Factors leading to onset of agriculture

In the late nineteenth/ early twentieth century, prehistorians had very little information about early
neolithic settlements. It was often assumed that food production began in those fertile areas (along the
Nile in Egypt or between the Tigris and Euphrates rivers in Mesopotamia). From the 1950s a vast amount
of new archeological evidence has become available from sites in west asia and this was also the time
when radiocarbon dating was developed thus facilitating the interpretation of the finds. Nearly 150 early
neolithic sites have been discovered in West Asia. Apart from the fact that the date for the beginning of
the neolithic have now been pushed hack by almost 5000 years, it is clear that the shift to food-
production did not initially take place in fertile river valleys but in grasslands, foothills and semi-arid
areas which were located at a distance from the very fertile river zones.

The earliest neolithic settlements have been found in two areas of West Asia: Palestine/Israel and North
Iraq. The Jericho neolithic dates back to 10, 500 BP. Jericho exhibits continuity of settlement from the
Natufian culture to various phases of the neolithic. The water provided by the natural spring/ oasis at
Jericho would have attracted the earliest settlers. Jericho gradually became a semipermanent settlement
where hunter-gatherers supplemented their food supply with a little cultivation. Although Jericho is
perhaps the oldest neolithic settlement that we know of, it was the Zagros Mountain foothills in North
Iraq that provided the first archeological evidence for the beginnings of agriculture.

Why was hunting and food gathering abandoned? This is a relevant question mainly for two reasons.
Firstly, people do not easily give up a pattern of subsistence which they have been accustomed to for
generations. Secondly, hunting and food gathering does not necessarily imply near-starvation conditions
or inadequate food supply. The transition to food production was a complex phenomenon. It involved
manipulating nature. Through human intervention some plants were made to grow intensively, while
others were excluded. These plants were not just grown in their wild state but they were domesticated.
Over a period of time some characteristics of chosen species of plants were altered. Characteristics
which were found useful were adopted, whereas unfavourable characteristics were discarded. Similar
with animals.

The notion that humans took to agriculture when they discovered the seed-plant relationship is also a
popular one. Hunter-gatherers paid close attention in observing plants and animals. This helped them to
extrapolate that which plant/animal food will be available for a particular part of an year. Late
pleistocene humans would have accumulated a great deal of information about how plants grow but it is
only at the beginning of the post-glacial epoch that this knowledge began to be used to manipulate
nature.

(Fir different theories aa jaengi)

We can now see the origin of agriculture as being a process, rather than an event. The different theories
that have been advanced do not necessarily account for the beginnings of food production in mutually
exclusive terms. While the stress in some theories in on environment, it is not as though environmental
change as a catalyst is completely ignored. The growth of those plants which were considered useful
could have been fostered. It is even possible that some plants were cultivated for their poison (for
arrows) or for extracting colours (for paintings).
The domestication of animals was a somewhat more complicated affair. Instead of killing animals directly
for food, as happens in a hunting economy, some species were reared for their produce: milk, eggs, wool
and meat. Animals were selectively bred so that they could provide surplus milk and eggs. In the case of
sheep, human intervention made them grow wool on their body. Wild ancestors of sheep did not grow
wool. As for animals which were reared for meat, these were not killed immediately but allowed to grow
to a particular age before they were slaughtered. Domestication of animals meant that they were made
to shed their wild characteristics (reduction of horn size, teeth, etc.). The first stage was a period of loose
interaction between humans and those animals which could be tamed easily. This was followed by a
period of rigid captivity of chosen species. The animals were not allowed to interbreed with the wild
types and remained in close contact with humans. Once they had shed their wild traits, they were
crossbred so as to improve certain features. Though domestication of animal’s dates back to the upper
paleolithic, it was only during the neolithic that domestication acquired a new significance.

During the neolithic, relatively larger numbers of animals could be maintained. Sedentism provided the
necessary conditions for rearing animals in captivity over long periods. It has also been pointed out that
the mental attitude towards animals in a hunting society is very different from that of food producing
societies. Hunter-gatherers are not emotionally attached to animals.

Early neolithic society

Early neolithic society differed in many ways from the paleolithic. Even in the upper paleolithic hunter-
gatherer bands no longer lived in complete isolation. They had formed relationships with other bands
with whom they cooperated for hunting. There was also some exchange between groups, especially
exchange of articles required for ritual. Some rituals too were performed in common. Yet hunter-
gatherer groups did not come together for extended periods of time. When social groups live together in
large numbers for a long time they need some mechanism to resolve disputes. Upper paleolithic hunter-
gatherers did not have such a mechanism. This was possible because hunter-gatherers were relatively
more mobile and not attached to a particular territory. It is only as people started settling down on a
semipermanent basis in the post-Pleistocene that they developed mechanisms for resolving conflicts. As
Barbara Bender notes, the problem of. sedentism is not so much a question of population as of finding
solutions to problems of living together.

To begin with, authority was linked to the performance of rituals. This authority, and the status that went
with it, would not have meant much in terms of access to food, but it would have provided an
opportunity to have access to objects like ornaments of some articles connected with ritual. Cooperation
among groups which had settled down at one place, and the emergence of some persons who had
authority, speeded up the transition to agriculture. The archeological evidence from several early
neolithic sites in West Asia points towards an efficient social organization. There was a great deal of
exchange involving sea shells and obsidian. Obsidian was a type of stone that was much sought after.
Catal Huyuk in Anatolia was involved in the exchange of obsidian on a fairly large scale. The evidence
from Jericho is even more significant. We have already noted the large defensive wall at this site, which
could only have been constructed if the labour of the people living at Jericho was pooled together.
Further, the neolithic settlement of Jericho was quite densely populated from an early date. As
population grew, a large area around the oasis of Jericho came under cultivation. On the whole control
over the· means of production as well the produce remained collective in the early neolithic. Bands were
now replaced by clans as the main social unit. These were extended families which comprised members
who had kinship ties. Relationships were more strictly defined and rules for mating/marriage were
specified. Gifts were given to and received from groups with which cooperation was desired. Apart from
objects, the exchange of marriage partners too became a way of strengthening ties of cooperation.
Descent within the clan was determined on the mother's side (matrilineal clan). During the early
neolithic women played a decisive role in developing agriculture. This placed them in a central position
when the cultivation of plants began. Religious beliefs and rituals too became more elaborate. In many
of the early neolithic settlements clay and plaster figures have been found. A large number of these
figures depict women. At times pregnant women are shown (connected with fertility). The ‘cult of skulls’
found at Jericho was another major find. Anatolia and the Eastern Mediterranean region remained the
home of bull cults for a long time.

Neolithic Revolution

Gordon Childe has referred to the shift to agriculture as the 'neolithic revolution'. Some prehistorians
have subsequently questioned the use of the term 'revolution' and pointed out that what occurred was
more of an evolution spread over a long period, rather than a revolution. But then this 'suddenness' was
not what Gordon Childe had in mind. His concept of neolithic revolution was that this was a revolution in
the sense that it marked a major qualitative change-not just a quantitative change. Once human
societies adopted agriculture they created conditions for developing a more complex society. They could
produce a surplus which eventually led to the beginnings of civilization. For several hundred thousand
years during the paleolithic, hunting and food gathering had been the basis of the economy. Agriculture
is of very recent origin. Nevertheless, it should be underlined that once agriculture had become an
alternative adaptive strategy it completely replaced hunting and foraging within a few thousand years.

Mesopotamia

Origin

THE transition from neolithic to bronze age civilization first took place in Mesopotamia. q. Mesopotamia
produced the earliest known bronze age civilization-the Sumerian civilization. For this reason
Mesopotamia has a special significance in a discussion on the transition from neolithic to bronze age.
The archaeological remains in this region are comprehensive enough to enable a step by step
reconstruction of the evolution. The historical evolution of Mesopotamia can be properly understood
only with reference to geographical features. Two major rivers flow through the country. These are the
Euphrates (Purattu} and the Tigris (Idiqlat). These rivers flow from north to south and discharge their
waters into the Persian Gulf. Mesopotamia can broadly be divided into two distinct regions: north and
south. These two regions have very different environment. These two regions have very different
environments. Northern Mesopotamia extends from the Zagros mountains to the middle Tigris. On the
west this region is bound by the Syrian desert. Southern Mesopotamia is an arid zone surrounded by
desert. Rainfall is scanty. However, the Euphrates and the Tigris provide possibilities for cultivation, and
therefore for habitation, in this region. At the beginning of the historical period the southernmost part of
Mesopotamia was known as Sumeria. The area lying between Sumeria and northern Mesopotamia was
called Akkad. In fact Sumeria and Akkad together constituted southern Mesopotamia. To sum up:
Mesopotamia has two distinct geographical zones-northern Mesopotamia (or Assyria) and southern
Mesopotamia.

Some of the earliest neolithic settlements were located in northern Mesopotamia. The Zagros Mountain
foothills and Jarmo have been identified as part of the West Asian belt in which evidence of the
beginnings of food production has been found. Northern Mesopotamia has adequate rainfall to sustain
cultivation of crops without having to rely on irrigation. Winter rainfall supports cultivation of crops like
wheat and barley. By c. 6000 BC food production had become widespread throughout northern
Mesopotamia, leading to the emergence of various successive neolithic cultures like Hassuna, Samarra
and Haraf. With the development of these neolithic cultures, food production replaced food gathering
and hunting in Mesopotamia. Another feature of these cultures was the manufacture of beautiful
handmade pottery.

In southern Mesopotamia settlement began a little before 5000 BC. It has been suggested that the
region was probably too swampy for settlement prior to c. 5300 BC. From about 5300 BC onwards efforts
were made to exploit the harsh environment of southern Mesopotamia. It needs to be stressed that the
settlement of southern Mesopotamia could only have been undertaken bY, simultaneously developing
artificial irrigation. There is hardly any rainfall in this region, but the soil is ·extremely fertile provided it
can be irrigated.

With the settlement of southern Mesopotamia three neolithic cultures developed in the region. The
earliest was the al-Ubaid culture (5000 to 4000 BC). This was followed by one of the most prominent
cultures of West Asia-the Uruk culture (4000 to 3200 BC). Finally, the Jamdat Nasr culture (3200 to 3000
BC) culminated in the emergence of Sumerian civilization.

The al-Ubaid culture marked the first major attempt to adapt to the environment of southern
Mesopotamia. Initially advantage was taken of natural channels to irrigate crops. Wheat and barley were
grown. Goats and sheep were also reared. The al-Ubaid culture provides evidence of the use of metal,
although on a small scale. Copper, which is a relatively" easy metal to work with, was utilized for making
copper tools showing evidence of metallurgy. it was in the al-Ubaid culture that bricks were used
extensively for constructing dwelling places. This was partly due to the fact that hardly any stone was
available in southern Mesopotamia. These bricks were formed by putting clay (mixed with straw etc.) in
wooden frames. It needs to be emphasized once again that the development of southern Mesopotamia
was dependent on the development of artificial irrigation. However, irrigation is not merely a matter of
developing technology but for this Planning and coordination are necessary. All this cooperation,
planning and coordination presupposes a higher form of social organization.

It is now generally recognized that temples played a key role in the formative phase of Sumerian
civilization. They were central to the development of political institutions and helped to shape economic
activity and one major work was organizing irrigation. The social, religious, cultural, economic and
political life of settlements in southern Mesopotamia revolved around them. The digging and upkeep of
canals was a joint effort on the part of the community. A great deal of labour had to be performed
collectively. All this was done under the supervision of temples. Gradually temples were transformed
into instruments of political control This process was spread over several centuries.
The contribution of the Uruk neolithic culture to human civilization is remarkable. This culture has
yielded the earliest evidence that we have of the use of the wheel and the plough as well as of writing.
With the Uruk culture we move from prehistory to protohistory. The Uruk culture saw the beginnings of
wheel-turned pottery. Beautiful wheel-turned vases have been found at various Uruk sites. From the
point of view of technology, wheel making was a momentous step. Wheels could be made efficiently
only with metal tools which interlinks wheel making and metallurgy. Wheels were subsequently adapted
for use .in transportation. They were fitted in carts. Images of carts are depicted on some of the Uruk
objects. Pottery making and metallurgy too had become specialized. This kind of specialization created
conditions for further technological development. In agriculture, introduction of plough was the main
breakthrough. They loosened the earth more easily and not much labor was required. But its use was
not sudden but gradual.

Excavations at Uruk sites have brought to light a large number of seals. There are two types of seals:
stamp seals and cylinder seals. Originally rectangular stamp seals were made. Stamp seals often depicted
animals or plants. These were followed by cylinder seals made of ordinary or semiprecious stone. The
small cylinder seals of the Uruk culture are artistically of a very high standard. Many of them depict
mythological figures or scenes from everyday life.

The most outstanding achievement of Uruk was the development.of writing. By about 3500 BC the
economy of Sumeria had become sufficiently complex to necessitate some system of making a proper
note of various transactions. It was not always possible to keep track of stocks or exchanges orally. Since
temples were engaged in extensive economic dealings they pioneered the use of a written script. . Clay
tablets were used for writing. Impressions were made on these tablets with a hard pointed device
(stylus). The script evolved by the Sumerians is known as the cuneiform script. This grew out of the
short-hand pictures. The pictograms became simpler and uniform. They were engraved on clay tablets
with the tip of a stylus in the shape of small triangles or wedges.

Towards the end of the Uruk period several settlements in Sumeria had grown into cities. The process of
transition from villages to cities continued in the Jamdat Nasr period. A number of urban centres had
come up in southern Mesopotamia by c. 3200-3100 BC. Gordon Childe calls this phenomenon 'the urban
revolution'.

Emergence of cities (upar vale se halka related)

The emergence of cities is not merely a question of an increase in population. Urbanization denotes the
concentration, in a particular settlement, of a fairly large population, pursuing diverse economic
activities and having a high degree of interdependence. Extensive specialization and division of labor are
prominent features of urban centers. Cities are marked by complex social and economic organization.
Elaborate political arrangements for regulating and controlling the settlement are also to be found.

Gordon Childe notes that the growth of urban centres at the end of the neolithic period went hand in
hand with other developments which were of far-reaching historical significance: i) centralized
accumulation of taxation; ii) monumental public works; iii) the invention of writing; iv) advances towards
predictive sciences; v) the emergence of a class stratified society; vi) the freeing of a part of the
population from subsistence tasks for full time craft specialization; vii) the substitution of a politically
organized society based on territorial principles, the state, for one based on kin ties; and viii) the
appearance and growth of long distance trade in luxuries. (closely linked to urban revolution)

Craft and all

Craft specialization ke liye society should be able to support specialists and for that food surplus is
required. These specialists first have to be away from food production and only dedicate their time to
the metallurgical activities which would further facilitate the widespread use of metal.

South Mesopotamia did not had much copper deposits so it had to be brought from iran or Anatolia. In
fact Sumeria was deficient in supplies of wood and stone as well. As a result, the Sumerians relied on a
network of trade with other areas for procuring metal and other raw materials. This trade had to be
carried on by exchanging the surplus produce of Sumeria for raw materials that the region lacked.

The technological and geographical possibility of producing a surplus does not necessarily lead to the
regular production of that surplus. Some kind of compulsion might be needed to induce the farmers to
produce a surplus on a permanent basis.

The production of surpluses set in motion another development. Systematic extraction of the surplus
created conditions for its redistribution in an inequitable manner. Some groups in society were able to
establish control over a disproportionately large share of the surplus. This share was far in excess of what
these groups (chieftains, priests, warriors) contributed to society, unlike the artisans. At the other end
there were groups which were denied their legitimate share of the surplus. This marked the division of
society into classes. The division of labor was not just a functional division but reflected increasing
stratification along class lines. State formation too has to be viewed against the backdrop of class
differentiation. The state performed other roles as well, as for instance, keeping conflicts in check,
providing protection, promoting trade and organizing irrigation.

Civilization is a definite stage of human social evolution. It is distinct from the earlier phases, namely,
hunting-gathering ('savagery'), and those neolithic societies which are not yet sufficiently advanced to
produce surpluses ('barbarism'). Urbanization; surplus production; complex social systems; division of
labour; existence of a state; organized religion; use of metal; development of writing and exact sciences
are some of the traits of civilization.

Through various myths/legends and rituals a value system was ingrained among the people which
stressed on the desirability of producing in abundance for the pleasure of the deities and for the welfare
of the community. A part of the produce was collected in the form of offerings made to deities. The
objective of these offerings was to propitiate the deities. The temple now became the point of collection,
storage and redistribution of the surplus produce. Sumerian priests already had physical access to a
sizable portion of the surplus produce due to the role played by the temple in its storage and
redistribution. Part of the surplus was expended on warriors. Warriors defended the territory and
engaged in raids on neighbouring territories. They also provided armed support to the priests for
coercing peasants and artisans. From the ti.me since southern Mesopotamia was settled, temples had
been the focal point of the communities in the region. This is demonstrated by the archaeological
record. The Eridu temple grew up into a large structure in the al Ubaid period. It stands on a high,
platform and is the most prominent building of the settlement. The temple at Uruk was a massive
structure. It was rebuilt at the same spot several times. The main ziggurat at Uruk was the E-anna
complex. This was devoted to the goddess Inanna. It contained warehouses, workshops, and living
quarters for artisans. The warehouses were meant for centralized storage of grain. The manner in which
the religious, social and economic life of the community revolved around the temple has led Gordon
Childe to describe these communities as 'temple households'.

The temple was the nucleus around which the city developed. In the Jamdat Nasr culture a number of
cities were concentrated in the extreme south of Mesopotamia: Uruk, Ur, Jamdat Nasr, Kish, Uqair etc.
This was the time when citystates were being formed in the region. The city-states were located at points
where there were adequate water resources. Many cities were fortified. The control which temples had
over the surplus, over irrigation and over a wide range of economic activities facilitated the
concentration of political authority in the hands of the priests. It is not surprising therefore that the
formation of the state in Sumeria was reflected in the growing political power of the temple. The various
eJements which constitute the state (kingship, army, law, bureaucracy, political bodies etc.) were
associated with the temple. In early bronze age Mesopotamia the temple was the state.

From c. 3100 BC Sumerian city-states were governed by chiefs or kings who also happened to be priests.
Kingship was integrated with priestly functions. At this stage archaeological evidence can be
supplemented with literary sources. With written records we can fill in some of the details. of political
history. We are fortunate to possess detailed 'King Lists' which give an account of the main dynasties of
ancient Mesopotamia. These lists are useful for working out the chronology of political events. Another
useful source is the epic of Gilgamesh.

In the periodization of Mesopotamian bronze age civilization, c. 3000 to 2350 BC is labelled as the Early
Dynastic Period. In this period the major city states of Sumeria (Ur, Uruk, Kish, Lagash) struggled to gain
supremacy over the fertile region. Many of these conflicts were over water rights. Warfare was a regular
feature of the period. Raids against neighbouring states were the easiest way to augment the surplus.
Chiefs or kings provided leadership in war and successful campaigns enhanced their prestige. The
emergence of a class of soldiers for regular warfare speeded up the process of state formation. Shortly
after 2600 BC the city-state of Ur, under its First Dynasty, became the paramount .power for some time.
Subsequently other cities reasserted themselves. A king from the relatively more backward region of
Akkad brought almost the whole of southern Mesopotamia (Akkad and Sumeria) under his rule. The
name of this ruler was Sargon· Sargon's conquests unified southern Mesopotamia politically for the first
time. He established a new capital for his kingdom at Agade. Under Sargon the king became a powerful
monarch with almost semi-divine status. The strengthening of monarchical traditions initiated the
process of shifting political power from temple to palace.

One might mention over here that the Akkadians were linguistically different from the Sumerians. The
Akkadian language belonged to the Semitic group of languages. This was quite distinct from the language
of the Sumerians. Following the Sargonic annexation of Sumeria, the cuneiform script was adopted by
the Akkadians for their language. Third Dynasty of Ur (2150-2000 BC). This was a glorious period for Ur.
When the royal cemetery of the Thitd Dynasty rulers was excavated in the 1920s and 1930s by
Sir.Leonard Woolley, the finds made at the site caused a sensation. The royal graves yielded a vast
collection of magnificent objects made of gold, silver and bronze. The craftsmanship of these items is of
outstanding quality. The splendour of the royal cemetery revealed the genius of Sumerian civilization
and pointed towards the enormous wealth accumulated by the ruling class of Ur.

The city of Nippur emerged as the religious centre of unified Sumeria. The large collection of religious
texts found at the Nippur library give us fairly comprehensive information about Sumerian religion,
especially at the level of official cults. A striking development of the period c. 3000-2000 BC was the
decline of female deities. As the bronze age progressed, most of the cults which centred around
goddesses were pushed into the background. While many of these cults eventually disappeared, some
goddesses were assimilated in the pantheon in such a manner that they invariably had a lower status as
compared to male deities. Mother-goddess cults, which had been prevalent throughout the neolithic,
were completely marginalized.