Decades removed from scholarly declarations that the polarizing formalist-substantive debate was over, the niche for a book-length treatment of premodern economies that both takes stock and outlines analytical paths forward remains open. Explicitly comparative, aimed at both general readers and disciplinary experts, and rich in empirical examples drawn from archaeology, history, and anthropology, this volume grounds the reader in assembled knowledge of the economic past. With chapters devoted to the domestic economy, the informal institutions that link households, the ties between domestic units and formal institutions, the financing of institutions, resource mobilization/taxation, merchants and trade, craft production, and markets and marketplaces (bookended by introductory and concluding chapters), the text features basic interpersonal and institutional units relevant to premodern economic practice.

By focusing a largely bottom-up lens on households and other fundamental components of the economy, Kenneth Hirth is able to describe rich variation in ancient and premodern economies (with examples drawn from prehispanic Mesoamerica, the classical Mediterranean world, Late Imperial China, Sumer, and many more contexts) while building an empirically grounded case to critique and eschew the categorical, stage-based monolithic models that have long dominated studies of humankind's economic past. By illustrating the variability of premodern economies and defining the basic units that he considers essential to their study, the aims the author states for the book are largely met. The bibliography is an impressive resource, and the glossary is an important pedagogical tool. But, more to the point, how and where does this leave the investigation of the documented variation in premodern economies across time and space?

Hirth acknowledges that his approach is empirically focused, theoretically eclectic, and selective in drawing from both substantive and formalist thought. But a deemphasis on the building and testing of new theoretical perspectives rarely means theory free, especially with a topic as richly debated as premodern economies. Instead, it tends to foster selective reliance on old paradigmatic tenets and seemingly commonsensical notions—in this instance, drawn from formalist, substantive, and even culture-historical thought. In discussing premodern households and their presumed adherence to the avoidance of risk, the author paraphrases William Faulkner: “You cannot swim for new horizons until you have the courage to lose sight of the shore” (p. 320).

But what is the evidential basis for the asserted assumptions (cf. Atwood, in Economic Analysis beyond the Local System, 1997, pp. 147–169) that “household self-sufficiency is the primary goal of the domestic economy” (p. 20), or that households are uniformly resistant to risk, or for the verbal coinage of a “law of unobtrusive expropriation”—a working principle—that people will be more supportive of emerging institutions that make fewer demands on their time and resources than those that make more demands (pp. 324–325)? How then do we understand the processes associated with the foundations of many of the globe's earliest cities and central places—Teotihuacan, Monte Albán, Cahokia, Rome (more could be listed)—where people flocked from afar, immigrated toward political power where their taxes were likely raised, and, when they arrived, quickly changed how they built their houses and what many did for a living?

The author's adoption of entrenched archaeological presumptions and truisms regarding the uniform conservatism of domestic decision-making and practice in premodern contexts underpins the blanket assertion that marketplaces only become important “where informal exchanges and the noncommercial economy could no longer regulate the distribution of resources” (p. 331), a finding that does not accord with extant historical evidence (e.g., Feinman and Garraty, Annual Review of Anthropology 39:167–191). Likewise, given the amply documented variation in ancient economies that is marshalled in the volume, grounding explication on the premise “that the cultural norms of society provided guidelines for the economy to run smoothly and with minimal short- and long-term risk to its members” (p. 319) seems to rely on a culture-historical trope that sidesteps in-depth recognition of cross-cultural patterns and processes that could help account for the marked diversity and dynamics of change that characterize humanity's economic past (and present). In his decision to concentrate on economic units rather than the practices of production, distribution, consumption, and inequality, different classes of evidence are underrepresented in this text, which, if more thoroughly examined, may have prompted fuller analytical explanations of variation and change. The limited attention devoted to diverse manifestations of economic inequities (and how they varied across time and space) is a missed opportunity to engage readers with the material richness of the archaeological record and its potential to gauge the depth and multiple dimensions of inequality beyond the “winners” who wrote histories. Also left unproblematized is why we cordon off most of economic history—ancient and premodern economies—from the last centuries in the West, especially given that those who isolate the modern West do not agree on just when that supposed “unique” transformation began. Hirth accurately notes key technological differences (fossil fuels, high-speed transport, and communication), but he also rightfully recognizes that when it comes to the way work is organized, this dichotomous distinction blurs. So in spite of the vast technological and institutional changes that preceded the last centuries in the West, to what degree do we really need completely separate disciplines and tools to study “modern economies”?

In sum, The Organization of Ancient Economies amasses a panoply of rich archaeological and historical case examples, structured in descriptive discussions of key economic units that thereby serve as a valuable chapter in the study of premodern economies. Nevertheless, it sticks close to shore, and so the book basically passes on the opportunity to set new conceptual agendas toward the understanding of global variation in human economic practices across deep time.