Scholars all agree that social organization reached the scale of “states” or “civilizations” by 5,000 years ago, though they have not standardized the definitions of these terms. One quality that all early civilizations had in common, and that distinguished them from what came before, was sheer size. This book will consider a civilization to be any stably unified polity with population on the order of 100,000 or more, including at least one city on the order of 10,000 or more. Each civilization is identified with its land, its people, and its government, respectively defined as its country, its nation, and its state, which reinforce each other in forming a community identity.
People who conceive of themselves as a nation speak a common language. National identity transcends a human lifespan, forming a collective consciousness of a shared past (history, mythology, birthright) and future (destiny, offspring). At the same time, the class structure is even more stratified than in chiefdoms. The upper and lower classes are so distinct that it is easy to forget that they are interdependent.
A state is a government capable of sustaining a civilization. It is necessarily large and complex. With few exceptions, states had their apex at a single executive, a monarch. The monarch delegated authority to a multi-layered bureaucracy of civil servants (for earthly affairs) and priests (for sacred rituals).
One of a state’s most important privileges is its monopoly of force. In pre-civilized societies, individuals had commonly judged for themselves when they were wronged and how to retaliate. Murder had been much more prevalent 2 , largely due to endless cycles of revenge killings. 3 States now formulated laws to decree matters of right and wrong, and they established courts to adjudicate them. State governments also centralized military decisions. Public dispute resolution is one of the hallmarks of what we call a “civilized” society, though many governments certainly abused this power too.
How did the first civilizations form out of chiefdoms? If we accept the definitions given here, then the answer is outwardly simple: they grew! All of the remarkable achievements that we associate with civilizations are only found in large populations, so they could well be natural consequences of organization on the 100,000-person scale. Complex bureaucracies and legal codes were necessary to manage all levels of society. Magnificent palaces and temples proved claims to power. 1 Feats of engineering were undertaken to solve problems of scale (“how do we irrigate all these fields?”) and were enabled by the social apparatus they served (full-time engineers, a broad tax base, and large slave labor forces). 4
But just because a population grows doesn’t guarantee that it will remain organized as a coherent unit. In fact, population growth quickly surpasses the limit of what psychologists call stable social relationships. These are group relationships in which, essentially, everyone knows everyone’s business. Consider a family of four. There are six relationships within this family: Mom-Dad, Mom-Son, Mom-Daughter, Dad-Son, Dad-Daughter, and Son-Daughter. Each family member can easily keep track of all six relationships. As a group grows, the number of relationships grows more quickly than the number of people. A family of five has ten relationships. An extended family of 20 or 30 cousins includes hundreds of relationships. By the time we get to 150 villagers, they have over 10,000 pairwise relationships! 2 That’s about all that a human mind can process. 5
That creates a significant qualitative difference between small and large groups, defined by approximately 150 people. Smaller groups can cohere by virtue of trust alone. They feel instinctively like unified communities. Larger groups have blind spots, relationships that not everyone can see. Individuals feel less connected to the whole. A large group cannot coordinate itself on autopilot, much as a large orchestra loses its way without a conductor. In the absence of a supervening force, large groups will simply splinter into smaller units. Before chiefdoms, the natural social unit was the band, a hunter-gathering group of fewer than 150 people from a handful of families.
We need two more key ingredients to understand the history of unification: a need and a mechanism. Consider the environment in which civilizations evolved. They grew out of regions crowded with warring chiefdoms. They had to cooperate inwardly to compete outwardly. 6 A group that was larger or more internally organized could subsume a smaller or more unstable neighbor. Multiple chiefdoms could ally together to rout a competitor. In that cut-throat setting, each political body had only two options: cooperate or be conquered. The chiefdoms that survived were those that cohered.
Cooperation is built on trust. Before people can trust each other, they must have a shared reality, a common vision of the world. They must play by the same rules, follow the same leader, and envision the same problems, goals, and enemies. The earliest large-scale shared realities emerged as organized religion. 7 Every early civilization 3 had one.
Today, we are familiar with brands and trademarks as emblems of trust. When you see a McDonald’s or Starbucks in an airport, you immediately know what to expect, even if it’s in Timbuktu. One important function of organized religion was to serve as a brand of trust. Brand loyalty is a strong bond. I’m sure you know sports fans who have a lifelong, unwavering loyalty to their chosen teams. Likewise, when people are away from home, but they see familiar religious symbols or rituals, they can form instant bonds of community and trust – strong enough to offer loans to strangers. 8
Matters of trust, law, and order are fundamentally down-to-earth, so isn’t it interesting that every civilization built its brand around a supernatural cosmology? With an evolutionary approach to psychology, it is easy to understand how god-given morality offered advantages for state stability and defense. Gods are more effective judges, juries, and executioners than mere mortals. Gods have unlimited power of patrol, reward, and punishment, and there’s nothing we can do to usurp them.
Now, here’s the slick trick: these godly advantages inhere whether the gods themselves are real or not. All that matters is that we believe in them. And as we have seen, the human brain comes prepackaged with an unquestioning instinct for animism.
In organized religion, then, the concept of spirits mentally evolved into personal gods with publicly recognizable trappings. Gods kept an eye on individual behavior and meted out appropriate justice. Personal gods were clearly a mental representation of the greater good, 9 omnipresent agents of the state. Belief in personal thought-police gods encouraged the kind of behavior that sustained the community 10 and helped societies become more complex. 11 As these cooperative civilizations grew, so did their belief in moralizing gods. 12
Consider the ten Hebrew commandments as a well-known example (albeit younger than this chapter). At least five commandments demanded loyalty to the Hebrew God and tradition. 13 The others proscribed lying, cheating, stealing, killing, 14 and even the temptation to transgress. 15 We know that they applied only within Judaism, because God sometimes commanded Hebrews to kill, enslave, and steal from outsiders. 16 The commandments are cloaked in godly language, but their effect is no more nor less than Hebrew stability.
Church and state were a match made in heaven. Kings did not invent religion, but they had great power to organize it. People viewed kings and their priestly courts as agents of the gods, an incontestable source of power. Fear of god made it much less likely for subjects to challenge the king or question his law. This might offend our sensibilities in the age of freedom of religion, but it has proven the simplest way to achieve law and order.
A social construct like morality is useful only to the extent that people believe it. Beyond the religious instinct, dogma evolved an increasing pressure to believe. Religions can offer extravagant rewards for conformity (from peace of mind to eternal paradise) and severe punishment for heresy (from ostracism to torture to eternal damnation). 17
So … why do we believe? Is it because our religion is true? That can’t be the case for most people, because no religion is a majority. Or is it because organized religious beliefs and “brands” helped certain civilizations hold themselves together, grow, and pass down their cultures through the generations?
Organized religions arose out of settlements and farming communities, giving them some unique characteristics to distinguish them from natural hunter-gatherer religion. Civilizations synchronized their religious traditions with agricultural cycles. Animal sacrifice became a common way to bargain with the gods. 18 It was one of the most important state functions. 19 Mythology became increasingly tied to the nation, country, and state. People believed in their god given rights to land, resources, and kings.
This presented a quandary whenever two groups claimed conflicting rights. Should they share, or should they fight? Demonizing outsiders offered two evolutionary advantages: a self-defense instinct and the need to assimilate conquered people into the dominant religion.
The history of the last 10,000 years has involved a never-ending tug-of-war between the forces of integration and insularism. When small groups unite to form a larger one, there are undeniable advantages including peace and productivity. 4 This socioeconomic force is pulling us inexorably toward global society, yet that pull just barely outpaces the psychological counterforce of xenophobia.
Today, most of us live in secular societies where “separation of church and state” is axiomatic. It’s easy to forget the extent to which organized religion defined reality for 10,000 years. Though we still call many religions “organized”, they have mostly become untethered from earthly power. This paradigm is new and exceptional in the grand scheme of things. The old order still lives strongly in our collective memory. Many conservative communities still haven’t adjusted to the idea of state without a state religion. They still desire that sense of certainty and privilege, and some are still willing to fight for it.
There are only a few spots on Earth where chiefdoms grew spontaneously into cities and states. They were all located in the previously identified cradles of agriculture, nurtured by rivers. Their countries are today called Egypt, Iraq, Pakistan, China, Mexico, and Peru. No Old-World civilization remained completely isolated from all the others, so they all developed under some mutual influence in the long term. However, their earliest city-states were localized and appear to be largely independent. The New World civilizations were clearly isolated from the Old and most likely independent of each other.
Mesopotamia is a geographic term meaning “between the (Tigris and Euphrates) Rivers”. The region was agriculturally fertile but poor in other resources, necessitating constant trade between the river valleys and the highlands and war over access to metal, wood, and stone. This bustling activity stimulated several civilizations, starting with Sumer in the 4th millennium BCE. Sumer was known for its advanced women’s rights, including the rights to conduct business and declare divorce. Uruk, one of the world’s first cities, was an important Sumerian power center. Though long gone, its name still survives in the form Iraq. The subsequent Akkadian civilization was multi-national and was thus considered the world’s first empire. Mesopotamian culture peaked with the Babylonian civilization of the 1st and 2nd millennia BCE. Babylon’s cultural heritage still lives on in its astronomy, literature, and mathematics. Babylonians invented the sixty-second minute and the concept behind the dreaded quadratic formula.
Egypt traces its identity to the unification of the upper and lower Nile Valley civilizations in the 4th millennium BCE. For thousands of years, it was as stable as its iconic pyramids. It benefited from a predictable river, natural geographic defenses, and a “provider state” system that kept civil unrest to a minimum. 20 Egypt’s rulers, the pharaohs, were completely deified. The pyramids were elaborate tombs for a series of pharaohs in the 3rd millennium BCE. Egyptians embalmed their dead to preserve their bodies for the afterlife. 5 21 Though we often associate Egypt with its extinct exotica, it was a pragmatic civilization that produced several fundamental innovations still used today. Egyptian contributions included surveying and the Pythagorean Theorem, ink and papyrus, police, and surgery.
The Fertile Crescent was one continuous cultural zone. Its history remains influential today, as it shaped the world view that was eventually expressed by Hebrews in the bible. Many biblical tales, including the stories of Eden 22 and the fall of man 23 , Noah’s flood 24 , infant Moses 25 , and Job 26 have elements found millennia earlier in Mesopotamian narratives. The ancient Israelites originally worshipped many regional gods, including El and Yahweh. These two gods’ identities would eventually merge into the single God of Israel.
The earliest Chinese state known by name was the Shang Dynasty of the 2nd millennium BCE Yellow River Valley. Chinese lore tells of an earlier Xia Dynasty, but this is questionable history written centuries later, blatantly wrapped up in legend and myth. Enticingly, archaeologists have indeed identified a civilization that predates the Shang. They call it the Erlitou culture, and its existence is undeniably attested by advanced bronze work and roads rutted with wheel tracks. 27 It is not yet known if Erlitou culture can be associated with the Xia Dynasty.
The Shang Dynasty was founded by King Tang, a benevolent ruler, and persisted over a period of prosperity punctuated by famine. The general state of abundance enabled construction of countless towns and a few great cities such as Erligang and Angyang. Shang craftsmen excelled at bronze and jade objects and the production of musical instruments.
Compared to the other classic civilizations, China stands out as being the most continuous and humanistic. No foreign empire has ever erased the foundations of Chinese culture. Dynasties have come and gone, but the Chinese identity is traced without interruption to the Shang and beyond.
The Shang practiced divination, the art of communicating with ancestral spirits for guidance. One common form of divination was oracle bones. A diviner would crack an animal bone or turtle shell with fire and would then interpret the pattern of fractures as messages from the spirit world. Only ancestral spirits could communicate directly with Shangdi, the most powerful spirit, who directly controlled the weather and earthly fortunes. However, the Shang did not ascribe creative powers to Shangdi. They believed that humans made their own advances in civilization and technology. This “optimistic humanism” has always been central to Chinese philosophy. 28
The first civilization in South Asia occupied Pakistan’s Indus River Valley in the 3rd millennium BCE. Like the Erlitou, this civilization is known only from archaeology, not written history, so it often goes by the name given to it by modern archaeologists, the Harappan civilization.
The Harappans were a standout for their urban planning. They constructed wide streets laid out in neat grids. They excelled at brick work, and their cities had wells and extensive sewers.
Many mysteries remain. Their political structure is unknown; large-scale organization is inferred by their massive public buildings, widespread standards, and far-flung trade with China and Mesopotamia. They had a written language, but it is found only in fragments and has never been deciphered. They probably spoke a language from the Dravidian family, now associated with southern India. 29 Most mysteriously, this civilization vanished. 6
In the 2nd millennium BCE, Indo-European speakers called Aryans migrated into northern India. 7 They established a system of social classes or castes that socially isolated themselves from the Dravidians. The Aryan literary tradition is remembered as the Vedas, verses that honor the gods and ritualize ceremonies from weddings to animal sacrifice. Vedic religion was the precursor to Hinduism.
The Norte Chico civilization was found in the river deltas of coastal Peru as long ago as the 4th millennium BCE. Norte Chico architecture included platform mounds, sunken plazas, and terracing, features that remained prevalent in the region for millennia. What little remains of this civilization’s artifacts includes cotton textiles, musical instruments, and possibly an early example of a quipu, a system of ropes tied in knots to represent numbers. 30 Most intriguingly, as of yet there is no evidence of war in pre-ceramic Norte Chico archaeology, making this possibly the world’s only civilization to grow peacefully. 31
By contrast, Mexican chiefdoms were highly belligerent. There is no clear consensus on which one was the first to achieve the scale of “civilization”. The Olmecs (2nd millennium BCE) are the most ancient commonly cited candidate, based on large gulf coast settlements. The Olmecs left behind captivating stone sculptures, including the famous “colossal heads”. They also exhibited early appearances of Mesoamerican icons such as the were-jaguar, the feathered serpent, and the ceremonial ball game. 32 Even if the Olmecs were not the first Mesoamerican civilization, at least they were the best-known representatives of its culture.
Civilization greatly accelerated the pace of invention. Basic necessities such as irrigation, clocks and calendars, “intermediate” mathematics 8 , and codes of law date to this period. Other critical inventions included the sailboat and the plow. I recognize three especially far-reaching innovations as having revolutionized the human experience.
Metals as they occur in nature are difficult to exploit. Most are rare and / or stubbornly difficult to extract from the earth. Due to such challenges, metal working did not exist until the Neolithic period, and only about ten elementary metals were ever known before modern chemistry. Gold, silver, and copper were mined and used to some extent in early villages, even before civilization. These precious metals are soft and effective only for luxurious jewelry and art.
True metallurgy began with the controlled melting of metals, which dates back as surprisingly far as 7 TYA (Serbia and Turkey). 33 An early application was the creation of bronze by blending copper with a secondary metal. Bronze, unlike pure copper, is hard and rigid enough to use as tools, weapons, and armor. It became gradually more refined and widespread throughout the Old World from the -5th to -2nd millennia 34 , with tin becoming the secondary metal of choice. The impact on formative civilizations was so great that archaeologists refer to this period as the Bronze Age. Bronze found numerous applications in art and music, ships, and even mirrors. Bronze fishhooks and metal-tipped plows were vastly superior to their organic precursors. And only with the availability of chisels, saws, and rivets did it become possible to craft wooden wheels! 35
In Eastern Europe and Southwest Asia, iron began to overtake bronze in the 2nd millennium BCE. Iron was stronger than bronze and much more plentiful, though it required difficult new techniques for smelting and shaping. Iron swords, armor, and arrowheads were a critical part of the war package that swept through the Fertile Crescent at the end of this “Chapter 4” period.
The earliest wheeled vehicles are found in central Europe, Mesopotamia, and the northern Caucasus. These findings all date to the late 4th millennium BCE. Because of their proximity in time and place, it is probable that they all derived from one single invention, most likely in the Proto-Indo-European homeland. 36 Wheels rolled across the entire Old World over the next 2,000 years. Vehicles were personalized and beloved by their Bronze Age owners just as much as they are today; they were one of the personal possessions most often buried with the dead.
Despite the deceptive simplicity of the wheel, neither its conception nor its construction was trivial. The real breakthrough was not the wheel per se but the axle that affixed it to a vehicle. Aside from the matter of having metal tools on hand, a wheelwright must balance considerations of weight, speed, friction, durability, ease of steering, availability of wood, and simplicity of construction.
After all that, most terrains are still more difficult to traverse by wheel than on foot. Vehicles must have come into being only where specialized needs made them worth the trouble. (Tellingly, Olmecs made wheeled toys but never scaled them up). The first vehicles may have found utility as mining carts in the mountains or ox-pulled covered wagons on the steppe. 37
By the 2nd millennium BCE, wheel craft had progressed to veritable mechanical engineering with the spoked wheel and the chariot. Horse-drawn chariots, especially when bearing archers, were formidable and unstoppable weapons. They shaped the military history of the Fertile Crescent and became the status symbol of choice for kings and gods alike.
The concept of writing grew out of the ages-old art of drawing. Since some words sound like others, pictures can assume multiple meanings:
This rebus principle hinted at the idea that visual symbols could represent sounds regardless of meaning. When special symbols came to represent the elementary sounds of speech – syllables, consonants, and vowels – they became the first systems of full writing.
Writing was probably invented independently by only two civilizations: the Sumerians and Olmecs. 38 Egyptians and Indians borrowed the idea from Mesopotamia. 39 Egyptian hieroglyphics was the first system to use alphabetic characters, later extracted by Phoenicians into the strictly alphabetic scripts used by most of the world today. Chinese writing followed millennia later, and (though hotly debated) the preponderance of evidence suggests that the Chinese also adopted writing from western Asia. 40
The earliest writing was mostly for mundane record-keeping. Merchants wrote bills of sale while scribes recorded the accomplishments of their kings. Such records give us the first known individual names, from Egypt’s Scorpion King to a slave named Enpap-X. 41 Still, scant literature survives from before 1000 BCE.
Writing had enormous impact not only for the people who used it, but for present perceptions of the past. Until recently, the only known evidence of ancient civilizations was their written records. Since writing seemed to come from nowhere about 5,000 years ago, there was absolutely no conception of pre-history. The creation myths recounted in the earliest written literature were taken at face value, and most people alive today still believe them. Committing religion to writing made it inflexible. Oral traditions can change quickly and fluidly to keep up with conventional wisdom. 42 Scripture is (sometimes literally) carved in stone, forcing it to eventually grow old-fashioned.
In any event, writing disseminated and preserved knowledge like never before. In the historic age, there are now five ways to change the world: authority, wealth, arms, organized numbers, and ideas.
- Babylonian tablet public domain, https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Khashkhamer_seal_moon_worship.jpg (accessed, saved, and archived 2/03/20). ↩
- Max Roser, “Ethnographic and Archaeological Evidence on Violent Deaths”, Our World in Data (2013), https://ourworldindata.org/ethnographic-and-archaeological-evidence-on-violent-deaths (accessed, saved, and archived 12/12/20). ↩
- Christopher Boehm, “Retaliatory Violence in Human Prehistory”, The British Journal of Criminology 51(3):518-534 (May, 2011), https://www.jstor.org/stable/23640324?seq=1 (abstract accessed 12/13/20). ↩
- Charles Spencer, “Territorial expansion and primary state formation”, PNAS vol. 107 no. 16 (4/20/2010), pp. 7119-7126, http://www.pnas.org/content/107/16/7119.full (accessed and saved 10/04/2017). ↩
- Robin Dunbar, “Co-Evolution of Neocortex Size, Group Size and Language in Humans”, Behavioral and Brain Sciences 16(4):681-694 (Dec., 1993), https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/behavioral-and-brain-sciences/article/coevolution-of-neocortical-size-group-size-and-language-in-humans/4290FF4D7362511136B9A15A96E74FEF (accessed and saved 1/22/20). Though the famous “Dunbar number” of about 150 was proposed with a grain of salt and has not been rigorously tested, it is found to be consistent with many typical foraging bands and maximal self-managing teams. ↩
- The field of multi-level selection, or the spread of cultural traits such as cooperation through non-genetic means, is traced at least to Richard D. Alexander, The Biology of Moral Systems (Routledge, 1987), https://www.amazon.com/Biology-Systems-Evolutionary-Foundations-Behavior/dp/0202011747 . It is often justified by the statistical Price Equation. As a caveat, the whole principle of group selection is highly controversial. However, that resistance comes mostly from biologists, who do not incorporate group-vs-group competition into their models. I find it plausible if not compelling that, when groups must cooperate to compete, there is a non-genetic evolutionary pressure toward intra-group cooperation. ↩
- Emil Durkheim, The Elementary Forms of Religious Life (1912). Durkheim described religion as “a system of ideas by means of which individuals imagine the society of which they are members.” 1995 translation by Karen Fields, https://www.amazon.com/Elementary-Forms-Religious-Life/dp/0029079373 , p. 227. ↩
- Richard Sosis, “Religious Behaviors, Badges, and Bans: Signaling Theory and the Evolution of Religion” (2006). Chapter 4 (pp. 61 – 86) of P. McNamara (Ed.), Psychology, religion, and spirituality. Where God and Science meet: How brain and evolutionary studies alter our understanding of religion (Vol. 1): Evolution, genes, and the religious brain. Praeger Publishers. http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/summary?doi=10.1.1.527.8723 (accessed and saved 5/23/21). See pp. 10 – 11 of the isolated PDF or p. 66 – 67 in the book. ↩
- Such observations are traceable at least to Emil Durkheim, The Elementary Forms of Religious Life (1912). In fact, Durkheim wrote that, even before gods, rituals and totems symbolized the collective and were held as sacred. ↩
- Quentin Atkinson and Pierrick Bourrat, “Beliefs about God, the afterlife and morality support the role of supernatural policing in human cooperation”, Evolution and Human Behavior 32(1):41-49 (Jan., 2011), https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1090513810000899?via%3Dihub (accessed and saved 1/22/20). ↩
- Joseph Watts et al., “Broad supernatural punishment but not moralizing high gods precede the evolution of political complexity in Austronesia”, Proc. R. Soc. B. 282(1804): 20142556 (4/07/2015), http://rspb.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/282/1804/20142556 (accessed and saved 9/17/2017). ↩
- Franz Roes and Michael Raymond, “Belief in moralizing gods”, Evolution and Human Behavior 24(2):126-135 (Mar., 2003), https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1090513802001344?via%3Dihub (paywall; abstract accessed 1/25/20). Summarized in Franz Roes, “Moralizing Gods and the Arms-Race Hypothesis of Human Society Growth”, The Open Social Science Journal, 2009(2):70-73 (7/05/2009), https://benthamopen.com/ABSTRACT/TOSSCIJ-2-70 (accessed and saved 1/25/20). ↩
- Exodus 20:1 – 12. The commandments are not numbered 1 – 10 in the bible, so there are different versions of the numbering. ↩
- Exodus 20:13 – 16. ↩
- Exodus 20:17. ↩
- Deuteronomy 20:10-20, Joshua 6:16-21, Numbers 21:2-3, Psalm 106:34. ↩
- Samuel Johnson defined religion in part by “expectation of future rewards and punishments.” A Dictionary of the English Language (1806), p. 620, https://play.google.com/books/reader?id=z3kKAAAAIAAJ&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_atb_hover&pg=GBS.PA606 ↩
- Nicholas Wade, The Faith Instinct, Penguin Press (Kindle ebook edition, 2009) location 712. ↩
- The words “sacred”, “sacrifice”, and “sacerdotal” (priestly) have the same root. ↩
- Barry J. Kemp, Ancient Egypt: Anatomy of a Civilization, 2nd edition, Taylor and Francis (2005), Part II. ↩
- Herodotus, The Histories Book 2 Chapters 86-88. English translation by Henry Cary, Herodotus: A New and Literal Version, Harper & Brothers (New York, 1859), pp. 126 – 127, https://archive.org/stream/herodotusnewlite00hero#page/126/mode/2up (accessed and saved 11/07/2017). ↩
- Archibald H. Sayce, Lectures on the Origins and Growth of Religion as Illustrated by the Religion of the Ancient Babylonians, AMS Press (New York, 1887) pp. 237-241, https://archive.org/stream/LecturesOnTheOriginAnd#page/n247/mode/2up (accessed and saved 11/07/2017). ↩
- “The Myth of Adapa”, -4th millennium Akkadian myth, translated by R.W. Rogers, Cuneiform Parallels to the Old Testament, Oxford University Press (London, 1912) pp. 67-76, https://archive.org/stream/cuneiformparalle00rogerich#page/66/mode/2up (accessed and saved 11/07/2017). ↩
- “The Babylonian Flood Story”, translated by R.W. Rogers, Cuneiform Parallels to the Old Testament, Oxford University Press (London, 1912) pp. 90 – 102, https://archive.org/stream/cuneiformparalle00rogerich#page/90/mode/2up (accessed and saved 11/07/2017). ↩
- Similar to the infancy of Emperor Sargon of Akkadia. Analyzed by Otto Rank, The Myth of the Birth of the Hero (1914), Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease Publishing Company (New York, 1914), translated by F. Robbins and Smith Ely Jelliffe, http://www.sacred-texts.com/neu/mbh/index.htm . See specifically Sargon and Moses (both accessed, saved, and archived 1/25/20). ↩
- “Man and His God”, Sumerian, c. -2000. Translation with original transliteration and sources at http://etcsl.orinst.ox.ac.uk/section5/tr524.htm (accessed and saved 11/07/2017, archived 1/25/20). ↩
- Li Liu and Hong Xu, “Rethinking Erlitou: legend, history and Chinese archaeology”, Antiquity 81(314):886-901 (12/01/2007), https://doi.org/10.1017/S0003598X00095983 (accessed and saved 11/07/2017). ↩
- Paul S. Ropp, China in World History, Oxford University Press (New York, 2010) p. 1. ↩
- Asko Parpola, “A Dravidian solution to the Indus script problem”, lecture notes from World Classical Tamil Conference (6/25/2010), https://www.harappa.com/sites/default/files/pdf/Parpola-2010-Coimbatore.pdf (accessed, saved, and archived 1/26/20). ↩
- Charles C. Mann, “Unraveling Khipu’s Secrets”, Science 309:1008-9 (8/12/2005), https://science.sciencemag.org/content/309/5737/1008 (accessed and saved 1/26/20). ↩
- Jonathan Haas et al., “Power and the Emergence of Complex Polities in the Peruvian Preceramic”, Archaeological Papers of the American Anthropological Association 14(1):37-52 (Jan., 2004), http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1525/ap3a.2004.14.037/abstract (accessed and saved 11/07/2017). ↩
- For a good gallery of Olmec art and artifacts, see Anirudh, 10 Interesting Facts On The Ancient Olmec Civilization | Learnodo Newtonic (learnodo-newtonic.com) (2/16/2018; accessed, saved, and archived 12/20/20). ↩
- Miljana Radivojevic et al., “On the origins of extractive metallurgy: new evidence from Europe”, Journal of Archaeological Science 37 (2010) 2775-2787, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jas.2010.06.012 (accessed and saved 11/19/2017). ↩
- Christopher Thornton et al., “On Pins and Needles: Tracing the Evolution of Copper-base Alloying at Tepe Yahya, Iran, via ICP-MS Analysis of Common-place Items”, Journal of Archaeological Science 29 (2002), 1451-1460, https://doi.org/10.1006/jasc.2002.0809 (accessed and saved 11/19/2017). ↩
- David Anthony as interviewed by Natalie Wolchover, “Why It Took So Long to Invent the Wheel”, Live Science 3/02/2012, https://www.livescience.com/18808-invention-wheel.html (accessed and saved 11/12/2017, archived 1/26/20). ↩
- Asko Parpola, “Formation of the Indo-European and Uralic (Finno-Ugric) language families in the light of archaeology: Revised and integrated ‘total’ correlations”, A Linguistic Map of Prehistoric Northern Europe, Suomalais-Ugrilaisen Seuran Toimituksia, ed. By Riho Grünthal & Petri Kallio (Helsinki 2012), 119-184 at 125-127. http://www.sgr.fi/sust/sust266/sust266_parpola.pdf (accessed and saved 11/11/2017). ↩
- Richard Bulliet, The Wheel: Inventions & Reinventions, Columbia University Press (New York, 2016), chapters 3 & 4. ↩
- Carmen Rodriguez Martinez et al., “Oldest Writing in the New World”, Science vol. 313 Issue 5793, pp. 1610-1614 (9/15/2006), http://science.sciencemag.org/content/313/5793/1610 (accessed and saved 12/03/2017). ↩
- Steven Roger Fischer, A History of Writing, Reaktion Books (Kindle eBook edition, 2001), location 413. ↩
- Steven Roger Fischer, A History of Writing, Reaktion Books (Kindle eBook edition, 2001), location 2335. ↩
- Cuneiform tablet # OIM A2513, in possession of the Oriental Institute Museum, Chicago, IL. Translated and analyzed by Christopher Woods, “The Earliest Mesopotamian Writing”, in Visible Language, ed. Woods et al., Oriental Institute Museum Publications (2015), p. 39. https://oi.uchicago.edu/sites/oi.uchicago.edu/files/uploads/shared/docs/oimp32.pdf (accessed, saved, and archived 1/26/20). ↩
- Kent Flannery and Joyce Marcus, The Creation of Inequality, Harvard University Press (Kindle eBook edition, 2012), pp. 59 – 60. ↩
Facebook comments preferred; negative anonymous comments will not display. Please read this page / post fully before commenting, thanks!
Powered by Facebook Comments