Achieved vs Ascribed status

1. Achieved vs Ascribed status Achieved Pre-chiefdom (egalitarian society) Ascribed Chiefdom (stratified society) Probably requires a steady source of surpluss

2. Surplus development Alexander Chayanov, the surplus ceiling How do communities get Surplus??? V Gordon Childe said it was intensive agriculture (but is it really?) Domestic Economy ==> Political Economy DMP 1 ==> DMP 2 The one constant in economic activities around the world is production of surpluses that the upper class appropriates through tributary relationships (Trigger 1993) Surplus?

3. Processes of cultural complexity • Process 1: (community aggregation, polities coming together) • Process 2: (community hierarchical organization, how one population comes to dominate others) • Robert Cairnero: • Supra-locality and (3) levels of administrative hierarchy • Process 3: (intra-community specialization) • Wright and Johnson • Need to collect taxes and administer the population --> Segmentation of power --> bureaucracy, writing, predictive sciences, etc. • Process 4: (inter-regional specialization) • Algaze and World-Systems Theory, geographic division of labor

4. Biased Selection of cultural traits in complex societies (example of a process): • Trait transmission (Trigger 1993) • Traits that vary little in ancient civilizations (one basic religious paradigms, one form of basic class hierarchy) probably do because they are very efficient. • By contrast, traits that vary quite a lot, such as art styles and cultural values, probably do because they have little effect on the adaptive and competitive success of the social organism of which they are a part. • Cultural traits that are beneficial to the stability of the society will be selected for • For example: the glorification of the warrior class (this is seen in societies around the world) • Community aggregation REQUIRES soldiers. • Soldiers come from the general populace (through drafts) • This places a big toll on the general population. • Big toll can cause instability in the system (people will revolt, not follow the leaders) • Some societies have an ideology that glorifies death in battle as the ultimate honor. Soldiers as heroes. Selfless. • Some do not. • Societies with this ethos have an advantage. There is justification for the commoners in paying such a heavy toll. • So a trait such as this would be expected to be strongly selected-for. • Most complex societies would be expected to have it.

5. The Rise of Social Complexity in Mesopotamia

6. Urban Genesis – Mesopotamia www.archatlas.dept.shef.ac.uk www.brown.edu

7. Chronological Overview of Early Mesopotamian Societies

8. Current Channels Channel circa 4000 B.C.

9. Archaeological sites mimic waterways in southern Mesopotamia

11. The rise of farming villages in southern Mesopotamia • emerged around 5300 B.C. (Ubaid); • were small in area(3-4 acres) and population (150 people); • sites of early intensified agriculturalproduction.

12. The first primary villages in southern Mesopotamia • arose around 4000 B.C. (Late Ubaid/Early Uruk); • dependent on irrigation-based farming; • incipient centers of production for exchange of craft items; • public architecture including temples; • about 10 – 12 hectares (25-30 acres) and about 4000 inhabitants.

13. Environmental Changes Drying of the southern floodplains around 4500 B.C. permitted irrigation- based farming and supported population growth. Separation of the Tigris and Euphrates forced populations into southern alluvium around 4000 – 3500 B.C.

14. Nomadic/transhumant pastoralists in the piedmont/foothills (yellow) exchanged with their counterparts from sedentary farming villages in the alluvial lowlands (red). www.edupic.net

15. Nomadic/Transhumant Pastoralists Sedentary Agriculturalists www.iraqscape.com www.iraqscape.com

16. The first true urbancenter (Uruk) in southern Mesopotamia • emerged around 3500 B.C. (Uruk period) • large-scale production and inter-regional exchange • monumental architecture: temple and palace • large in area (250 acres) and population (10,000 inhabitants) www.crystalinks.com/mesopotamia.html

18. Regional Scale Patterns recap • Sedentary villages emerge in southern alluvial plains of Mesopotamia. • Intensified agriculture based on river-fed irrigation and alluvial deposits. • Villages accommodated mixed transhumant and sedentary population. • Increased regional exchange and diversified resources. • Increased production of goods “pulls” migrants toward centers. • Environmental changes help to “push” populations south. • Urban centers arise from increasing growth and activity in primary villages and towns.

19. Looking inside the City • Pollock et al.1996: • At their peak, Mesopotamian cities were highly organized administrative centers • Evidence of (utilitarian) production led scholars to suggest that production had been organized centrally by incipient administrators • --> highly organized Administrative centers. • Was there central control of craft production? • What was the role of political coercion in Uruk? • Role of the Temple? • Two arguments: • A Coercive model (the all powerful state) • A Managerial Model

20. chronicle.uchicago.edu Household Production

22. Debitage used for blades to harvest cereal used for butchering and hide working

23. Blades used for blades to harvest cereal used for butchering and hide working

24. Clay Sickles

25. Ceramic Wasters

26. Household/Local Level • Spatial distributions of utilitarian craft items in Uruk Households: • all households produced about the same amount of each item; • no individual household specialized in production of any item; • Institutions – Temple, Elites – exacted tribute and organized exchange, but did not directly control production in EARLY cities.

27. Chronological Overview of Mesopotamian Social Development

28. Chronological Overview of Mesopotamian Social Development

29. Measuring Centralization of Populations • Rank-size Distributions: • graphically plot the distribution of the population in a • given region. • reveals the degree of centralization or integration of a • population. • provide one indication of the relationship between the • city and it’s hinterland.

30. Basic Principles of Rank-size Distributions. Zipf’s Law: (a probability distribution) is the tendency for certain sets of data (such as the size of population of cities) to follow a log-normal distribution. Log-normal: Second largest city ½ the size of largest, third largest is ⅓ the size of the largest, fourth largest in ¼ the size of the largest, etc., etc., etc.

31. Log normal Distribution: • Hypothetically normal distribution. • Used as a baseline to measure variation. • Indicative of a highly integrated social system. Log-Normal Distribution: The Largest city is twice as large as the second largest city, three times as large as the third largest city, and so on.

33. Primate Distribution: • Reveals a single dominant city within the region. • Surrounding settlements are connected with a single center. • Indicative of a highly centralized social system. Primate Distribution is revealed when the second largest city within the region is considerably less than half the size of the largest city, and not much larger than the other cities in the region.

34. Convex Distribution: • Multiple settlements/centers of similar size within a region. • Multiple important secondary centers. • Indicative populations that lack a systemic relationship (more than • one political unit). Convex Distributions occur when the second largest city and multiple subsequently-ranked cities are similar in size to the largest city.

35. Population Estimates: Pollock 1999:64 “Archaeologists commonly assume that settled area is directly proportional to population size.” Typically, estimates of 100 to 200 per hectare for Mesopotamia, based on ethnographic and historic records.

36. Late Ubaid Period Settlement Hierarchy • Primate Distribution. • One large settlement, two medium settlements, several small. • Is this is centralized or integrated system? Rank-Size Distribution POPULATION Settlement Distribution RANK

37. Increasingly “primo-convex”. • Suggests multiple second order settlements. • How might this pattern be explained in terms of social and • political relationships? Uruk Period Settlement Hierarchy Rank-Size Distribution POPULATION Settlement Distribution RANK

38. Increasingly “primo-convex”. • Suggests multiple second order settlements. • How might this pattern be explained in terms of social and • political relationships? Uruk Period Settlement Hierarchy Rank-Size Distribution POPULATION Uruk, primate center Settlement Distribution RANK

39. Early Dynastic I Period Settlement Hierarchy Remains primo-convex, but with increasing variation in Smaller (lower order) sites. Rank-Size Distribution POPULATION RANK Settlement Distribution

40. Early Dynastic I Period Settlement Hierarchy Remains primo-convex, but with increasing variation in Smaller (lower order) sites. Rank-Size Distribution POPULATION RANK Settlement Distribution

41. Top two sites are much closer to one-another in size. • Lower-order sites form separate tiers. • Implies two separate polities. What might this reflect • about social patterns? Sasanian Period Settlement Hierarchy Rank-Size Distribution POPULATION Settlement Distribution RANK

42. Top two sites are much closer to one-another in size. • Lower-order sites form separate tiers. • Implies two separate polities – two primate centers. Sasanian Period Settlement Hierarchy Rank-Size Distribution POPULATION Settlement Distribution RANK

43. These changes in the way the population is distributed in settlements reflect changes in the social organization. • Populations shifting from rural to urban areas. • Growing secondary villages. • Increasing interdependence of settlements within a region. • Increasing Integration of settlements within a region. • Emergence of multiple polities within region in later periods.

44. Bureaucratic Growth in Mesopotamia www.brown.edu

45. Growth of Bureaucracy • Production becomes increasingly specialized beginning • around 3000 B.C. • Communities specialized in producing certain goods. • Created interdependence among communities for • goods. • Created a need/opportunity for organized redistribution • of goods among the population.

46. Specialized Production and Redistribution Specialized Metal Production Specialized Pottery Production Specialized agricultural Production

47. Indicators of Bureaucratic Growth • Seals • Increase in frequency • Increase in sophistication Seals were tools of economic interaction. The sharp increase in use and sophistication of seals reflects increases in the scale of economic activities.

50. Indicators of Bureaucratic Growth Emergence of portable writing • Technological Advances • Wheel • Plow • Wheel-thrown and mold-made pottery • Specialized Production • potters • metal smiths • textiles