Introduction
What I hope to show in this essay is that the journey to statehood by the Egyptian and Indus civilization had as many differences as similarities. While the journey to state-level society may have been achieved by both civilizations and influenced by similar factors, geography and ingenuity may have produced two very different entities. I hope to show that the reading of a people is not like that of a book, that there are no simple answers with one explanation suiting all. Behind the theories of state-formation such as those on environment, social organization, civic planning and craft specialization there are people, and it is unfortunate that three thousand words just allow one to scratch the surface, but even with this in mind I will only focus on the stark differences or remarkable similarities in both cultures.
Throughout I will treat on the attitudes as well as the assessments of archaeologists and anthropologists who regarded both cultures. I will also write on the two distinctly different technologies developed and mastered by each civilization- that of Egyptian bureaucracy on the one hand and Harappan toilets on the other, both forcing the participants to sit and work things out and both dealing with opposite ends of the nutritional process. Finally I will have a brief look at the theories of state formation and how they fit in with both civilizations.
Geographical Location
Both Egypt and the Indus civilizations existed and expanded in much the same geographical terrain. Both depended on mighty waterways, alluvial plains, deltas and seasonal flooding for the lifeblood of the fledgling communities (Sabloff & Lamberg-Karlovsky 1995, 228). However, the Nile and the Indus, being very different entities, would lead the respective civilizations down very different paths.
While Egypt enjoyed a regular and largely dependable flood or inundation supporting two crops per year, the general population was largely chained to the green ribbon of the Nile- hemmed in by arid deserts (Scarre & Fagan 1997, 52); the Harappan civilization, on the other hand, had to contend with a somewhat unpredictable waterway more tempestuous in nature than the Nile, making it an altogether more risky affair to inhabit the water’s edge (Fairservis 1975, 230). The upside was, however, that the general populace was not as hemmed in by deserts, as it was possible to grow certain crops in uphill regions which enabled communities, initially at least, to be more scattered in nature (ibid, 232). Despite some geographical anomalies both the Nile and the Indus in drawing people to their banks may have provided the catalyst needed for medium- sized chiefdoms to coalesce into proto-state civilizations (Scarre & Fagan 1997, 33).
Political and Social Organization
Population growth
When the relatively scattered agricultural-based communities of Egypt came to realize the fertile qualities of the Nile one can only imagine that this led to a migration to the edge of the flood plains (ibid). Factors influencing population growth would include the availability of a greater abundance of food from the fertile plains such as wheat and barley and the ancillary agriculture of the raising of sheep, goats and cattle (Sabloff & Lamberg-Karlovsky 1995, 130), improved agricultural techniques such as the implementation of seasonal work camps, the construction of irrigation ditches and pumps for fertile areas adjacent to the flood plains and the cultivation of geographically suitable crops not native to the area ((Scarre & Fagan 1997, 132).
Some suggest that an efficient and coherent agricultural approach and strong political leadership may have led to a population increase (Sabloff & Lamberg-Karlovsky 1995, 228) while others argue the reverse is true or that both occurred symbiotically (ibid, 229). The Harappan civilization may have been faced with a similar destiny but it may have been achieved in different ways. For instance the pull of the river may not have been as strong as in Egypt due to a greater availability of arable land, which in turn would lead to a pattern of settlement diversity from the outset (Allchin & Allchin 1982, 133). The crops of wheat and barley were subsidised in many areas with mustard, dates, peas and possibly rice and sorghum combined with the rearing of cattle (Scarre & Fagan 1997, 52). Irrigation ditches were vastly superior to that of ancient Egypt indicating an application of a higher level of skill when it came to waterside developments. This skill along with crop surpluses may have driven the surge in population growth through the early Harappan phase (Sabloff, Lamberg-Karlovsky 1995, 127).
Cycling chiefdoms
The visible signs of fluctuations in chiefdom complexity are depicted in very different ways between the Harappan and Egyptian Civilizations. Tablets, hieroglyphics and images of the type found on the Narmer Palette clearly demarcate the last days of disunity during the pre-dynastic period of ancient Egypt when both Upper and Lower Egypt were united by conquest (Scarre & Fagan 1997, 117). The Harappan Civilization offers a mere tantalizing scattering of evidence of inter-settlement strife (Cork 2005, 418). Some say the floodwalls, of the type found at Mohenjodaro and Harappa, a possible twin city, were built with defence in mind (Allchin & Allchin 1982, 157).
What is most striking is the overall evidence for a subtle unification of the Indus region such as the spread of Kot-Diji pottery to multiple settlements (Scarre & Fagan 1997, 153). One could also say that the absence of evidence of conflict during the formative years is just as striking. One gets the feeling that there is a concerted effort to portray the peoples of the Indus Valley as a peace-loving, meditating, egalitarian culture- a kind of valley of the lost Hippie, but one wonders if certain uncomfortable pieces of evidence were just overlooked (ibid, 160). In fact there is reason to suggest that Harappan weapons were just as prolific, effective and used as those of Egypt (Cork 2005, 418). Some Harappan cities show signs of repeated burning which could indeed indicate violence or the presence of some very careless people (Scarre & Fagan 1997, 161).
Centralization
The most enduring evidence of the centralization of both the Egyptian and Harappan civilizations has to lie in their writing. With this medium we are given insights into trade, crop yield inventories, regional identification within a unified political entity (Trigger 1993, 27), and with particular emphasis on the Nile Valley, consolidation and aggrandizement of the ruler’s power (Sabloff & Lamberg-Karlovsky 1995, 134). In Egypt writing was mainly carried out by scribes and the earliest seem to be in the form of bone and ivory labels- some of which have been carbon dated to 3200 B.C. (Scarre & Fagan 1997, 116) The Narmer palette relates the story of one of the battles of King Narmer (a.k.a. Scorpion King) sowing the seeds of Egyptian unification which would eventually be reaped by King Horus Aha in 3100 B.C. (ibid, 117)
Another sign is the construction of large granaries enabling large surpluses of food to be held over or traded, all under the direct control of the king or a locally appointed leader (lecture notes). One of the possible consequences of centralization was the development of a strong ideology to help maintain control over a large body of people (Trigger 1993, 107), especially during the inundation period, and this appeared to have worked when one considers the fruits of their labour in the form of vast monumental tombs (Scarre & Fagan 1997, 124). While there is ample evidence to point to specific roles within Early Egyptian society with regard to the task of writing (Trigger 1993, 27), we are not so lucky with the Harappan civilization, mainly because unlike Egyptian texts the writings of the Indus remain largely indecipherable (Allchin & Allchin 1982, 186).
Yet one can speculate that finds such as the Harappan carved cylinder seals were once used as customs stamps are used today, and though no apparent signs of kingly leadership have been found in the Indus region to date it is tempting to think that the seals produced with the cylinders were meant to be broken only by someone in high office. Whoever it was would have also presided over granaries, storerooms and trade in much the same way as the Egyptian kingdom; there have been suggestions that the Mohenjodaro bearded man- a 19cm limestone sculpture- might well be a representation of such a person (Scarre & Fagan 1997, 160). As to whether this was a symptom or the cause of centralization is still the subject of hot debate. If there was a king then he certainly did not get or possibly need the lavish pictorial adoration that his Egyptian counterpart enjoyed (Sabloff & Lamberg-Karlovsky 1995, 134).
Architecture & Civic Planning
Power
In a burgeoning state-level society it was most important that the position of king was clearly emphasised above all else (Scarre & Fagan 1997, 124). In Egyptian society this was achieved by elaborate palaces such as found at Nekhen. Here we see a vying for the position of authority between the king and the gods. It is in fact the first place where we see images of the Falcon god- possibly an early form of Horus usurped by later kings in an effort to combine dynasty with deity (ibid, 114). The palace as a centre of authority would have provided an impressive image of leadership and power to those living within the city while presenting rivals with a façade of foreboding prestige. Palaces would in fact have been a barometer to gauge how stable a city or state was.
The illusion would not be lost even in death as Mastaba tombs often reflected the grandeur, on the surface at least, of the palace complex (ibid, 119). Much less is known about the Harappan civilization with regard to palaces. In most cities an area, called the citadel by archaeologists (Allchin & Allchin 1982, 157), has been found which apparently, looked at most likely through a Greek city layout (Scarre & Fagan 1997, 294), served the same function as its Egyptian counterpart. It occupied a prominent part of the city and would have stood imposing over it. Little if anything is known about the occupiers or even if they were kings at all. However, one of the keys to the maintenance of power was the ability to control food and goods surpluses and this the ruling classes did through the granaries located close to the seat of power- a feature also found in Egypt (Fairservis 1975, 173).
In terms of a subterranean waste water disposal system, the Indus people were streets ahead of the people of the Egyptian kingdom who mostly relied upon a relay system of pot-emptying all destined for the Nile (Horan 1996, 6). The Harappan system relied on a complex maze of subterranean man-made waterways which could remove waste directly from the house via a component on which people have sat and pondered from that day to this, the humble toilet (Scarre & Fagan 1997, 157). A greater attraction could not be found in any other place and certainly would account for a large influx of people who in turn would bring with them yet more skills to further the Harappan civilization. However, it is impossible to say if one directly led to the other or if both occurred symbiotically.
Devotion
Though there are many examples of temple complexes throughout Egypt (Trigger 1993, 75), some stretching beyond the unification of the two lands (ibid), it cannot be said that they were a vital ingredient in the transition from a complex chiefdom to state level society, although they might have proved useful to control a peripatetic people during times of low employment or social unrest (Scarre & Fagan 1997, 126). Suppositions that the Mohenjodaro carved man was a holy man based upon the clothing which hangs off one shoulder simply do little else but serve the cause of nationalist archaeology as the Pakistan government seek to claim a direct lineage with the Harappan civilization as we have done with the Celts, and strengthen national borders on that premise (Fairservis 1975, 260).
People
Architecture can be a useful tool to gauge the stratification of society among the ordinary people of the city (ibid, 270). Sometimes, however, it might be misread, especially when looking at ancient civilizations through modern eyes and modern motivations (Trigger 1993, 15).
In Egypt we are lucky to have written accounts that sometimes reveal who lived in what building, and through this we are able to paint a vivid picture of social stratification which has many contemporary comparisons, such as houses with function rooms and bedrooms and those less well catered for (Scarre & Fagan 1997, 121).
Of the Harappan culture we find houses tightly packed within a latticework of city streets with most opening out into a courtyard (Allchin & Allchin 1982, 179). They are of various sizes (ibid, 178), and it is assumed that the larger the room the wealthier or greater in status the person was who lived within (Fairservis 1975, 253), and using the Egyptian model this may well be the case but we cannot say for sure (Scarre & Fagan 1997, 162). It could be argued that room sizes may also have varied according to how much skill one possessed. Since most Harappan cities were a veritable showcase of state-of-the-art civic and agricultural technologies it is logical to assume that some incentive was needed to attract this level of ingenuity.
Economy & Craft Specialization
Economic power is thought by some to be derived primarily from the capacity to produce increasingly specialized items and the ability to manage the complicated tasks of food storage and distribution (ibid, 42). This power, over time, leaks down to those who are responsible for overseeing this important task, and they become a class of officials, one step down from the elites (ibid). For some academics a state level society cannot exist without the presence of elites, officials and of commoners- everyone else. However, I do not think that it can be painted so black and white. If we take Egypt, for example, the daily tasks of the elite and official classes are well documented- from the Narmer Palette carved on stone (Sabloff & Lamberg-Karlovsky 1995, 134) to the writing developed by scribes in the archaic period and used predominantly on papyrus (Trigger 1993, 7). With this medium scribes could calculate fractions, survey land and assess the quantities of material to be used on a construction project, all by using a measurement based on dimensions of the human body and standard cubic measurements (Scarre & Fagan 1997, 122). Evidence of standardization can be plainly seen through the regularization in the size of pottery vessels used throughout the kingdom (ibid, 114).
The Harappan civilization also had their particular brand of writing probably used for much the same purpose; however, much less of it survives owing to little of it being committed to hard-wearing surfaces, instead being written on perishable pounded flat ola leaves (ibid, 161). We do know, however, that this script was most probably used to record trade and ownership owing to the large amount of carved seals found (Fairservis 1975, 273). The production and spread of Kot Diji pottery is a testament to Harappan standardization and to a unified culture, however, it can tell us even more (Allchin & Allchin 1982, 155). The kiln required to fire Kot Diji pottery has to reach exactly the same temperature as needed to smelt bronze (Lecture Notes), so one can deduce that a town which produced one item would more than likely have been famed for the other.
Trade, Bureaucracy & Warfare
Although the fertile valley of the Nile produced an abundance of crops it is highly unlikely that the increased population brought about as a result of food surpluses would have developed in any real way without the influence of trade (Sabloff & Lamberg-Karlovsky 1995, 122). The select group of officials in society whose service would be recognized eternally, judging by the tombs at Saqara (Scarre & Fagan 1997, 124), having developed the administration of irrigation, harvesting and redistribution of crops, would have taken the next logical step such as tfers a mere tantalizing scatterilly obtained material (Sabloff & Lamberg-Karlovsky 1995, 230). The latter of course would have been done before the transition to state society; however, with the improved efficiency of the overseers more elaborate goods would become available to trade over greater distances, unlocking previously hidden wealth within a given region.
The regular recording of harvests, trade and building requisitions would have served to increase a city (Trigger 1993, 64), but were these practices in use in complex chiefdoms - that is the question. One could suggest that both in Egypt and the Indus valley it is immediately apparent that the bureaucracy is already at an advanced stage even from the earliest recorded evidence (Scarre & Fagan 1997, 116), and so its introduction cannot be said to have contributed to the formation of state level society; however, one may say that the elaboration of this field may have done so.
The ability to have a standing army is one sign, according to some experts, of state level society (Trigger 1993, 52), and the kingdom of Egypt certainly boasted of such an institution (ibid, 51). The united land of Egypt itself owed its existence to the subjugation of smaller societies (Scarre & Fagan 1997, 110). It is easy to forget that the Pharonic Kingdom is an amalgamation of many albeit smaller complex chiefdoms (ibid), all of which would have contributed to the overall greatness of the kingdom. Evidence in the Indus is not so apparent or at least taken seriously. For instance the numerous burnings of cities such as Kot Diji (Allchin & Allchin 1982, 143) fired the imagination, as it were, that there might have been a conflict or at least a sacking of the city based upon the wealth it would have accrued by copper and bronze smelting, or it could have just as easily been caused by over-industrious kiln workers within the tightly-packed city streets.
Theories of State Formation
One theory suggests that a state-level society depends on centralized political and social organization, class stratification and intensive agriculture (Sabloff & Lamberg-Karlovsky 1995, 231). States possess complex political structures and are usually based on social inequality with a small ruling class (Scarre & Fagan 1997, 48). Egypt, we can say without doubt, exemplifies all these characteristics as it is likely that this very theory was based upon the Pharonic state. While the Indus, on the other hand, embodied much of the theory, there is one stubborn incongruity namely the basis of social inequality- this at the moment can only be guessed at in Harappan civilization (Sabloff & Lamberg-Karlovsky 1995, 230). While Carneiro’s theory on warfare has been much maligned of late (Scarre & Fagan 1997, 37) it does resonate with Egypt in the archaic period. Egypt only became a true state-level society after both upper and lower Egypt were combined by conquest (Sabloff & Lamberg-Karlovsky 1995, 132). This military strategy did not come about, therefore, as a consequence of civilization but rather influenced and enlarged it. Warfare does not appear to have been a factor in creating Harappan civilization, but it may have influenced its direction both in industry and architecture (Fairservis 1975, 252).
Conclusion
In summing up I hope to have shown that it is the end of an age of monocausal explanations with regard to state formation. I also have shown that while the Nile and Indus Valleys are superficially similar they have in the end produced two distinct civilizations. I hope to have shown that long since held preconceptions about civilizations do not often endure under scrutiny and especially with regard to the Harappan civilization all is not what it first appears.
David Martin Byrne
Bibliography
Allchin, B. & R. Allchin 1982 The rise of civilization in India and Pakistan. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Cork, E. 2005 Peaceful Harappans? Reviewing the evidence for the absence of warfare in the Indus Civilization of north-west India and Pakistan (c. 2500-1900 BC). Antiquity 79, 411-423.
Fairservis, W. 1975 Roots of Ancient India: Archaeology of Early Indian Civilization. University of Chicago Press
Horan, J. 1998 Sitting pretty- An uninhibited history of the toilet. London: Robson
Jones, C. 2007 Lecture Notes AR 334.
Sabloff, J. and C.C. Lamberg-Karlovsky 1995 Ancient civilizations of the Near East and Mesoamerica. 2nd ed. Prospect Heights: Waveland Press.
Scarre, C. and B. Fagan 1997 Ancient civilizations. Upper Saddle River: Prentice Hall.
Trigger, B. 1993 Early civilizations: ancient Egypt in context. Cairo: American University in Cairo
No comments:
Post a Comment