312068778JASON LOCKART1987 WORDS

Compare and contrast the theories that have been put forward to explain the evolution of
complex societies.
For centuries archaeologists have sought to uncover the mysteries of people of the past. While
advancing technology and increasing curiosity has allowed us greater insight into how the people
of the past came to be, there is still much debate and contention around ancient history,
especially concerning the conception and eventual demise of famous ancient civilisations. While
Wenke and Olszewski (2!" claim that original, long#past theories of the establishment of
civilisations revolved entirely around religion and the work of gods, we will be e$amining much
more recent and modern theories.
%carre and Fagan (2&" described, at length, many different thoeries put forth over the last
hundred#and#fifty years, primarily by archaeologists, many of which held values in common with
'.(. )hilde*s +rban ,evolution theory. )hilde established a commonly used form of identication
for what constitutes a state#level, comple$ society or *civilisation* which is very similar in
structure to other definitions such as that of %carre and Fagan (2&". -his definition formed the
basis for his theory of +rban ,evolution # a famous yet flawed and simplified estimate of how
comple$ societies became to be governed at a state level. -he +rban ,evolution theory claimed
that after the introduction of farming to a society, a new social class arose of artisans and
specialists. .s the introduction of farming and artisans created a surplus of food and goods,
societies then looked to other societies for trade and began to travel long distances for this
()hilde, /01" which brought about new and foreign materials to each society and led to
interdependence, increasing productivity. . centralisation of the distribution of food and goods
became a necessity for the growing society, bringing with it ta$ation and all its comple$ities.
%ocieties then needed to make records, such was the introduction of writing. -hus different
social classes were born, and religious leaders climbed to the top, showcasing the wonder that
their gods have brought about.
)hilde*s +rban ,evolution theory has elements present in many other theories. Wenke and
Olszewski (2!" reinforced )hilde*s view that the agricultural surplus formed the basis of a
society*s growing comple$ity by 2uoting -rigger (/0!2", who called it 3the one constant3 (Wenke
1
312068778JASON LOCKART1987 WORDS
4 Olszewski, 2!. p. 2&/" across the many ancient civilisations he had studied . While this adds
credibility to )hilde*s claim, it also hampens his overall +rban ,evolution theory by indirectly
invalidating the theory*s other claims, such as the direct lead to trading and craft specialisation.
5ven 6reasted*s (/07" Fertile )rescent hypothesis held beliefs similar to )hilde (/01" and
-rigger (/0!2", arguing that 8esopotamia and .ncient 5gypt flourished due to the rich soil and
vegetation surrounding them, causing a surplus of food.
%till, the belief of food surplus causing a society to grow in comple$ity is not a wholly popular
one. %carre and Fagan (2&" described economist 5sther 6oserup as believing that the food
surplus was a result of an e$plosion in population around fertile areas such as the 9ile, creating a
3specialized ecosystem...and thus civilization3 (%carre 4 Fagan, 2&, p. ::".
Wittfogel (/01!" believed that the most important evidence that a society was operating on a
comple$, state#level was their implementation of irrigation systems. -he e$tensive irrigation
systems are still visible 3even today...8esopotamia, ;eru, and most other areas of early state
formation clearly show the massive remnants of these ancient structures3 (Wenke 4 Olszewski,
2!, p. :/". Wittfogel (/01!" argued that due to the massive efforts and manpower re2uired to
not only create the irrigation systems but to maintain them, a society would most likely re2uire
centralised rule and a stratified social hierarchy where those in authority can employ or
command those to keep operations running. Wenke and Olszewski (2!" claimed that comple$
irrigation system also added social comple$ity to a society through the resulting and apparent
value of land after the irrigation system has been built. -his valuable land could be a target for
those with social power, creating very apparent discrepancies in social class. While Wittfogel*s
(/01!" perceived importance of irrigation is common with )hilde*s (/01", it is structured
e$tremely differently. Wittfogel also believed that irrigation brought about the need for writing
and sciences in the need for calendars and logs to record annual floods and dry seasons. <is
belief was that irrigation started many different things that all formed to become a society,
whereas )hilde*s +rban ,evolution theory structures the events as a domino effect, with, for
e$ample, the introduction of farming leading to surplus which lead to trade and so on. Wittfogel
(/01!" would, however, agree with -rigger (/0!2" as they both found irrigation to be the main
proponent of civilisation. %carre and Fagan (2&" found that the main evidence of the impact of
irrigation was that 3most settlements lay near ma=or rivers and made the most of the natural
2
312068778JASON LOCKART1987 WORDS
hydrology of the waterways3 (%carre and Fagan, 2&, p. :>", though only for 8esopotamia #
they claim that irrigation is not always correlated with early civilisations.
Wittfogel believed that conflict played a part in the development of a society, though he believed
conflict would arise primarily due to large irrigation works. Warfare would lead to the need to
defend these works, as the society as a whole depended on it for work, produce and trade. -he
people would then need to look to a central leadership again to determine how to defend
themselves. )arneiro (/0!" believed that conflict and warfare was the main contributor to the
growth and evolution of societies. <e believed that as populations grew, so did conflict. -his
effect was increased proportionately to the amount of natural resources in the area and, like
Wittfogel (/01!", believed that it led to the need of centralised rule. )entralised rule could
organise, train and form military groups, which would most likely lead to warfare. <owever this
brings about another comple$ity in itself, as the conse2uences for warfare can be endless.
Warfare could bring about the end of state#level societies if not organised well enough, or it
could lead to complete social domination, which would increase the population dramatically,
thus creating more warfare. ?t would, however follow the domino#effect system of )hilde (/01",
as warfare would lead to trade, leading to con2uest, leading to surplus, which would lead to
social domination. )hilde (/01", however, did not place such a large weighting on military
force or warfare. %carre and Fagan (2&" claim, however, that the only evidence of a coercive,
warfare#based rule on a comple$, state#level scale was in 8oche, and well after the
establishment of comple$ irrigation#based societies # showing warfare to be a conse2uence of
civilisation rather than a predecessor.
.dams (/077" believed that it was a large culmination of specific factors that resulted in a
comple$, state#level society. .dams* theory had similarities with those of )hilde, Wittfogel and
)arneiro@ he argued that the main foundations of civilisations were warfare, irrigation systems
and surplus of food and livestock based on local availability (%carre 4 Fagan, 2&. p. :&" # all
of which were interdependent. .dams argued that easy geographical access to natural resources
in particular played a large part in the success of a civilisation. -hrough the accumulation of
resources, trade became not only easy but necessary, which brought about wealth and a stratified
social hierarchy. -hough the foundations he described were interdependent, resource availability
ultimately determined the potential strength to which a society could grow. -his theory, %carre
3
312068778JASON LOCKART1987 WORDS
and Fagan described, was similar to that of Flannery who claimed a civilisation was a 3a very
complicated *living* system3 (%carre 4 Fagan, 2&. p. :0" due to the interdependence of .dams*
foundations of a society.
%carre and Fagan (2&" e$plained that .dams* belief of interdependence was similar to that of
%anders, who claimed that in the case of the .ztecs, their success depended on their ability to
e$ploit their environment and the leader to organise such acts. -his was due to the massive effect
of the change in sea levels, which pushed the need to ac2uire natural resources at every
opportunity. -his led to the need for a centralised rule to direct the growing population to
maintain the ac2uiring of goods for trade and consumption through the harsh, changing
environment. .ccording to %carre and Fagan (2&. p. >#>/" these ecological theories have
been reinforced very recently by the discovery of =ust how 2uickly the global water level was
changing in ancient times.
%carre and Fagan (2&" described the theory of 3;ower in -hree Aomains3 (%carre 4 Fagan,
2&. p. >2" which held a striking resemblance to .dams* (/077" theory. -he theory described
claims that economic power, social and ideological power, political power and the driving force
behind each were the most prominent reasons for a society to grow and evolve to become state#
like. -he theory is much more dependent than others on personal relationships and power,
arguing that relationships were formed between those who produced food and those who
distributed it (presumably those in a higher social class", between artisans and traders and traders
and the other trader whose goods are sought. -hese relationships created power, which then
resulted in a shift in social hierarchy, economic class and political power. 5very part of the
society depended on another, for either power or goods. -his sort of society could not have
conceivably worked without an organised central rule, however it is hard for this to e$plain, as
in other theories, the conception of the society*s evolution. %carre and Fagan (2&" admit 3there
was...no one moment when civilization came into being.3 -hey argue that all societies underwent
the described power struggle at different levels, 3%ome collapsed@ others survived for many
centuries.3 (%carre 4 Fagan 2&. p. >:" -hese theories bare little resemblance to that of )hilde
(/01" or, though with slightly more resemblance, Wittfogel (/01!" as it depends more on
relationships and assumes a gradual increase in population compared to the e$pansion in
population being a key factor in the evolution of a society.
4
312068778JASON LOCKART1987 WORDS
(.'. )hilde*s (/01" theory 3+rban ,evolution3 was arguably the most prominent theory in
terms of e$plaining the evolution of comple$ societies, though it may have been one of the most
general. -hough it has been heavily criticised by many archaeologists for its 3serious flaws3
(%carre 4 Fagan, 2&. p. :2", it offers an insightful and informative hypothesis based on a
commonly used definition for civilisation that )hilde himself defined. +nfortunately, due to its
narrow scope, it has been superceded by theories like Wittfogel*s (/01!" concerning irrigation,
which, though possibly not the only reason for the establishment of civilisations, most definitely
played a key role # even more so with the reinforcement of -rigger (/0!2" and Wenke and
Olszewski (2!". -o a lesser e$tent, the same can be said for )arneiro (/0!", who put forth
great arguments for the importance of warfare, though it was proven to most likely be a
byproduct of civilisation rather than causing its establishment. Other theories such as the
ecological and power#based theories put forth by %carre and Fagan (2&" held common values
but had less sources and fame. .gain, though flawed, )hilde*s (/01" theory was possibly the
most influential, with %carre and Fagan (2&, p. :2" admitting that 38ost scholars now agree
that three elements of )hilde*s +rban ,evolution were of great importance in the development of
all the world*s early civilizations...5arly ecological theories revolved around these.3 9o other
theories, by comparison, consistently covered all of the values put forth by )hilde*s (/01"
+rban ,evolution theory.
5
312068778JASON LOCKART1987 WORDS
Bibliography
Wenke, ,. B. and Olszewski, A. 2! (1th ed.", Patterns in Prehistory: Humankinds First Three
Million Years, 9ew CorkD O$ford +niversity ;ress
%carre, 6 and Fagan, 8. 2& (:
rd
ed.", Ancient Civilizations, 9ew BerseyD ;earson
)hilde, (. '. /01. +rban ,evolution. The Town Plannin !eview, 2/, :#/!.
-rigger, 6. (. /0!2. Cartiers Hochelaa and the "awson #ite$ 8ontreal and EingstonD 8c(ill#
FueenGs +niversity ;ress.
6reasted, <.B. /07. Ancient !ecords o% &y't: The &ihteenth "ynasty. 2nd ed. ?llinoisD
+niversity of ?llinois ;ress.
Wittfogel, E... /01!. (riental "es'otism) a Com'arative #tudy o% Total Power$ )onnecticutD
Cale +niversity ;ress.
)arneiro, ,. H. /0!. . -heory of the Origin of the %tate. #cience /70D !::I!:&
.dams, ,. 8c)., /077. -he 5volution of +rban %ocietyD 5arly 8esopotamia and ;rehispanic
8e$ico. *ournal o% +ear &astern #tudies, 2!, :27#::.
6