Lecture 32: The World That Agrarian Civilizations Made
Now we focus on some of the shared features of the largest and newest
of these communities: Agrarian civilizations. Agrarian civilizations were
huge and complex, with hundreds of thousands, or millions, of inhabitants
linked by religion, trade, economics, and politics. They were supported by
the surplus labor and produce of peasant farmers, who made up most of the
population. (As a rule of thumb, in most Agrarian civilizations, it took about
nine peasants to support one city dweller.) Peasant life was tough. Egyptian
documents from late in the 2nd millennium B.C.E. provide a vivid description
of peasant life and the many trials caused both by natural disasters and the
demands of tribute-takers. Elite groups, particularly in towns and cities,
supported themselves by exchanging specialist skills as artisans, traders,
warriors, priests, and rulers.At the core of all Agrarian civilizations were tribute-taking states. States
exacted resources in labor, goods, or cash. Tributary rulers claimed the right
to exact resources but backed up their claims with the threat of force. We
call such exactions “tributes.” Their coercive power depended on organized
armies that could defend against external attacks and suppress internal
resistance. Administrative tasks, such as the collection and storage of tributes,
or the administration of justice and law, were handled by organized groups of
literate of¿ cials. The documents we have used earlier in this lecture provide a
vivid account of the attractions of being a scribe and of¿ cial. Writing appears
in all Agrarian civilizations, though in some cases (e.g., the Inka), it assumed
rudimentary forms. Tributary rulers built “monumental architecture”: tombs,
palaces, and temples designed to display their majesty and power. At lower
levels, rulers depended on local nobles or of¿ cials, who duplicated their
power on smaller scales.Within Agrarian civilizations there were steep, and relatively rigid,
hierarchies of wealth and power. Class hierarchies ranked groups by their
lineage and social status. Aristocracies were distinguished by their lineage,
power, lifestyle, and wealth. Members of the ruling elites generally despised
the peasants who generated most of society’s wealth. They also tended to
regard those outside Agrarian civilizations as inferior or subhuman. And they
normally despised merchants, whose wealth came not from tributes but from
entrepreneurial activity. Power hierarchies shaped gender hierarchies. As
most rulers were men, women rulers were generally regarded as exceptional