CWC
PRIMER Introduction: The Approach to Classical World Civilizations
The purpose of this course is to
examine the emergence of ancient urban civilizations on three continents,
Africa, Europe, and Asia. The author defines these civilizations as ancient
world systems that underwent similar patterns of growth and collapse. Tracing
development regionally from prehistoric times through the height of the ancient
experience, we will identify the Classical traits of each civilization – traits
that gave each regional culture its individual character and traits that are
inherently recognizable in modern cultures that evolved in the same regions.
Our treatment extends from prehistoric times until the end of antiquity, or by
our reckoning from 150,000 Before Present (BP) to the sixth century AD.
Chronologically we organize this material according to three recognized eras of
urban civilization: The Bronze Age 3000-1100 BC, The Classical or Early Iron
Age 1000-27 BC, and the Roman Era 27 BC-612 AD. It should be apparent that
dates for most of the material covered in this book proceed backward, from BC
(Before Christ) to AD (Anno Domini) or from BCE (Before Common Era) to CE
(Common Era). For dates ranging in remote prehistory (tens of thousands of
years ago) the acronym BP (Before Present) is also used.
Our chief premise is that
civilizations thriving in distant continents during these eras increasingly
came in contact with one another to form an interconnected or global world system. At the height of the second century AD, interconnectivity
enabled societies such as the Roman Mediterranean, East Africa, various
principalities in India, and the Han dynasty in China to attain their greatest
levels of urban expansion, material prosperity, and cultural achievement prior
to modern times. Despite the limitations posed by pre-industrial technologies,
large urban societies were thriving across a broad expanse of landmass, sea,
and ocean at this time. In many regions the size of these societies far
exceeded those of societies existing in the same regions more than a thousand
years later. Nonetheless, by 600 AD all these societies collapsed. In the case
of Rome collapse was dramatic; in India and China, on the other hand,
traditional societies recovered within a relatively brief period of time.
Although it is harder to document, something very similar appears to have
happened at earlier points in the ancient experience, for example, at the end
of the Early Bronze Age, 2200-2100 BC, at the end of the Middle Bronze Age, ca.
1550 BC, and most particularly at the end of the Late Bronze Age, 1200 BC. At
these moments highly integrated economies and hierarchies in Egypt, the Aegean,
Anatolia, Syria-Palestine, and Mesopotamia appear to have experienced
simultaneous setbacks such as population decline, loss of advanced skills, and
a reversion from urban to rural settlement patterns. The benefits furnished by
complex urban societies – literacy, monumental architecture, advanced creature
comforts – declined into phases invariably referred to as “Dark Ages.” It would
appear as well that parallel setbacks were experienced in cultures existing
along the margins of major urban societies, from Denmark to Central Asia, from
the Indus to China. Sometimes these setbacks were significant in some regions
but passed quietly in others.
Hypothetically, one could argue
that the growth of urban populations in antiquity experienced undulating peaks
and valleys since the Neolithic Era. It is important to stress the lack of
commonality to the patterns of growth and decline. Each era of
interconnectivity between civilizations exhibited variable characteristics and
was exponentially larger (in size, in expanse, in cultural attributes) than the
one that preceded. Yet, each of the four ancient phases of global world-system
(Early Bronze Age, Middle Bronze Age, Late Bronze Age, Roman
Era) ultimately came unraveled and collapsed. This suggests that there is
something implicitly unsustainable about the foundations of complex urban
societies, not to mention the demands they impose on their environment and
human resources. This pattern furnishes a potential warning to the contemporary
pursuit of ever advancing levels of urban growth across the globe. The
undulating pattern of development, interdependency, and growth, followed by economic
disruptions, political disturbances, and societal collapse appears to furnish
an essential rhythm to the history of human experience. The transition from
scattered, highly diverse rural populations to more centralized complex urban
societies (what archaeologists refer to as the transition from dispersed to
nucleated settlements and the reverse) forms a central theme and underlying
premise to this text.
The
assertions made in the previous paragraph are broad and far reaching, easier to
state in general terms than to prove with specifics. In particular, several of
the terms used above require working definitions. For example, what precisely
defines a civilization, not to mention a world system? To understand how the human experience has undulated between dispersed
rural populations and interconnected world systems, we must delve somewhat
deeper into some of the basic principles of social theory and come to terms
with concepts such as culture, state formation, civilization, world system, and
globalism. This will require more detailed discussion below.
Defining
Civilization
Civilizations represent periods
of heightened engagement in the processual (step by step) development of human
culture. Culture represents a crucial building block of civilization. Human
cultures evolve, expand, merge, and progress to the point where a
"critical mass" of civilization takes hold. So what does culture
entail? Anthropologists define culture as a uniquely human system of habits
and customs acquired by humans through exosomatic processes, carried
by their society and used as their primary means of adapting to their
environment. Inherent in this definition is the insistence on
learned, as opposed to genetic behavior. Birds migrate seasonally as a result
of millions of years of genetic hard-wiring; humans harnessed fire through a
process of discovery, observation, and retention of acquired knowledge. In
other words, humans in isolated cultural contexts, such as those that existed
in prehistory, acquired skills, experience, and knowledge over time regarding
ways to improve their well-being and to adapt to a changing environment. They simultaneously handed these skills down from one
generation to the next through forms of education. Recursive forms of education
(that is, the transfer of knowledge that repeats itself indefinitely) enable human cultures to sustain themselves across
distances of space and time. Unlike animals, prehistoric humans learned to fashion tools for specific purposes,
to remodel landscapes for various needs, to express themselves through language
and art, to formulate hierarchies, to articulate a sense of awareness of their
place in the universe, to revere deities, and ultimately to devise appropriate
ways to commemorate their dead. Handed down from one generation to the next,
these recursive processes have been likened to memory. Societies rely on past
and living memory of their acquired attributes to perpetuate their existence.
Awareness of the existence of unique sets of cultural attributes holds the key
to explaining past human experience. In brief, culture reflects the single most
distinctive trait that separates humankind from other natural species.
Another
essential component to urban civilization is something commonly referred to as
the process of state formation, or the identification of definable stages
in human social organization. Since all ancient civilizations underwent some
process of state formation, the mechanisms by which this occurred in each
instance become important bell weathers to their development. Social theorists
have traditionally argued that the process of state formation entailed an
evolutionary progression from minimal forms of social organization such as
hunting bands, tribes, and chiefdoms to more advanced forms such as states, civilizations,
and world systems. Hunting bands and Tribes, for example, were loosely organized formations based on
lineage or kinship ties, or the perception
of the group as an extended
family or clan.
A Chiefdom is defined as
an
autonomous political
unit comprising a number of such entities under the permanent control of a paramount
chief. A State, on the other hand, is organized according to permanent institutions
that existed and perpetuated themselves independent of lineage connections. A state typically displays a
centralized government that maintains
a monopoly of the legitimate use of force within a specified
territory. Social structure within a state tended to be highly
stratified.
For the purposes of this book
we define a Civilization as a social
organization that transcended states both in terms of the breadth of its
territorial extent and its population base. A civilization typically
incorporated numerous states within its reach. As such it might be referred to
as an extra-territorial state or an empire. For purposes of this book we define
a civilization as a uniform society that
exhibits the following characteristics.
THE SEVEN CRITERIA FOR ANCIENT CIVILIZATION
1. URBAN CENTERS, Cities or
large dense settlements
All civilizations arose from
settled agricultural communities. These communities produced food surpluses to
sustain growing populations. As clusters of small agricultural settlements
expanded within the limits of a given ecological niche, urban centers typically
emerged.
2. PROFESSIONS or the separation
of population into specialized occupational groups
Due to the availability of
surplus agricultural resources, all civilizations developed labor elements that
specialized in activities other than food production. Craft, artisan,
metallurgy, forestry, mercantile, finance, and other non-agricultural
professions emerged by exchanging the results of their labor (metal wares,
pottery, timber, stone) for food produced by farming populations.
3. ELITES or a social hierarchy
that was exempt from subsistence labor
All civilizations generated
stratified population elements at the top of which stood elites. These usually
included some combination of warrior elites, priestly castes, noble
aristocracies, and/or royal dynasties. Elite elements dominated “inferior”
social orders and drew upon their surpluses to sustain themselves, thus freeing
themselves from participation in every day subsistence labor. These elites
invariably justified their elevated status by furnishing military protection,
religious direction, political representation, legal authority, infrastructure,
and civic order to those below.
4. PUBLIC WEALTH or the ability
to extract and store surpluses in the form of taxes and tribute
In addition to rents and dues
obtained by elites to sustain themselves, ruling hierarchies also imposed
various forms of taxes in the interest of the state. These resources would be
used to finance activities to benefit the common good, such as offerings to the
gods or the construction of urban defenses. Poll taxes, property taxes, income
taxes, import and export duties, manumission and sales taxes were all devised
by early civilizations. The human lament of "death and taxes" has
been a constant since the beginning of recorded history. Tribute was slightly
different in that tribute was a tax imposed on subject states by an dominant state. This indicates the existence of an empire
or extraterritorial state, a political formation recorded in Sumer already by
2700 BC. From the
perspective of a dominant imperial hierarchy, tribute enabled it to sustain
itself, to obtain prestige goods from distant populations, and to deploy its forces against
outside threats, thus furnishing security to subject states. From the vantage point
of the subject states, however, tribute amounted to a form of extortion imposed
on an already overburdened native population. Tribute payments inevitably
provoked impoverishment, resentment, and rebellion. This problem will be
discussed in greater detail below.
5. CANONICAL EXPRESSIONS OF
AESTHETIC ACHIEVEMENT (fine arts and monumental architecture)
Civilizations encouraged the development of formal
schools of art and design. These enabled the inhabitants to generate more
finely articulated expressions of aesthetic achievement than those possible in
less complex societies. In architectural development, sometimes the sheer size
and scale of monuments surpassed anything that could have been produced by a
smaller population. But there is more – training, skill, and the application of
sophisticated methods of science (mathematics, geometry, etc.), technique, and
design enable architects to construct structures that are straighter, more
angular, or rounder than anything that exists in nature. Artists reproduced the
human form in ways that were precise yet emotive. The visual effect of these
perfect forms (encompassing aspects of symmetry, and congruence of lines) have
been shown to stimulate the human mind in significant ways, triggering
cognitive responses -- a sense of awe, inspiration, emotion, and well being. Well-designed emblems of aesthetic achievement
have the capacity to express the significance of human existence unattainable
otherwise, to represent it symbolically, and to instill in the viewer a belief
that life has meaning. Not by coincidence most high art during antiquity was
rooted in religion. While the fine arts of any civilization inevitably emerge
from more primitive forms of artistic expression, recursive institutions were
essential to the development and sustainability of high art. The transition
from round huts in Prepottery Neolithic A (9500-8500
BC) to rectangular houses with drafted corners arrayed on a grid in Prepottery Neolithic B (8700 - 6000 BC) is generally recognized as a significant cultural
achievement and demonstrates the importance of learning. To make straight walls
and angled corners required enhanced knowledge of and training in techniques of
survey, mathematics, geometry, and drafting. These were precisely the kinds of
skills that could disappear when recursive institutions ceased to exist. As
schools emerged, their graduates designed canonical forms of aesthetic
expression that became recognized and reproduced as the emblems of their
society’s collective cultural memory. As high art and architecture these
expressions were transmitted spatially and temporally. The vestiges of these
expressions in monumental architecture, sculpture, and the arts tend to
distinguish the cultural attributes of one civilization from another and are
very much a part of their historical record.
6. CREATURE COMFORTS or the development of permanent forms of domestic
shelter
One of the principal
requirements of any urban civilization is to generate habitats, or safe, secure
means of shelter to its inhabitants. Most civilizations developed primitive
systems of urban infrastructure to improve the general quality of life. These
might include insulated houses with terracotta roofs to withstand the elements.
Houses might contain indoor plumbing, means of heating and cooking, furnishings
such as tables, chairs and beds, and bathing and toilet facilities. Large
scale, well organized water systems were essential to direct and to distribute
fresh, clean water across urban landscapes. Sewerage systems were equally
necessary to draw away waste materials and to diminish the risk of contagion or
disease. Streets and roads were necessary to import bulk quantities of
agricultural goods from surrounding hinterlands, just as massive storage
facilities and market places were essential for the distribution of surplus
commodities throughout the population. All of these result in artificial
landscapes or built environments constructed through human labor. One of the
more recent ways to assess the achievements of past civilizations is to
calibrate the quality of creature comforts (quality of life or well being) that it furnished to its residents. Such
comforts need to be evaluated vertically as well as horizontally. To what
extent did creature comforts extend beyond the social elites to lower elements
of society? To what degree did similar levels of creature comfort and household
technology extend beyond the core urban centers to the periphery?
7. LITERACY or a System of
Writing
All great civilizations
developed a system of writing, preserving for us at least some partial record
of their historical experience. Writing enabled them to record their
accomplishments and cultural achievements, and usually some manifestation of an
articulated world-view, whether philosophical or religious. Even when
restricted to a limited elite, literacy helped to sustain the recursive process
of stored cultural memory. It not only enabled societies to hand down knowledge
from one generation to the next, but it also facilitated the assimilation of that
knowledge by newly arrived outsiders, or the exportation of the same to
neighboring societies (something referred to as cultural diffusion), thus enabling outsiders to adapt to their new
situation and gradually to merge with the native population.
To define a particular human
culture as a civilization presupposes a number of assumptions that might be
interpreted as bias. While recognizing these shortcomings, the author uses
these criteria to focus on those civilizations that seem to have exerted the greatest
possible impact on the development of ancient world systems. Due to their
superior labor power, surplus resources, stratified societies, military
capacity, accessible technologies, and in many instances the advantageous
environments in which they settled (something referred to as geographical determinism), certain
civilizations managed to exert authority over less developed populations and
natural resources within their horizons. These states successfully tapped into
new and different resources further abroad, while retaining neighboring peoples
in subordinate positions. Asymmetrical relationships, in which more advanced
civilizations, or core polities,
dominated the activities of subordinate or periphery
polities form the basis of social constructs known as world systems. Simply
put, world system emerged when a more advanced civilization assumed control
over the economic activities of less advanced neighboring populations,
particularly by exploiting the neighboring peoples' available natural
resources. Invariably, the relationship emerged as one in which the core polity
exported costly, technologically more advanced finished goods (such as metal
wares, ceramic fine wares, household furnishings, textiles, works of art, wine,
and olive oil) to peripheral states in exchange for abundant, unfinished
natural resources such as timber, stone, metals, human prisoners, and raw
foodstuffs. The more advanced core polity used its wealth and power to
manipulate flows of material, energy, and people at a macroregional
(world-system) scale through the establishment of ties of super ordinance and
dependency.
One scenario posits that the wider the range of a
civilization’s trading capacity the larger its capacity for growth. This is
where globalism enters the picture.
Implied in each of these assumptions is the tendency for urban societies to
expand and grow to some undeterminable size. Typically, a society will expand
to the limits of the carrying capacity of its immediate ecological niche. The
question at that point becomes one of sustainability. Control of peoples and resources on the periphery typically enabled
localized economies to continue to expand; they could also lead to contact with
civilizations further removed. The extension of communications further and
further abroad formed the basis of an emerging macroregional or global world system. This is what
appears to have occurred during the Early and Late Bronze Ages and again during
the Roman Era. It needs to be emphasized, however, that no past civilization
was monolithic in character; each civilization consisted of a patchwork of
neighboring cultural entities that tended more often than not to preserve their
own separate identities while assimilating some veneer of the mainstream
culture espoused by the hierarchy. In each instance, however, cultural
attributes of the dominant society tended to remodel those of neighboring
peoples. This propelled them through space and time along common cultural
trajectories.
Theories for
World Systems Collapse
For complicated reasons ancient urban societies failed
to sustain their trajectories of growth. At certain pivotal moments, at the end
of the Early Bronze Age, the Middle Bronze Age, the Late Bronze Age, and the
Roman Era, geographically distant civilizations appear to have experienced
synchronous patterns of political, social, and economic collapse. The
historical record suggests, in fact, that the human experience has undergone an
undulating pattern of rise and fall. In the
final chapter of this book we will discuss various arguments to explain the
phenomenon of societal collapse. For now it suffices to recognize that
recurring patterns of societal rise and fall form an unmistakable template to
the course of human history. It is precisely at the juncture between
societal growth and collapse that arguments derived from resilience theory become
pivotal. Given the fundamental importance of this theory to the construct of
this book, we must impose on the reader’s patience slightly further to explain
its purpose.
According to resilience
theory, the natural world exists generally in a dynamic state of change,
invariably cycling through four recognizable phases: rapid growth, conservation, release, and reorganization. Those who
adhere to the argument of ecological economics recognize this process of rise
and fall, or growth and collapse, as inevitable phases of systems dynamics.
When applied to human activity, in other words, resilience theory posits that
human social-ecological systems cycle through the same four recognizable phases
(rapid growth, conservation, release, and reorganization) as other natural
systems. In the human historical experience the fore loop of rapid growth and
conservation may be identified with eras of large urban civilizations; the back
loop of release and reorganization with societal collapse and a reversion back
to subsistence forms of production. If dynamic change is the one constant
variable in nature, then the tendency of human societies to sustain themselves,
or even to attempt to sustain themselves, at peak levels of urban complexity
becomes counterintuitive. Inevitably significant changes will occur. Despite a
number of issues that remain unanswered, it is important to recognize for now
that the undulating pattern of rise and fall visible in the history of human
experience appears to resemble the recurring fore loops and back loops of the
wider ecosystem.
In this chapter we have progressed through an array of
definitions that underpin the assumptions in this textbook. We have explored
notions of culture, state, and civilization, the formation of world systems,
and global interconnectivity. We have posited the theory that patterns of
societal rise and fall in human history closely resemble those that exist in
nature. These concepts furnish an essential toolkit to be employed in the pages
that follow.