exclusive content, and the latest updates. 

Check us out on EarthSnap, a free app brought to you by Eric Ralls and Earth.com.

—–