While early social hierarchy emerged from the so-called egalitarian contexts of small-scale societies, Wiessner (2002: 233) observes that "hierarchy characterizes the societies of our closest non-human primate ancestors and seems to be deeply rooted in human behavior" and social hierarchy can therefore be considered a "reemergence" of hierarchy. Egalitarianism is not the "tabula rasa for human affairs on which aggrandizers impress their designs" (Wiessner 2002: 234); rather, it is the result of coalitions and complex institutions of weaker individuals in society that curbs the ambitions of the strong and results in egalitarian structures that were as complex and varied as hierarchical power structures. Wiessner argues that cooperative behavior, such as elaborate exchange relationships, in egalitarian institutions fostered ideologies of coalition building and cooperation in kinship-based networks that extended far beyond local groups. While the egalitarian ethos constrained the competitive activities of aggrandizers, these institutions also provided powerful tools to the cooperative structure that could be used to the advantage of aggrandizers. Exchange has particular significance in agency models that strive to explain how the activities of aggrandizers can result in institutionalized inequalities because exchange can contribute to an understanding of the relationship between structure and agency at this juncture.

Aggrandizers had to work within powerful institutional boundaries that already existed in egalitarian societies in order to forward their interests. The changing nature of exchange, embedded within shifting institutional contexts, complements the emphasis on alienable commodities (Appadurai 1986, see Section 2.2.2). Aggrandizing individuals operate within institutional contexts, indeed their vehicle to promotion is social recognition, yet the ability to organize resources to obtain lower costs for particular items benefits aggrandizers and their supporters. Exchange is a universal feature of human societies, and studies that document the diversity of forms that exchange takes in contexts of early social ranking can shed light on the specific strategies used by aggrandizers that resulted in institutionalized inequality (Clark and Blake 1994).