Page 3 :
EARLY, , SOCIAL, FORMATIONS
Page 6 : First Edition 2001, Reprint : 2022, , MANAK, PUBLICATIONS PVT. LID, , B-7, Saraswati Complex, Subhash Chowk,, Laxmi Nagar, New Delhi 110092 (India), Phone:011-22453894,22042529, E-mail :
[email protected], Website: www.manakpublications.in, , All rights reserved, © Prof. Amar Farooqui, , No part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical,, including photocopying, recording, or any information, storage and retrieval system, without permission, in writing from the publisher., , ISBN 978-93-7831-407-0, , Laser Typeset by: Tabrez Ali, Aadil Printographics, Delhi, Printed in India by: Nice Printing Press, New Delhi (India)
Page 7 :
PREFACE, , For the past several years I have been associated with teaching, a course on 'Social Formations and Cultural Patterns of the, Ancient and Medieval World' at the undergraduate level in, the University of Delhi. The course is meant to acquaint, students with the historical evolution of human societies, from, the origins of humankind to the rise of feudalism in Europe., Even though this is only supposed to be a survey course, it, has a wide range of themes. The literature dealing with these, themes is vast and my students and I have often felt the need, for a concise book which would provide the basic information, on the topics in the course. The present book is intended to be, a general introduction to the subject. The main focus of the, book is on early social formations of West Asia, Egypt, Greece, and Rome.· I have broadly kept in mind the structure of the, University of Delhi course (including the proposed changes ·, in the draft of the revised course), but have included some, material which, it is hoped, will be found useful by others as, well. My work is based entirely on secondary sources and, lays no claim to original research., I should like to thank Smita Sahgal, without whose support, and encouragement this book would never have been written., I must acknowledge my debt to P. S. Dwivedi who first, initiated me into the discipline as my teacher in Si Stephen's, College. His guidance, when I subsequently began teaching, the course on social formations, was a source of enrichment, for me. I .am grateful to Virginius Xaxa for providing me with, information I needed.
Page 8 :
d, , I, , Early Social Formations, , The interaction and lively discussions which I have had, with my students at Hans Raj College over the years have, shaped my understanding of the issues which are dealt with, in this book., My sincere thanks to M.P. Yadav of Manak Publications, for all his cooperation in bringing out this book., , Amar Farooqui
Page 9 :
CONTENTS, , Preface, V, 1. Hum.an Evolution, 1, 2. Paleolithic Age, 24, 3. Neolithic Age, 44, 4. The Beginnings of Civilization and, Bronze Age Mesopotamia, 71, 5. Early Egyptian Civilization, 103, 6. From Bronze Age to Iron Age: Anatolia, and Greece, 128, 7. Archaic and Classical Greece, 153, 8. Ancient Rome (I), 198, 9. Anc~ent Rome (II), 247, 10. Ancient Rome: Crisis and Decline, 290, 11. The Arabs, Islam, and the Early Abbasid Caliphate 318, 12. Early Medieval ·west Asia, 367, 13. Germanic Invasions and After: Origins, of Medieval Europe, 394, 14. Feudalism in Medieval Europe, 426, Appendix: Religion in the Roman Empire, 473, Further Readings, 505, Index, 511
Page 11 :
Chapter One, , HUMAN EVOLUTION, , THE human species represents the most advanced stage of a, long process of evolution which began with the formation of, the Earth nearly 4600 million (4, 600, 000, 000) years ago and, the emergence of the earliest forms of animate matter about, 3500 million years ago. This does not mean that the process of, evolution has come to an end. There is continuous change in, nature. But changes which result in the evolution of new, species are usually spread over such a long time span-often, millions or hundreds of thousands of years-that they are, not easily apparent. As a matter of fact the human mind cannot, easily comprehend the time span over which the evolutionary, process in nature is spread. Humans are accustomed to dealing, with time on a comparatively minute scale. There is another, aspect of change which has to be taken into account. With the, emergence of humans a qualitatively new situation has arisen., Human intervention itself has become a factor and biological/, natural evolution is not the only option. Human intervention, implies cultural adaptation and this has opened up several, new possibilities. The evolutionary process is not confined to, biological evolution alone., , I, It is relatively recently, during the latter half of the nineteenth, century, that the theory that human beings are the product of, an evolutionary process was first .advanced. This revolutionary
Page 12 :
2, , I Early Social Formations, , theory was first developed by Charles Darwin (1809-1882)., Darwin, an English scientist, completely transformed our way, of looking at nature and ourselves. He accompanied a fiveyear long naturalist expedition to various parts of South, America and the Pacific aboard the ship HMS Beagle. The, expedition visited some very remote islands and provided, Darwin with an opportunity to acquaint himself with numerous, unfamiliar features of plant and animal life in those regions., During the course of his voyage Darwin accumulated a vast, amount of information ·at first hand about varieties of plants, and animals. The material collected by him on this expedition, and his subsequent researches led to the publication of his, pathbreaking work The Origin of Species in 1859. In this book, Darwin outlined his theory of evolution., Darwin's work was preceded by significant developments, in natural sciences during the eighteenth and early nineteenth, century. Considerable headway had been made, for instance,, in the classification of plants and animals. An important, contribution to this classification was made by the Swedish, botanist Linnaeus (Carl von Linne, 1707-1778). Classification, based on criteria which have been scientifically worked out, requires grouping together of plants/ animals which share, certain characteristics, thereby introducing some order in the, available data about the bewildering variety of living organisms. Systematic classification made it easier to perceive differences and similarities between various species., By the end of the eighteenth century scientists were beginning to think in terms of nature having a history, i.e., that the, natural world had not come into existence as a finished product, at a given moment, but had evolved through a historical, process. It had a history just as human societies have a history., The French scientist George de Buffon (1707-88) argued in, his several volume work Natural History that the natural world, had changed over a period of time. The contemporary natural, world was different from what it was like in earlier ages., Two related developments which assisted in providing a, firm basis for the concept of evolution were the emergence of
Page 13 :
Human Evolution I, , 3, , geology as a scientific discipline, and the study of fossils., Geology is essentially the scientific study of the origins,, structure and composition of the Earth, especially its rocks., Fossils are imprints of animals or plants which lived long ago, preserved in rocks. In the case of animals these are usually, remains of the harder parts-e.g. bones and shells-which, have left a permanent mark on the rock while that rock is in, the process of hardening. The hardened rock would then bear, the shape of the given animal/plant part. Fossils provide us, evidence about animals or plants which lived several hundreds, of thousands or even millions of years ago. They are our main, source of information about species which haye become, extinct-as for instance dinosaurs., Fossils are basically rocks. Therefore they have to be, studied with the assistance of geologists. The development of, the science of rocks helped to interpret fossils. Geology was, the means to establishing the antiquity of a fossil and the environment in which the fossilized organism had lived. Of course, early geology could only indicate the possible sequence in, which one fossil relative to another could have evolved,, without providing actual dates. One could say that a fossil, was earlier, later or contemporary when compared with, another. But what was crucial at that stage was the suggestion, of change having occurred in nature over a period of time., We will return to the question of fossils a little later., All these developments in science prepared the ground, for the work of Chevalier de Lamarck (1744-1829). Lamarck, was a French scientist who was appointed botanist to the king, of France a few years before the French Revolution, and was, professor of zoology in Paris after the Revolution. In his, writings, which included the seven-volume work Natural, History of Invertebrate Animals published between 1815 and 1822,, Lamarck made the central point that plant and animal species, underwent change. They were not static, unchanging entities., The species were not fixed but could change from one, generation to the next. This was an important step towards, explaining the enormous diversity of living organisms in terms
Page 14 :
4, , I Early Social Formations, , of evolution. Fossil evidence confirmed that species had, undergone changes, that some life forms had died out, while, new ones had evolved and got diversified. Lamarck's understanding of these changes was, however, simplistic and, scientifically incorrect. He suggested that changes occurred, when a particular part of an animal was either put fo more, frequent use or was not regularly used. This might cause that, part to become larger, and conversely disuse would result in, smaller organs. If this assisted in better adaptation the change, might be passed on to successive generations. This would give, rise to species with different characteristics. Unfortunately, this Lamarckian understanding has at times been confused, with Darwin's extremely sophisticated theory of evolution., The main thesis propounded by Darwin was that species, have evolved due to minor variations in individual members, of species. These variations may be inherited by the offspring., As a result of a long cumulative process (often over several, hundred thousand or millions of years) the variation/swill, end up in the emergence of new species. The success of thel?e, variations in better adaptation, or more efficient survival,, determines whether the variations continue to be passed on., The principle of heredity makes it possible for the offspring, to inherit the variations, which in turn are passed on to their, offspring. If the variation does not result in death or less efficient, adaptation, it might continue being passed on to successive, generations. This implies natural selection. The fittest will be, selected-survival of the fittest., The continuous struggle to survive, i. e. to adapt more, efficiently, is also to be seen in the context of competing, demands of other living organisms on the resources of a given, environment. In any case the environment itself is not a fixed, one but also changes over a period of time, necessitating, adjustment. An additional factor in coping with the, environment and contributing to the intense struggle for, survival is the increase in population of a species which has, adapted successfully in a given environment. Minor variations, could equip an organism to compete better. By a cumulative
Page 15 :
Human Evolution, , !, , 5, , process a new species (or several new species)·might arise, which survive in that environment in different ways. By, surviving better would be meant not just being able to live, but also reproduce successfully. There are two important points, to be borne in mind. One is that from one generation to the, next the variations are very small. If they were not minor the, offspring with variations would just not survive. These changes, take place over a very long time, involving several hundred, thousand generations. Every generation will have its own, branches and sub-branches and sub-sub-branches and so on., At every level there will be the possibility not only of old, variations being carried forward but new variations being, introduced. As successive generations branch out yet new, variations might be introduced in varying combinations. All, members of a given generation will therefore not have the, same set (or combination) of variations. Thus the various, branches will evolve differently. This brings us to the second, point. Every variation must not be thought of as an, improvement. There could be many variations which by, themselves or when combined with earlier received variations, might result in a dead-end. The mathematical possibilities for, differentiation, when the astronomical number of generations, multiplied by possible variations is taken into account, are, literally mind-boggling. This accounts for the kind of diversity, which we find among living organisms., Not only did Darwin provide a plausible theory for understanding the dynamics of evolution, but also placed human, beings within this process. It was this part of Darwin's theory, that many people found difficult to accept. There was a lot of, opposition to his views. Darwin pointed out that humans were, as much a product of evolution as other living organisms., Human beings did not arrive readymade: they evolved from, earlier and more primitive life forms. He fully developed his, argument about human evolution in his later work Descent of, Man (1871). The argument outlined in this work has been, generally confirmed by subsequent scientific research., The further back we go in time the larger the number of
Page 16 :
6, , I Early Social Formations, , species with which we share common ancestors. Starting with, the common ancestor of apes, those of primates, of mammals,, vertebrates, to those of multicellular organisms etc., till we, eventually trace our steps back through several million years, to single-cell organisms. We have so many common features, because we have common ancestors. The point is that we are, not just descended from apes, who only happen to be nearest, to us in the evolutionary tree, but also from some of the most, primitive life forms as well. As twentieth century advances in, science have demonstrated we share with them a very essential, feature-DNA. DNA, or genes, are the basis of life as we, know it. These are molecular structures which are distinguished, from molecules of non-life forms of matter primarily by their, ability to self-replicate (i.e. make 'copies' of themselves), and, to transmit the instructions for further self-replication to their, 'copies', thereby setting; in motion a continuous process of, reproduction and evolution., DNA are long chains of small molecules. These small molecules (or nucleotides) are joined together forming a lengthy, chain. This chain (located on chromosomes) contains the, information, something like computer memory or. a floppy, disc, which determines the specific characteristics of a living, organism. This information is the genetic 'code' of a species., The 'code' or the information contained in the DNA provides, instructions which are used in the process of building up cells, of animals and plants. Different kinds of cells. in a living, organism use information in the DNA that is relevant to the, building of that type of cell. There will be different types of, cells performing different functions, but each cell in a given, organism will have the same 'code' or DNA. This DNA must, be thought of as a vast storehouse of information which has, been passed on to that organism in the process of evolution., All the information might not even be used by that species. It, has been pointed out that the DNA of even very primitive, animals might contain more information than all the volumes, of the Encyclopedia Britannica put together. It needs to be, emphasized that the information contained in the DNA will
Page 17 :
Human Evolution, , I, , 7, , be that which is conducive to survival of an organism. The, transmission of the genetic code (containing all the, accumulated information of the species) takes place during, the course of reproduction. As we have already noted, the, distinctive ·feature of DNA is that they are self-replicating., The ability to make copies of themselves and to pass on, instructions for making further copies is what makes them, dilierent from other molecules. The ability to reproduce is what, defines living organisms. Otherwise living as well as non-living, forms of matter are just molecules. This special quality of DNA, to make copies of itself and the instructions contained in those, copies to make further copies is what sets in motion the, process of evolution., What has happened over nearly 3500 million years is that, the copies have not always been exact. There have been very, small errors at times. This has given rise to possibilities for, change. All copies are not necessarily exactly identical. New, types of organisms have therefore evolved. DNA has a, remarkable capacity for making exact copies without ariy, errors. The copies are normally free of errors and remain so, for long periods of time during which several million errorfree copies might be made. But reproducti,on is such a complex, process that once in a while there could be a minor errormutation. Just one small bit of information may be wrongly, copied or transmitted. Since the data or information with, which we are dealing is so large, there are as many possibilities, as te what the actual error or mutation will be. Whether or, not the mutation is retained will depend on the extent to which, it enables the organism to survive. Through natural selection, and a long cumulative process, mutations which are retained, and transmitted to successive generations will result in the, evolution of new species., It is remarkable that nearly 150 years after the publication, of Origin of Species, Darwin's theory remains the most satisfactory hypothesis that we have for understanding evolution,, including the evolution of the human species. This is all the, more astonishing when we realize that Darwin did not have
Page 18 :
8, , I Early Social Formations, , access to the knowledge which revolutionary advances in, science during the last fifty years or so have placed at the, disposal of today's scientists. The vast 4omain of molecular, biology which has emerged only recently has substantiated, Darwin's theory. It is only now that scientists are beginning, to understand the precise details of the evolutionary processthough there still remain many mysteries to be unravelled., But facts by themselves cannot explain much unless one has a, working hypothesis. It is not as though Darwin knew all that, modern genetics tells us, but as with any good theory,, Darwin's theory can be updated with new facts as they emerge, without altering the underlying principles of that theory., Darwin's theory is now widely accepted by scientists. A, few scientists have, however, suggested that some ~spects of, Darwinian evolutionism need to be modified. It has been, argued that the total time that has elapsed since the emergence, of life is not sufficient to account for the large number of species, that has evolved, if we think in terms of evolution taking place, at a gradual pace. According to Stephen Jay Gould, Darwinian, theory indicates very slow and gradual changes. Gould's view, is that while there were long periods when almost no change, took place, there were short phases when there was a burst of, evolutionary activity. This is different from the suggestion, that large changes occurred in one jump. It only means that, some critical mutations might lead to a quickening of evolution, for brief periods. The evolutionary process was speeded up, by these bursts. Gould's argument is mainly derived from his interpretation, of fossil evidence. Gould himself is a palaeontologist, i.e. a, specialist in the study of fossils. As we noted earlier, fossils, were some of the earliest clues that pointed in the direction of, evolution. While nineteenth century geology was of limited, help in making sense of fossil finds, the breakthroughs in the, discipline came about in the latter half of the twentieth century, with advances in chemistry and physics. These advances (which, have also enrichecl geology) have made palaeontology a much, more precise science. We now have a fairly good idea about
Page 19 :
Human Evolution I 9, , species which have become extinct. Palaeontologists like Gould, find it disturbing that there are some very big gaps in the, fossil evidence. These gaps, it is pointed out, cannot be only, due to the fact that fossils belonging to intermediate stages, have not been discovered. What if there never were any, intermediate stages?·This is the main question posed by Gould., If evolution occurred in jerks or bursts then this is the kind of, fossil evidence that we would have. Richard Dawkins, an, eminent zoologist, has comprehensively refuted Gould's, argument by emphasizing that such sudden hursts of change, would initially make adaptation very unlikely for the group, with different characteristics. There are several ways in which, gaps in fossil evidence_ can be explained. The most obvious is, that a small group could have got separated from the main, population and might have started evolving in isolation. lf, after a long period of evolution during which it evolved into, a new species, it returned to the original location, the fossil, evidence in that location might show up two different species, without the intermediate stages. For us to know of the, intermediate stages of evolution we would also have to find, fossils at the site where the separated group had evolved., Such comprehensive findings are unlikely. We are thus left, with big gaps., , II, Among the species which are extant,. apes and monkeys bear, the closest resemblance to human beings. Monkeys, apes and, humans all share a large number of characteristics. They are, all placed by scientists in one broad group. To use scientific, terminology, they are classified as belonging to the same order., Monkeys, apes and humans (and a few other animals like, lemurs) belong to the order 'primate'. Primates are part of a, broader group, i. e. mammalian vertebrates. All vertebrates, (fish, amphibians, birds, reptiles and mammals) have a, backbone which is a column of discs (vertebrae) enclosing the, spinal cord. This backbone gives internal support to the body.
Page 20 :
HJ, , I Early Social Formations, , Mammals have four legs or limbs. Their bodies are covered, with hair. They are warm-blooded animals, i.e. their body, temperature remains relatively constant. Female mammals give, birth to live offspring-they do not lay eggs. There are however, some rare species of mammals like the platypus and the, anteater in which the females lay eggs (monotreme mammals)., Then there are some species of mammals in which the young, are born before being properly developed. These are termed, marsupials. The mother has a pouch-the most familiar, example is the kangaroo-in which the baby marsupic1-l, completes its development. What is common to all mammals, is that the female of the species has mammary glands which, secrete milk to feed the young., The earliest primates evolved with features which enabled, them to adapt to living efficiently in trees. Primates have, features which allow them to climb and move about on trees, with great ease. They use their forelimbs extensively. Their, nails are flattened and the thumb of the hand is opposed to, the forefinger. Primates possess what are called 'prehensile', hands and feet (hands and feet which are adapted for, grasping). With these they can move up and down tree trunks, or from branch to branch by grasping and clutching. Those, mammals which do not have this trait have to rely on other, means, as for instance digging in their claws, in order to hold, on to trees or branches. The shape of primate hands and feet, gives them a firm hold or clutch over tree trunks and branches., Among primates, claws have got reduced and nails have, become flattened (compare with cats or dogs). The way in, which the fingers have evolved (they are separated from each, other), and the opposition of the thumb to the forefinger,, makes it possible for primates to put th~ir hands around an, object and to enclose it. Moreover, the forelimbs have the, capacity to rotate, to flex and to extend., During their evolution primates have acquired stereoscopic, vision. This means that their eyeballs are located in such a, position that the two fields of vision combine to give c1- threedimensional picture of their surroundings. Stereoscopic vision
Page 21 :
Human Evolution, , I, , U, , makes it easjer for them to gauge distance and depth, which, is important for moving about in trees. Some other animals,, for example birds like the falcon, too possess stereoscopic, vision., Primates began evolving about 70 million years ago, For, several million years they evolved as competent tree-dwellers., Their special features-prehensile hands and feet; extensive, use of forelimbs; stereoscopic vision etc.-were designed for, adaptation to an arboreal ha~itat (living in trees). Trees provided, them with almost everything that they required for, subsistence, mainly fruit, leaves, insects and bird's eggs. They, moved about among branches and jumped from tree to tree, without having to come down on the ground. People in most, parts of India are familiar with monkeys and the ease with, which they move about in trees., All the living and extinct species of primates are classified, into two subgroups, or suborders: the 'prosimii' and the, 'anthropoidea'. The prosimii (or prosimians) are more primitive, and were the earliest to evolve. The suborder anthropoidea, includes more advanced primates, viz., monkeys, apes and, humans. The prosimii include lemurs, lorises and tarsiers. Some, zoologists also classify tree-shrews ('tupaioidea') with, prosimians. Tree-shrews are very small squirrel-like creatures, who might represent the transition from insectivores to early, primates., ·, The various species of prosimii are mainly found in Africa, and South Asia. Lemurs are confined only to Madagascar., These primates are relatively small in size. However they, possess very large eyes. The eyes are placed close together at, the front of the skull (not on the sides). What distinguishes, prosimii from anthropoidea is the structure of the bones in, which the eyeballs are placed. The eyeballs of the prosimii are, located in a ring-like structure, whereas the eye sockets of the, anthropoidea are bowl-like in shape. The ring-like structure, of bones in which the eyeballs of the prosimii are placed,, restricts the field of vision of these creatures. The bowl-like, shape of the anthropoidea eye sockets gives greater freedom
Page 22 :
12, , I Early Social Formations, , to the eyeballs to move in different directions and at various, angles. This was important for better sight., The anthropoidea first got separated from the prosimii, about 40 million years ago with the evolution of the monkeys., The suborder anthropoidea is divided· into three subgroups,, or superfamilies. Two superfamilies are those of monkeys. These, two superfamilies are labelled 'cercopithecoidea' (Old World, monkeys) and 'ceboidea' (New World. monkeys). The, differences between them relate largely to their dental, structures, and need not detain us. Suffice it to say that, monkeys had highly developed forelimbs, better vision, flatter, faces and shorter snouts as compared to prosimians. Their, adaptation to an arboreal habitat was extremely specialized., They could cover long distances in jumping from tree to tree., In some species like the langur an elongated tail could be used, almost as an additional limb. The tail also helped to balance, the body while jumping. The langur can clear remarkably long, distances in jumping from one tree to another and its graceful, jump is almost like a short flight. This is illustrative of very, specialized adaptation to an arboreal habitat. The dexterous, prehensile limbs of monkeys represent an important stage in, our own evolution. In the late nineteenth century there was, overwhelming resistance to Darwin's suggestion that we are, descended from monkeys. The similarities are so obvious, but, there is often a failure to recognize the 'descent'. This reflects, a particular way of thinking, which is not very easy to change., Usually when one sees a monkey, say, peeling a banana, the, immediate reaction is that the monkey's way of handling, objects with its hand is so very like that of humans. Monkeys, learnt to use their hands the way we do much before humans, evolved. Therefore it is we who behave like them rather than, the other way around., The next stage in our evolutionary history was the, emergence of apes about 30 million years ago. Apes and, humans are placed in the superfamily 'hominoidea' which is, the third superfamily of the suborder anthropoidea (the other, two being those to which the monkeys belong). There are
Page 23 :
Human Evolution I ] 3, , several species of apes: chimpanzees, gorillas, gibbons, orangutans etc. They are all collectively grouped in the family, 'pongidae' (to repeat: order, suborder, superfamily, family,, genus, and species are some of the categories used by, zoologists for classifying animals). In other words the, superfamily hominoidea is divided into two families: (i), pongidae (apes)i ~nd (ii) hominidae (human beings and extinct, species of the closest ancestors of humans). Apes and humans, belong to the same superfamily and are closest to each other, among surviving species. They probably first separated from, monkeys in the extensive African forests. The evolution of, apes was one way of adapting to the environment in a, somewhat different way. Apes are relatively larger in size, than monkeys. They have large canine teeth and are powerfully, built. Some species of apes (chimpanzees, gorillas and orangutans) have long forelimbs as compared to their hindlimbs., Others, like the gibbon have a small body and long arms and, legs. (The gibbon and siaming are therefore placed by some, zoologists in a family of their own-'hylobatidae'.) Unlike, monkeys, apes are not adapted exclusively to an arboreal, habitat. They climb trees in search of food and for protection,, but they attempt to regularly exploit resources on the ground, as well. Gorillas are heavy animals and spend most of their, time on the ground. Adult chimpanzees too have some, difficulty in moving about in trees with agility. Gorillas and, chimpanzees adopt a semi-erect posture while walking on the, ground. They use their legs and hands for movement and, rely on their knuckles to assist them while walking. The, pattern of subsistence evolved by apes was a success and by, about 20 million years ago the number of ape species in Africa, was larger than that of monkeys., It was around this time that some significant developments, were taking place. Fossil evidence has revealed the evolution, of an ape which lived in Africa about 20 million years ago and, was very well adapted to living on the ground. This type is, referred to as 'dryopithecus'. From Africa this species moved, into Asia a~out 15 million years ago. We learn from geologists
Page 24 :
l~, , !, , Early Social Formations, , that 15 million years ago the African-Arabian landmass, collided with Asia thereby bringing the two continents, together. This created the conditions for expansion from Africa, into Asia. A branch of the dryopithecus then separated and, evolved into a small apelike creature which has been named, 'ramapithecus'. The first fossils of ramapithecus were, discovered in India (in the 1930s)., Subsequently in the early 1960s it was suggested that ramapithecus was the earliest known species of hominidae. In other, words that ramapithecus represented the point at which, hominids (hominidae) separated from apes (pongidae)., However the fossil evidence on which the initial interpretation, was based was extremely scanty-a small fragment of the jaw., Extensive work is still going on in the Siwalik hills to discover, ramapithecus fossils, and there have been some discoveries in, the Rawalpindi area .. Ramapithecus was adapted to, environments in which forest growth was not very dense., But it is doubtful whether it could walk upright. Ramapithecus, became extinct about 8 million years ago., Recent advances in molecular biology have reduced our, dependence on fossil evidence. Molecular evidence (this mainly, involves comparing DNA of living species and calculating the, rate at which changes-mutation-might have occurred) has, brought to light a startling feature of the evolutionary process., The evolutionary paths of Asian and African apes diverged a, very long time ago. In terms of their DNA, Asian apes are much, , more different from African apes, than African apes are from humans., Humans stand much closer to African apes than was suspected, earlier. Asian apes had begun evolving differently almost 15, million years ago, when they moved into Asia. The, ramapithecus belongs to this evolutionary proc~ss (12 million, years ago). The African apes diverged from Asian apes 15, million years ago and proceeded along a different path. There, are now three surviving species of African apes. These are the, gorilla and the common and pygmy chimpanzee. 7 million, years ago African apes got split into two branches. One of the, branches led directly to human beings. The revised picture of
Page 25 :
Human Evolution, , I, , 15, , human evolution that we now have suggests (i) that humans, are descended from African apes (gorilla, chimpanzee), rather, than Asian apes and (ii) that the earliest humans got separated, from African apes relatively recently, i.e. 7 million years ago, (not 15 million years ago, as was thought earlier)., If we accept evidence from molecular biology then we can, date the earliest hominids (hominidae) to about 7 million years, ago. Unfortunately there is a big gap in the fossil record for, the critical period between 8 million and 4 million years ago., The fossils which belong to the period from about 4 million, years ago indicate that hominids evolved in two phase:s. The, first phase was marked by the· development of 'bipedalism', or 'bipedal locomotion', i.e. walking on two feet. The second, phase saw rapid expansion in brain size. The Darwinian view, was that both features had evolved simultaneously. This view, has persisted in the present century. In all fairness to Darwin,, it needs to be pointed out that Darwin's understanding was, mainly based on comparative anatomy, a comparison of the, physical structures of living species and apes. No early human, fossils were available in Darwin's time (with the exception of, neanderthal fossils). Generally too the study of fossils was in, its infancy. However even with more fossil evidence in the, twentieth century some scholars have found it difficult to, abandon the view that bipedalism and large brain size, developed together. It needs to be emphasized that there was, a gap of at least 3 million years between the two developments., Fossil evidence when combined with molecular evidence, points towards the beginnings of bipedalism 7 million years, ago. Some species of African apes became bipedal about this, time. This might have been caused by environmental changes, leading to more open grasslands. The lower limbs (legs) of, these apes increased in length as compared to their upper limbs., They acquired an erect posture. They could walk on two feet., This development did not immediately result in an increase, in brain size. As W. E. Le Gros Clarke observes in his work, The Fossil Evidence for Human Evolution, whereas size of brain, is certainly the distinctive feature of humans, it is not the dis-
Page 26 :
16, , I Early Social Formations, , tinctive feature of hominidae vis-a-vis pongidae. According, to Le Gros Clarke initially the crucial difference between early, hominids and apes lay in bipedalism among early hominids., Of the different species of bipedal apes that might have, evolved soon after 7 million years ago, probably one, developed a large brain size. This bipedal creature with a, significantly larger brain separated from other bipedal, hominids about 2.5 million years ago, and began making crude, tools somewhat later., Before proceeding further it is necessary to mention that, modem humans are the only surviving species of hominidae., All other species are extinct and the only information that we, have of them is derived from tossils. On the basis of fossils, the hominids (including our own species) are divided into, two genera: the genus 'australopithecus' and the genus 'homo'., Of these, australopithecus was the first to evolve. What, separated it from the apes was the ability to walk upright, on, the two lower limbs. Australopithecus fossils were originally, discovered and recognized in 1924 by Raymond Dart in South, Africa. It was Dart who labelled the fossil as 'australopithecus', (southern ape). What Dart had discovered was a fossil of, 'australopithecus africanus' which lived between 3 and 1 million, years ago. Later, a number of other fossils of australopithecus, were discovered in South Africa. Some of them had features, which differed from those of australopithecus africanus. A, close scrutiny of these features indicated that there were, actually two different species: australopithecus africanus and, australopithecus robustus. The robustus had large cheek teeth,, and a flatter forehead as compared to the africanus. The, africanus forehead was steeper (sloping downwards) and the, skull was more rounded at the top. Rqbustus males had a, bony crest at the top of their skulls. In both the species the, cheek teeth (molars and premolars) differed from those of, apes. Unlike apes, australopithecus cheek teeth were flat which, suggests they were adapted to grinding tough plant foods, rather than soft fruit. It has been suggested that while, australopithecus robustus was herbivorous, australopithecus
Page 27 :
Human Evolution I 17, , africanus was omnivorous (i.e. its diet included meat), but, such specialization is not fully established. Incidentally, males, of australopithecus species are much larger in size than females, (this is called 'sexual dimorphism'). This feature gradually, disappeared with the evolution of homo., In the 1950s important discoveries of australopithecus, fossils were made in East .Africa. The husband and wife team, of Louis and Mary Leakey found australopithecus remains in, Tanzapia at sites located in the Olduvai Gorge. They were, fossils of a species which was different from the robustus and, africanus. This spec;ies was named 'zinjanthropus', and is now, labelled 'australopithecus boisei'., The most recent evidence pertaining to australopithecines, has come from Ethiopia (Omo Valley; Hadar). Australopithecus, fossils found here have been identified as belonging to a species, which evolved much earlier than boisei, robustus and africanus., This species which has pushed back the date for australopithecines to about 4 million years ago, has been named, 'australopithecus afarensis'. Australopfthecus afarensis might, be the ancestor of all other australdpithecus species. This is a, controversial point and remains to be resolved. As of now, this is the earliest known species of hominidae., In australopithecus afarensis we can see the final stages of, transition to bipedal locomotion. This species ha:d acquired, an erect posture but it still retained some characteristics of, apes. The development of bipedal locomotion is a very complex, process and requires several changes in the anatomy. The, bones of the feet undergo modifications which enable them, to carry the entire weight of the body. Similarly knees and, the pelvic girdle (the 'box' to which lower bones are attached), have to be shaped in such a way that a comfortable erect, posture can be maintained while walking or running on two, feet. The pelvic girdle has to accommodate large leg muscles, and at the same time hold the weight of the body., The backbone too has to be shaped accordingly. This is, necessitated by the requirements of the thorax or chest. In, apes the backbone is inward-curving or concave (' c' shaped).
Page 28 :
18, , I, , Early Social Formations, , This shape can be a hindrance for regular upright posture., The weight of the thorax, which is located on the inside of the, curve, would make the animal fall forward. An adjustment in, the shape of the backbone from concave to convex or outwardcurving ensures better balance (in fact the human backbone is, 's' shaped). This assists in erect posture. In the process of, evolving bipedal locomotion, the shape of the thorax too has, changed from being funnel-shaped or conical in apes to, cylindrical in humans., While australopithecus afarensis possessed most of the, essential features of bipedalism there were still a few survivals, of apelike traits. The lower limbs were relatively shorter as, compared to humans; the thorax was still conical in shape and, the fingers were much more curved as in chimpanzees., As we have seen, australopithecus had definitely developed bipedalism by about 4 million years ago. There is a big, gap in the fossil record for the period prior to that, but in, view of the molecular evidence it would appear that this, process had been at work since 7 million years ago when the, earliest bipedal apes might have begun to evolve. The point, about the large. number of anatomical changes (outlined above), required for bipedalism is that it would have taken, considerable time for these changes to accumulate. However,, for several million years, from 7 million ye·ars ago to 2.5 million, years ago, there was no vital increase in brain size., Australopithecus brain size (450 c.c. to 550 c.c.) was not very, different from that of the apes (470 c.c. for chimpanzees)., Increase in brain size occurred between 3 and 2 million years, ago. The possibilities for this had been created partly by, changes in the teeth and jaws. The canines were reduced in, size and the lower jaw became lighter. Since the lower jaw, was lighter, the bones of the upper part of the skull too could, be correspondingly lighter as they did not have to support a, heavy mobile lower jaw. This in turn meant that more room, was available to the brain. The brain could expand into the, space created by thinner/lighter bones in the upper part of, the skull.
Page 29 :
Human Evolution I l q, , These changes led to a new evolutionary path, culminating, in the emergence of modern humans. Human beings and their, immediate ancestors are placed in the genus homo. The genus, homo is distinguished from australopithecus by its larger brain, size. One of the oldest fossils of the genus homo is that of the, 'homo habilis'. This was found near Lake Turkana .in Kenya., Other specimens have been discovered at Olduvai. Homo, habilis lived 2 million years ago and had a brain which was, considerably larger than that of australopithecus. Its brain size, was 800 c.c. Homo .habilis was a tool'-maker. For several years, there was a reluctance to accept homo habilis as a species of, the genus homo and in some books it is placed in the category, of australopithecus. But a close examination of the brain size, of the adult homo habilis has entitle4 it to be regarded as an, early human specimen., ·, The emergence of homo habilis was followed by the, emergence of another species of homo: 'homo erectus'. Homo, erectus fossils date back to 1.75 million years ago. The earliest, homo erectus fossils are from East Turkana in Kenya. Homo, erectus was almost like modern human beings. Apart from, bipedal locomotion and well-developed hands it had a large, brain. It was much taller than the australopithecus. The homo, erectus brain was about 1000 c.c., which is nearly 70% the size, of homo sapiens brains. Homo erectus made tools with gre~t, skill (tool technologies will be discussed in the next chapter)., From the time of homo erectus onwards, homo began to move, out of Africa into Asia and Europe. All fossils belonging to, australopithecus and homo habilis have been discovered, exclusively in South and East Africa, confirming Darwin's, conjecture that humans originated in Africa. With homo, erectus, the immediate ancestors of humans spread to other, parts of the world. Richard Leakey has calculated that the, migration out of Africa may have been at the rate of 20, kilometres per generation, thus covering 14, 000 kilometres, between East Africa and China in 20,000 years. Nevertheless, the majority of homo erectus might have continued to live in, Africa.
Page 30 :
20, , I Early Social Formations, , The fossils of homo erectus were first discovered in, Indonesia. These were fossils of pithecanthropus found in Java, (the terminology can sometimes be confusing depending on, the date when a label was used and the individual preferences, of scholars, but it should be borne in mind that, 'pithecanthropus erectus', 'pithecanthropus javanensis', 'Java, Man', 'pithecanthropus pekinensis', 'sinanthropus', etc. are, now all conveniently called homo erectus). Homo erectus, fossils are also found in China and parts of Europe. The, Indonesian homo erectus fossils are at least 900, 000 years old, and the Chinese fossils are 500-350, 000 years old., . For nearly 60-70, 000 years different species of, australopithecus, homo habilis and homo erectus coexisted., Natural selection eventually led to the extinction of, australopithecus and homo habilis. From 1 million yeari:; ago, only homo thrived. This should not be taken to mean that, homo erectus was more successful at adaptation. After all, australopithecus had survived for at least 3million years, if, not longer, whereas homo erectus existed for 1.5 million years., The possible reasons for the extinction of australopithecus, continue to be the subject of a lively debate., Homo erectus became extinct nearly 400, 000 years ago., Meanwhile a new species of homo had branched out and, embarked on a separate path of evolution. This new species, of homo emerged about 125, 000 years ago (135, 000 years, ago according to some scholars). These were the neanderthals., Neanderthals were early homo sapiens (they are named 'homo, sapiens neanderthalensis'; our species is named 'homo sapiens, sapiens'). Their fossils were first discovered in Germany in, 1856 and have been widely known ever since. In neanderthals,, brain size saw further expansion, stone tools became more, efficient and what we recognize as 'culture' became more and, more visible. But the neanderthal skulls were thicker and less, rounded at the top than those of modem humans., The neanderthal population began to dwindle about 50,, 000 years ago, and the species became extinct 34, 000 years, ago. What should be underlined is that neanderthals
Page 31 :
Human Evolution I 21, , represented only one evolutionary path of the genus homo., Strictly speaking, true neanderthal fossils have been mainly, found in parts of Europe and West Asia, but other fossils which, closely resemble modern humans have been found in various, parts of Africa. It is likely that around 125, 000 years ago early, homo sapiens separately branched into neanderthals and, 'homo sapiens sapiens' (modern humans). On the basis of, recent fossil and molecular evidence, Richard Leakey has put, forth a strong argument for the African origin of homo sapiens, sapiens. In any case there were several types of homo sapiens, which coexisted for a long time. Apart from neanderthals,, these homo sapiens include species whose fossils have been, found at Broken Hill in Zambia (110, 000 years); Qafzeh in, West Asia (92, 000 years); and Cro-Magnon in Wes~ Europe, (40, 000 years). One of these might have evolved into homo, sapiens sapiens and coexisted with the rest down to about, 40-30, 000 years ago when all other species (and subspecies), became extinct leaving only our species. Subsequently there, has been no evolution at the species or subspecies level and, even though there are some superficial differences (complexion, stature, etc.) homo sapiens sapiens remains a unified and, homogeneous species., With the emergence of homo sapiens sapiens the size of, the brain increased to an average of 1350 c.c. However scholars, are divided in their opinion as to whether mere increase in, brain size had much significance once neanderthals and other, homo sapiens had evolved. With neanderthals the size of the, brain had equalled that of homo sapiens sapiens. What then, was the direction of further evolution? This is a difficult, question to answer because it is linked to the problem of, defining what is so very specific about homo sapiens sapiensbrain size, or speech, or ability to make increasingly complex, tools, or a high level of social interaction., A larger brain when combined with well developed hands, which were free because they were not used for locomotion, had revolutionary consequences, as was demonstrated by the, rapid development of tool technology. Augmentation of brain
Page 32 :
22, , I Early Social Formations, , size had already reached a point where it was possible to, make tools requiring a high level of skill., The focus has now shifted to understanding the social context of human behaviour. Homo sapiens sapiens were better, equipped for social interaction and cooperation than other, homo sapiens. Some scientific evidence has been put forth in, support of this view. Philip Lieberman has carefully studied, the shape and size of the skull and neck of modem humans in, relation to neanderthals and apes. The skull of homo sapiens, sapiens acquired a globular shape, which differs from the low, and bulging skull of neanderthals. The shape of the modern, human skull introduced modifications in the shape of the neck,, the most important being that the sound resonating portion, of our throats (between the vocal cords and the back of the, mouth) was able to produce a greater variety of sounds., Though other primates, as well as other animals communicate, by producing sounds, modern humans are unique in the, variety of sounds they can produce. These can be combined, in an infinite number of ways which is reflected in the vast, number of languages (living and dead) that human societies, have produced., Language is now seen by a large number of scholars as, the key to understanding the specificity of hom9 sapiens, sapiens. This is not just a question of producing a variety of, sounds for communication but is also related to our capacity, to arrange our ideas (thought) with the help of language. This, in turn is associated with both the size of the brain and to the, manner in which different parts of the brain are organized., Recent studies have indicated that while the size of the brain, in neanderthals was the same as that of our species, there was, still scope for changes in the structure of the brain which, facilitated the development of language., Apart from its other functions, language allowed humans, to transmit knowledge and information to successive, generations in a manner that is not possible for other animals., This means that each generation does not have to start from, the scratch. It can build upon the accumulated experience of
Page 33 :
Human Evolution, , I, , 13, , previous generations. A more developed brain allowed the, information to be stored. This accelerated the pace of cultural, adaptation and humans were no longer dependent on, biological evolution. This is a theme which we will examine in, greater detail in the following chapter.
Page 34 :
Chapter Two, , PALEOLITHIC AGE, , WE saw in the previous chapter that hominids began making, tools about 2.5 million years ago. Australopithecus robustus, may have been the first tool-maker, though this is yet to be, convincingly established. We can, however, be reasonably, certain that homo habilis was a tool-maker. According to, Richard Leakey regular tool-making commenced with the, emergence of homo habilis. The larger brain size of homo, habilis played a pivotal role in this development. Evidence, for the beginnings of stone tool manufacture has been found, at Olduvai. Hence the oldest stone tool culture is named, 'Oldowan'. Louis and Mary Leakey were pioneers in, discovering the Oldowan culture. They established that human, ancestors first became tool-makers in East Africa. Oldowan is, the oldest known paleolithic (early stone age) culture., The earliest tools made by homo habilis were extremely, crude and rudimentary. It requires considerable expertise to, identify these tools. The tools are small in size and often made, from pebbles. A small piece of ston_e would be hit with another, stone to 1'anufacture the tool. This is not as easy as it sounds., It should be emphasized that this involved the making of tools,, not merely using naturally available stones. A conscious, attempt was made to give the stone a sharp edge or point. In, this humans are unique. Chimpanzees are known to use tools,, as for example sticks to procure insects for food. But, chimpanzees do not use tools on a regular basis, and they, certainly are not able to make stone tools. On the other hand
Page 35 :
Paleolithic Age, , I, , 25, , tools have been an integral part of the adaptive strategy of, the genus homo for 2.5 million years., The increase in the size of the brain in early humans was, crucial for their tool-making ability. The reason why australopithecus might not have been a tool-maker is that it had a, much smaller brain. It is now recognized that even the most, rudimentary tools require a high level of intelligence which, the australopithecus perhaps lacked. Nicholas Toth is a scholar, who has spent. several years studying stone tool techniques., He has tried to master these techniques by actually making, stone tools of the type which were manufactured during the, early stone age. Toth has demonstrated that a lot of skill went, into making even crude tools. Appropriate types of stone had, to be selected and the maker had to know the angle at which, to strike as well as the amount of force required. Incidentally,, Toth also demonstrated that homo habilis was right-handedthe preference for a particular hand is another human trait., A highly specialized hand, and bipedalism (which led to, 'freeing' the specialized hand so that it could be used for other, purposes, e.g. making tools) are, of course, important prerequisites for making tools. However, the real breakthrough comes, about with a large brain. Tool manufacture calls for a high, degree of motor skills and coordination of various parts of, the body (eyes, limbs, fingers etc.) as well as enormous, concentration. Moreover tool-making involves a certain, measure of conceptualization. The concept of the tool precedes, the tool. The tool-maker should be able to form a mental image, of the tool which is to be obtained. All these functions can, only be performed with greater mental capacity. There can be, no doubt that the larger brain of homo habilis (800 c.c.) and, homo erectus (1000 c.c. and beyond) and the beginnings of, tool-making were closely interlinked., Oldowan tools mark the beginning of the paleolithic age., Paleolithic is the earliest phase of human prehistory. In this, age humans lived by gathering plant foods (foraging) and, hunting animals. Generally speaking, paleolithic economy was, characterized by hunting and plant gathering. The tools made
Page 36 :
26, , I Early Social Formations, , during this period were meant to assist humans in procuring, and processing plant and animal foods. Like apes,, australopithecus mainly subsisted on a plant diet., Australopithecus might have occasionally included some very, small animals in their diet. This is true of apes as well. Initially, homo habilis also continued with this pattern. Oldowan tools, were used mainly for cutting plant foods, breaking nuts,, digging roots, scraping wood, and obtaining honey., As a meat-,eater homo habilis would have been able to kill, small animals which could be easily overpowered (e.g. some, species of antelopes), but otherwise it usually consumed, remains of animals killed by other predators (scavenging)., The ·Oldowan tools were used for skinning the meat of these, animals and for extracting bone-marrow. Bone-marrow is a, rich source of nourishment. We are not very certain about the, extent to which meat was included in the homo habilis diet., In any case, at the beginning of the paleolithic age, humans, were essentially scavengers rather than hunters. Growing, efficiency in making tools did create the conditions for the, transition from scavenging to hunting. This meant that a larger, quantity of meat could now be included in the homo diet., Some prehistorians have pointed out that we cannot deduce, the beginnings of meat-eating merely from the shape of, Oldowan tools. Just because a tool can be used for slicing meat, does not necessarily mean that it was actually used for that, purpose. This has led paleontologists and archeologists to apply, more rigorous methods to the study of fossilized animal, remains found at sites where the earliest stone tools have been, discovered. Advanced scientific techniques. have helped, scholars to pinpoint evidence of cut marks on animal bone, fossils dating back to over 1.5 million years. These cut marks, were caused by stone tools in the process of separating meat, from the bone. These studies on bones have shown that early, humans had made meat a regular part of their diet between 2, million and l.,? million years ago. Further assessment of the, evidence (types of bones found at the spot; whether these, bones constitute the fleshiest parts of an animal or are likely
Page 37 :
Paleolithic Age, , I, , 27, , to be leftovers, etc.) indicates that homo star~ed out as, scavengers and killers of very small animals, a~d only, gradually became competent hunters., By the time homo erectus emerged, hunting had become, well-established. The typical pattern of paleolithic adaptation,, viz. hunting and foraging, was now the basis of the economy., Homo erectus tools were more efficient, requiring more, complex techniques. The tools were standardized and made, according to a repeatable pattern. Nicholas Toth, whom we, have already mentioned above, has noted that when humans, first started making tools they did not produce tools according, to a specific design. They did of course have a general concept, of what they required (e.g. a sharp edge for cutting). What, seems to have happened is that they hit one stone against, another at one or two points. They then selected., from the, bits (flakes) which broke off, those pieces or flakes of stone, which most closely resembled the tool they had in mind and, which were most likely to serve their purpose. This was the, technique employed for making Oldowan tools. As we have, seen, even these tools reflect great physical dexterity., Nevertheless they are simple tools as compared to those, manufactured by homo erectus. In homo erectus tools we see, an attempt to impose a predetermined 'design' on the stone., This reflects more accumulated experience and a higher level, of intelligence., · The most prominent tool of homo erectus was the, 'handaxe'. Handaxe tools are pear-shaped or teardrop-shaped., They are pointed at one end and broad at the other. Handaxes, are much larger in size than Oldowan tools and are remarkably, symmetrical. The homo erectus handaxe is a 'core' tool. There, are two broad groups of stone tools: 'core tools' and 'flake, tools'. Flake tools are stone tools which are fashioned from, the small bits or flakes which come off a block of stone when, it is hit. Core tools are those which are made from the larger, block or 'core'. In the case of handaxes the core itself is worked, upon to produce a tool, The culture which evolved with homo erectus is called
Page 38 :
:!8, , I Early Social Formations, , 'Acheulian', named after a site in north France (St. Acheul)., Many paleolithic cultures are named after French sites, where, they were initially identified. This does not mean that they, are confined to France (or Western Europe) alone, but is only, a convenient way of referring to those cultures. Acheulian, handaxe culture developed 1.4 million years ago and was, closely associated with homo erectus almost throughout the, world. It continued up to 150, 000 years ago. Acheulian tools, have been found in East, South and West Africa; in Spain,, France and several other parts of Europe; and in West Asia,, India and some other regions of South Asia. However, handaxes have not been found at homo erectus dwelling sites, in the Far East., Handaxes were primarily used for processing meat. J., Desmond Clarke, who experimented with these tools, has, suggested that the handaxe was 'an all purpose skinning tool, and meat chopper'. By now humans were hunting and eating, large animals. At the Acheulian site of Torralba in Spain,, remains of elephants consumed by homo erectus have been, found. It is not certain as to how these large animals were, hunted. Either some kind of trap was laid for them or else, they were driven into swamps or marshes and killed when, they got stuck. It should be borne in mind that traps would·, have been one of the frequently used methods for hunting, animals., Recently another theory has been advanced about the use, to which handaxes were put. Handaxes were not the only, tools used by homo erectus. They used smaller tools as well, (in:duding flake tools) many of which were much more useful, for cutting or slicing meat. It has been suggested that the, purpose of the handaxe was somewhat different. The tool, was a weapon which could be thrown like a discus. The shape, of the handaxe is such that if it is expertly thrown its pointed, side can hit objects at some distance with great force. In their, capacity as weapons, handaxes could have been used both for ·, hunting prey as well as for defence against predators., What is astonishing is the uniformity which the technique
Page 39 :
Paleolithic Age I 29, , of making handaxes exhibits over most of the regions, inhabited by homo erectus. Wherever homo erectus went they, carried this technique with them and handed down the, technique from generation to generation for more than a million, years. The standardization of a relative complex way of making, tools can only be achieved with a more developed brain as, well as through improved communication/ social interaction., Increase in the size of the brain itself created conditions, for better social interaction. The large size of the brain when, seen in the context of bipedal locomotion imposed certain, limitatfons of a purely biological nature. But these limitations, had far-reaching implications. As we noted in the previous, chapter, bipedal locomotion involved several modifications, in the structure of the pelvic girdle (hip bones, etc.). These, modifications produced a narrower birth canal among females., On the other hand an offspring with a larger brain had to, pass through this narrow canal. During human evolution there, was some subsequent increase in the size of the opening, but, bipedal locomotion could not accommodate enlargement, beyond a certain point due to the requirements of bipedal, locomotion. Given these limitations the child would have to, be born when its brain was still very small. The brain would, have. to go through substantial growth after birth in order to, attain its full size., The human brain is just about one-third its full size at the, time of birth (as against half in the case of apes). This makes, the human child extremely vulnerable, causing it to be so very, dependent on the mother. The child has to be carefully tended, while its brain increases in size. The length of time required, for this development creates a strong mother-child bond. This, bond forms the nucleus of a social group in which the child, grows up. A few human adults, male and female, provided, protection and food for the offspring as they grew to, adulthood. Such a group provided the conditions for the, development of the children which in turn was essential for, the survival of humans., A human child takes several years to grow into an adult.
Page 40 :
30, , I Early Social Formations, , Although the brain increases in size very rapidly after birth,, physical growth 'of other parts of the body takes much longer., The length of time over which this growth takes place imparts, stability to the mother-child bond and the social group which, this bond sustains. This provides the child an opportunity to, learn survival skills and imbibe elements of culture. The larger, size of the brain enables a vast amount of information to be, stored. The development of rudimentary language facilitated, the communication and accumulation of information. No, wonder then that homo erectus groups were so successful at, imparting knowledge of complex tool-making techniques, generation after generation. Obviously each generation would, have added its own bits of information based on its own, experience., As humans spread to different parts of the Old World, they tried to adapt to their specific environments in different, ways. They introduced variations in tool techniques. We have, already seen that the handaxe was not used in the Far East., Here smaller chopping tools were preferred. In some parts of, north Europe and England core tools which differed from the, Acheulian handaxe were manufactured. These were the, qactonian and Levalloisian cultures. Clactonian tools were, turtle shaped, while Levalloisian tools were round. It should, also be emphasized that whereas we have been referring only, to stone tools so far, tools were made from other material as, well. Wood and bone were certainly used, but tools made, from such highly perishable material do not survive easily in, the archeological record. Wood, for instance, was used for, digging up roots, tubers and bulbs., Homo erectus began using fire about 700, 000 years ago,, though it has been suggested that the use of fire is much older., Fire had several advantages. It could be used for cooking meat;, for removing poisonous substances from plants; for scaring, away animals; and for keeping warm. It took a long time for, early humans to master the technique of making fire. Initially, they used fire that was naturally caused. These could be bush, or forest fires or fires caused by lightening. Wooden logs which
Page 41 :
Paleolithic Age, , I :n, , had caught fire naturally, and kept smouldering for some time,, were a useful source of fire. Care would be taken to ensure, that fire was not easily extinguished. One of the best known, homo erectus sites which has yielded definite evidence about, the early use of fire is located in North China. This is the site, of Zhoukoudien, situated at a short distance from Beijing., Zhoukoudien is approximately 500, 000 years old. It was, occupied by homo erectus for a considerable length of time., Apart from Zhoukoudien, Hoxne in England and Torralba in, Spain have also provided evidence of the beginnings of the, use of fire., The paleolithic cultures which we have referred to so far, (Oldowan, Acheulian, Clactonian, Levalloisian) are all 'lower, paleolithic' cultures. These also include the lower paleolithic, chopper tools of China, Indonesia and some parts of Africa., Lower paleolithic cultures were followed by the 'middle, paleolithic'. The most- significant culture of the middle, paleolithic is the Mousterian culture, named after the French, site of Le Moustier. Mousterian culture was the product of, neanderthals. Before outlining some of the features of this, culture let us make a digression and look at the environmental, conditions in which the paleolithic cultures evolved. This is, essential for a better understanding of the natural setting of, the paleolithic., ., Most of the paleolithic age coincided with the phase of, Earth's history which is labelled 'pleistocene epoch' by geologists. As we noted in chapter I, advances in geology have, been vital for the study of prehistory. Geology provides a, chronological framework for the evolution of the Earth, and, many aspects of the remote past have to be viewed in the, context of this chronology. Moreover, from a careful stuc;iy of, rocks, geologists have been able to work out details about the, environmental conditions which prevailed during the distant, past. Geologists divide the history of planet Earth into 'eons',, which are subdivided into 'eras'. Subdivisions of era are called, 'periods' which in turn are subdivided into 'epochs'. In, geological terms periods and epochs have small time spans.
Page 42 :
32, , i Early Social Formations, , For our purpose it is sufficient to note that we live in the, geological era called 'cenozoic'. Cenozoic began 65 million, years ago when the landmasses on the Earth acquired their, present position and shape. Scientists have established that, there was a time when the various continents were almost, joined together to form one large landmass (Pangea)., Subsequently over several hundred million years the, continents drifted apart and the present map of Earth's surface, was formed 65 million years ago. This marks the beginning of, the cenozoic era. The cenozoic era is subdivided into two, periods, 'tertiary' and 'quaternary'. The tertiary period had, five epochs: 'paleocene' (65 million to 56.5 million years ago);, 'eocene' (56.5 million to 35.4 million years ago); 'oligocene', (35.4 million to 23.3 million years ago); 'miocene' (23.3 million, to 5.2 million years ago); and 'pliocene' (5.2 million to 1.64, million years ago). Primates had begun evolving about 70, million years ago and at the beginning of the cenozoic the, prosimii were in existence. Bipedalism began evolving during, the miocene leading to the emergence. The genus homo, evolved during the pliocene and it was during this epoch that, hominids began making tools., Major advances in tool technology were made during the, following period, the quaternary. The quaternary is, subdivided into two geological epochs: pleistocene (1.64 million, years to 12, 000 years ago) and 'holocene' (12, 000 years ago, to the present, i.e. we are now living in the holocene geological, epoch). The paleolithic age of prehistory belongs to the, pleistocene geological epoch., During the pleistocene there was a significant lowering, of temperatures all over the world. This .resulted in a series of, ice ages. A sizeable portion of the northern hemisphere was, under ice for several hundred thousand years. Regions with, temperate climate wer,e covered with ice and glaciers., Beginning about 2.36 million years ago, ic;e-sheets spread, southwards to large parts of the northern hemisphere. More, than one-third of the northern hemisphere, right up to New, York, London and Moscow was completely under these ice-
Page 43 :
Paleolithic Age, , I, , 33, , sheets. In between there were warmer intervals (called, interglacials) when the ice-sheets retreated northwards., Geologists have identified several ice ages. Each g~aciation, (or southward spread of ice-sheets) took place at intervals of, about 100, 000 years. The last ice age, which is also referred to, as the Wurm glaciation (the term is derived from the Alpine, region where it was identified), began 118, 000 years ago and, was the most extensive. This ice age was preceded by an, interglacial (128-118, 000 years ago), during which the climate, was warmer. It was during this interglacial that the earliest, homo sapiens came into existence. The last ice age reached its, greatest intensity 20, 000 years ago. The ice ages came to end, 12, 000 years ago, which marks the beginning of the holocene, (or post-glacial) geological epoch., The Mousterian culture was an attempt to adapt to the, warmer climatic conditions which preceded the last ice age., One would like to repeat that during the pleistocene epoch, humans were still evolving biologically. But they were now, capable of cultural adaptation as well. Neanderthals lived in, an environment in which big game was plentiful. Seacoasts,, streams and rivers which were earlier frozen or inaccessible, could be exploited for new types of food like fish. Mousterian, tools were more specialized and as many as sixty varieties of, tools have been identified. Neanderthals were expert hunters., The animals which they hunted were mainly bison, horse, red, deer and reindeer. Fish too became a part of the diet. Several, Mousterian traditions developed independently in West Asia, and Africa also. These were traditions of different species of, early homo sapiens. They have features which resemble the, neanderthal Mousterian culture very closely. Early homo, sapiens seem to have produced fairly uniform cultures. The, need to adapt to diverse environments did introduce variations but these are not significant. In fact some scholars have, pointed out that the various middle paleolithic/Mousterian/, early homo sapiens tool traditions are not fundamentally, different from the tools of the lower paleolithic. Techniques, evolved earlier were further refined. The really important
Page 44 :
34, , I Early Social Formations, , changes came about 35, 000 years ago which marked the, beginning of the upper paleolithic and the appearance of homo, sapiens sapiens., There is one sense in which Mousterian culture differs, from the cultures of lower paleolithic. For the first time we, find an attribute which is such an important component of, human culture, namely, the careful disposal of the dead body., Mousterian sites have brought to light burial traditions of early, homo sapiens. The dead body is not merely abandoned, but, its disposal was undertaken with some care. The earth was, dug up and the body laid out along with some tools and other, objects. Early homo sapiens had begun to think about the, phenomenon of death, thereby reflecting a much higher level, of thinking and imagination. Mousterian graves have been, found at Shanidar Cave in Iraq and various sites in Europe., The upper paleolithic began 35, 000 years ago. By this time, homo sapiens ·sapiens were coming into existence and were, replacing the neanderthals. The environment too had changed., The last ice age had reduced temperatures appreciably in, Europe, Asia and North Africa. Stone tool technology, witnessed significant improvement in this period. A large, number of upper paleolithic sites have been discovered in, France and Spain. Many of these sites are concentrated in, southern France, and extensive work has been done on them, over the past several decades. In the first half of the twentieth, century the French prehistorian Henri Breuil established, himself as the most outstanding authority on West European, upper paleolithic sites. His work showed that there were, several distinct upper paleolithic cultures. Three of these, cultures are crucial for an understanding of the upper paleolithic. These are the Aurignacian, the Solutrean and the, Magdalenian., Upper paleolithic humans hunted a variety of animals, including big mammals like the woolly rhinoceros and, mammoth. They trapped huge arctic ~ammals. Bison, reindeer,, horse, sea and river fish continued to be part of their diet. A, wide variety of plants was eaten, some of which were tough
Page 45 :
Paleolithic Age. I 35, , but could be processed with the tools that humans now, possessed., Upper paleolithic tools were increasingly specialized. Tools, were made for specific purposes. A group could be using up, to a hundred different types of tools. There was growing, refinement ·in tools made for manufacturing other tools. A, typical tool of this type was the 'burin'. The burin acted as a, kind of chisel for making other tools. The Aurignacians were, adept at making small blades with parallel edges. The edges, were extremely sharp. Among the tools of the Solutrean, culture one of the most characteristic is the tool with a sharp, 'leaf point'. The Magdalenians made excellent harpoons which, were used for fishing., Two other features of upper paleolithic stone tools need, to be mentioned. One is that the use of materials other than, stone becomes more widespread. Wood, bone, ivory and antler, (deer horns) were commonly used. Second, many tools now, were composite tools. They were composed of several parts,, of which some parts might be made of stone and others of, wood or bone. Leaf points could have been joined to wooden, rods to make a spear-like weapon. These weapons could be, very lethal when used for hunting. Arrows were also used, for hunting and were often poisoned in order to be more, effective. There were also tools for making crude clothing, (from hides, etc.). Finally a number of tools were made for, scraping and chiselling wood, bone, ivory and antler for, decorative purposes., The upper paleolithic provides us with the earliest examples, of art. With upper paleolithic art humans took a giant cultural, leap. Art marks an entirely new phase in human history-in, the development of thought and imagination. Upper paleolithic, art began evolving in Eastern Europe (Hungary, Yugoslavia), and South-West Asia. Subsequently it reached its peak in, Western Europe. Specimens of upper paleolithic art have been, found in West Asia, Siberia, Africa and most of Europe., Upper paleolithic art was first discovered in the last, quarter of the nineteenth century. In 1879 Don Marcelino de
Page 46 :
36, , I Early Social Formations, , Sautuola found paintings on the roof of a cave in Altamira,, Spain. He examined the paintings carefully and suggested that, they were made by early stone age people. The paintings were, so brilliantly executed that de Sautuola's view that they dated, back to the paleolithic was not taken seriously for a long time., The main reason was that stylistically the paintings appeared, to be very modern. The realistic manner in which the paintings, depicted animals in motion was considered to be beyond the, capacity of paleolithic humans., Subsequent work on the paintings confirmed that de, Sautuola was correct. These were indeed paleolithic paintings., Henri Breuil did pioneering research on upper paleolithic art., Nearly 200 upper paleolithic caves are now known. These, contain paintings and engravings on the walls. Apart from, Altamira, another famous upper paleolithic cave is situated at, Lascaux in France. Cave paintings were not the only art form, proquced by these cultures. Thousands of other art objects, have also been found. These include handles of tools, statuettes, and clay figures. These objects depict animals or have geometric, designs. Interestingly a number of the clay figures portray, the human female body. Whereas paintings are confined to, Western Europe, other art objects are quite widespread. They, have been discovered at sites in Europe, Africa and Siberia., Sites associated with the Aurignacian culture (34, 000 to, 30,000 years ago) contain the first extensive evidence of upper, paleolithic art. There are practically no Aurignacian paintings,, but there are a number of beautifully carved ivory beads which, were used for ornamentation. The Aurignacians made small, animal figures using ivory and bone. They also made a flutelike, wind instrument from bone. Here we see the beginnings of, music as well., In the Solutrean culture (22,000 to 18, 000 years ago) cave, painting emerged as a major art form. Early paintings were, rough outlines but over a period of time the lines become, graceful and are filled with details. The paintings were, coloured by using various· natural pigments. The Solutreans, were also expert at carving figures on walls of caves. This
Page 47 :
Paleolithic Age, , I, , 37, , technique is called 'bas-relief' (or low-relief) where the figures, are slightly raised on the· surface of the wall., Upper paleolithic cave paintings reached their fullest, development in the Magdalenian culture (18, 000 to 11, 000, years ago). This is the time when the last ice age, after reaching, its greatest extent and intensity (c. 20, 000 years ago) began to, retreat. The climate became warmer as the culture progressed., By this time homo sapiens sapiens had spread out to different, parts of the world, and had completely replaced other species, of homo sapiens. V. Gordon Childe refers to the Magdalenian, as the most brilliant culture created by hunter-gatherers., Nearly 80 percent of all upper paleolithic cave paintings, are from Magdalenian sites. The Magdalenians had perfected, the technique of painting deep inside caves. Almost no natural, light penetrated these dark interior parts of the caves. Lamps, containing animals fat were used for lighting up the caves, while the painters worked. This was obviously a tedious and, difficult job and required considerable skill. The painters, concentrated mainly on drawing animals. Many of these, animals, though not all, are animals that were hunted by the, Magdalenians. There are also scenes depicting humans engaged, in hunting. Besides, there are some geometric patterns and a, few fantastic animals (figures which combine features of, different animals)., Ever since the date of upper paleolithic art was established, at the beginning of the century, scholars have speculated about, the underlying motives of this art. What purpose did this art, have? Why did upper paleolithic people undertake such, painstaking work to produce this art? These questions have, given rise to a vast literature which seeks to interpret upper, paleolithic art. At one end of the debate are those who feel, that this is merely 'art for arts' sake', i.e. just for the aesthetic, pleasure provided by art and that it is futile to see any meaning, in it. At the other end are those who have read so much, meaning into it that their critics have pointed out that we, should refrain from imposing meanings drawn from our, experience on this art.
Page 48 :
38, , I Early Social Formations, , One thing that is immediately apparent is that it is incorrect to dismiss upper paleolithic humans as primitive people, incapable of intricate patterns of thought. These are people, who had attained an advanced level of artistic sophistication, which reveals a highly evolved thinking process. Upper, paleolithic people had their own coherent world-view. Modern, anthropological studies have forced us to rethink about the, concept of 'primitiveness'. Just because a society is, technologically less advanced than our own does not, necessarily mean that it is incapable of a profound, understanding of nature and the world. In fact their, understanding could at times be more sophisticated than that, of a modern city-dweller. It has been pointed out that our, obsession with technology does not allow us to perceive this, easily., Anthropological studies of present day hunter-gatherers, have placed a wealth of information about these societies at, our disposal. It is with the interpretative framework provided, by these studies that prehistorians have attempted to examine, the thought process which went into the making of upper, paleolithic art. Breuil who, as we have noted, did pioneering, research on this art was deeply influenced by the work of S., Reinach at the beginning of the twentieth century. Reinach, had studied paintings made by Australian aboriginal hunters, and found that these paintings were a ritual intended to, improve chances of a successful hunt. Most of the animals, drawn were those which they intended to hunt. Reinach drew, a parallel between these and upper paleolithic paintings. Using, Reinach' s suggestion Breuil argued that upper paleolithic, paintings were magical in nature., The term 'magic' is used here in the sense of a ritual or, practice which is intended to exert control over some objects, or natural phenomena. At one level the attempt to intervene, in or control nature through magic or the performance of some, ritual led to a closer observation of natural phenomena which, in turn had important implications for the growth of early, science. At another level magical rituals marked the beginnings
Page 49 :
Paleolithic Age I 39, , of religious beliefs since they involved developing a coherent, world-view-a particular way of looking at the world., Breuil's interpretation of upper paleolithic ·paintings was, that these were part of a magical ritual: The purpose of the, ritual was to give the hunters greater control over the animals, which they hunted. It was for this reason that animals like, bison, reindeer and horse constituted the predominant theme, of these paintings., While most sc~olars have come to accept that these, paintings had a ritualistic purpose, there is some disagreement, about the exact objective underlying the ritual. Snme, prehistorians have argued that Breuil's understanding of the, ritual is oversimplified. The hunters were not thinking in terms, of overpowering a particular animal by just drawing it., Moreover the animals which were drawn were not always, those which formed the staple diet of a particular group. Andre-Leroi-Gourhan, another major authority on these paintings,, has approached the problem from a different perspective., Unlike Breuil, who looked at individual animals, LeroiGourhan has tried to place the animals in groups. He has found, that certain groups of animals are uniformly depicted in certain, parts o_f caves., There is a pattern in this depiction. For instance bison and, horse are invariably depicted deep inside the caves. On the, other hand deer were always drawn near the entrance of caves., According to Leroi-Gourhan a complex set of beliefs underlay, the paintings. Their arrangement suggests that different groups, of animals were linked to different natural phenomena in the, mind of upper paleolithic people. He has gone further and, proposed that animals were grouped according to a malefemale division of nature. Some forces were supposed to, represent 'maleness' and others 'femaleness'. The.' male', animals (e.g. horse, stag) were representative of the male, principle, while the 'female' animals (e.g. bison, ox), represented the female principle., Thus from these paintings we get an insight into the upper, paleolithic mind and see how these people understood the
Page 50 :
40, , I Early Social Formations, , forces of nature. Through their specific view of nature, in which, they linked certain groups of animals to certain natural forces, they hoped to gain control over nature. This is particularly, seen in the case of their attempt to control what they thought, was the 'male-female' principle in nature. However, LeroiGourhan's interpretation has been disputed by many, prehistorians. Some have even stated that considering the, length of time which separates our society from the upper, paleolithic it is doubtful whether we can ever unravel the, pattern of thinking which produced the paintings., There is one other issue which needs to be considered., What was the nature of the ritual that was practised? This is a, difficult question to answer. Much that has been said in this, regard is speculative in nature. Some scholars have seen the, beginnings of witchcraft here. Another hypothesis is the one, propounded by Count Begouen. His view is that the ritual, consisted of the act of drawing itself. In drawing an object the, painter was performing a ritual. Begouen' s suggestion is based, on two significant features of the paintings. First, in many, cases the figures are drawn repeatedly at the same spot in, respective caves. Paintings at these spots are superimposed, on previous drawings. The act of drawing at that particular, spot (which could be regarded as 'sacred') seems to be more, important than the painting itself. Second, the majority of the, paintings are located in dark and inaccessible parts of caves., This meant that drawing the painting was a very difficult job., The act of drawing required a lot of time, labour and skill., The person drawing a figure could therefore be regarded as, performing a ritual. Moreover, since the paintings were, executed in remote interiors of the caves where hardly any, natural light penetrated, they could not have been meant for, viewing. Hence the act of drawing was itself the ritual. The, appeal of this interpretation lies in its simplicity., Paleolithic remains offer us a glimpse into the social, organization of early humans. These remains have often to be, correlated with the experience of contemporary huntergatherers. In the lower paleolithic hominids lived in very small
Page 51 :
Paleolithic Age, , I, , 41, , groups. The mother-child relationship was the nucleus around, which social groups were formed. Primatology, which is the, study of primate behaviour, has of late become an independent, discipline in its own right. It has helped us to reconstruct the, social organization of early humans. Anthropoids are generally, very social in their behaviour. They live in groups of some, size. There are well-defined relationships in these groups. This, would have been true for the earliest humans as well. The, need to carefully look after infants for a length of time, reinforced cooperation among them., Mobility was an important factor in the adaptive strategy, of the paleolithic. Groups would constantly move from place, to place in search of food. They however remained wfthin a, familiar env:ronment. Plant gathering was an individual, activity. It was time consuming as well. All grownup members, of the group had to engage in this activity. Given the time,, labour, and level of technology involved it was not possible, for one person to gather food for another. Scavenging too, was more of an individual activity. With the Acheulian and, other homo erectus cultures social groups became somewhat, larger. These groups are referred to as 'bands', and usually, comprised 20-25 individuals. The core of the band was based, on kinship ties, i.e. people having close blood relationships., There were some restrictions on mating within this group., Hunting required more cooperation. Such cooperation was, facilitated by improved capacity for communication., The Mousterians were accomplished hunters of big, mammals. These large animals could be hunted more efficiently, if this was done collectively. Tracking the animals, preparing, traps for them and killing them called for enhanced, cooperation. Such cooperation also provided opportunities for, learning tool-making techniques and standardization of the, techniques. As a particular group grew in size, subgroups, would branch off so that the resources of an area were not, overburdened. This is reflected in the large-scale migrations, of hominid population from the homo erectus onwards., By the middle paleolithic bands were no longer living in
Page 52 :
,r2, , I Early Social Formations, , total isolation. Loose links were established with other bands, who simultaneously exploited a large area. The bands as a, whole did not move from place to place every few days, but, relied on a more elaborate strategy. The bands would move, over a large territory in a seasonal cycle. _During each seasonal, movement they would select an appropriate site as their 'home, base'. From this home base small groups would venture forth, in different directions for the purpose of hunting animals. This, could necessitate absence of several days from the home base., This arrangement involved division of labour within the, bands. Males usually went out for hunting. The women stayed, close to the home base, tending the children and gathering, plant~ for food. They also hunted small game that was available, near the home base. This was just a functional division of labour, and should not be taken to indicate 'male prowess' at hunting., It certainly did not imply that males had superior abilities for, hunting, or that hunting was a superior activity as compared, to plant gathering. All these concepts arose much later, with, the establishment of inequality in society., With the emergence of homo sapiens sapiens and the transition to the upper paleolithic, communities based on a network, of a large number of bands were formed. These communities, contained several bands which lived in a common ecological, .zone and procured their food in similar ways. By coming, together they engaged in hunting jointly. They exchanged, objects and even mating partners. These bands congregated, on certain occasions for performing rituals. The _rituals, which, reflect their shared beliefs, gave rise to the cave paintings of, this period. Ornaments indicated group identity. Rituals and, the growth of relationships based on exchange point towards, the emergence of a more complex social organization., Language played a crucial role in this development. As, Philip Lieberman has shown, even neanderthals lacked, language skills possessed by homo sapiens sapiens. The, neanderthal vocal tract is closer to that of the chimpanzee., Early homo sapiens did communicate more efficiently than, apes or even australopithecus and could store a much larger
Page 53 :
Paleolithic Age, , I, , 43, , amount of information, but they might not have been able to, use language in the same way as we do. Once this ability was, acquired it created possibilities for wider and more intensive, communication. Language helped to establish and maintain, links with several bands. Homo sapiens sapiens, moving in, large groups formed through a network of mutual cooperation whose members communicated with great ease, would, have been deadly for other homo sapiens populations. Other, homo sapiens lived in smaller groups and did not communicate, so efficiently. Within a short space of time they succumbed to, the pressure of modem humans, and soon became extinct., Throughout the paleolithic period one feature of social, organization remained constant. Within the bands and even, within larger groups there was collective access to tools and, food. Plant foods were usually individually collected and, consumed. Meat was shared. This sharing could involve an, elaborate ritual,· especially in the upper paleolithic. In this, period sharing should not be confused with gifting or, voluntary sharing of food by individuals with other members, of the group. There simply was no concept of individual control, since access to killed animals (as to tools) was collective. These, concepts began to undergo changes only with the beginningsof food production.
Page 54 :
Chapter Three, , NEOLITHIC AGE, , THE end of the pleistocene epoch marked the end of the ice, ages. In the post-pleistocene or p9st-glacial epoch (which geologists refer to as the holocene epoch) climatic conditions were, much warmer. Environmental changes meant that postpleistocene societies could not always procure food in ways, that they had been accustomed to for several thousand years., Some species of animals which had been hunted in large, numbers, as for instance reindeer, were now scarce. The precise, impact of these changes on different ecological zones is, somewhat unclear. But the broad contours of these changes, can be recognized., ·, A large proportion of Earth's water, which had been, locked up in the form of ice, was now released with melting, of ice due to warmer temperatures. This led to a rise in ocean, and sea levels. On the one hand many coastal areas were, submerged, as were low-lying areas. On the other hand areas, which had been completely covered by ice-sheets now became, habitable. Frozen rivers and streams melted and could be, exploited. This is reflected in the great diversity of sea food, and river fish consumed at the beginning of post-glacial times., In the temperate zones and tropical areas wetter conditions, prevailed. Higher water levels combined with warmer climate, increased the level of humidity in these areas. Many of the, forests saw dense growth and several areas which had earlier, ., been dry became open grasslands., Although climatic changes had a profound impact on
Page 55 :
Neolithic Age I 4:',, , patterns of subsistence, we should not overemphasize their, importance. It should be remembered that throughout the, upper paleolithic, humans had to constantly adapt to rapid, changes in the environment. As the last ice age progressed, there had been a steady fall in temperatures till 20, 000 years, ago. Following a phase of severe cold, deglaciation had started, almost immediately. Human societies had learnt to cope with, such shifts in the environment. Moreover, human society, during the upper paleolithic was sufficiently evolved to be, able to respond to such changes., The post-glacial epoch began 12,000 years ago (or 12,000, BP: 'BP' stands for 'before present' and is reckoned from 1950, AD. Thus 12, 000 BP means 12, 000 years before 1950, which, could also be written as 10, 150 BC. Most of the dates in this, chapter are 'BP'). After 12, 000 BP the brilliant upper paleolithic, cultures of Europe collapsed. The most outstanding of these, cultures, the Magdalenian, disappeared. For a long time after, that nothing comparable to the achievements of the, Magdalenian culture is to be found. Obviously the new, environment could not sustain the Magdalenian economy. The, successful adaptation of the Magdalenians was seriously upset, by the transformation which had taken place in the, environment., In most parts of Europe hunting and food gathering, economy continued at the beginning of the post-pleistocene, epoch. These early post-glacial cultur·es seem inferior as, compared to the Magdalenian. For a long time prehistorians, saw this essentially as a period of all-round decline. They used, the term 'mesolithic' (middle stone age) for European cultures, of this period. The term mesolithic was used specifically for the, , hunting and food gathering cultures of Europe in early post-glacial, times. It was assumed that climatic changes had caused a, reversal in Europe. While West Asia advanced towards, agriculture, the Europeans continued with a primitive, paleolithic way of life. The mesolithic was supposed to have, come to an end with the spread of food-production to the, continent. The use of the term is itself somewhat controversial.
Page 56 :
46, , I, , Early Social Formations, , Prehistorians have not been able to decide whether neolithic, (new stone age) represented a complete break with the, paleolithic or whether there was a gradual transition from, paleolithic to neolithic, the mesolithic being an intermediate, stage between the two. Moreover, in the context of Europe, some scholars have regarded the mesolithic as a phase of, decline while for others it was an attempt to adapt to the, post-pleistocene environment by modifying the hunting and, food gathering economy., It is true that several parts of Europe stagnated or went, into decline after c. i2, 000 BP. However recent research has, shown that some exciting developments were taking place in, a few areas. This research has given a new meaning to the, term mesolithic. Though the mainstay of the mesolithic, remained hunting and food gathering, .there were substantial, innovations in the adaptive strategy. Much of· the evidence, for this new picture of the European mesolithic comes from, Scandinavia and North Europe., The mesolithic cultures of Scandinavia attempted to realize, the full potential of hunting and food gathering. In these cultures a wide range of animals was hunted intensively. New, tools and techniques were utilized to hunt more efficiently., Sea food came to occupy a central place in the economy. This, became possible through exploiting the Baltic sea coast which, was hitherto frozen. The Scandinavian ice-sheet covered much, of North Europe in the last ice age. With warmer temperatures, the ice-sheet retreated and the Baltic region, as well as the, North European coastline, became accessible. The rich marine, life of this region sustained Scandinavian mesolithic hunters., Different types of fish (of which salmon became a great, favourite) and sea mammals (dolphins, seals and whales) were, eaten. A rich assortment of land animals too were included in, the diet. On the whole, mesolithic diet was increasingly, diversified. A number of fishing hooks; nets and harpoons, have been discovered at the mesolithic sites. The manufacture, of very small and highly effective stone pieces (called, 'microliths') became common. These microliths, with their
Page 57 :
Neolithic Age I 47, , sharp points or edges, were used to make extremely lethal, hunting tools. Mesolithic hunters regularly used bows and, arrows. Canoes were made for navigation. These were dug, out of tree-logs. Dogs had been domesticated for hunting., The development of the mesolithic iri North Europe can, be divided into three main periods; Maglemose (9500 to 7700, BP); Kongemose (7700 to 6600 BP); and Ertebolle (6600 to 5200, BP). Sweden, Denmark and other parts of southern, Scandinavia were the major centres of the mesolithic cultures., Mesolithic sites in southern Scandinavia show a high density, of population. The population is fairly large in relation to the, size of the respective territories. Hunters seem to have, congregated in large numbers at certain favoured locations., They exploited these locations over a prolonged duration. This, gave rise to a more sedentary lifestyle, something that is not, common among hunter-gatherers. The mesolithic huntergatherers were in the process of settling down. This is very, different from the usual pattern of hunter-gatherer adaptation., Hunter-gatherers are constantly on the move and live in small, groups. In the transition from the Maglemose to the, Kongemose and then the Ertebolle periods, Scandinavian, mesolithic communities grew extraordinarily large. They lived, in densely populated settlements., This has been called a 'complex' hunting society. Social, groups were larger in size. The environment was exploited, intensively, particularly through fishing. Relationships of, cooperation and exchange were established with other groups., Some goods (like specialized tools, ornaments and seashells), were also exchanged. By the Ertebolle period there is evidence, of exchange with some.farming communities as well. This is, reflected in pottery discovered at mesolithic sites. In the words, of T. Douglas Price we can now see the mesolithic as an age of, 'innovation, interaction and successful adaptation among the, early post-glacial hunter-gatherers of northern Europe'. This, created conditions for the introduction of agriculture in these, parts of Europe between 6000 and 5000 BC., The mesolithic economy was essentially an extension of
Page 58 :
·11:l, , I Early Social Formations, , paleolithic hunting and gathering. It was marked by intensive, collection of plants. The mesolithic saw the beginnings of, sedentism. RelaHonships of exchange between groups, intensified. There is sufficient evidence to indicate an overall, growth in population as well as increased density (more, persons per square kilometre) in certain areas. As we have, seen, these features can be discerned in the European, mesolithic. These new elements in the hunter-gatherer wayof-life were quite pronounced in West Asia. It seems that in, this region many of these new elements began to develop, from the late pleistocene onwards. The adaptive strategy of, hunter-:--gatherers of West Asia during the late pleistocene/, mesolithic led to the beginnings of food-production in this, region., West Asia had been cold and dry in the ice ages. Postglacial warming and humidity allowed grasslands to come, up. The pleistocene environment in West Asia had been very, harsh. Groups which inhabited this region could have, sustained themselves by constantly moving about and, gathering whatever edible wild plants were available. Gazelles, were hunted in large numbers, ahnost to the exclusion of other, animals. In these difficult conditions there might have been a, greater willingness to experiment with some new types of, food. At some point of time, towards the end of the pleistocene,, wild cereal grasses were included in the diet., ·, From 12, 000 8P onwards the paleolithic econon,,.y of West, Asia was being steadily modified. New types of tools were, made and the highly mobile lifestyle which was characteristic, of the West Asian paleolithic was abandoned as food, availability improved. Permanent dwellings began to make, an appearance and there is a remarkable continuity qf, settlement during the post-pleistocene epoch at some West, Asian sites. Evidence of· such settlements has been found in, Palestine/Israel, Syria and Jordan. These settlements, dating, back to 12, 000 BP, are referred to as the 'Natufian' culture, (12, 000 BP to 10, 000 BP). In some of the earlier works on the, subject, Natufian is referred to as a mesolithic culture, because
Page 59 :
Neolithic Age, , I, , 49, , it was recognized essentially as a hu,nter-gatherer culture, which had been modified to suit the post-glacial environment., A better understanding of the emergence of food production, has enabled us to view the Natu.fian culture as having created, the preconditions for agriculture. In West Asia a brief, mesolithic age preceded the Natufian culture. The neolithic, did not arise abruptly, bµt was the product of a long period, of adjustment and experimentation. The N atufian culture, marks the transition from paleolithic/mesolithic to neolithic., The Natufians subsisted on collection of wild cereals and, nuts, and hunting of gazelles. They lived in circular huts. There, is evidence to indicate that there were storage areas for plant, foods. This points towards a more stable supply of food as, well as a more settled existence. The most significant, innovation in tool technology was the introduction of sickles, by Natufians. These are the oldest sickles we know of. The, sickles consist of two or three sharp-edged stone blades which, are set in handles usually made from bone. The edges of the, blades resembled goat-teeth. These were suitable for cutting, wild cereal grasses. Cutting the hard stalks of t~ese grasses, resulted in a typical gloss or sheen on the blades which has, been preserved on these implements. This gloss confirms that, wild cereals were an important source of food for the, Natufians., 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), which produced, great civilizations. Till as late as the 1940s dates for neolithic, settlements were highly unrealistic and frequently based on, guesswork. From the 1950s a vast amount of new archeological, evidence has become available. This evidence was based on, excavations conducted in West Asia during the late forties, and early fifties. These excavations coincided with a revolution, in dating methods. The single most important breakthrough, was the application of radiocarbon dating to archeological
Page 60 :
50, , I Early Social Formations, , finds. This new method made possible more precise dates., This method was a by-product of advances in atomic physics., What was revolutionary was its application to archeology., Scientists had discovered that energy rays from outer, space are constantly reaching the Earth's atmosphere. These, are radioactive rays and they cause various reactions. As a, result of chemical reactions involving certain gases (nitrogen,, oxygen), a type of carbon is produced due to the impact of, these energy rays from outer space (radioactive cosmic rays)., This type of carbon (carbon-14) is somewhat different from, the type of carbon which is most widely found on Earth, (carbon-12). The two have different atomic weights (14 and, 12 respectively}, but their chemical properties are the same., For our purpose what is important is that all living organisms a"psorb carbon. Since carbon-12 is the most widespread, this is the type of carbon which is absorbed in large quantities., But there are also very small quantities of carbon-14 in the, atmosphere. This carbon-14 too is absorbed. Interestingly there, is a certain proportion between the two types of carbon. This, proportion tends to remain constant due to an important, feature of carbon-14. Carbon-14 is radioactive (it is also, referred to as radiocarbon). Being radioactive it decays. This, decay implies that it ceases to remain carbon. The decay ensures, that the proportion between carbon-14 and carbon-12 remains, constant even though carbon-14 is constantly being formed, due to cosmic energy rays. While on the one hand carbon-14, atoms are being formed, on the other hand they are decaying, (i.e. they no longer remain carbon). All living organisms which, absorb carbon, imbibe carbon-14 and carbon-12 in the same, proportion as is found in the atmosphere., Plants and animals stop absorbing carbon when they are, no longer alive. At the time of its death an organism would, have had carbon-14 and carbon-12 in the same fixed proportion, in which the two are found in the atmosphere, a proportion, that can be estimated. Over a period of time the carbon-12, content will remain what it was at the time of ·death, but, carbon-14 will keep on decaying. A dead organism does not
Page 61 :
Neolithic Age, , !, , :;1, , absorb any carbon, consequently no fresh carbon-14 will be, added to replace that which has decayed., An important discovery was that the decay of carbon-14, takes place at a regular rate. Every 5500 years half of a given, amount of carbon-14 will have decayed in a dead-organism., 5500 years after the death of an organism just half the original, amount of carbon-14 (the amount which was present at the, moment of death) would be left. After about 11, 000 years, only one-fourth the original amount would be left, and so on., We can estimate the time of death of the organism by, measuring the carbon-14 present in it and comparing this, carbon-14 with the carbon-12 present. The carbon-12 content, will not have changed, while carbon-14 will have decayed. As, the original proportion is known and the time-span over which, carboil-14 decays is known (half a given amount every 5500, years), the period when the organism lived can be found out., Samples of wood or bone from a particular site can be used to, date a culture by this method. Beyond a certain point (about, 70,000 years) carbon-14, which in any case found in very small, quantities, will have decayed to an extent that it becomes, difficult to detect. Using the same principle other methods, are now available for dating objects like fossils which are very, old-several million years old. One important method is the, potassium/ argon method, which is usually used to estimate, age of fossils. Potassium/ argon dating can be used together, with geological data to compute the date when the fossilized, organism lived., ·, The application of radiocarbon dating to archeology began, in 1949. The pioneer in this field was Willard Libby, an, American scientist, who won the Nobel Prize in 1960 for his, contribution. This dating technique completely revised the, history of the neolithic. As stated above, this method became, available at a time when important archeological excavations, were being made in West Asia. When radiocarbon dating was, applied to remains from West Asian neolithic sites it was found, that these sites were much older than what had been thought, earlier. This point will become clearer when we realize that
Page 62 :
52, , i Early Social Formations, , written records from Egypt and Mesopotamia had been used, by historians to date the beginnings of ancient civilizations in, this region to 3000 BC (4950 BP). Working backwards from, this date it had been estimated that about 1500 years would, have elapsed between the beginnings of agriculture and the, emergence of Egyptian and Mesopotamian civilizations. This, meant that the earliest neolithic cultures were regarded as, not older than 4500 BC (about 6500 BP). The revised dates, based on carbon-14 revealed that some Palestinian neolithic, sites were nearly 8200 years old. Subsequent research and, more accurate application of radiocarbon dating now indicates, that the neolithic in West Asia began 10, 500 BP., Nearly 150 early neolithic sites have been discovered in, West Asia. These sites are located in a belt extending from, the Dead Sea region in Palestine /Israel; the Jordan Valley;, Syria, North Iraq; the Zagros mountains; and parts of NorthWest Iran. On the west this belt extends to southern Turkey., 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. In Palestine, the most important site is at Jericho .. In North Iraq there are, two important sites. These are Zawi Chemi Shanidar and, Jarmo, both located at the foothills of the Zagros mountains., The excavations at Jericho were a major breakthrough for, archeology. The Jericho neolithic dates back to 10, 500 BP., Jericho exhibits continuity of settlement from the Natufian, culture to various phases of the neolithic., Jericho is situated near the Dead Sea. It is endowed•with, a natural spring. 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
Page 63 :
Neolithic Age I 5?:, , cultivation. As they settled down they built round huts. These, were followed later on by better built rectangular houses,, some houses having courtyards. Although for a long time, archeologists had equated the beginnings of pottery-making, with the neolithic, the first two layers of settlement at Jericho, contain no evidence of pottery. These two layers are referred, to as 'pre-pottery neolithic A' (PPN A) and 'pre-pottery, neolithic B' (PPN B). They were followed by neolithic cultures, in which pottery was introduced. In PPN A and PPN B bowls, and dishes were made out of-soft limestonE;. They were cut, out of stone and polished. The houses have large storage pits,, obviously for storing seeds and nuts. A remarkable feature of, the pre-pottery phase at Jericho is the construction of a massive, defensive wall. The wall surrounded the settlement and is an, amazing piece of architecture. It was made of large blocks of, stone, and had a width of six and a half feet. On one side, (west), where it is still well-preserved, the wall rose to a height, of 12 feet. A large tower was built on the inside of the wall., The tower is 30 feet high, and has 22 steps leading to the top., The introduction of pottery, after the PPN A and PPN B, phases, represented a significant improvement. Pottery was a, technological advance. Making pottery involves giving a, permanent shape to clay by drawing water from it. The, chemical nature of the clay is changed by bringing it in contact, with fire. The clay is made into a particular shape and then, baked, thereby removing the moisture. People had learnt to, work with clay during the upper paleolithic (clay figurines, etc.). In the mesolithic and Natufian cultures storage pits had, been lined with clay. Perhaps more important than familiarity, with clay, the making of pottery required controlled use of, fire. Ovens had to be made where high temperatures could, be constantly maintained for the time required to bake the, clay. As we shall see, the ability to use fire in this way had, important implications for the later transition- to metal-using, society. Baskets made by upper paleolithic and mesolithic, cultures out of certain types of plants might have suggested, the shapes for the first pottery vessels. These vessels were
Page 64 :
54, , I Early Social Formations, , used for storage of food and for cooking. Pottery shapes, the, manner in which pottery is decorated and the technique employed (temperature at which the clay is baked; the type of, clay used) is often very specific to a particular group. So much, so that for archeologists pottery is a convenient method of, dating and identifying cultures., In the neighbourhood of Jericho, Abu Hureyra in Syria, and Ain Ghazal in Jordan also provide evidence of the, beginnings of agriculture. Abu Hureyra covers a large areaalmost 28 acres. The people of Jericho, Abu Hureyra and Ain, Ghazal devoted an increasing amount of time to cultivating, cereals like wheat and barley. They also domesticated sheep, and goats. Stone tools were adapted for cultivation. A large, number of sickles have been found at these sites. There are, also heavy stone apparatus for grinding cereals. The presence, of arrow heads indicates the continuance of hunting during, the early neolithic., 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. Excavations conducted in the late, 1940s resulted in the discovery of Janno in this area. The excavations were led by Robert Braidwood and his team. This, was just the time when the radiocarbon dating method became, available. With the help of carbon-14 dating Braidwood was, able to show that the neolithic was much older than was earlier, suspected. Further, that the transition to food production had, taken place not in fertile river valleys but in the relatively, marginal grasslands in North Iraq., There is a story of professional jealousy connected with, Jarmo. Shortly after the sensational find made by Braidwood,, another archeologist, Kathleen Kenyon, published the results, of her excavations at Jericho. These showed that Jericho was, much -older than Jarmo and that Palestine rather than North, Iraq was the place where agriculture had first evolved. As we, have seen, there was also a continuity from the N atufian culture, to the early neolithic in this area. Though Kenyon's dates were
Page 65 :
Neolithic Age I ss, , also based on the radiocarbon dating method, Braidwood was, sceptical about her conclusions. The Jericho versus Jarmo, dispute continued for several years. It is now accepted that, Kenyon was right. Jericho is in fact much older (10, 500 BP), than Jarmo (7000 BP)., Nevertheless, the Zagros mountain foothills remain crucial, for reconstructing the early history of agriculture. Subsequent, work in this area has brought to light older sites where we, can see the shift to food production taking place. One such, site is Zawi Chemi Shanidar which dates back to 11, 000 BP., This was a settlement of hunter-gatherers who led a, semipermanent existence. They specialized in the hunting of, wild mountain goats and might have started herding sheep., Wild cereals were included in their diet. Evidence for regular, food production in this area comes from Ali Kosh. This neolithic, settlement in North Iraq dates back to 10, 000 BP. At Ali Kosh,, and later at Jarmo, the people subsisted increasingly on, cultivation. Rectangular houses were built. These contain pits·, for storage. Stone tools were adapted for agriculture. Sickles, and grinding stones have been found. It has been estimated, that in Jarmo less than twenty percent of the food came from, hunting and food gathering, so that this subsistence pattern, had ceased to be an important part of the economy., In Turkey (Anatolia) regular cultivation of plants might, have b-egun in 9500 BP at Cayonu and somewhat later at, Hacilar. The most signific~t early neolithic site in this region, is Catal Huyuk (8000 BP). Catal Huyuk was a large neolithic, settlement. It is spread over an area of 32 acres. The houses, are built of sun-dried bricks. There are a number of shrines as, well. Catal Huyuk can be described almost as a town. It traded, in various types of stone raw materials and seashells. To the, west of Anatolia one might mention another early neolithic, settlement, Agrissa-Maghula in Greece (8000 BP)., Between 7000 and 6000 BP agriculture became the mainstay, of several communities in West Asia, South Europe and North, Africa. Unlike what was thought earlier, the Egyptian neolithic, started relatively late. In the Nile Valley neolithic settlements
Page 66 :
%, , l Early Social Formations, , began to develop c. 6500 BP. Two of the most well-known, early neolithic settlements are Fayum and Merimde. The, people of these settlements practised farming, buflived at a, low level of subsistence. Tools and pottery are very simple; It, has been suggested that there might have been several other, neolithic settlements along the Nile and that agriculture might, have begun in Egypt c. 7000 BP., Now that a fairly reliable chronology of the early neolithic, has been worked out, prehistorians have turned their attention, to another problem. A lot of archeological evidence has, accumulated to show when and where the neolithic began. Over, the past few decades historians, sociologists and, anthropologists have been more preoccupied with, understanding why paleolithic adaptation was given up in, favour of a different strategy. The distinctive feature of the neolithic, was food-production (farming; domestication of animals), in place of, hunting and food gathering., 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. Anthropological studies, have shown that hunting and food gathering societies are quite, capable of procuring sufficient diet and nutrition. It is wrong, to assume that the transition from {ood gathering and hunting, to food production was inevitable. After all many huntergatherer societies have managed to survive quite well down, to the present time., During the 1960s Richard Lee, an American anthropologist,, investigated the subsistence pattern of a hunter-gatherer, community living in South Africa. These were the Kung (the, correct spelling is !Kung) Bushmen of the Kalahari Desert., They live in a marginal habitat which is sparsely endowed, with plants. Anyone would think that procuring food in this, area would keep the Kung fully occupied the whole day. Lee's, study, however, showed that this was not the case. The Kung
Page 67 :
Neolithic Age, , I, , 57, , were very well adapted to the environment. They subsisted, on hunting and foraging. They spent an average of two hours, per day to collect food. Their food supply was adequate and, they got sufficient nourishment. In fact Lee found that their, diet was more nutritious than that of some of the neighbouring, farming communities. The Kung managed to survive periods, of drought very well because they relied on a variety of plants., On the whole they were a healthy people, even though they, continued to live on the basis of food gathering and hunting., Lee's research shattered the myth that hunter-gatherers, invariably live on the verge of starvation and that they have, to spend long hours to procure fdod., Lee's conclusions, which have been reinforced by, subsequent anthropological research on contemporary huntergatherers, has compelled prehistorians to rethink about the, transition to the neolithic. If we stop thinking of hunting and, food gathering as being inherently deficient, and regard it as, one of the several possible adaptive strategies, then it is, necessary to consider why humans switched from one strategy, to another. Upper paleolithic hunting and food gathering was, highly efficient. Moreover, whereas present-day huntergatherers have to live in marginal habitats (the most favourable, areas having been taken over by agriculture}, hunter-gatherers, in the late pleistocene occupied regions with plentiful 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. One, such example is the propagation of those varieties of wheat, which did not have a brittle 'rachis'. Rachis is the part where, the seed is attached to the main stem of the plant. In the wild, variety this tends to become brittle, i.e. it breaks very easily,
Page 68 :
58, , I Early Social Formations, , as the plant matures. This enables the seeds of the wild plant, to be dispersed easily for subsequent reproduction, However,, this would have been a problem for cultivators since the seeds, would have &cattered when the plant was cut. If the plant was, cut too early then it would contain moisture which would, make storage difficult, Consequently such varieties were, encouraged and developed in which the rachis did not break, easily in the mature plant. Humans now intervened in helping, the plant to reproduce, therefore a brittle rachis was no longer, essential and could be dispensed with. In the case of animals, too we find a similar process. Domesticating animals meant, that some selected species were tamed and their wild traits, were removed through selective breeding. In the case of both, plants and animals domestication was a matter of choosing, the appropriate species and then concentrating on them., Through observation and experimentation those species were, selected which were amenable to domestication and which, provided sufficient nourishment in relation to the amount of, labour expended in growing/breeding them., We must' shed some simplistic notions about the origins, of food production, as for example the notion that humans, took to agriculture when they discovered the seed-plant, relationship. Hunter-gatherers live in very close touch with, nature. They have to observe plants and animals very, carefully-after all their survival is dependent on this. They, have-a very good knowledge of what plant foods are available, in which part of the year. They know where. to look for a, particular plant, the season it grows in and the environment, which is favourable for its growth. Late pleistocene humans, would have accumulated a great deal of information about, how plants grow. Though they might have possessed this, knowledge they did not necessarily put it to immediate use., It is only at the beginning _of the post-glacial epoch that this, knowledge began to be used to manipulate nature., Since the transition to food production coincided with the, end of the ice ages, a number of prehistorians have regarded, environmental changes as a significant factor in the transition.
Page 69 :
Neolithic Age, , I, , 59, , V. Gordon Childe, one of the greatest prehistorians of this, century, put forth the view that in the post-pleistocene epoch, there was a general process of 'desiccation' (drying up). Due, to this desiccation those zones which had been rich in plants, and animals could no longer support hunter-gatherers. People, began to move to areas where there was some source of water., Animals too were forced to move to these areas in search of, food. This resulted in a very close relationship between humans, and animals, some of which were subsequently domesticated., Species of plants like wild cereal grasses began to be cultivated, to supplement the food supply. This led to agriculture., It should be noted that Chllde's theory was based on evidence which was available during the first half of the century,, when most of his major works were written. As we have, already noted, it was only during the 1950s that more precise, information on the early neolithic became available. This, showed that there was no evidence of desiccation in areas, where early neolithic cultures had developed. Robert, Braidwood during the course of his excavations in North Iraq, tried to see whether there was any evidence of desiccation in, the post-pleistocene epoch. He found no such evidence and, therefore ruled out the possibility of drastic environmental, changes having led to the origins of agriculture., Braidwood sought to explain the shift to food production, in cultural terms. He argued that agriculture developed in, certain areas-'nuclear zones' -where potentially cultivable, plants (wild cereal grasses, lentils etc.) and animals which could, be domesticated (sheep, goats) were available in abundance., People living in the nuclear zones were already familiar with, these plants and animals and had been exploiting them for a, long time. As they acquired more knowledge of the habitat, they learnt to manipulate certain species of animals and plants., This was a cultural process and it was only a matter of time, before the shift to agriculture took place in these nuclear zones., It was from 1968 onwards, especially after the Work of, anthropologists like Lee, that more elaborate theories about, the origins of agriculture were put forth. By this time a large
Page 70 :
60, , I Early Social Formations, , amount of archeological evidence was available from different, parts of the world. The post-pleistocene environment was also, better understood. It was clear that there was no drying-up, in this period. Though there were changes in the environment,, they effected different regions in specific ways. Environmental, change as a factor was not completely abandoned, but the, focus shifted to factors like population growth and the social, consequences of sedentism., Lewis Binford suggested that demographic factors were, responsible for the shift to agriculture. His hypothesis is that, the pattern of adaptation would change if the equilibrium, between population and environment is disturbed. As long, as the equilibrium is maintained people would continue to, pursue the adaptive strategy which they were accustomed to., The equilibrium would be disturbed either due to the drastic, environmental changes or due to demographic changes. As, there is no evidence of a drastic change in the environment of, West Asia at the end of the ice ages, Binford has focused on, population growth as the main factor responsible for the origin, of farming. This population growth occurred in those areas, where favourable conditions at the end of the pleistocene, encouraged hunter-gatherers to settle down for relatively, long periods of time. Sedentism (lack of mobility) triggered, population growth. As long as· hunter-gatherers were, constantly on the move they tried to keep the birth of offspring, in check. Too many infants can hamper movement from one, place to another as it is difficult to carry them, particularly if, one has to simultaneously forage for food. With sedentism it, was not necessary to have a long gap between the birth of, one child and another. Thus there was rapid increase in, population during the early post-pleistocene., Binford differentiates between two types of habitats: optimal and marginal. Even in the paleolithic age, some areas had, a larger population than others. The optimal habitats were, the main centres of population growth. These had a greater, 'carrying capacity', i.e. these were areas which had sufficient, resources to support a large population. This induced people
Page 71 :
Neolithic Age, , j, , bl, , to inhabit the optimal habitats as they were assured of, adequate food supply. But sedentism caused population to, grow to .a point where it exceeded the carrying capacity of, the area .. Once the equilibrium was disturbed, some groups, moved away from the optimal habitats to neighbouring, marginal habitats (Binford refers to these groups as 'daughter, groups'). These were areas which were located at the margins, of the optimal habitats. The marginal habitats did not have a, very high carrying capacity. Their resources were not adequate, for supporting a large population. Consequently the, communities which inhabited those areas continued with a, more mobile lifestyle. In the absence of sedentism, population, growth was kept in check and equilibrium was maintained., Population growth in the optimal habitats created, problems for the marginal habitats. As daughter groups from, the centres of population growth moved to the margins, the, balance in these zones was upset. The pressure felt by the, people living in marginal habitats forced them to look for new, ways to subsist. It was this situation that led to the shift to, agriculture in the marginal zones rather than in the optimal, habitats., Though Binford regards population growth as the prime, mover of change, he has not completely discarded, environmental factors. He has suggested that the postpleistocene rise in sea levels created a favourable coastal habitat, for sedentary populations. These coastal habitats provided, opportunities for augmenting food supply though fishing and, including a wide range of marine animals in the diet. These, became centres of rapid population growth while marginal, zones lay in the interior., During the late 60s another scholar, Kent Flannery, put, forth the view that there were other ways in which the, equilibrium could have been disturbed. He stated that the, shift to agriculture did not denote a drastic change. The, stability of the hunting-gathering economy was gradually, disturbed due to the fact that during the upper paleolithic,, people living in some areas (especially marginal areas like West
Page 72 :
62, , I Early Social Formations, , Asia) began paying more attention to certain types of plants., It was found that these were species whose yield could be, increased considerably. Flannery suggested that there might, have been accidental changes (mutations) in some of the species, which were collected in their wild form. These mutations, brought about changes in the structure of these species,, accelerating their growth at the expense of other species. People, starting paying more heed to these species, even encouraging, their growth, so that eventually other species were pushed, out. In the case of West Asia, wheat and barley became the, favoured plants. Flannery' s- theory was based on evidence of, the origins of agriculture in the American continent. In, mesoamerica ('middle America', or the region between North, Mexico and Panama), early agriculture was based on maize, cultivation. Here the natural evolution and spread of mutant, forms of maize-types which began to grow in abundance, naturally-had prompted people to collect them to a greater, extent thereby neglecting other species. As dependence on, these species grew, the next stage was to intervene in nature, by nurturing the mutant forms., According to Flannery these developments were preceded, by a shift from a 'narrow spectrum' to a 'broad spectrum', ecor.omy. A broad spectrum economy is one in which a wide, range of animals and plants, procured in diverse ways, are, included in the diet. In the upper paleolithic there was already, a broadening of the subsistence base; Fish, crabs, snails, turtles, and possibly wild cereals were becoming part of the diet in, some areas. This 'broad spectrum revolution' as Flannery calls, it, took place in marginal areas like West Asia. In marginal, areas it was necessary to tap all possible sources of nutrition., People living in these habitats were more open to, experimentation. There was also need to encourage the growth, of certain species. For instance, this could have been achieved, by weeding out competing species., More recently Mark Cohen has restated the case for population being the major factor underlying the origin of agriculture., His argument is somewhat different from that of Binford. In
Page 73 :
Neolithic Age I 63, , Binford' s model demographic changes occurred at the, beginning of the post-pleistocene epoch. Cohen sees population, growth as a long-term process. There had been a continuous, rise in population during the paleolithic age. As the population, increased, humans began occupying all those regions which, could sustain the hunting and food gathering economy. By, the end of the ice ages most areas which were suited to the, paleolithic hunting and foraging economy had a1ready been, inhabited by the expanding population. Once it became, increasingly difficult to have access to such areas, it was, necessary to experiment with new ways of procuring food., Agriculture was a response to population pressure. Cohen, points out that the advantage of agriculture is that it allows, greater density of population. This new adaptive strategy, created possibilities for producing more edible calories per unit of, , land., Cohen has questioned some of the earlier population estimates for the beginning of the holocene. The consensus among, scholars who have worked on the subject has been that the, population at the end of the paleolithic, and during the, mesolithic, ranged from 3 to 5 million. Cohen's figure is much, higher-15 million. According to him only agriculture could, support such a large population. Hunting and foraging implies, a low density of population. The paleolithic economy permitted, a density of 0.1 persons per sq. km. The early neolithic density, was 1 to 2 persons per sq. km. In other words with the, transition to agriculture at least ten times more persons per, unit of land could be maintained than what could be achieved, by hunting and gathering., Barbara Bender has been very critical of theories which, centre around population growth. She has argued that increase, in population cannot by itself be regarded as a prime mover., population growth does not take pl~ce in isolation., After, It is linked to a number of factors. The manner in which a, society is organized;· its subsistence pattern; the level of, technology; integration with the environment; and world-view, are some of the factors which determine population levels. As, , an;
Page 74 :
64, , I Early Social Formations, , Bender puts it, 'Demography is the result of a hierarchy of, causes, of which the most important are the relations of, production'. What is crucial is how society produces what it, requires and how this production process is controlled. All, this affects the demographic structure. We should therefore, start by looking at social relations as a whole, rather than, isolating population or environment as causes of change., Adaptive strategies change because social relations undergo, change., Even though the debate on this issue remains inconclusive,, it has shed light on several aspects of the problem. 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. We, have noted that this is the case with Binford' s hypothesis., M.uch before the end of the paleolithic, hunter-gatherers, had begun intervening in nature by showing more interest in, some species of plants. 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). A small plot might, have been set aside for cultivating certain wild species. This, kind of cultivation of plants on tiny plots led to horticulture, (as different from agriculture, or field cultivation). As we have, already noted some species could have been favoured at the, cost of others by foragers. This was done by weeding 'out, plants that were not required., At the beginning of the post-glacial epoch people inhabiting, the 111-arginal areas of West Asia concentrated on two types of, cei;-eals: wheat and barley. Wild cereals were already included, in their diet at the end of the pleistocene. Soon domesticated, species were being cultivated. Genetic accidents gave rise to, these new species. A variety of wheat called 'emmer wheat', and a variety of barley called 'two-row barley' became the
Page 75 :
Neolithic Age, , I, , 65, , basis of agriculture in this region. Emmer wheat and tworow barley are different from their wild ancestors. Emmer, wheat remained the most important variety of wheat during, the early neolithic. In some parts of Central Europe another, variety of wheat was cultivated. This variety is known as, 'einkorn wheat'., The domestication of animals was a somewhat more, complicated affair. Instead of lcilling 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 !=ertain features. The objective was to enhance yield, of milk, eggs, wool or meat-depending upon the product, for which a species had been domesticated., There is evidence to suggest that during the. upper paleolithic some animals had been domesticated. The dog was the, first animal to be domesticated. Domesticated dogs assisted, upper paleolithic humans with hunting. Reindeers were also, domesticated. These would be released among wild reindeer, to distract them to facilitate hunting of the wild reindeer., Though domestication of animals dates back to the upper, paleolithic, it was only during the neolithic that domestication, acquired a new significance. Upper paleolithic groups might, have had a few domesticated animals which were primarily
Page 76 :
66, , I Early Social Formations, , used to assist in hunting. 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, so that a hunting and, food gathering society is not very conducive to domestication, of animals on a large scale., It was only during the early neolithic that domestication, of animals occurred on a sufficiently large scale to be, significant for the economy. During the early neolithic sheep, and goats were the two main animals that were domesticated., Sheep were domesticated in West Asia around 10, 500 BP., Towards the end of the pleistocene hunter-gatherers in some, parts of West Asia, e-.g. in the Zagros mountains, where, mountain goats were an important source of food, might have, become familiar with the technique of herding sheep and goats, in loose enclosures. Younger animals (and females) were not, killed but allowed to grow /reproduce. By sparing younger, sheep and goats the food supply was made more stable. With, sedentism more long-term herding became possible. Apart, from sheep and goats, pigs were also domesticated. The, domestication of cattle came somewhat later as wild cattle, were more difficult to tame., It is incorrect to assume that hunting and food gathering, were abandoned as soon as plants and animals were, domesticated and the shift to agriculture had taken place. Until, people were sure that agriculture was a viable alternative to, hunting and foraging, they would not have completely given, up their earlier lifestyle. Even after the cultivation of plants, had been introduced a sort of mixed economy prevailed for a, while, i.e. food production, hunting, foraging. The proportions, in which the three were combined varied from region to, region. However over a period of time certain plants (cereals, like wheat and barley) responded very well to the effort that, was put into cultivating them. Concentrating on a few chosen
Page 77 :
Neolithic Age, , I, , 67, , plants meant that other plants were neglected and no longer, grew in abundance. Foraging was no longer available as an, option because wild plants had been excluded. Once tNs option, was closed it was even more necessary that the success of, agriculture be ensured.. Sedentism helped :in this process by, br:inging several groups in close contact with each other on a, semipermanent or permanent basis and promoting cooperation, among these groups, thereby reinforcing food production., · 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. In the marginal habitats some amount of, cooperation would have been indispensable. 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. If there was a dispute it was easier, to move away. 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, semiper~anent 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. This gave rise to structures of authority as, well as rules for social interaction., 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 ot some articles connected with ritual This, status was further reinforced if relationships of exchange and, cooperation with other groups could be worked out
Page 78 :
68, , I Early Social Formations, , successfully by persons enjoying some authority in the group., 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. In fact these social, changes might themselves have been the catalyst for the shift, to food production., 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 since it was easy to work on for the purpose of, making tools. Catal Huyuk in Anatolia was involved in the, exchange of obsidian on a fairly large scale. This was helped, by the emergence of persons who could organize the exchange., T~e graves at Catal Huyuk show that some persons were buried, alongwith objects which could be regarded as superior. Other, graves do not have such objects. It is in this context that we, must place the growth of Catal Huyuk into a large neolithic, settlement., 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. This called for some, · organizing skills to plan and coordinate this activity. 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. Many fields were, located at some distance from the oasis. Channels were dug, to carry water to the outlying fields. Kathleen Kenyon has, pointed out that there must have been some social mechanism, to make arrangements for planning the channels and, distributing water equitably., 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 (i.e. were related by blood; had a common
Page 79 :
Neolithic Age, , I, , 69, , ancestry). Relationships were more strictly defined and rules, for mating/marriage were specified. The clan evolved into an, exogamous unit: one had to marry outside one's own unit., Marriage within the clan was prohibited as those who were, members of the clan were related by blood. The exogamous, clan served a useful purpose in developing cooperation, between different groups. Cooperation between groups could, become more stable if there we~e relationships of exchange, among them. Part of this exchange was of the nature of gifts., 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. Marriage partners were given (gifted) by, exogamous clans to other exogamous clans. 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. We have already noted that women, were intimately connected with gathering of plants in the, paleolithic. 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. The, figurines of women were connected with rituals which were, meant to promote fertility (of women as well as the soil). These, developed into mother-goddess cults which are so, characteristic of agrarian societies. At Jericho, apart from, figurines of women, an interesting discovery is that of skulls, which were carefully placed in dwelling places. These skulls, have a coating of clay and their eye sockets are inset with, shells. These skulls served some ritualistic purpose. Kenyon, says that they were part of a 'cult of skulls'. This cult could be, some form of ancestor worship. At Catal Huyuk there is clear, evidence of the prevalence of a bull cult. Bulls were worshipped, and/ or sacrificed and a large number of shrines of this cult, have survived. This cult too was connected with fertility
Page 80 :
7U, , i Early Social Formations, , rituals. Anatolia and the Eastern Mediterranean region remained the home of bull cults for a long time., 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. We have, already seen that the origin of agriculture cannot be regarded, as an event which took place at a specific moment. It is true, therefore that we must rule out the possibility of a sudden, shift to agriculture. 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. Contemporary hunter,-gatherers are invariably confined to marginal areas. Agriculture has, completely revolutionized the lifestyle of humans.
Page 81 :
Chapter Four, , THE BEGINNINGS OF CIVILIZATION, AND BRONZE AGE MESOPOTAMIA, , THE transition from neolithic to bronze age civilization first, took place in Mesopotamia. Mesopotamia broadly corresponds, to present day Iraq. 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. Moreover, the, archaeological record pertaining to this transition in, Mesopotamia is very rich. The archaeological remains in this, region are comprehensive enough to enable a step by step, reconstruction of the evolution from early food producing, society to metal using society., It is necessary to begin by outlining the specific geographical features of Mesopotamia. The historical evolution of, Mesopotamia can be properly understood only with reference, to these 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 environments. Northern Mesopotamia, extends from the Zagros mountains to the middle Tigris. On, the west this region is bound by the Syrian desert. During, ancient times northern Mesopotamia was frequently referred, to as Assyria., Southern Mesopotamia is the region lying roughly between
Page 82 :
72, , I Early Social Formations, , the middle Tigris and the Persian Gulf. This region is nearly, 400 km long and over 100 km across. In the east it is bordered, by Iran. In the west there is an unending stretch of desert, which merges with the Arabian desert. The land is absolutely, flat with no stones or rocks. We can get some idea of the, flatness of the land from the fact that even at a distance of 400, km from the Persian Gulf (i.e. the point where southern, Mesopotamia begins), the land is just 20 metres above sea, level. This means that the region exhibits virtually no slope in, the direction of the sea. 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. From around 2000 BC onwards Sumeria, and Akkad are often referred to as Babylonia. To sum up:, Mesopotamia has two distinct geographical zones-northern, Mesopotamia (or Assyria) and southern Mesopotamia. In, ancient times southern Mesopotamia was subdivided into two, parts. These were Akkad and Sumeria. From c. 2000 onwards, Akkad and Sumeria together are referred to as Babylonia,, since Babylon became the political centre of a major empire in, southern Mesopotamia., , I, As we have already seen in the previous chapter, some of, the earliest neolithic settlements were located in northern, Mesopotamia. The Zagros mountain foothills have been, identified as part of the West Asian belt in which evidence, of the beginnings of food production has been found. The, beginnings of agriculture in the Zagros mountain foothills, goes back to nearly 10, 000 BP (Ali Kosh). Later, the important, neolithic settlement of Jarmo came up in this area. Northern
Page 83 :
The Beginnings of Civilization and Bronze Age Mesopotamia I 7:-1, , Mesopotamia has adequate rainfall to sustain cu~tivation of, crops without having to rely on irrigation. Winter rainfall, supports cultivation of crops like wheat and barley as well, as various kinds of grasses. Wheat and barley can be grown, in the Zagros mountains wherever 200 mm of rainfall is, available., Betwe~n 8000 BC and 6000 BC a number of neolithic villages, came up in northern Mesopotamia. Jarmo has already been, referred to. The village of Jarmo had multiroomed houses., The houses had mud walls and contained two or more rooms., They also had ovens and storage basins. Food production was, a major activity. Several sickles have been found at the site., The people of Jarmo cultivated wheat and barley. Umm, Dabaghiyah was andther important early neolithic settlement, in northern Mesopotamia., By c. 6000 BC food production had become widespread, throughout northern Mesopotamia, leading to the emergence, of three successive neolithic cultures: Hassuna (6000-5500 Be);, Samarra (5500-5000 Be); and Halaf (5500-4500 BC). All these, three cultures were products of the northern Mesopotamian, environment. Cultivation was mainly based on winter rainfall., 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., The Hassuna culture derives its name from the site of Tell, Hassuna where it was first identified. A large number of settlements belonging to this culture have been discovered. These, are spread over an extensive area in northern Mesopotamia., Hassuna neolithic villages had houses consisting of-several, rooms. All houses had structures for storing grain. Sickles, with stone blades were widely us~d. Other types of stone, tools discovered at Hassuna sites include heavy javelins., Hassuna pottery was painted and decorated with various, geometric designs. There is some evidence of hunting, but by, now this was a secondary activity. It has been estimated that, many Hassuna villages had as many as four hundred
Page 84 :
74, , I Early Social Formations, , inhabitants. This is an indication of the successful adaptation, of Hassuna farmers., ·, The Hassuna culture was followed by the Samarra neolithic, culture. By the time this culture developed, people of northern, Mesopotamia were beginning to settle along the middle Tigris,, i.e. on the margins of southern Mesopotamia. Winter rainfall, is relatively scarce in this area. Therefore the Samarrans had, to rely on some amount of artificial irrigation. Evidence of, primitive irrigation has been found at Samarra sites like Tell, es-Sawwan and Choga Marni. At Choga Marni rudimentary, canals were dug to carry the water to fields. The population, of this settlement might have been nearly 1000 persons. The, village was protected by a ditch. All these features point, towards a more complex social organization. The Samarrans, cultivated wheat and barley. Linseed (alsz) was also grown., The Halafian culture represents the most advanced stage, in the development of the neolithic in northern Mesopotamia., This culture, which lasted for nearly a thousand years (c. 55004500), was first identified at Tell Halaf. Tiny beads of metallic, copper have been found at some Halafian sites. These were, made of copper found on the surface (i.e. the metal was not, procured by mining). However, various types of stone (flint,, obsidian etc.) continued to be the main material for making, tools., The Halafians produced pottery of outstanding quality., This pottery was technically and artistically of a very high, standard. Georges Roux considers Halafian pottery to be 'the, most beautiful ever used in Mesopotamia'. Other scholars too, regard the pottery of this culture as the most attractive of all, the handmade pottery produced in ancient Mesopotamia. The, pottery was painted and slightly glazed. It was fired at a very, high temperature which gave it a characteristic shine. Halafian, pottery has been found at a large number of sites spread over, a very wide area extending from the Zagros mountains in' the, east to Syria in the west. It is quite likely that settlements in, this area had established trade and exchange relationships., The process of settlement in southern Mesopotamia began
Page 85 :
The Beginnings of Civilization and Bronze Age Mesopotamia, , I, , 75, , 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. Probably some, Samarran farmers settled in central Mesopotamia may ha~e, taken the initiative to occupy the delta region. As we have, noted, the Samarrans had already attempted a primitive form, of irrigation., 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. The earliest settlements were, along the banks of the Tigris and the· Euphrates. Subsequently,, canals were dug to carry the water to fields located at a, distance from the rivers. The bed of the Euphrates is higher, than that of the Tigris. In the delta region this causes small, streams to flow out from the Euphrates in the direction of the, Tigris. These can be channelled in to fields by digging canals., The Tigris requires the construction of barrages for diverting, water for the purpose of irrigation. Eventually a network of, canals and barrages came up in southern Mesopotamia which, allowed the full potential of the region to be realized, making, it the centre of the earliest bronze age civilization., 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. Fish, procured from the Euphrates and the Tigris, as, well as from marshes in Lower Mesopotamia, was an
Page 86 :
76, , l Early Social Formations, , importan~ source of food. The nutritious date palm which, grows in abundance in the area would have supplemented, the diet., 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., Gordon Childe has suggested that at this stage a few, metallurgists would have been going from village to village, for the purpose of making metal objects. It should be noted, that working with metal requires a certain level of skill. In, other words, the production of metal requires specialists who, have knowledge and experience of metallurgy. The technology, involved in extracting and processing metal is a specialized, job which, normally, cannot be undertaken by someone who, does not have the requisite skill. Production of metal objects, involves a much more complex process than making stone tools, or pottery. The first steps might have been taken by potters, with their skill in using ovens. The Halafian potters had been., firing their pottery in kilns in which temperatures as high as, 1200° C could be attained. This is precisely the temperature at, which copper melts. It could not have been very difficult to, transfer this technical know-how to copper. Nevertheless,, casting of copper came somewhat later. From casting copper, the next step was to produce bronze. Copper is too soft a, metal for-making effective tools. and weapons. Metallurgists, discovered that by adding small quantities of tin to copper a, harder material was obtained. This led to the making of, bronze, which is an alloy of copper and tin. Bronze came into, use only towards the end of the neolithic., Some people would have had to devote considerable time, for specialized metal production. However, this kind of, specialization becomes possible only in a situation where a, community can produce enough food to provide subsistence, to specialists. The producers of copper objects could then, exchange their products for food. Initially the use of metal, would have been very limited and these specialists, or 'roving, specialists' as Gordon Childe calls them, would have moved
Page 87 :
The Beginnings of Civilization and Bronze Age Mesopotamia, , I, , 77, , from place to place making available their services. Moreover,, during the al-Ubaid period a given community might not yet, have been in a position to produce enough food to support a, group of metallurgists on a permanent basis. Consequently, several villages shared the services of these roving, copperworkers who made copper implements in exchange for, food., Although the Halafians had initiated the use of clay for, making bricks, 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. The bricks, were initially sun-dried and not baked. The people of the alUbaid culture continued with older techniques of making, pottery. The pottery was shaped by hand (i.e. it was not yet, wheel-turned)., 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. Even very simple types of, irrigation in this region require that a group of people should, pool together their resources. Planning and coordination are, necessary. People have to cooperate with each other over a, long period of time, during the course of a season as well as, from one season to another. All this cooperation, planning, and coordination presupposes a higher form of social, organization. Graham Clarke, writing about southern, Mesopotamia, states: 'Its full possibilities could only be realized, by civilized societies, i.e. societies with political as distinct, from merely familial or social institutions, institutions which, ensured the discharge by individuals of increasingly, specialized roles.', 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. A major function of the temples
Page 88 :
78, , I Early Social Formations, , was to organize irrigation. From small shrines at the beginning, of the al-Ubaid cultl.tre, temples grew into massive structures., The social, religious, cultural, economic and political life of, settlements in southern Mesopotamia revolved around them., Excavations conducted at the site of Eridu, near al-Ubaid, hav~, brought to light a huge temple built with mud bricks. This is, one of the earliest settlements which provides us evidence of, the dominant position of temples in Sumeria. ·, Given that temples had a pivotal position in Sumerian, society, they could play an important role in organizing tasks, related to irrigation. At the same time, their dose connection, with irrigation made them even more indispensable, thereby, reinforcing their authority. Irrigation in southern Mesopotamia, demanded considerable attention to detail. Deep canals had, to be dug to carry water to the fields. Due to the fierce summer, heat in the region, crops were mainly planted in September/, October. This presented a formidable challenge from the point, of view of irrigation. The water level of Mesopotamian rivers, and streams was very low precisely at the time when the, fields had to be irrigated. The flood waters of the Euphrates, and the Tigris arrive in the lowlands only in April-May, that, is, when the main agricultural season is over. They are too, late for winter crops and too early for summer crops. Since, water levels tended to be low during winter, canals had to, be dug very deep so that water could be drawn off the dvers, and their channels from these levels. This was all the more, so because ancient southern Mesopotamian agriculturists had, to rely primarily on canals in the absence of water-lifting, devices., An additional problem was that when the water level rose, and the plain was flooded, it had to be drained. As we have, noted, the landscape of southern Mesopotamia is so flat as to, be virtually without a slope. This means that it takes, considerable time for flood waters to be emptied into the sea., If it took very long for the water to be drained, there was the, danger that fields would become waterlogged. A network of, canals, dykes and reservoirs was created in Sumeria over a
Page 89 :
The Beginnings of Civilization and Bronze Age Mesopotamia, , •I 79, , period of time to avoid the threat of waterlogging and to, accelerate drainage., From the time of the al-Ubaid period onwards, temples, were the mechanism for developing ir_rigation. 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. Priests and other temple personnel soon accumulated, expertise in the matter of irrigation. This was used for evolving, more efficient techniques as well as for asserting the authority, of the temple. Gradually temples were transformed into, instniments of political controt This proces,s 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. Uruk (modem Warka) was a large, Sumerian settlement situated near the Euphrates. The Uruk, culture represents a qualitative· advance over al-Ubaid., The Uruk culture saw the beginnings of wheel-turned, pottery. Initially a slow turning wheel was used to shape the, clay. Later, a fast potter's wheel was developed. 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. Metal axes and saws make it easier to cut wood, into rc;mnd shapes. In other words, the progress of metallurgy, and wheel making was closely interlinked. Wheels were, subsequently adapted for use .in transportation. They were, fitted in carts. Images of carts are depicted on some of the, Uruk objects. The workmanship involved in making wheels, and carts indicates that there were specialist carpenters in, Uruk. Pottery making and metallurgy too had become, specialized. This kind of specialization created conditions for, further technological development., In agriculture the introduction of the plou:gh was the main
Page 90 :
80, , I Early Social Formations, , breakthrough. This revolutionary new tool rendered the, breaking of soil much easier. Ploughs needed much less labour, than digging sticks which had so far been used for the purpose., They loosened the earth with greater efficiency. It should not, be assumed that the use of the plough immediately became, widespread despite its tremendous advantages. Ploughs were, costly and did not completely replac;_e digging sticks for a long, time. They had to await further developments in metallurgy, which only occurred much later., Excavations at Uruk sites have brought to light a large, number of seals. There are two types of seals: stamp seals and, cylinder seals. The seals most probably served to indicate, ownership of goods. 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. These would be rolled on clay as a mark of, identification. 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. Georges, Roux calls them 'art in miniature'., 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. This, allowed them to maintain a more durable record of, transactions rather than having to rely on memory alone. Clay, tablets were used for writing. Impressions were made on, these tablets with a hard pointed device (stylus). The clay, tablets were then dried in the sun or baked in an oven. This, gave permanent shape to the document., The earliest such tablets were of the nature of temple, accounts and ration lists. These contain crude pictures of certain objects (fish, sheep, goats, ears of barley etc.). Later, these, symbols were simplified further so that only the bare outline
Page 91 :
The Beginnings of Civilization and BronzeAge Mesopotamia I 81, , would be depicted. This kind of representation of objects in, the form of short-hand pictures is called pictographic writing, and the symbols are referred to as pictograms. The forerunner, of these pictograms has been found at Tell el-Oheimir (ancient, Kish) on a small limestone tablet dating back to c. 3500. By, 3200 this pictographic writing was employed by temples at, several places in Sumeria., 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 (the word cuneiform is derived from the, Latin word cuneus meaning 'wedge'). Each symbol was a, combination of these wedges. Initially only objects were, depicted. Over a period of time symbols were formed for, other words also., 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'., , II, The emergence of cities is not merely a question of an increase, in population. Of course, at a very basic level urbanization, does imply the concentration of a large population. In terms, of numbers this might be taken to mean a settlement with at, least 5000 inhabitants. But an urban centre is not just an overgrown village (an increase of population can at times lead just, to a simple multiplication of village units, i.e., a group of rural, settlements rather than a city)., Urbanization denotes the concentration, in a particular, settlement, of a fairly large population, pursuing diverse, economic activities and having a high degree of, interdependence. A prominent feature of urban centres is
Page 92 :
82, , I, , Early Social Formations, , extensive specialization and division of labour on the one hand, and absence of self-sufficiency on the other. Cities are marked, by complex social and economic organization. Elaborate, political arrangements for regulating and controlling the, settlement are also to be found. There are structures of, authority for managing disputes. Moreover, cities contain, some large buildings which have specific functions., 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 capital resulting from, the imposition of tribute or taxation; ii) monumental public, works; iii) the invention of writing; iv) advances towards exact, and 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., It is when we view the rise of cities in the context of these, development~ that we can grasp the importance of the 'urban, revolution'. Childe placed special emphasis on the progress, of metallurgy. He traced a link between urbanization,, metallurgy and the rise of bronze age civilization., We have seen that the production and use of metal, presupposes the presence of specialists. Soci~ty should be able, to support these specialists by providing them with food and, other basic necessities. The use of metal can become, widespread when it is possible for a group of specialists to, permanently withdraw from food production. This would, allow the specialist metallurgists to exclusively produce metal., However, in order to support this specialist activity,· society, , should be able to produce sufficient food over and above the requirements, offood producers (surplus) on a regular basis. The surplus can then, sustain specialists., In southern Mesopotamia an additional problem was that, it did not possess deposits of copper. The metal had to be
Page 93 :
The Beginnings of Civilization and Bronze Age Mesopotamia, , !, , 83, , imported from outside. Copper was brought to Sumeria mainly, from Iran and 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. A group of specialist traders came into, existence to carry on this trade., It was imperative that there should be a suitable, mechanism for the regular production and redistribution.of, the surplus. The surplus produce had to he stored and used, for trade as well as to sustain artisans and traders. Gordon, Childe points out that even though possibilities for producing, a surplus were present in southern Mesopotamia during the, neolithic, farmers might not have been inclined to produce, over and above their immediate requirements. More labour, is required for surplus production. Why should people, constantly go on producing a surplus if their immediate needs, are fulfilled? 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. This historical situation, as we shall see in, the next section, coincided with the process of state formation, and the creation of a coercive apparatus., 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: a class of people, who actually produced (peasants, artisans, slaves); and a class, which took over-appropriated-the bulk of the suq,lus and, possessed political and economic power.
Page 94 :
84, , i, , Early Social Formations, , The growth of class society is yet another feature of the, urban revolution. The division of labour which we have, referred to in the context of the rise of the city 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 was primarily an, instrument to perpetuate the domination of the class which, appropriated a disproportionately large share of the surplus., The state performed other roles as well, as for instance,, keeping conflicts in check, providing protection, promoting, trade and organizing irrigation. The pattern of state formation, which we find in Sumeria, in which the temple occupied a, prominent place, should not be regarded as a univer:sal pattern., State formation took different forms in other societies (in, subsequent chapters we will discuss Egypt, Greece and Rome)., But the basic characteristics of the state remained more or, less the same., According to Childe, urbanization was not an isolated, event but was closely related to technological advance,, metallurgy, surplus production, specialization, class, differentiation, and state formation. All these elements,, combined with the invention of writing, together constituted, the urban revolution. The urban revolution ushered in, civilization. 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., Some scholars, as for example Robert Adams, are slightly, critical of Gordon Childe because they feel that he attaches, excessive importance to a particular attribute of civilization,, i.e., the city. Secondly, some civilizations like those of America did not use metal and had no written script. Further, Adams, has suggested that factors like changes, in social organization,
Page 95 :
The Beginnings of Civilization and Bronze Age Mesopotamia, , I, , 35, , rather than technology (metallurgy), were primarily, responsible for the origin of civilization. However the main, hypothesis of Childe concerning the role of surplus production, is widely accepted., At this point we must draw attention to some of the, changes which had been taking place in social organization., As we saw in the previous chapter, the exogamous clan had, become the principal social unit of neolithic societies. The clans, had forged links with other clans by establishing exchange, relationships. Marriage partners and goods were exchanged., These relationships helped in encouraging cooperation. A, number of clans in a given area normally exchanged partners, within a well-defined group. This group was often in the form, of a tribe. Tribes had mutual social and economic ties and, shared common beliefs, culture and language. As tribes, evolved, they tended to impose restrictions on marrying outside, the tribe. Social groups which are governed by the rule that, no member of the group can marry outside the group are, called endogamous. Thus tribes were endogamous, whereas, clans were exogamous. Members of clans would marry outside, their respective clans (exogamy) but within the tribe, (endogamy). Clans can be seen here as lineage groups which, were subunits of the tribe., As tribes became cohesive and stable social units it was, typical for them to trace their origin to a common ancestor., Generally, this would be a mythical ancestor who might be, represented as a sign or totem. The totem was the symbolsome natural object like an animal or plant-by which the tribe, identified itself. It was considered sacred and regarded as, the progenitor of the entire tribe. This kind of totemic, organization helped to unify the various subunits which, constituted the tribe both internally and as vis-a-vis outsiders., It fostered solidarity in times of war., Once the tribe had been settled at a place for some length, of time it associated itself with that territory. It might be, recalled that originally it was the transition to agriculture that, had created conditions for sedentism. Sedentism had
Page 96 :
86, , I Early Social Formations, , prompted social groups which were settled in close proximity, to each other to form ties of cooperation with each other. Not, only was social organization becomin~ore complex but the, nature of clans and tribes was being transformed. They were, getting crystallized as territorial entities., During most of the neolithic period the territory of the, clan or tribe was the common property of the entire group., Land was owned collectively. Natural resources and water, supply were controlled and managed in unison. There were, no superior rights in land. If there were variations in the, fertility of the soil, fields might be rotated among members, of the clan/ tribe. Since there was insufficient pasturage in, southern Mesopotamia, cattle holdings had to be centralized., Any surplus that Wc!,S produced would be shared by the group., Defending the territory was the responsibility of the group as, a whole. When neighbouring territories were raided, the booty, was redistributed equitably., With regular surplus production and its inequitable redistribution, it was no longer possible to maintain egalitarian, relationships within the community. The clan/tribe got, differentiated into classes. Hierarchies appeared, thereby, undermining collective ownership. The concept of private, ownership of property came into existence. The period of, transition from neolithic to bronze age was therefore also a, period of transition from clan or tribe organization to a society, with class stratification. Of course clans and tribes survived, till very late in history, although their characteristics, underwent considerable change. They continued to be, important for purposes of marriage and ritual. \, , III, We have already observed that artificial irrigation was the, prerequisite for realizing the productive potential of southern, Mesopotamia. Further, that temples played a vital role in, organizing irrigation in the region. In the words of Robert, Adams, 'the allocation of irrigation water was in the hands of
Page 97 :
The Beginnings of Civilization and Bronze Age Mesopotamia, , I, , 87, , temple officials ... and the necessary labour forces for the, maintenance work were apparently organized and directed by, the individual temples'. This circumstance strengthened the, authority of the temple. The temple could use its authority to, coerce peasants to grow a surplus. Coercion need not always, have meant the use of force. People could have been compelled, to produce a surplus by simply instilling the fear of displeasure, of gods/ goddesses in them. If gods/ goddesses were dissatisfied, they would cause crop failures. It should be kept in mind that, despite the progress that agriculture had made, the outcome of a, harvest was still a matter of gre,at uncertainty and anxiety., Through various myth-s/legends and rituals a valuesystem 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. Some of the rituals went back to the time when food, production had just begun. The temple now became the point, of collection, storage and redistribution of the surplus produce., Needless to say, coercion was ultimately backed by force and, the threat that force would be resorted to in case of resistance., 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. They used this huge, surplus to further consolidate their position. 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 alUbaid period. It stands on a high, platform and is the most, prominent building of the settlen:ient. The temple at Uruk was, a massive structure. It was rebuilt at the same spot several
Page 98 :
88, , I Early Social Formations, , times (at least six times). At the end of the Uruk phase the, temple was 245 feet by 100 feet and it rose to a height of 35, feet or more. Another temple, at Uqair, was rebuilt thrice., These huge temples, built in the shape of step pyramids with, long flight of steps leading to the top, are referred to as, ziggurats (or ziqqurats). This term is derived from the word, zaqaru which means 'to build high'., The main ziggurat at Uruk was the E-anna complex. This, was devoted to the goddess Inanna (we will discuss this cult, below). The E-anna complex was not only a place for ritual and, worship. It contained warehouses, workshops, and living quarters, for artisans. The warehouses were meant for centralized storage, of grain. The grain was used to feed artisans who produc~d, metal objects, pottery and textiles in the temple workshops. The, surplus was also used to procure raw material, especially copper., 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. A large city and its, surrounding countryside made up the city-state. 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. In addition, the priests had an important status, as ritual specialists. 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. Anna Schneider, has termed this as 'temple state'.
Page 99 :
The Beginnings of Civilization and Bronze Age Mesopotamia I 89, , 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. Written, texts in the cuneiform script are available for the period, following the Jamdat Nasr culture. The cuneiform script had, by now been systematized and symbols were being used not, just for objects but for speech sounds. In Jamdat Nasr, the, script had progressed from pictograms to being partly, phonetic. This meant that some of thj symbols stood for speech, sounds (i.e. they had a phon~c value). Without this, improvement it would have been difficult to denote various, parts of grammar., 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. Gilgamesh, the hero of the epic, was a ruler of, Uruk. His heroic exploits became the subject of many legends., In these legends Gilgamesh was depicted as partly human and, partly divine. The legends were compiled around 2000 BC in, the form of a long poem, known as the 'Gilgamesh Epic'. This, epic, the earliest of its kind, is an outstanding example of, Mesopotamian literature and has come down to us more or, less in its entirety. Apart from its great literary value it is rich, in details about contemporary society and religion., 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 thei!'. prestige. The emergence, of a class of soldiers for regular warfare speeded up the
Page 100 :
90, , I Early Social Formations, , process of state formation. The tribe as a whole no longer, participated in war, .or even if it did it was only to a limited, extent. Specialist warriors were the mainstay of the army. This, guaranteed that the majority of the people would not possess, military training., ', 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. This state of, affairs continued till the end of the Early Dynastic Period., Around 2350 BC a significant historical event occurred. 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, (Sharru-kin). Though Akkad had so far lagged behind Sumeria, economically and culturally, Sargon seems to have created a, vigorous military system which made him such an effective, leader. One of the earliest historical references which we have, for the existence of a standing army is from Sargon's reign., Sargon speaks of 5400 soldiers eating bread in his presence., · 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. Other elements, of Sumerian civilization were also absorbed by Akkad., The dynasty founded by Sargon ruled for nearly two, centuries. But Sargon's successors could not hold on to all the, territories which Sargon had conquered. The Sumerian citystates could not be easily subdued on a permanent basis. The, city of Ur again rose to prominence c. 2150 BC, this time under
Page 101 :
The Beginnings of Civilization and Bronze Age Mesopotamia, , I, , 91, , the 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., Following the collapse of the Thlr'IiDynasty of Ur, c. 2000, BC, the city-states of lsin and Larsa became important in Sumeria. Almost simultaneously, the city of Babylon (Bab-ilani or, 'gate of the gods') near modern Baghdad was rising to, prominence in Akkad. The Babylonian dynasty founded by, Sumu-abum in 1894 BC extended its influence over parts of, Akkad and made Babylon a major political power. The sixth, ruler of this dynasty was the famous Hammurabi who ruled, for forty-three years, from 1792 to 1749. Hammurabi founded, a vast empire by conquering most of southern Mesopotamia, and making northern Mesopotamia (Assyria) part of his, domain. Under Hammurabi, Babylon became a great city, so, much so that henceforth southern Mesopotamia was referred, to as Babylonia. Hammurabi's lasting contribution was his, code of law, which we will discuss in some detail below., Hammurabi was succeeded by Samsu-iluna (1749-1712) who, added new territories to the Babylonian empire. However, Babylonian power declined under Samsu-iluna's successors, and eventually Babylon was captured by the Hittites of, Anatolia (c. 1600 BC)., , IV, Robert Adams has drawn attention to the evidence froin burial, sites. In the al-Ubaid period differentiation was almost absent., The graves are uniform and articles of more or less similar, types are found in them. Early Dynastic Period burials show
Page 102 :
92, , I Early Social Formations, , signs of stratification. A few graves contain objects made of, metal, especially copper, but the majority of the graves (poor, graves') are without any metal implements. It should be borne, in mind that metal was too precious to be b_uried together, with the body of the owner. Even though we sp~ak of a bronze, age, everyone could not have afforded this material. Not only, that. Metal could always be recycled. If it was buried, alongwith the dead person it could not be utilized any longer., Therefore only the wealthier sections of society would have, been inclined to bury metal objects., By the time we come to graves of the Third Dynasty of, Ur, class divisions in society are very clearly defined. At one, end there is the royal cemetery where graves have gold objects, and other articles of very high value. Personal servants, slaves, and even palace officials associated with respective kings (or, members of the royal family) were ceremonially buried with, the dead person. For instance, one grave has nearly sixty bodies, of the royal retinue which was buried alive at the funeral., Royal funerals were occasions for displaying the power and, divine status of rulers., A second category of graves contain objects of lesser value,, mainly items made of copper. These are probably burial, chambers of officials. Finally there are the graves of ordinary, people in which there are hardly any valuable items. In the, words of Adams, 'Here we see the remains of a peasantry, presumably maintaining itself only slightly above the margins, of subsistence, physically associated with an urban center but, having few of the tangible symbols of its wealth or, technological progress'. Contemporary documentary evidence, confirms this picture. By c. 2000 BC the Mesopotamian social, structure was rigidly stratified as is borne out by written texts,, above all by Hammurabi's code of law., Temple priests exercised supreme authority in the preSargonic period. They controlled virtually every sphere of, life. The activities of temples had steadily multiplied. As we, have noted, Anna Schneider uses the term 'temple state' to, describe the Early Dynastic city-states. In the written texts a
Page 103 :
The Beginnings of Civilization and Bronze Age Mesopotamia, , I, , 93, , large number of persons are mentioned as being in the service, of temples. These included cult personnel, artisans, labourers,, people liable for rendering compulsory public duties, and, slaves. It has been estimated that the construction of the Inanna, temple at Uruk would have required the labour of at least, 1500 full time workers for a period of not less than five years., Most of the inhabitants were supposed to be in the service, of the temple. Tribute was collected in the name of the deity., There is some controversy over the. proportion of land which, the temples actually owned. Initially all land, in theory at least,, belonged to the temple. The temple symbolized the community, as a whole. Over a period of time some of the land became the, private property of ruling families, powerful chiefs and other, dominant sections of society. Even then the temple remained, one of the biggest l ~ e r s . Scholars are of the opinion that, at least one third of the arable land was owned by temples., This land was tilled by tenants, sharecroppers, day labourers, or slaves under the supervision of the temple authorities., At the beginning of the bronze age there were some, survivals of older and more egalitarian social organization, wherein there was wider participation by the people. This, can be seen in the existence of institutions like unken in some, city-states. Unken can be roughly translated as an assembly., The Akkad.ian term was puhrum, which had the same meaning., Incidentally, the Akkadians used the term puhrum, synonymously with the Akkadian word for town or city, (alum). This gives us a clue to the possible origins of unken/, puhrum. It was originally perhaps an institution in which the, inhabitants of the city were collectively represented. Its most, important functions related to deliberating issues relating to, war. In Early Dynastic times unken/puhrum was more of a, consultative body in which real power was in the hands of, special advisers called shibutum who were obviously heads of, influential families., However, despite these relics of an earlier era, such institutions were not very relevant to the political structure as it, had evolved by the Early Dynastic Period. We can be certain
Page 104 :
94 I Early Social Formations, , that Sargon, kings of the Third Dynasty of Ur, and, Hammurabi ruled as absolute monarchs. Speaking of the, Third Dynasty of Ur, Woolley says that the ~ngs of this, dynasty 'were deified in their life-time and worshipped as, gods after their death'., The formal title of rulers of Ur and Kish was lugal, which, means 'big man' in Sumerian. This became a commonly used, royal titleJ9r kings who ruled over an extensive territory., Some kings bore the title en. En was a title frequently used by, priest-rulers and literally signified' spouse of the city goddess'., In this title we see the merging of political power and priestly, functions. In certain other cases rulers are called ensi. This is, usually translated as 'city ruler' or 'governor'. It denoted a, status that was inferior to lugal. Ensis were often rulers of, smaller territories who might have accepted the overlordship, of a powerful monarch. The title ensi contains within it the, term en, which once again indicates the intimate connection, which ensis had with the temple. This link is reflected in a few, other titles of rulers too, e.g., sangu (temple administrator),, and ishakku (tenant farmer of the deity). Under Hammurabi, power was fully concentrated in the person of the monarch., The palace, rather than the temple, became the main seat of, political authority. Before we turn to Hammurabi's code of, law and the kind of social formation it reveals, let us briefly, describe some features of Sumerian religion in the bronze age., We cannot speak of Sumerian religion in the sense of a, single, unified belief. The Sumerian cities had their own respective gods and goddesses. The main deity of the city had a big, temple (ziqqurat) dedicated to it. It is-here that the :official, religious ceremonies were performed. The deity associated, with the big temple was the dominant cult of the community, residing in the city and the surrounding countryside. At the, same time there were smaller shrines in various localities. The, deities at these shrines were worshipped by particular groups., These could either be deities of certain professional groups or, else of clans or tribes., However, the inhabitants of southern Mesopotamia shared
Page 105 :
The Beginnings of Civili:zation and Bronze Age Mesopotamia, , I, , 95, , certain religious practices and beliefs. The Sumerians as a, people had evolved some common traditions. The making of, these traditions was an ongoing process--a process which was, the product of political unification and cultural exchanges. The, Sumerian priests systematized myths, rituals and religious ideas, to create a pantheon in which several cults were, accommodated. By a process assimilation many of the deities, became merely relatives, servants or officials of the great gods., At the popular level minor deities, as distinct from official, cults, continued to be worshipped., 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., Similar collections ~ also been discovered at Assur and, Nineveh. The three most important Sumerian gods were An, (or Anu), Enlil, and Enki (or Ea). On some occasions political, shifts were accompanied by attempts to promote a few other, gods, but such attempts were shortlived. With the ascendancy, of Babylon, Marduk, the chief deity of the city, was temporarily, elevated to the status of supreme god. Marduk never found, universal acceptance and the worship of this god remained, confined to Babylon. Generally, Sumerian gods had a much, wiq.er appeal than Akkadian gods even during phases of, Akkadian political supremacy., An was the highest power in the universe and was the, sovereign of all gods. He does not usually intervene in earthly, affairs and remains aloof. The main temple of An was at Uruk., Enlil was the most eminent among the gods worshipped by, the Sumerians. Enlil was originally the city deity of Nippur., This was one of the reasons for the importance of Nippur as a, religious centre. Enlil was regarded as the master of humanity, and as king of kings. It was believed that Enlil had separated, Earth from sky and created the world. Enlil was also associated, with storm and thunder. It was to Enlil that kings appealed, when they prayed for favours. Enki was literally 'lord of earth'., In Sumeria the earth cannot bear fruit without water, therefore
Page 106 :
%, , I Early Social Formations, , Enk.i was identified with sweet water. He was worshipped as, the god of sweet water., \, ,, ., As we.can see, these gods have features which overlap., The distinctions are not always clear. This kind of confusion, was inevitable in a situation where an attempt was being, made to accommodate diverse cults in the Sumerian, pantheon., 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. The marginalization of goddesses, was the outcome of the general relegation of women to an, inferior position during the bronze age., There was one exception to this tendency.. One goddess, who continued to command a big following was Inanna., Though at times Inanna was assimilated as the consort of major, gods, she was essentially an independent goddess. She had, her own temples and a distinct cult.The origins of the Inanna, cult can be traced back to Uruk where, as we have noted, a, large temple was devoted to this goddess. The worship of, Inanna is possibly even older than the Uruk culture. As a, mother-goddess she was a symbol of fertility. The major, festival connected with Inanna was the annual marriage of, Inanna with the god Dumuzi. Dumuzi was the god of, vegetation and cattle. This festival was meant to ensure a good, harvest. The date harvest was also connected with the ritual, wedding of Inanna and Dumuzi. This suggests that the Inanna, cult had evolved when people began to inhabit southern, Mesopotamia and dates were crucial for their nourishment., Inanna was primarily a Sumerian goddess. When the, Akkadians established their rule over Sumeria they too began, to worship her. The Akkadians identified Inanna wit:h their
Page 107 :
The Beginnings of Civilization and Bronze Age Mesopotamia, , I, , 97, , goddess of love-Ishtar. Later the worship of Ishtar spread, to other parts of West Asia, north Africa and southern Europe., Ishtar remained one of the most popular goddesses right down, to the Roman Empire., , V, Hammurabi's code of law is not really a legal code in the, sense of a comprehensive, systematic arrangement of all the, laws governing Mesopotamian society. It is not even the, earliest compilation of laws. Mesopotamian rulers had a, tradition of recording some important laws and judgements., Documents J:,~nging to the reign of Urukagina, the ruler of, Lagash c. 2350 BC, record some laws of this king. Codes, prepared by Urnammu, the founder of the Third Dynasty of, Ur (c. 2113-2095), and Lipitishtar of Isin (c. 1934-1924) have, also been discovered., Customary law was the basis of the legal structure. Rulers, would usually apply the laws of their predecessors. However, changes in society created new situations for which, modifications had to be made in existing laws . Sometimes, new laws ha"d to be formulated. Rulers would issue edicts, which contained these modifications. These were often of the, nature of royal judgements which could be used as precedents., Towards the end of his reign, Hammurabi carried out a, thorough compilation of laws, many of which were intended, to guide judges in situations which were not provided for in, existing law., In order to familiarize the people with these laws, Hammurabi had them inscribed and placed in several parts of, the empire. Many inscriptions were placed in temples. One, such inscription was placed at the temple of Shamash in the, city of Sippar. This was later taken to Susa (modem Shush in, Iran) where it was discovered in 1901. The Susa inscription is, the most well knr,wn of all the copies of Hammurabi's code., It has 282 laws which cover a very wide range of subjects., It should be remembered that Hammurabi's code was
Page 108 :
98, , I Early Social Formations, , written at a time when Mesopotamian society had undergone, substantial transformation. This necessitate-4 new legal, provisions. It should not be assumed that all laws in, Hammurabi's code are new. Several of them were already, being followed for centuries. But changed circumstances called, for fresh interpretations or else a clear-cut statement so that, there might be no ambiguities. Further, since Hammurabi ruled, over a large territory he would have felt the need to have a, uniform legal system for the whole empire., The code confirms the existence of a highly stratified, society. This was a class society with separate provisions in, the code for various classes. The code recognizes three main, classes: wardu, mushkenu and awelu. Wardu was the term used, for slaves. By Hammurabi's time there was a considerable, slave population in Mesopotamia. Slaves were mostly prisoners, of war or those who were forced to accept slave status due to, their inability to repay loans., The ability to produce a Slll'plus ·on a regular basis had, been the first precondition for the emergence of slavery. It is, meaningless to reduce someone to the status of a slave unless, the slave can produce something over and above what is, required for his or her own subsistence. Slavery becomes, possible when society reaches a stage where it can produce a, surplus. Warfare was the second precondition for slavery., Communities which were engaged in warfare had at their, disposal specialist warrfors and sufficient military force to, capture people from amongst their enemies and make them, slaves. Enslavement implied complete dehumanization of a, person. Slaves were treated as things and not as human beings., To make a group of people accept permanent captivity, a, society would need to have access to force on a sufficiently, large scale. The first slaves were women. When a group was, conquered, the normal practice was to kill the men and enslave, the women. It would have required too much armed force to, watch over men slaves who possessed military training. It, was much later, when society was in a position to mobilize, armed force on a massive scale, that men were made slaves.
Page 109 :
The Beginnings of Civilization and Bronze Age Mesopotamia, , I, , 99, , By c. 2000 BC there were both male and female slaves in, Mesopotamia., The wardu had distinctive marks on their bodies. This made, it difficult for them to run away. They were shaven and, branded. In Hammurabi's code the penalty for helping a slave, to escape was death. Slave owners had absolute power over, theirslaves. If a person caused harm to another person's slave, the penalty was the same as that for damaging property., Slaves were used for domestic work and for doing menial, jobs. Many female slaves were engaged in weaving. Temples, and royal households had large numbers of slaves working, for them. Some slaves were employed in agricultural, production. This was on a limited scale since extensive slavery, was not the basis of the Mesopotamian economy. Moreover,, Gordon Childe observes: 'It is not at all likely that slaves and, captives formed an important element in the labour force, engaged on public works'., The awelu were the uppermost stratum of society. Leonard, Woolley regards them as the nobility. Georges Roux merely, describes them as free persons. Igor M. Diakonoff suggests, that awelu were free inhabitants enjoying superior rights. This, class had a better social and economic status as compared to, other free persons. The awelu included priests, nobles, military, leaders, warriors, scribes (those who were trained in writing, the cuneiform script), and big farmers. The ruling elite was, drawn from amongst the awelu., The superior status of the awelu can be better understood, with reference to another section of the free population, the, mushkenu. The mushkenu did not enjoy certain rights. They, could not hold public office and were usually not allowed to, possess weapons. Their right to property was limited. They, were tenants rather than landowners. The mushkenu stood, much lower than the awelu in the social hierarchy of, Mesopotamia. Yet they were free, unlike the wardu. Whereas, laws in the code ordinarily apply to the awelu and mushkenu in, a similar manner, most of the penalties prescribed are much, lighter for the awelu.
Page 110 :
100, , I Early Social Formations, , Almost one-fourth of the laws in the code pertain to marriage and the regulation of family relations@ps. Changes in, social organization had to be provided for in the legal structure. On the one hand there was class stratification and on the, other hand decline of clan or tribal organization led to growing, emphasis on the family as the primary social unit. The, emergence of private property meant that rules for inheritance, had to be properly defined. There must have been a large, number of disputes over the inheritance of property. The, family, rather than the clan, now became the main unit for, control over property. Property was inherited within the, family., A related development of great significance was the, subjugation of women in the bronze age. Frederick Engels in, his work The Origin of the Family, Private Property and the State, has called this 'the world historical defeat of the female sex'., In hunting-gathering societies and early neolithic societies, there had been some division of labour between men and, women. For instance, men might have engaged in hunting, while food gathering was mainly the responsibility of women., One reason for this division of labour was the role played by, women in reproduction and in tending infants. It would not, have been feasible for them to venture out on hunting, expeditions, especially if the expedition was spread over a, few days., With the development of agriculture, agrarian communities, took to sedentism and estab-lished ties of cooperation with, one another. These ties were strengthened through exchanges,, notably exchange of marriage partners. Though both male and, female partners might have been exchanged, scholars have, pointed out that the tendency would have been to exchange, women. Women would give birth to children and thereby, could be tied down to a new group more easily. Their, reproductive function would give them a stake in the group, into which they had married, ensuring their loyalty. Men on, the other hand would find it easy to break their ties and run, away. Women thus became_ commodities to be exchanged
Page 111 :
The Beginnings of. Civilization and Bronze Age Mesopotamia, , i, , !ffl., , primarily for the purpose of producing children. This was an, important consideration for primitive societies. Later, with, the development of warfare, the capture of women became, another source for procuring them., Once woman had become a 'thing' she no longer enjoyed, an equal status. Society became male dominated {patriarchal)., Descent was traced in the male line, i.e., it was patrilineal., The creation of patriarchy brought to an end the equality of, sexes. Surplus production, warfare, enslavement of women, for reproduction and for labour led to further subordination, of women. In class society women were denied access to, property. The structure of the family was patriarchal. The, husband controlled property and exercised absolute power, over the household., Hammurabi's code sought to strengthen the structure of, the patriarchal family. The authority of the father could not, be questioned. If a son hit his father, the father could punish, the son by cutting off his hand. Marriage was generally, monogamous, at least for the ordinary people. A dowry, settlement would be made at the time of marriage. When a, woman died, her dowry went to her sons. Divorce was a, male prerogative. According to the code one of the acceptable, grounds for divorce was that a woman had behaved 'foolishly, wasting her house and belittling her husband'. The most, common reason for divorce was the failure to give birth to, sons., ~ Another category of laws in the code deal with the, economy. A farmer who undertook to reclaim wasteland was, allowed three years· to perform the task. In the first year he, paid no tax; half the normal tax in the second year; and the, full rate in the third year. The laws make it clear that every, holder of land had to maintain the bank of any canal that, flowed past the fields, and any neglect which might result in, damage to adjacent fields was punishable. Then there are laws, which lay down the price that had to be paid for certain, services, e.g., surgery., Some of the laws throw light on the Hammurabi's military
Page 112 :
102, , I Early Social Formations, , organization. The code has references to the system of ilkum,, which was a mechanism for enlisting military service. Ilkum, implied a grant of land which obliged the holder to serve in, the army. It is not very clear as to how ilkum operated, but, this institution was useful for mobilizing military support., ., Many of the punishments in the code are based on the, principle of 'an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth'. Thus if, an architect had built a house for an awelu, and the house, collapsed leading to the death of the awelu, the architect could, be punished with death. Some scholars are of the opinion that, punishments of this nature were not necessarily imposed in, all cases. There was also a lot of scope for arbitrariness., Moreover, it' is wrong to think that Hammurabi was, responsible for introducing this principle. The customary law, of many traditional societies is based on similar principles of, punishment being the exact physical equivalent of the injury, caused., Mesopotamian laws, including those enshrined in, Hammurabi's. code, exerted considerable influence over the, legal systems of other societies of West Asia. Many of these, laws were later modified and adapted to suit the social, conditions of the people of this region.
Page 113 :
Chapter Five, , EARLY EGYPTIAN CIVILIZATION, , PRIOR to the discovery of Sumerian civilization in the early, twentieth century, Egyptian civilization was generally, considered to be the oldest civilization. Thi~ was mainly due, to the continuous existence of Egyptian civilization for an, exceptionally long period. Several features of Egyptian, civilization .endured for almost three thousand years. The, ancient Greeks and Romans adopted many Egyptian traditions, when they ruled over the country. Accounts of Greco-Roman, historians dwell on the antiquity ofEgyptian civilization. Judaic, 0ewish), Christian and Islamic religious texts are replete with, references to Egypt and ·its kings (pharaohs). For centuries, the monumental remains of ancient Egypt, as for instance the, pyramids, had a profound impact on popular imagination. The, memory of Egyptian civilization therefore remained alive till, modern times when a more systematic study of its history, )9a§ initiated., We have already noted that the neolithic developed, relatively late in Egypt. Features of civilization and the urban, revolution began to appear in Egypt somewhat later than in, Sumeria. However the transition from the neolithic age to, early civilization occurred fairly rapidly in Egypt and by about, 5000 years ago the whole country had been politically unified., The 'King Lists' of Egypt go back to c. 3100 BC. Unfortunately, several aspects of the period of transition to civilization remain, somewhat obscure because the archaeological record of this, period is not as extensive as in the case of Mesopotamia.
Page 114 :
1• , ,, , Early Social Formations, , A brief account of some of the geographical features of, Egypt will be useful for a better understanding of its history., Most of Egypt is a dry, arid region with very little rainfall., The western part of the country is a vast desert which merges, with the Sahara. This desert area is referred to as the Western, Desert. The eastern part of Egypt is also a desert stretching, from the Red Sea to the Nile. There are some low hills in this, area. This is called the Eastern Desert. Egypt however is fortunate to have the river Nile flowing through it. The Nile runs, along the entire length of Egypt, from south to north, and, discharges its waters into the Mediterranean Sea. The river, flows through a valley. At places the valley is almost 25 km, wide. This valley is bounded by cliffs and desert., ·, The Nile valley is the most fertile region of Egypt. The, annual flooding of the river provides excellent prospects for, irrigation in this otherwise arid country. The Nile forms a, delta at the northern end of the valley before flowing into the, Mediterranean. This delta area in the north is usually called, Lower Egypt. The southern portion of the country is referred, to as Upper Egypt. In Upper Egypt the Nile has its course, through a rift with rocks on either side. Thus the country can, broadly be divided into: i) Westerri Desert; ii) Nile valley;, and iii) Eastern Desert. During the historical period the Nile, valley was the main area in which the population was, concentrated. This is in turn divided into two parts: i) the, delta or Lower Egypt; and ii) Upper Egypt. The land lying to, the south of Egypt was called Nubia., , I, , -...J, , Unlike what was presumed earlier, the Egyptian neolithic did, not originate in the Nile valley, but in the Western Desert., This has to be viewed in the context of the'--environmental, history of Egypt. The work of Karl Butzer (Early Hydraulic, Civilization in Egypt) has shed light on some of the changes, which occurred in the region during the early holocene. There, was initially a period of increased rainfall which lasted from
Page 115 :
Early Egyptian Civilization, , I l o.s, , about 9200 BC to 6000 BC. This was followed by a dry interval, till 5000 BC. After some further fluctuations, during which there, were wet· spells, the present arid conditions were established, c. 2400 BC. This would suggest that in the early holocene some, parts of the desert were not as dry as they became later on., Subsequent research by scholars like F. Hassan has shown, that during the early Holocene the Western Desert had more, water, and that the Nile valley suffered widespread flooding, in this period. As the valley was flooded, groups which, inhabited this area moved towards the Western Desert. Since, the Western Desert was relatively more hospitable in those, times, it could support a food gathering and hunting economy., The hunter-gatherers of the Western Desert probably, experimented with cultivation of wild cereals and might have, tried to domesticate animals. By c. 8000 BP there is evidence, of domesticated barley (six-rowed barley, which requires, more moisture than two-rowed barley) in this area., Subsequently as the desert became increasingly arid, people, shifted towards the Nile valley. We have seen in chapter three, that settlers in the valley began practising agriculture c. 7000, BP. Between 7000 and 6500 BP neolithic economy developed, in Lower Egypt. The earliest neolithic sites in Lower Egypt, have been discovered at Fayum and Merimde. It has been, suggested that the neolithic of this area might have been, influenced by West Asian cultures. As for Upper Egypt, we, st_i~Jdo not know much about the beginnings of food, production here. Recent archaeological evidence indicates that, the neolithic began in southern Egypt after c. 6500 BP., Following the early neolithic settlements at Fayum and, Merimde, there were three successive neolithic cultures in the, Nile valley. As these cultures evolved, the people became progressively adept at utilizing the floods of the Nile for agriculture. The three cultures identified by archaeologists are: Badarian, Amratian {or Naqada I) and Gerzean (or Naqada II). The, Badarian culture (named after the site of Badari), c. 41003600 BC, saw the emergence of several neolithic villages along, the Nile. It is likely that the inhabitants of these villages were
Page 116 :
W1,, , I Early Social Formations, , descendants of those who had 1noved into the valley from, the Western Desert. The Badarians cultivated barley and, wheat. They had domesticated sheep, goats and cattle. Pottery, was made. They still relied on some food gathering and, hunting although agriculture, based on natural irrigation by, Nile floods, played a more important role in the economy., The features of the Amratian culture (named after El, Amrah), c. 3800 to 3500 BC, were more or less the same as that, of the Badarian, though the floods of the Nile were exploited, more systematically. The number of neolithic settlements, increased throughout the v~ey. There is also some evidence, of the use of copper by the· Amratians., It was during the Gerzean culture (which gets its name, from the site of El Gerzeh) that the Egyptians initiated artificial, irrigation by controlling inundation. Canals were dug to carry, the water so that fields located at some distance from the, Nile could be cultivated. This create_d conditions for producing, a surplus. The soil- of the Nile valley is so fertile that it hasbeen estimated that under normal circumstances a farming, family can, even with relatively primitive technology, produce, almost three times as much food as is required for its own, sustenance. This should give us some idea of the potential, which Egypt has for producing a huge surplus. By the end of, the Gerzean culture there had been a marked rise in population., Karl Butzer has estimated that between 4000 and 3000 BC, population went up from 350, 000 to 870, 000. The Gerzeans, made copper objects and had kilns in which temperatures as, high as 1200° C could be attained. As we sllall see,--tlns was, the period in which the foundations of early Egyptian, civilization were laid., The Gerzean culture culminated in the political unilication, of Egypt. This was an event of great historical significance,, although the process by which it came about remains, imperfectly understood. By c. 3100 BC Egypt was a politically, unified state with a powerful monarchy. There was a, bureaucracy and there were warri&s and priests. Several, prominent urban centres had come up in the Nile valley. A
Page 117 :
Early Egyptian Civili7.lltion, , I, , 107, , script was being used for writing. Egyptian society had become, a class society and had acquired the various attributes of, 'civilization' which we discussed in the previous chapter. The, transition to civilization was apparently so swift that a few, scholars have argued that some groups (possibly from West, Asia) might have entered Egypt, bringing with them new ideas, and techniques thereby speeding up the transition. Leonard, Woolley has suggested that some features of Egyptian, civilization, as for instance writing, may have been borrowed, from Mesopotamia., ~, Among those who have\argued in terms of foreign, influences providing the impetus for the emergence of, Egyptian civilization one might mention W. B. Emery (Archaic, Egypt). Emery contends that some groups from West Asia, entered southern Egypt via the Red Sea, bringing with them, Sumerian influences. According to,Emery it is uncertain as to, precisely who these outsiders were, but we can interpret some, ancient Egyptian myths as referring to the conflict between, these foreigners and the indigenous people., In Egyptian mythology a prominent place was occupied, by the god Horus, depicted as a falcon, who was identified, with the kings of Egypt. One of the most well known legends, connected with Horus concerned the struggle of Horus with, his uncle Set. We will discuss this myth in some detail below., It will suffice for the moment to mention that Set was supposed, to have assassinated his brother Osiris. Osiris was the father, of Ho)'tlsY Horus eventually avenged the death of his father, by killing Set. Emery sees the conflict between Horus and Set, as a reflection of the struggle between foreigners (falcon, worshippers) and the indigenous population (Set, worshippers). He points out that there was a very ancient, tradition of Set worship in many parts of Egypt. Set (Sutekh), had been worshipped for a long time as the god of the barren, desert. On the other hand, the worship of Horus was of, relatively recent origin. However in the myth, as it eventually, developed, Set was portrayed as evit. This indicates the victory, of the falcon worshippers.
Page 118 :
108, , i Early Social Formations, , A large number of historians consider it much more likely, that Egyptian civilization had its roots in the Gerzean/Naqada, II cultures. Glyn Daniel refers to the rich potential of the Nile, valley which created possibilities for civilization. He states, that in the period preceding political unification, Egypt was, already on the way to civilization and could have reached, there without inputs from Mesopotamia. B. G. Trigger has a, similar understanding and he stresses the need to look at, continuities between the Gerzean culture and early civilization., Trigger does not completely rule out external stimulus but, says that there seems to be no evidence that large scale, migrations from outside were responsible for Egyptian, civilization. He is particularly critical of the hypothesis that, similarities between ancient Egyptian and (West Asian) Semitic, languages were the result of migrations into Egypt. According, to him there is nothing unusual in this as it has been shown, that many ancient languages spoken over a wide area in, southwest Asia and north Africa had a common ancestor., In any case, as Butzer notes, growing aridity resulted in, the Nile valley being completely surrounded by desert, (Western desert, Eastern desert, and Nubian desert). This, restricted the interaction with West Asia, Nubia and the, Sahara, accounting for the 'closed' nature of the Nile valley., At the same time the 'closed' character of the valley gave it, greater uniformity and cohesion, facilitating the unification, of Upper and Lower Egypt., , II, -..J, , Circa 3100 BC marks the beginning of the Dynastic Period of, ancient Egyptian history. We can gather some particulars of, the political history of this period from a historical account, written by Manetho. Manetho was a priest who lived during, the period of Greek rule over Egypt (following Alexander, the Great's invasion). It should be borne in mind that, Manetho' s History of Egypt''Was written almost 2800 years after, the unification of Egypt. However he had access to a number
Page 119 :
Early Egyptian Civilization, , !, , 1 \N, , of ancient works which formed the basis of his nar.rative., Manetho' s History has been found useful by modern historians, to work out the chronology of ancient Egypt. This is all the, more so since many of the details mentioned by him have, been corroborated by archaeological evidence as well as other, sources., Manetho listed thirty-one dynasties which had ruled over, Egypt from its unification down to Alexander's conquest., These dynasties were classified by him into several periods, such as Old Kingdom, Middle Kingdom and New Kingdom, with intervening phases (First Intermediate Period, Second, Intermediate Period, etc.). Modern historians continue to use, Manetho' s periodizafion. This broad periodization is, convenient because the change of a particular dynasty did not, always necessarily involve major social and political changes., Our discussion of early Egyptian civilization will mainly be, confined to the Early Dynastic Period (or Archaic Period) and, the Old Kingdom., The Early Dynastic Period was the period during which, the First and Second Dynasties ruled over Egypt (c. 3100 to, 2686 BC) .. This was followed by the Old Kingdom-Third, Dynasty to Sixth Dynasty (c. 2686 to.2181 BC). For a ·short, while after the Sixth Dynasty the picture is somewhat, confusing. This is called the First Intermediate Period (c. 2181, to 2133 BC), Seventh to Tenth Dynasties. A new phase, commenced with the reign of the Eleventh Dynasty. This was, the Middle Kin~om (c. 2133 to 1786 Be), ijleventh and Twelfth, Dynasties. A~rt>the Twelfth Dynasty there was another, intermediate period, the Second Intermediate Period (c. 1786, to 1567 BC), Thirteenth to Seventeenth Dynasties. The Second, Intermediate Period was followed by the New Kingdom (c., 1567 to 1080 BC), Eighteenth to Twentieth Dynasties. Though, Manetho records a unilinear succession of dynasties, it is likely, that there were phases when different parts of Egypt were, concurrently ruled by separate dynasties. Such rulers are not, accounted for in Manetho' s list., According to Manetho, Egypt was unified by a ruler
Page 120 :
11U, , I, , Early Social Formations, , named Menes. We are not certain whether Menes was a, historical figure. Archaeological excavations have brought, to light some evidence pertaining to a ruler by the name of, Nar-mer who might have played an important role in the, unification of Egypt. It has been suggested that Nar-mer could, be identified with the legendary Menes. Unfortunately almost, no records of the First Dynasty have survived. What we know, is that the first two dynasties came from the town of thinis, in Upper Egypt. Hence they are also called 'Thinite, Dynasties'., The First Dynasty was responsible for the unification of, Lower and Upper Egypt. This unification was possibly the, work of Nar-mer (who may have been the same as Menes)., The memory of this event was preserved in the tradition of, designating all Egyptian rulers as kings of both 'Upper and, Lower Egypt'. As a symbol of this unification the kings wore, a double crown: a white crown representing Upper Egypt, and a red crown representing Lower Egypt. The king was, an all-powerful monarch-the pharaoh. The word pharaoh, is the Hebrew form of the ancient Egyptian term per-o (or, per-aa) which meant 'Great House'. This was a reference to, the palace., Although the First Dynasty succeeded in integrating Egypt, on a long-term basis, their endeavour must have been, preceded by similar attempts in the predynastic period. State, formation was already taking place in the predynastic period., A number of petty-states had emerged in the Nile valley. These, were ruled by chieftains who controlled relativeJJv small, territories. It would seem that through a process of forming, coalitions of petty-states and/ or through subjugation, larger, territorial units were created eventually leading to the political, unification of the valley. ., Many of the predynastic petty-states survived for a long, time after unification in the form of provincial administrative, units. These administrative units were called nomes by the, Greeks (the ancient Egyptian word for nome was spt). In the, dynastic period nomes were stable entities and had well defined
Page 121 :
Early Egyptian Civilization I 111, , territories. The provincial elites of these nomes could be quite, powerful. The nomes had their own emblems which were often, animal symbols. The symbols were originally totems of the, dominant clans settled in the respective nomes. Thus the nomes, of the dynastic period probably had their roots in the, predynastic petty-states. After unification these states were, incorporated in the administrative structure in the form of, nomes and in many cases the territories of the nomes, corresponded to the former predynastic states., We are not in a position to estimate the number of pettystates which had come up in the predynastic period, but we, learn that at the time of unification there were forty-two nomes., Twenty-two of these were in Upper Egypt and twenty were, in Lower Egypt. It is likely that the political unification of, Upper Egypt took place much before Upper and Lower Egypt, were merged. Excavations at Nekhen in Upper Egypt have, revealed one of the earliest sites with monumental architecture., This city was called Hierakonpolis (' city of the falcon') by the, Greeks and may well have been the capital of unified Upper, Egypt in the predynastic period. Incidentally, Manetho used, Greek names for cities and rulers, which can be somewhat, confusing at times., _, The rulers of the First Dynasty established their capital at, Memphis located at the junction of Upper and Lower Egypt., Memphis (the remains of this ancient city lie just south of, modern Cairo) remained the capital of Egypt for several, centuries. This city in fact gave its name to the entire country., 'Egypt' is deriv~"hom Hik.upteh, the ancient Egyptian name, of Memphis. By this time large urban centres, several of which, were fortified, had appeared throughout the Nile valley. The, majority of the urban centres which developed towards the, end of the Gerzean culture/ predynastic period were located, in Upper Egypt. These included Hierakonpolis (Nekhen),, Abydos (Thinis), Ombos (Naqada),-Elkab and Coptos. In, Upper Egypt there were Sais and Buto., By c. 3200 Egypt had developed a script. The Egyptian, script is called 'hieroglyphic' which means 'sacred carving'.
Page 122 :
l 12, , I Early Social Formations, , This was the name given to the script by ancient Greeks when, they came across texts written in this script carved on stone in, temples or tombs. Although the symbols used in the, hieroglyphic script are very different from Sumerian, cuneiform writing, yet in both scripts a sign could denote, either an object or a sound (or even an idea). This form of, writing is said to be based on the 'rebus' principle in which, a combination pictograms or symbols are used to represent, objects, words or syllables. The hieroglyphic script, remained in use for nearly 3500 years. The Egyptians also, had a slightly modified form of hieroglyphic writing called, 'hieratic'. The hieratic script was similar to the hieroglyphic,, but in this script the signs were simpler, more rounded and, less intricate. The hieratic script was suitable for everyday, purposes, especially when a lengthy document had to be, written on papyrus with a brush (papyrus was a paper-like, writing material made from the papyrus plant)., Archaic Egypt was a highly stratified class society, governed by a tiny elite centred around the pharaoh. This, ruling class had access to the huge surplus of Upper and, Lower Egypt. The political unification of the Nile valley, over an extended period of time made the river the main, highway to transport the surplus for centralized storage, and redistribution. A disproportionately large share of the, surplus was appropriated as tribute in the name of the, pharaoh and distributed among the royal family, the, priesthood, the bureaucracy, and_ the army. This tribute, further reinforced the position of the pharaoh as an all, powerful monarch. Even in late predynastic times there is, evidence of social stratification. The graves at Hierakonpolis,, Naqada and Abydos point towards the presence of a, wealthy elite. Some of the tombs belong to rulers and their, families., "\../, The pharaohs presided over an elaborate administrative, structure which included a large bureaucracy. One of the, important functions of the bureaucracy was to supervise, irrigation. From an early date there is reference to an official
Page 123 :
Early Egyptian Civilization I 1 J.3, , called adj-mer (literally, 'canal digger') who was held charge, of irrigation works. The importance of this official grew, with time and we later find that the term adj-mer was also, used ·as a title for provincial governors. In view of the, critical dependence of Egyptian agriculture on annual Nile, floods, it was necessary for the state to keep itself informed, about the level of water. For this purpose there was a branch, of the administration (per-mu) which was entrusted with, the task of recording and reporting water levels., The annual inundation of the Nile is primarily caused by, monsoon rains on the Ethiopian plateau where the Blue Nile,, one of the branches of the main Nile, originates at Lake Tana., These rains cause the level of the water to rise. In Egypt the, river begins to rise in June and the water reaches its highest, level by September. Thereafter the river begins to recede. The, seed was sown in October/ November when the floods began, to subside and water had been drained from the fields., Between August and January the Nile can be utilized for, irrigation by channelling the water into fields. By February, the level is too low for the purpose. The agricultural cycle, was divided into three seasons: akhet or flood; peret or, germination (sprouting); and chemu or harvest. It is worth, noting that the annual inundation coincides with the, agricultural season, a feature which we do not find in, Mesopotamia. This renders irrigation a relatively easier task, in Egypt. Unlike Mesopotamia, where detailed attention has, to be paid to irrigation facilities depending on local conditions,, only a generalized supervision of irrigation is required in, E~, Whereas the floods are on the whole quite regular, there, can be variations in the water level A difference of six feet, either way can create problems. If the river rises more than, six feet above the normal flood level, the countryside tends, to become waterlogged delaying agricultural operations. On, the other hand if the level is more than six feet below normal, it is insufficient for irrigation. Consequently the water level, was a matter of great concern to the Egyptian state. It kept a
Page 124 :
114, , ! Early Social Formations, , close watch on the status of the annual flood so that the nature, of the harvest could be ascertained., , III, It was during the Old Kingdom that Egyptian civilization, entered its mature phase. The achievements of the Old, Kingdom had a profound impact on Egyptian culture and, civilization for several centuries. In this period the Egyptian, ruling class, headed by the pharaoh, further consolidated its, power. This allowed it to increase its control over the rich, resources of the country. The pharaoh was by now firmly, established as a god. Even in the Archaic Period, the pharaoh, was being projected as a divinity. We should note that in Egypt, the priesthood generally played a secondary role in relation, to the king. The king himself was worshipped as a god. The, Old Kingdom witnessed the growth of elaborate rituals, connected with the worship of the pharaoh. The cult of the, pharaoh was vigorously promoted and this cult came to occupy, an important place in Egyptian religion. Many of the prominent, Egyptian deities were gradually associated with the cult of, the pharaoh. This made the Egyptian rulers omnipotent in an, unprecedented way., The archaeological remains of the Old Kingdom help us, to reconstruct some of the features of state and society in the, Old Kingdom. The most impressive buildings are the royal, tombs. The practice of constructing gigantic monuments for, the burial of pharaohs commenced in the Third Dynasty with, the step pyramid of Djoser. Djoser was the founder of the, Third Dynasty. He built a huge monument at Saqqara (near, Memphis) for his own burial. Before this the pharaohs had, been buried in large underground cemeteries called' mastabas'., From the time of Djoser overground mausoleums began to be, constructed., ·, Djoser' s step pyramid revolutionizeµ Egyptian, architecture. His tomb was made entirely wifh stone, being, the earH.est Egyptian monument to be built fully of stone. The
Page 125 :
Early Egyptian Civilization I 1J5, , stones were placed very skilfully in· such a manner that large, steps were formed on each of the four sides of the building., The arrangement of steps gave the structure a pyramidical, shape. Djoser' s step pyramid is supposed to have been designed, by lmhotep whose name is inscribed on it. Imhotep' s fame as, an ar~hitect endured for centuries right up to the period of, Greek rule. Imhotep was raised to the status of a god and, worshipped by the Egyptians and later by the Greeks. The, Greeks identified lmhotep with Asclepios, the god of healing., The architecture of the pyramids continued to evolve, under the successors of Djoser-from step pyramids to true, pyramids-till it reached its climax in the Fourth Dynasty., The Fourth Dynasty pyramids, situated at Giza close to modem, Cairo, are staggering in their dimensions. In terms of sheer, size these monuments were unparalleled in the ancient world., The Fourth Dynasty pyramids highlight the unique position, which the pharaohs occupied within the Egyptian ruling class., They are also a reflection of the extensive resources which, were at the command of that class. The two most spectacular, pyramids of the Giza group are those of Cheops or Khufu, (second ruler of the Fourth Dynasty) and one of his successors,, Chephren (or Khafre). The pyramid in which Cheops was, buried has a square base with each side measuring 235 metres., It is 146.5 metres high. The pyramid of Chephren has a base, of 215.25 square metres and is 143.5 .metres high., The gigantic proportio1;1s of these pyramids can be gauged, from the fact that each of them was built out of at least two, million blocks of stone, a block weighing two-and-a-half tons, on an average. These pyramids .exhibit a very high degree of, a~ectural perfection. The design involved considerable, mathematical calculations. This was not just, a, precision in, I, ., matter of aesthetic appeal, but without such precision the, buildings would not have been architecturally feasible. Given, their weight, size and shape they would just have collapsed., It has been estimated that it would have required the, labour of at least 10, 000 persons, working together, to build, each pyramid. This labour was requisitioned when fields were
Page 126 :
1'/ 6, , I Early Social Formations, , flooded by the Nile and no agricultural .activity could take, place. The construction work stretched over several seasons., Some historians hold the view that the labour for pyramid, construction was not forced labour but essentially a way of, providing livelihood and sustenance to the peasants when, agricultural work was slack. However, considering the harsh, labour that went into this task there must have been a strong, element of coercion in mobilizing a labour force for it. One, should also keep in mind that engaging so many workers in, pyramid building amounted to diverting a large labour force, (mainly able bodied adults) from economically productive, activities. Even otherwise the construction of tombs on such a, scale was a drain on the resources of Egypt. It is hardly, surprising that the pyramid built by Mycernius (Menkure),, the successor of Chephren, was architecturally inferior and, much smaller in size Oust 62 metres high and 108.4 square, metres at the base). After Mycernius there was an overall, decline in pyramid building. For a long time after the Fourth, Dynasty the Egyptian economy could not afford such lavish, monuments. Some major dynasties in later periods did build, elaborate cemeteries but these were designed very differently, and the emphasis shifted to making huge larger-than-life, statues of the rulers., The pyramids were principally buildings in which the dead, bodies of respective pharaohs were buried. There was a significant ritual connected with the burial. This ritual was intended, to enable the dead pharaoh to be reborn. A myth was invented, according to which the life of the pharaoh did not completely, cease with death. The pharaoh was supposed to possess an, after-life. But this after-life (or life after death) had to be facilitated by performing some complex burial ceremonies. The, most important part of the ceremony was the preservation of, the dead body. The internal organs were removed and the, body was embalmed by applying some herbs and chemicals., It was then wrapped in bandage-:Jjke strips of Icloth. This, process is usually called 'mumrilification'. The---tnummified, body was put in a chamber inside the pyramid (or other types
Page 127 :
Early Egyptian Civilization, , Tl 7, , of tombs) alongwith various objects connected with the dead, pharaoh. A ritual boat was placed in the mausoleum to aid, the passage to after-life., The concept of the after-life of the pharaoh was linked to, the Osiris myth, to which we have already made some reference, above. The dead pharaoh was identified with Osiris, the god, of 1he 'blessed' dead. Some more aspects of the myth might, be mentioned over here. Osiris (Asar) was a widely, worshipped deity in Egypt during the predynastic period., His cult was initially connected with agriculture. Osiris was, regarded as the god of vegetation and was supposed have, taught humans how to cultivate. It was believed that he had, acquainted them with wheat, bread, and beer. The worship, of Osiris seems to have become very popular in the delta region, where Busiris became the main centre of this cult. There were, many other centres of the cult as well, and during the dynastic, period Abydos emerged its principal centre. ·, According to Egyptian mythology Osiris was a just and, good king who ruled over the entire world. Osiris had a, brother by the name of Set who was jealous of him. Set, conspired to assassinate Osiris. His plan succeeded and Osiris, was killed. Isis, the wife of Osiris, found the dead body of, her husband and through her efforts he was reborn. After his, rebirth, Osiris became the god of the blessed dead and ruled, over the region of dead. Isis then gave birth to the posthumous, son of Osiris. Horus was the son of Osiris and Isis. When, Horus grew up he avenged the death of his father by killing, Set. After the victory against Set, Horus occupied the throne, of Osiris with the consent of the gods. A~l ruling pharaohs, were identified with Horus. Horus had been originally linked, to the worship of the falcon totem. The falcon eventually, became the symbol of all pharaohs. They were always denoted, by depicting a falcon. Thus each reigning pharaoh was, believed to be Horus., The divinity of Egyptian kings was asserted by identifying, the living pharaoh with Horus and the dead pharaoh with, Osiris. The myth of the rebirth of the pharaoh as Osiris helped
Page 128 :
l 18, , i, , Early Social Formations, , to reinforce the notion that the king was immortal. All the, rituals associated with the rebirth of the pharaoh have to be, viewed in this context. The pyramids and other royal, cemeteries had an ideological function. They were not the, result of some peculiar Egyptian obsession with death and, after-life. Had that been the case such burials would have, been a universal feature in that society. However, the majority, of the Egyptians were buried in very austere graves. The, graves of the poor were narrow pits in which the dead body, was placed in a crouching position in a very undignified, manner., The grand monuments built by the pharaohs were intended, to overawe the people as well as to impress upon them that, the pharaoh was no ordinary human being but a mighty god., It is not difficult to visualize the impact which the pyramids, of Cheops and Chephren would have had on the people. The, pyramids were not isolated structures. They were part of much, larger complexes which contained temples where priests, regularly performed rituals. The pyramid-complex of, Chephren has additiorially a large and very unusual piece of, sculpture called the 'sphinx'. The sphinx is carved out of a, single rock, and depicts a lion with the body of a human being., The head is a representation of the pharaoh Chephren. In order, to promote the cult of the pharaoh the state expended immense, resources on the maintenance of these temple-cum-burial, complexes. From the Fourth Dynasty onwards the belief that, pharaohs were gods remained firmly entrenched in the minds, of the Egyptians., The Egyptian state, and the ruling class which controlled, it, was constantly engaged in perpetuating the cult of the pharaoh. This ruling class wielded enormous power which was, derived to a large extent from the divine status of the pharaoh., We must remember that in the Old Kingdom a powerful, centralized state came into existence in Egypt. It is only a ruling, class which is extremely confident of its ability to mobilize, financial, technical and human resources on a very large scale, that can undertake such an ambitious enterprise as the
Page 129 :
Early Egyptian Civilization ! 119, , construction of the great pyramids. Nevertheless the demands, made by the ruling elite on the productive resources of the, country had become excessive by the end of the Fourth, Dynasty. There was growing pressure on marginal areas which, probably resulted in environmental degradation and declining, productivity. This might have been one of the causes which, led to the momentary break.down of the centralized state at, the end of the Old Kingdom., By the Old Kingdom the Egyptian state had developed an, extensive bureaucratic structure with wide ranging, administrative functions. This bureaucracy carried out the, systematic collection of tribute. Another major function of the, bureaucracy was to organize and coordinate tasks related to, irrigation. The overwhelming bulk of the tribute came from, agriculture:Wheat, barley and flax (a kind of fibre used for, making cloth) were the main crops. Besides, cattle rearing, was an integral part of the agrarian economy. The produce of, the peasants (mertu is a term frequently used for peasants in, Egyptian documents) was appropriated in kind through a tax, levied on them. This tax wa_s called mezed and it included grain,, bread, flax and animal hides. The mertu were also liable to kat,, which implied forced labour either for the state (construction, of pyramids etc.), or for digging and maintaining canals and, dykes for irrigation. Artisans and craftsmen were generally, bound to workshops attached to temples, palaces and houses, of wealthy families. Although there were private traders, the, state organized major trading expeditions especially for, procuring metal, wood and luxury goods., Every two years the government conducted a census for, assessing cattle and to some extent land. This should not be, confused with'the modern concept of census, since it would, have been based on a rough estimate of the resources of each, province or nome. We do not know as to how efficient or, thorough the census was, but it was probably linked in some, way to the system of taxation. The officer who was responsible, for this biennial census enjoyed a prominent position in the, state. The taxes collected in kind were stored in central
Page 130 :
tzn j Early Social Formations, , granaries located in various parts of the country. Payments in, kind were disbursed from the granaries. In the Archaic Period, there were two separate treasuries for Upper and Lower Egypt:, the treasury of Upper Egypt was designated as 'White House', and that of Lower Egypt as 'Red House'. In the Old Kingdom, the treasuries were merged into one central treasury called, 'Double White House'. The granaries were managed by the, treasury, which also kept an account of receipts, payments,, tribute, royal treasure and collection of flax and hides., As centralized administration became more and more, complex, the pharaohs began to appoint a chief minister to, look after the day to day functioning of the government. The, chief minister bore the title taty and was usually from the, royal family. In the provinces the position of the adj-mer, who, was initially responsible for irrigation works in the names,, became increasingly powerful. The adj-mer was virtually the, head of the provincial government, carried out the biennial, census in names, and dispensed justice. At the lower levels of, bureaucracy there were a large number of scribes who had, been trained to read and write the hieroglyphic script and to, draft various types of official documents. We can be certain, that knowledge of the hieroglyphic script was confined to a, very small section of society (officials, priests, scribes, and, the aristocracy). The vast majority of the people were ignorant, of the script., Whereas the Egyptian state had evolved a fairly efficient, system for centralized control, beyond a certain point centralization was difficult for a premodern state. In view of the his.:, torical limitations of a premodern state, the government in, ancient Egypt had to rely on ancient village level institutions, for routine local administration. We have references to village, councils called seh (or zazat) in the Old Kingdom and qenbet, during the Middle Kingdom. These councils consisted of the, saru-local notables and some scribes. In other words, the, saru or members of these councils were drawn from among, the dominant groups in the villages. The seh or zazat had, probably existed in the predynastic period. The centralizing
Page 131 :
Early Egyptian Civi1ization, , I, , 121, , tendencies of the Egyptian state did not destroy these, institutions. These councils now assisted the government in, village administration. In the countryside, the saru became, the main support base of the state and upheld the authority of, the pharaoh., , N, We have already observed that in the dynastic period the, official religious ideology of Egypt revolved around the cult, of the pharaoh. However, this cult developed relatively late, and it incorporated several aspects of Egyptian religion which, were much older (e.g. the worship of Osiris). The roots of, Egyptian religion go back to the Amratian and Gerzean, cultures, or even earlier. The first agricultural communities in, Egypt worshipped mother-goddesses and had their own, fertility cults. As these communities got organized into clans, and tribes they adopted totems which symbolized respective, clans/tribes. When the clans or tribes settled down in the Nile, valley; they attached themselves to specific territories. The, totems which were held sacred by clans or tribes residing in a, particular area became the emblems of respective predynastic, territorial units. Mother-goddess and fertility cults as well as, wors~p of certain elements of nature (sun, barren desert), was prevalent., As in the case of Mesopotamia, it is not possible to speak, in terms of a single, uniform Egyptian religion. Even though, Egypt was politically unified at a very early date, religious, beliefs and practices exhibited great diversity. We must distinguish between state-sponsored religion, which tried to, embrace the country as a whole, and the local cults which, were confined to certain nomes or cities. At the popular level, several primitive beliefs persisted. Wepwawet was a wolf god, associated with the Asyut nome, Khentiamentiu was a jackal, god in Abydos and Sobek was a crocodile god in Thebes. All, three might have been survivals of early totems. Egyptian, religion kept evolving over centuries so that some cults were
Page 132 :
122, , I Early Social Formations, , modified and transformed while others disappeared., In the dynastic period there was a general decline in the, importance of female deities and mother-goddess worship., In our discussion on Mesopotamia we have seen how this, process was linked to the emergence of patriarchal society., Female deities either disappeared altogether or else were, subordinated to male deities. In some cases they became, consorts of prominent gods. Thus Isis was linked to Osiris as, his wife. Similarly, a lion-headed goddess, called Sekhmat,, became the consort of Ptah who was the main god of Memphis., Ptah was one of the gods who retained a large following, throughout the dynastic period, even when Memphis ceased, to be the capital. The worship of Ptah was popular within the, educated elite as well as among artisans., There was also a tendency to combine two or three deities, in the form of a family. We have mentioned the Osirian family:, Osiris-Isis-Horus as husband, wife and son. Another well, known family was Ptah, Sekhmat (consort), and Nefertum, (son). We can see the growing emphasis on the family as a, social unit in the attempt to fuse separate cults.in this manner., Another interesting characteristic of Egyptian religion was, the existence of numerous deities which were represented as, part animal (usually the head) and part human. Arsaphes was, the ram-headed god of Heracleopolis; Sokar was a falconheaded god worshipped in the Memphis region., The most outstanding feature of Egyptian religion at the, level of the state was the worship of the sun god. From the, Third Dynasty the pharaohs patronized solar cults in some, form or the other. The solar cult embraced other cults as well., In the Archaic Period the worship of Horus, represented as a, falcon, became prominent though different religious beliefs, were still contending for supremacy. Evidence from the reign, of Peribsen, the sixth ruler of the Second Dynasty, shows that, there was a strong move to revive the worship of Set towards, the end of the Archaic Period. As Emery has pointed out, at, this stage Horus had not yet been fully integrated with the, Osiris cult. It was in the Old Kingdom that the process of
Page 133 :
Early Egyptian Civilization, , I, , 123, , amalgamating Horus with the Osirian family and depicting, Set as evil was completed. Simultaneously the sun god Re, became the basis of official religion. A major source for, information on the worship of Osiris and Re are the detailed, religious texts inscribed inside pyrami~s. These are known as, Pyramid Texts and the earliest belong to the Fifth Dynasty (c., 2300 Be). The Pyramid Texts are the oldest religious texts in, the world., The trend of royal worship of Re assumed significance, under Djoser. Gradually a theology evolved whereby Re,, Osiris., Horus and pharaohs were accommodated in the, pantheon. According to the genealogy which was created,, Osiris and Horus were regarded as having descended from, the sUJ.'1. god Re. Thus the divine phaxaoh was associated with, Re as well as with Osiris and Horus. The worship of Re was, fully established by the Fourth Dynasty. This cult maintained, its preeminent position in Egyptian religion for over twentyfive centuries. Of course the actual manner in which Re was, worshipped underwent several changes throughout this long, period-.., At different points of time Re was linked to separate, deities. This was the direct outcome of political change·s. As, new groups rose to power they sought to project their own, cults by combining them with the worship of Re. This was, done by resorting to the device of converting a given local, deity into a manifestation,of Re. For instance Amon became, Amon-Re, Atum became Atum-Re and Sobek became SobekRe. This formula was convenient for giving a more universal, appeal to local deities., We have mentioned that in Egypt the priests by and large, did not directly wield much political authority. However they, played a crucial ideological role in the political structure and, in times of crisis their support could be vital. In the Old, Kingdom the priests of Heliopolis had acquired a special status., Heliopolis was located close to Memphis. Atum was the main, god of the city. The Heliopolis priesthood successfully, identified Atum with a much older deity, namely the sun god
Page 134 :
124, , I Early Social Formations, , Re. Through this association they made Atum more widely, acceptable. The Heliopolis priests consolidated their position, by attaching themselves firmly to the state. The Atum-Re cult, was the dominant cult of the Old Kingdom. When there was a, prolonged era of political crisis after the Fourth Dynasty, and, the authority of the pharaohs weakened, the Heliopolis priests, became politically powerful. Under the Fifth and Sixth, Dynasties the Heliopolis priesthood enlarged the scope of its, authority., The Old Kingdom came to an end with the collapse of the, Sixth Dynasty. With the decline of the centralized state in the, First Intermediate Period the Heliopolis priests and the, Atum-Re cult suffered a setback. The focus shifted to some, powerful nomes, which asserted their independence., Provincial governors became strong, and in Greek accounts, such governors are referred to as nomarchs. Heracleopolis, became one of the major new centres of power. Wi~h the, rise of Heracleopolis, Arsaphes, the local god of the city, became a leading deity of the Egyptian pantheon for some, time., When Egypt was once again unified under the Eleventh, and Twelfth Dynasties the worship of At~m-Re was replaced, by the worship of Amon-Re. In the Middle Kingdom the centre, of political power moved to Thebes in Upper Egypt. The rulers, of the Eleventh and Twelfth Dynasties came from Thebes., Amon was the main deity of Thebes. Re was now, conceptualized as Amon-Re and it was in this form that the, sun god was worshipped for most of the Middle and New, Kingdoms. We also have references to Sobek-Re. We have, ·, noted that Sobek was a crocodile deity of Thebes._, From the Twelfth Dynasty the pharaoh was represented, as being descended from Amon. The Amon cult became the, foremost cult of the Egyptian state. This cult was so influential, that when Amenhotep IV, one of the rulers of the Eighteenth, Dynasty, tried to break away from it by transferring the capital, from Thebes to a new site called Akhet-aten where he, established the worship of another deity (Aten), his move
Page 135 :
Early Egyptian Civilization I 125, , was short-lived. His successor once again made Thebes the, capital of the empire and ensured the continued domination, of Amon (or Amon-Re)., During the course of these changes, the Osirian cult was, also modified. ln the Old Kingdom only the pharaoh enjoyed, the privilege of being reborn as Osiris. Later on, this privilege, was extended to other members of the royal family and yet, later to provincial governors, nomarchs, and the aristocracy., Several sections of the ruling class were allowed to perform, the ritual for being reborn as Osiris. Correspondingly there, seems to have been a decline in the importance of the Osiris, cult in terms of promoting the divinity of the pharaoh. Though, the Osiris cult remained very popular, its overall character, was transformed after the Old Kingdom. One might comment, here that by the end of the Fourth Dynasty the notion that the, pharaoh was a god was ingrained in the minds of the Egyptians, to such an extent that it was no longer necessary to rely on, the Osirian myth to perpetuate the idea of the pharaoh' s, divinity and immortality., , V, The remains of ancient Egyptian civilization, including the, written texts which have survived, leave us in no doubt about, the impressive accomplishments of the Egyptians in science, and mathematics. The Greeks, who themselves made great, advances in these fields, readily acknowledged their debt to, the Egyptians. The Egyptians were not very good at theory, but they were excellent observers and adept at working out, practical solutions to problems in science and mathematics., The pyramids are the most ,;ioteworthy illustration of this., Early Egyptian geometry and arithmetic was a response, to the need to measure Nile floods and survey land for, irrigation or taxation. The official unit for length was a royal, linear measure of 52.3 cm. This was used for measuring the, level of water in the Nile and was employed from the Old, Kingdom onwards. There was another linear measure which
Page 136 :
126, , I Early Social Formations, , was employed for ordinary purposes. This was somewhat, smaller than the royal unit., The Egyptians had evolved symbols for representing, numbers from one to nine. The concept of zero was unknown, to them. They had separate symbols for numbers like ten,, hundred, thousand and so on till one million. Their, arithmetical calculations were mainly based on addition and, subtraction. Knowledge of the properties of multiplication was, very elementary. Multiplication invr)lved a tedious method, which was more like an extended form of addition. This was, also true for division. The only numerator used by the, Egyptians in their fractions was the number 'l'. Therefore a, fraction having a numerator larger than one had to be, represented in a long repetitive manner: 3 / 11 would be shown, as 1/111/111/11. To simplify this there were a few symbols, for commonly used fractions, e.g., 2/3 and 3/4., Despite these limitations, the Egyptians were exceptionally, precise in their calculations. This is all the more remarkable, .when we realize that calculations on a scale as vast as that of, the pyramids have to be exact. The smallest inaccuracy will, tend to get enlarged manifold when the design is executed., Even in the modern computer age the designing of a true, pyramidical structure, having the dimensions of the great, pyramid of Cheops, would be a, challenging job due to the, numerous simultaneous calculations this would require. We, know that the Egyptians used some of their astronomical, observations to work out the alignment of the great pyramids., They were familiar with the relationship between the diameter, of a circle and its area and estimated the value of p quite, correctly., Whereas it is generally recognized that the Egyptians did, not on the whole make much progress in astronomy, they did, devise a workable calendar. The length of a year was computed, almost accurately. In the ancient Egyptian calendar one year, contained 365 days. The year was divided into 12 months of, thirty days each. The beginning of the year corresponded to, 19th July of our calendar. The five additional days were ~acred
Page 137 :
Early Egyptian Civilization, , I, , 127, , days devoted to feasts. The discrepancy which would have, been caused over a period of time by skipping one-fourth of a, day annually was rectified through the system of reckoning, the calendar afresh with the accession of a new pharaoh. The, calendar of the previous pharaoh was abandoned. This meant, that the error caused by the failure to add one day to the, calendar in every four years, something that we do in ·every, leap year, did not accumulate beyond a certain point. The, discrepancy was thus kept within manageable limits., The Egyptians were highly successful in preserving the, human dead body. The art of mummification had been, perfected by· the Fourth Dynasty. Preservation of the dead, body required a good understanding of human anatomy and, of the basic principles of chemistry. This was a highly, specialized job and the skill would have been acquired after a, long period of training. Unfortunately the expertise which, was developed for mummification did not lead to any, breakthrough in medical science. The specialists who carried, out the preservation of the dead body got a chance to learn, much about human anatomy. This experience could not benefit, medical science for the simple reason that medicine was, normally the domain of priests who did not directly have, anything to do with the actual process of preservation. Priests, preferred to use magical charms and spells for curing illness., A great historical opportunity for the advancement qf medicine, was thereby lost.
Page 138 :
Chapter Six, , FROM BRONZE AGE TO IRON AGE:, ANATOLIA AND GREECE, , DURING the third millennium BC (between 3000 and 2000 BC), several bronze age cultures appeared in Anatolia, Greece and, some other parts of the eastern Mediterranean zone. By 2000, BC, ,almost a thousand years after the birth of Sumerian and, Egyptian civilizations, conditions were ripe for the emergence, of new bronze age civilizations in this region. The historical, development of Anatolian and eastern Mediterranean societies, had reached a stage where they were ready for the transition, to civilization. The presence of two great bronze age, civilizations in this part of the world (Mesopotamia and Egypt), had a far-reaching effect on many of the neighbouring peoples,, most of whom were at a relatively lower level of development., More important, however, were the internal changes which, had been taking place in Anatolian and eastern Mediterranean, societies over a long period of time. It is necessary to mention, that an extensive trading network, in which a number of, communities participated, had been established in this region., _ A prominent feature of the second half of the millennium, (after c. 2500 BC) was the movement and displacement of, various tribes, including the group which we broadly refer to, as the Inda-Europeans. For nearly 1500 years West Asia and, the eastern Mediterranean witnessed a constant traffic of, innumerable tribes. The history of many of these tribes is, obscure but their interaction and conflict with settled agrarian
Page 139 :
From Bronze Age to Iron Age: Anatolia and Greece, , I, , 129, , societies of the region was occasionally recorded in some form, or the other. These .records· provide us with vital clues for, understancting these tribal movements. Scholars have grouped, these tribes on the basis of their language. Unfortunately this, linguistic classification has at times been misrepresented to, support racist interpretations of history. The languages of these, tribes fall into two broad divisions: Indo-European and, Semitic. There are a few linguistic groups which do not belong, to either category. The prominent Semitic tribes were the, Amorites of Syria, who contributed to the establishment of, the Babylonian empire in Mesopotamia; and later on, the, Canaanites in Syria and Palestine. A branch of the Canaanites,, the Phoenicians, played a key role in the Mediterranean history., Among the Indo-Europeans there were Indo-Aryans, Nesians, (Hittites), Greeks and Mitanni. Another group, known as the, Hurrians, were a people settled in northern Iraq and Syria, whose language had nothing in common with the IndoEuropeans or Semites. Afterwards we find an Indo-European, segment within the Hurrian population, the Mitanni. By c., 1500 BC the Mitanni had emerged as an aristocracy among the, Hurrians. They worshipped Indra, Mithra and Varuna. The, Mitanni are credited with having brought the art of horse, training from their home in the Russian steppes. They, popularized the horse in West Asia. Another tribe, the Kassites,, who were probably of the same stock as the Mitanni, moved, towards the Zagros mountains in northern Iraq. The incursions, of the Kassites into southern Mesopotamia speeded up the, overthrow of the Old Babylonian empire., , I, Anatolia (sometimes referred to as Asia Minor) is a vast, rectangular area which roughly corresponds to the Asian part, of modern Turkey. On the northern side it is bound by the, Black Sea and on the southern side by the Mediterranean. In, the west it is enclosed by the Aegean Sea, in which many, Greek islands are situated. Mainland Greece lies on the
Page 140 :
130, , I Early Social Formations, , opposite shore of the Aegean Sea. In the south-western part, of the Anatolian peninsula there is a major mountain rangethe Taurus. The Taurus mountains separate Anatolia from, northern Mesopotamia, Syria and the Lebanese coast. The, central part of Anatolia is a high plateau. It may be recalled, that southern Anatolia was part of the west Asian belt in which, food production had its origins. We have referred to Cayonu, where regular cultivation of plants was taking place c. 9500, BP, and the impressive neolithic settlement of Catal Huyuk., The large Catal Huyuk site, covering an area of nearly 32 hectares, can almost be described as a town (c. 7500 BP). Whereas, settlements like Catal Huyuk. had many of the ingredients, necessary for an 'urban revolution' (trade, specialization,, copperworking, large population), southern Anatolia was, unable to make an early transition to the bronze age. Catal, Huyuk declined after 7000 BP (5000 BC)., Evidence for the first Anatolian bronze age urban centres, comes from Hissarlik in the north-western part of the, peninsula, on the Aegean coast. Excavations have revealed, that Hissarlik was the site of the famous city of Troy. The, initial fortified settlement of Troy (Troy I) flourished between, 3000 and 2500 BC. A few bronze age sites belonging to this, period have also been found in central Anatolia at Alisar and, Alaca Huyuk. Troy I was succeeded by a new, and more, advanced, settlement-Troy II (2500-2200 BC). By this time, social stratification was well defined. Exquisite gold ornaments, and bronze weapons point towards a wealthy ruling class., Troy maintained trade contacts with other parts of West Asia, and the eastern Mediterranean., By c. 2500 BC a mature bronze age civilization had also, developed in central Anatolia. This part of Anatolia was the, home of a people who are known to history as 'Hatti' and, were probably indigenous to the area. The language of the, Hatti, called 'Hattie', does not resemble the structure of any, . other Asian language. The Hatti laid the foundations of, civilization in central Anatolia. Their civilization corresponds, to the Middle Bronze Age of Anatolia (2500 to 1800 BC). Alaca
Page 141 :
From Bronze Age to Iron Age: Anatolia and Greece, , I, , .i31, , Huyuk, where thirteen royal tombs have been discovered,, was one of the centres of Hattian ·civilization. The prosperity, of this civilization was closely linked to the role of Anatolia as, a major supplier of metal. It should be remembered that, Mesopotamia and Egypt were both deficient in copper. They, had to depend on large imports of the metal. As these, civilizations progressed, their demand for metal multiplied., Anatolia, on the other hand, had rich deposits of copper (as, well as of gold and silver) which were being systematically, exploited by 2000 BC. Around this time we find colonies of, merchants in central Anatolia for the purpose of procuring, metal. One such colony was at Kanesh (modem Kultepe), north, ofthe Taurus mountains, where Mesopotamian traders bought, and sold goods. Some of their business letters and accounts, registers have survived and these offer us a glimpse of this, trade. It is clear that the export of metal provided the Hatti, with an opportunity to augment their own resources and thus, to enrich their civilization., The Hattian homeland was gradually occupied by a group, belonging to the ludo-European linguistic family. Circa 2000, BC various Indo-European people penetrated Anatolia in the, course of tribal migrations which were then taking place in, southern Europe and western Asia. One of these IndoEuropean tribes, who have been identified as Nesians,, eventually settled down in the land of the Hatti. The Nesians, were outsiders to the area, but they soon became politically, dominant. At the same time they borrowed many elements of, Hattian civilization. This synthesis resulted in a new civilization, which is familiar to us as the 'Hittite civilization'., The Hittite. civilization (1800 to 1200 BC) ranks as. one of, the great civilizations of West Asia, next in importance only, to the Mesopotamian and Egyptian. The ample remains of, this civilization include several thousand written texts, mainly, on clay tablets. The principal city of the Hittites was Hattusas, (Boghazkoy). Hattusas was the capital of the Hittite empire, for a long time. Archaeological excavations at Boghazkoy have, brought to light Hittite buildings and fortifications. Several
Page 142 :
13:?., , I Early Social Formations, , thousand documents have also been discovered. These have, helped historians to reconstruct Hittite history in some detail., Interestingly it is possible to correlate this source material, with contemporary evidence from Mesopotamia and Egypt., Hittite chiefs began expanding their territory in central, Anatolia from 1800 BC onwards. Lists of early Hittite kings, are available but their chronology is doubtful. The Hittites, made occasional forays into Mesopotamia and their raids were, responsible for destroying the Babylonian empire (c. 1600 BC)., Sometime after 1500 BC a new Hittite dynasty started ruling, over most of Anatolia. The founder of this dynasty was, Tudhaliyas II. One of the successors of Tudhaliyas II, named, Suppiluliumas I, went on to create a mighty Hittite empire., Suppiluliumas I (1380-1345) added northern Syria to the Hittite, territories and subjugated the Hurrians. It was under, Suppiluliumas that the Hittites became a great power., His son, Mursilis II (1345-1315), continued with the task, of conquest and consolidation. This brought him in_ conflict, with the Egyptians who were then ruled by the Nineteenth, Dynasty. Subsequently another Hittite ruler, Hattusilis III, (1275-1250 BC), formed an alliance with Egypt. The pharaoh, Ramesses II of the Nineteenth Dynasty established a close, relationship with Hattusilis and married a Hittite princess., The basis of this alliance seems to have been the growing threat, of invasions from Mesopotamia. The Hittite empire came to, an end c. 1200 BC when Anatolia was invaded by some tribes, who are referred to in contemporary records as 'people of, the sea'., As we have already noted, the Hittite civilization, continued with many Hattian traditions. The Hattian concept, of kingship influenced the evolution of Hittite monarchy., Hattian chiefs and kings were not absolute rulers like the, monarchs of Egypt or Mesopotamia. Hattian society retained, a strong element of tribal political organization. This was, reflected in the nature of Hittite monarchy wherein kings did, not have unlimited authority. The king was not looked upon, as a god and till very late in Hittite history he was not deified
Page 143 :
From Bronze Age to Iron Age: Anatolia and Greece, , I, , 133, , after death. The early Hittite state was essentially oligarchical, and the king shared power with other warrior chieftains. It, has been suggested that initially Hittite monarchy might have, been elective and not based on the hereditary right to, succession. We know that Hittite kings had to struggle hard, to strengthen the monarchy and it was only during the reign, of Suppiluliumas that the nature of kingship was fully, transformed. Suppiluliumas enjoyed more extensive authority, than his predecessors., An important survival from the Hattian age was, matrilineal social organization of which there are some traces, in the Hittite period. In the Hatti.an political structure the right, of succession was in the female line. This meant that the, children of the ruling king's sister had the prerogative of, inheriting the throne and various high offices. The king's sister, bore the title tawananna. The tawananna had substantial power., It was her son who had the right to become the ruler after the, death of the reigning king, while her daughter would in turn, inherit the title and authority of tawananna. This custom was, also prevalent among the Hittites. In the Hittite period the, tawananna's position remained very strong. Apart from her, role in determining succession, she was the chief priestess., Certain taxes were specially reserved for the tawananna thereby, making her financially independent., The later Hittite rulers attempted to abolish this practice,, which naturally led to conflicts over the question of succession., Finally Suppiluliumas altered the character of the tawananna, system. He declared his queen as the tawananna. Thus from, now onwards the queen, in her capacity as the wife of the, ruling king, was the tawananna. The authority and privileges, associated with this title were substantially reduced. The right, of succession was no longer with the tawananna but was vested, in the king. This measure was one of the reforms undertaken, by Suppiluliumas to strengthen the monarchy. It is worth, noting that the tawananna tradition had endured for so long, that it was not possible to completely do away with it. Even, after this title was transferred from the king's sister to the
Page 144 :
134, , I Early Social Formations, , queen, it carried with it certain religious functions; We hear, of some queens who as tawananna had a lot of political, influence. The best known example is that of Puduhepa, the, wife of Hattusilis. III. Puduhepa's diplomatic correspondence, with Ramesses II has been preserved. This correspondence, shows her in the role of an independent political figure., Nevertheless it should not be thought that the institution, of tawananna is an indication of the better status of women in, Hittite society. Hittite society was rigidly patriarchal. This is, the overall impression which we get from the law code of the, Hittites. As in the case of Mesopotamia, the Hittites have also, left a large collection of laws. Two sets of laws have been, found on clay tablets among the Boghazkoy ruins. Each of, these sets contains 100 clauses, i.e., in all we have 200 different, Hittite laws. The laws cover a wide range of subjects including, marriage, inheritance, punishments for offences, prices for, certain goods and services, and economic matters. About, twenty five laws in the code pertain to marriage and related, issues. Comparing the position of women reflected in these, laws with their status in Hammurabi's code and other, Mesopotamian laws, Gerda Lerner (in her work The Creation, of Patriarchy) comments that Hittite laws 'are more restrictive, of women than the other law codes'., It is apparent from these laws that a social structure, marked by sharp class distinctions existed in Anatolia under, the Hittites. Slavery was well established. In the code there, are provisions pertaining to slaves, including as many as six, laws which deal with the marriage of a slave to a free person., The concept of punishment in the Hittite laws is somewhat, different from that of Hammurabi's code. The underlying, principle of retribution in Mesopotamian laws was 'an eye for, an eye and a tooth for a tooth', which implied that the, punishment inflicted on an offender was the exact physical, equivalent of the wrong which a victim had suffered. The, Hittites laid greater emphasis on providing compensation to, the ~ggrieved party rather than on punishment in terms of, physical mutilation. Where the offender was a free person, he
Page 145 :
From Bronze Age to Iron Age: Anatolia and Greece, , !, , 135, , or she was usually required to adequately compensate the, vfctim for the harm caused. Another advance made by the, Hittite laws was that retribution was not merely a matter, between the offender and the victim, but between the guilty, person and the state. The intervention of the state was crucial, in determining the precise quantum of punishment in many, cases and it was not left to the two parties to settle the matter, on their own., Hittite religion incorporated several features of earlier, Anatolian beliefs. On the one hand a number of cults centred, around local deities flourished. These cults included various, mother-goddesses. With the rise of patriarchal society many, of the female deities disappeared or were subordinated to, male gods. One of the most popular gods in Anatolia was the, storm-god who was worshipped in different forms. The sun, cult was widespread in the region. The sun was represented, at times as a goddess and sometimes as a god. On the other, hand the religion patronized by the Hittite state was mainly, based on the worship of the storm-god Taru and the sungoddess Arinna. Arinna was depicted as the wife of Taru in, Hittite mythology. We can see the influence of-Mesopotamian, religion in the evolution of the Arinna cult. Arinna was, identified with Ishtar. In Anatolia Ishtar was associated with, fertility, war and the moon. The bull cult also occupied a, prominent place in Hittite religion., Mesopotamian civilization left a deep imprint on the Hittites. Hittite raids into Syria and Mesopotamia, as well as, Mesopotamian trade links with Anatolia, introduced aspects, of Mesopotamian civilization into the Hittite sphere of, influence. Perhaps the most outstanding contribution of the, Babylonians to the Hittites was the cuneiform script. At an, early date Hittites had adapted the cuneiform script to their, language. Although the language spoken by the Hittite ruling, class was Nesian (an Inda-European language), their official, documents are invariably written in Akkadian., Hittite military triumphs were facilitated by their use of, the light horse-drawn chariot. Unlike the heavy Mesopotamian
Page 146 :
136, , I Early Social Formations, , chariot with solid wheels, the Hittite chariot had spoked, wheels. Incidentally this type of chariot was also used by the, Egyptians. The main difference between the Hittite and, Egyptian chariots was that the Hittite chariot carried three, riders while the Egyptians put only two men on their warchariots. A major treatise on the breeding and training of, horses, belonging to the Hittite period, has survived. This, gives us some idea about the importance of this animal, which, was relatively new to Anatolia, in the Hittite military, formations. It is generally believed that one of the causes of, Hittite military superiority was the use of iron for making, weapons, particularly swords. It was earlier suggested by, scholars that iron technology was a Hittite military secret. As, we shall see this view is no longer tenable, but it is possible, that the Hittites might have been using iron to make some of, their weapons., , II, We have seen that in West Asia, pre-pottery neolithic cultures, began to develop after 10,500 BP. In Europe the transition to, food production took place more than 2000 years later. The, earliest neolithic cultures of Europe can be dated to the ninth, millennium BP. In chapter three we referred to the beginnings, of agriculture in south-eastern Europe, particularly Greece, where evidence of one of the first European neolithic, settlements has been found at the site of Argissa-Maghula (c., 8000 BP). The origins of food production in southern Europe, remains a controversial issue. The consensus among, prehistorians is that the European neolithic was the product, of West Asian influences. This new pattern of subsistence, spread to south-eastern Europe-Aegean and Greece-from, Anatolia. Either migrants from Anatolia brought farming, methods to Greece and the Aegean, or else the neolithic was, gradually diffused (spread) from West Asia to south-eastern, Europe., Gordon Childe held the view that most of the critical
Page 147 :
From Bronze Age to Iron Age: Anatolia and Greece I, , l.37, , achievements made during the prehistoric period, e.g. food, production, pottery-making, metallurgy, urban revolution etc.,, first took place in West Asia and Egypt. From this region these, advances were transmitted to. other parts of the world by a, process of 'diffusion'. Childe was of the opinion that every, major breakthrough was a one-time occurrence in a particular, area and subsequently the new knowledge or culture was, disseminated among other people. According to him Europe, had generally lagged behind in the development of the neolithic, and the bronze age. Europe acquired knowledge of agriculture, and metallurgy from West Asia. The path of diffusion was, from West Asia to Anatolia; from Anatolia to the Aegean;, from the Aegean to Greece and the Balkans; and from southeastern Europe to other parts of the continent by different, routes. This implied that there was always an interval in the, process of diffusion from one point to another. The Aegean, neolithic and bronze age developed later than in West Asia, and these patterns of subsistence reached other parts of Europe, even later. Childe' s model is referred to as 'diffusionist'. He, is, however, regarded as a 'moderate diffusionist' because he, does not rule out the contributions of local cultures. There, was no wholesale transfer of cultures from one place to, another. Whereas people borrowed new techniques they also, provided their own specific inputs, thereby introducing, modifications. Some of these modifications were necessitated, by the need to adapt to local conditions. This accounts for the, distinctiveness of each culture. Despite diffusion there was, considerable variation from one culture to another. Diffusion, did not lead to the creation of exact replicas of the original, culture., Childe' s diffusionist model dominated the study of, European neolithic and bronze age societies for most of the, twentieth century. Since the 1970s a few scholars have, challenged Childe' s assumptions. Foremost among these, prehistorians is Colin Renfrew, who is the leading critic of the, diffusionist model. Renfrew has forcefully argued that, European farming and metallurgy had independent origins,
Page 148 :
BH, , l Early Social Formations, , i.e., it was autochthonous (indigenous) and was not brought, from outside. Renfrew' s arguments were based on his, interpretation of the new chronology which became available, with radiocarbon dating (see chapter three, above). His, contention was that revised dates contradicted the diffusionist, explanation. These dates were much earlier than those worked, out by Childe and other prehistorians. Renfrew rightly pointed, out that Childe' s major work had been published prior to the, revolution brought about by the carbon-14 technique. With, the modified chronological seq11ence it could now be, demonstrated that there had been no significant time-lag in, the occurrence of changes in Europe. Renfrew therefore ruled, out the possibility of migrations or diffusion having been, responsible for the shift to agriculture and copperworking., For him these were essentially European in origin., Given the current status of archaeological finds it is not, possible to agree with Renfrew' s argument in its entirety. With, regard to agriculture, as stated above, the overwhelming, evidence points in the direction of diffusion or migration from, WestJAsia to south-eastern Europe. Summing up the debate, in the recently published UNESCO History of Humanity (Vol., I), S. J. De Laet observes that immigrants from Anatolia, introduced domesticated plants and animals as well as pottery, into Greece and the Aegean. He emphasizes the fact that the, first plants to be cultivated in Europe---einkorn and emmer, varieties of wheat-did not exist in their wild form in southern, Europe. They must have been brought from .West Asia and, after undergoing some changes they were adapted to, environmental conditions in different parts of Europe. It, should however be borne in mind that during the mesolithic, period some European societies had reached a stage of, development where the transition to farming might just have, been a matter of time., Apart from Argissa-Maghula, other early neolithic sites, in Greece include Sesklo and the Franchthi Cave. The prepottery neolithic Sesklo culture dates back to 5000 BC. Sesklo, grew into a large village with a population of almost 3000
Page 149 :
From Bronze Age to Iron Age: Anatolia and Greece · 1 139, , inhabitants. On the island of Crete archaeological excavations, have brought to light successive layers of occupation by, neolithic communities, going back to c. 600~5500 BC. The first, food producing societies of Greece, Crete and the Aegean, cultivated wheat and barley and reared sheep and goats. They, had learnt to make pottery of a very high standard., While it is difficult to accept Renfrew' s anti-diffusionist, position in the case of European agriculture, the story of metallurgy is somewhat different. The history of the genesis of, copperworking in Europe has been completely revised as a, result of archaeological evidence that has accumulated since, the 1960s and 1970s. The new picture which has emerged, confirms Renfrew' s view that European metallurgy was not, derived from West Asia but had independent local origins. It, now seems certain that the Balkan region of Europe had, initiated the use of copper much before any part of the Aegean., This implies that Balkan metal technology was not borrowed, from West Asia. The Balkans are situated at a much greater, distance from Anatolia than the Aegean Sea. According to the, diffusionist model metallurgy would have reached the Balkans, and central Europe after it had spread to Greece and the, Aegean. Since this is not the case, we can infer that European, metallurgy was an independent tradition. As a matter of fact, certain metallurgical techniques are of greater antiquity in, Europe than in West Asia., Native copper, or almost pure copper which was fou~in, its natural state on the surface of the earth, was the source of, the first metal objects made by humans. These were rocks, which did not break or shatter like stone when they were, repeatedly struck with force. Growing familiarity with the, properties of native copper showed that it was different from, other types of stone. It could be beaten into various shapes, through constant hammering. Copper was used in Anatolia c., 6000 BC (Catal Huyuk) for making small ornaments. A little, later, copper objects were being made in northern Iraq and, Iran. By c. 5000 BC there is evidence of copperworking from, Vinca (Yugoslavia) and Varna (Bulgaria) in the Balkans. Initially
Page 150 :
140, , I Early Social Formations, , the Yugoslavian and Bulgarian metal objects were made by, cold hammering of native copper. Soon the Balkans had, progressed to the stage of smelting copper. In West Asia the, technique of smelting probably came into use so·mewhat later., The earliest evidence pertaining to smelting of copper ore, found in West Asia is from the site of Tepe Yahya (3800 BC)., This process involved heating the rocks for removing, impurities and then beating the copper into the required shape., The ovens employed in the Balkans for manufacturing, pottery were sufficiently advanced to be adapted for purposes, of metallurgy. We have already referred to the close, technological link between pottery-making and copper, smelting. Significantly the oldest copper mines known to us, are located in Yugoslavia (Rudna Glava) and Bulgaria, (Aibunar). The production of copper by smelting ores extracted, from mines was another major step forward in the, development of metallurgy. The prehistoric metal specialists, of Yugoslavia and Bulgaria made copper ornaments and tools, of outstanding workmanship. Incidentally their gold objectsamong the earliest artifacts of this metal-also exhibit a high, level of skill. Unfortunately we do not have much information, about other aspects of these cultures except that they traded, in the metal goods manufactured by them., In Greece and the Aegean the copper age developed, around 3500 BC. Sometime after 3000 BC copper was being, alloyed with tin (or arsenic) to produce bronze throughout, West Asia, Greece and the Balkans. The Egyptians mastered, the technique of making bronze much later than Anatolia and, the Aegean. During the latter half of the third millennium BC, bronze age cultures were evolving on the island of Crete. This, large rectangular island in the eastern Mediterranean marks, the southern boundary of Greece and the Aegean Sea. Circa, 2000 BC it became the home of a brilliant bronze age, civilization-the Minoan civilization.
Page 151 :
From Bronze Age to Iron Age: Anatolia and Greece, , I, , 141, , m, The Minoan civilization can be described as the first European bronze age civilization. In the periodization of ancient, Greece the first phase of the urban revolution may be regarded, as having commenced with the Minoans. This civilization was, unknown till the early twentieth century when diggings, conducted by Sir Arthur Evans brought it to light. Evans, named the civilization after the legendary king Minos who is, associated with Crete in Greek mythology. We still know, nothing about the political history of the Minoans, but remains, of several Minoan cities have been found in Crete. The most, exciting discovery has been at Knossos., By c. 2000 BC the bronze age had attained maturity in Crete., Around this date the urban revolution had been completed, and a number of prominent cities had developed on the island:, Knossos, Phaistos, and Mallia. These cities contained large, palace complexes. The palace of Knossos is the most well, known and represents a remarkable artistic achievement. The, Minoan palaces were designed architecturally with great care, to make them pleasing to the eye. The .walls were decorated, with frescoes (paintings or designs made while the plaster on, the walls was still wet). The palaces had large store-rooms, and workshops. However they were not fortified. This would, indicate that Minoan society was internally very"s~ble. The, ruling class relied on force only to a limited exten~'"Moreover,, the lack of defensive walls shows that the Minoans had, sufficient naval strength to deal effectively with external, aggression. Their navy was also capable of resisting attacks, by· pirates., The Minoan civilization reached its climax in the period, 2000-1600 BC. Minoan products like vases and jewellery are, typical of these people. The aes.thetic sensibility of this civilization was distinctively Minoan and it was quite unlike what, we encounter in contemporary eastern Mediterranean and, West Asian cultures. Minoan art was marked by great delicacy, and warmth. In selecting themes for drawings their emphasis
Page 152 :
142, , I Early Social Formations, , was on scenes from nature or from everyday life. It is not, surprising that Minoan products were much sought after., The emergence of Minoan civilization coincided with the, quickening of trade contacts in the eastern Mediterranean and, the Aegean. A glance at a map of the region will show the, strategic location of the island of Crete. The Minoans exploited, their favourable location to create a vast trading network. It, will be correct to say that long distance seaborne trade and, exchange was the mainstay of the Minoan economy. Minoan, ships traded with Egypt, Anatolia, the Lebanese coast, Cyprus, and the Aegean. Traders from Crete carried wool, textiles,, perfumed oil, jewellery, and vases to various parts of the, Mediterranean., The Minoan cities and port-towns were integrated with, the agrarian economy of the Cretan countryside. Goods were, brought from the rural areas to the cities for exchange and, redistribution. The palace complexes played an important role, in this process. It has been suggested that the Minoan palaces, were not merely centres of political authority or residences of, the Minoan aristocracy. These complexes were engaged in, regulating economic activities over a wide area. Goods would, be taken to the palaces for storage, processing, redistribution, and overseas trade., Sheep rearing and wool production were vital components, of the Minoan rural economy. Further, in addition to wheat, cultivation there were two new staples of Minoan agriculture:, olives and grapes (vine). Olive and vine became the, qualitatively novel feature of farming under Mediterranean, soil and climatic conditions. Together with wheat, olive and, vine were soon established as the three main crops of Greece, and Rome. The olive is a small fruit which grows on trees., This fruit is processed mainly for its excellent oil. Vines are, climbing plants which yield grapes. Grapes are the main source, of wine production. One advantage of concentrating on, cultivation of olive and vine is that they can be grown in areas, where flat arable land is scarce. It should be kept in mind that, Greece and the Aegean islands do not possess vast fertile
Page 153 :
From Bronze Age to Iron Age: Anatolia and Greece, , I, , 143, , plains. There is a shortage of level agricultural fields and most, of the plots tend to be small. It therefore makes sense to, combine the cultivation of wheat and other cereals with olive, and vine as these do not compete for space. At the same time, this pattern of farming necessitates more exchange because, olive, wine and wool cannot be staples of the diet. The palace, complexes facilitated these exchanges and were centres for, the production of oil, wine and textiles., The Minoans had developed writing, mainly for the, purpose of maintaining lists of goods. Initially their symbols, were modified pictures. They then evolved a script which has, been named 'Linear A'. We do not know the language of the, Linear A script. This script remains undeciphered, but the, surviving recorq.s are probably related to trade and exchange., Another script was also in use in Crete. This third script is, called 'Linear B'. This has been found mainly on tablets of, unbaked clay. At some point of time the 'Linear B' script was, transferred to an early form of Greek. We will discuss this, script in some more detail a little later., The Minoan civilization suddenly came to an end c. 1400, BC. Invasions from mainland Greece contributed to the decline, of the Minoans. In order to properly understand this, development we must refer to the emergence of a new bronze, age civilization in Greece-the Mycenaean civilization., , IV, While the foundations of Minoan civilization were being laid, in Crete, continental Greece was being occupied by groups of, Indo-European people who· spoke an early form of Greek, or, a proto-Greek language. At the outset of this chapter we, mentioned waves of migrations by Inda-European tribes,, especially after c. 2500 BC. Some of these tribes had entered, Greece and settled down there between 2200 and 2000 BC., These tribes eventually produced a major bronze age, civilization known as the Mycenaean civilization. As fresh, waves of migrants penetrated the area the Greek language
Page 154 :
144, , I Early Social Formations, , evolved further and Greek speaking communities began to, dominate most of mainland Greece., The Mycenaean civilization (c. 1600-1200 sc) was, discovered in the late nineteenth century through the efforts, of Heinrich Schleimann. Besides his work at Mycenae,, Schleimann had pioneered excavations at Troy. This, civilization-the first bronze age civilization on mainland, Greece-is named after the site of Mycenae. Mycenae (the, Greek name is Mykene or Mykenai; Mycenae is the latinized, form) is situated in the southern part of mainland Greece,, near Corinth. According to legend it was supposed to have, been founded by Perseus. Other major Mycenaean sites are, Tiryns and Pylos. Large workshops for producing bronze, objects and textiles have been found at the palace of Pylos., The Mycenaens borrowed many elements of Minoan, civilization, including the system of centralized redistribution, and the Linear B script. The Mycenaeans had an extensive, foreign trade. Oil, pottery and textiles were their main exports., They imported gold, copper and tin. But the overall character, of the Mycenaean civilization was quite different from the, Minoan. When we speak of the Mycenaeans we are actually, referring to independent states ruled over by warrior chiefs., These chiefs, who usually had the title wanax or anax, ruled, over their territories from fortified urban centres. Unlike the, Minoan palace complexes, which were not fortified, the, Mycenaean cities were dominated by strong fortresses. The, citadels of the wanax were the nucleus of Mycenaean url;,an, centres. The Mycenaean states were governed by 1:1. powerful, warrior aristocracy. The warriors were constantly engaged, in a violent struggle with their neighbours to enlarge their, domains. This civilization is sometimes called a 'warrior, civilization'. The wealthy Mycenaean chiefs were buried in, beehive shaped tombs (tholoi) or in large chamber tombs. In, addition to Mycenae, some of the other states were Pylos,, Thebes and Orchomenos. The Mycenaeans took over most of, Crete and established their states on the1sland. Knossos was, the centre of one of these states., )-
Page 155 :
From Bronze Age to Iron Age: Anatolia and Greece, , I, , 1.45, , The Mycenaean civilization lasted till c. 1200 BC. This was, the time when the Hittite civilization also came to an end., Another round of tribal migrations coincided with the, simultaneous collapse of bronze age civilizations in the eastern, Mediterranean by 1200 BC. Egypt and Mesopotamia were also, undergoing a period of crisis. In the traditional periodization, of ancient Greek history the four· centuries from 1200 to 800, BC are denoted as the 'dark ages'. Mycenaean cities went into, decline, the Linear B script disappeared and trade was, disrupted. Source material for this period is rather scanty., Hence the use of the term 'dark ages' to describe this period., The 'dark ages' of Greece are supposed to have come to, an end c. 800/750 BC when two great Greek epics, The lliad, and The Odyssey, were written. These epics mark a turning, point in Greek history. Their composition is attributed to a, poet by the name of Homer. The historicity of Homer has. not, been confirmed. Nor is it certain that the author of both the, epics was the same person. What is relevant for our purpose, is that they are a very rich historical source. With the, composition of Iliad and Odyssey written records are once again, available for ancient Greece, after a gap of nearly four hundred, years., These two works are part of the tradition of epic poetry., Iliad is a long poem of nearly 16, 000 lines. Odyssey is a slightly, shorter poem of about 12, 000 lines. The main theme of Iliad is, the war of a coalition of Greek states against the state of Troy., The members of this coalition are collectively called 'Achaians', in the epics. According to the story a number of Greek states,, led by Agamemnon (ruler of Mycenae), carried out a ten-year, long campaign against the city-of Troy. Iliad presents a detailed, account of the last few days of the Trojan war. Odyssey recounts, the adventures of one of the heroes of the war-Odysseuson his homeward journey after the conclusion of the campaign., In the course of these narratives almost every aspect of society,, economy, religion, mythology, beliefs, and food habits is, touched upon., It was generally believed that fliad and Odyssey were in-
Page 156 :
146, , ! Early Social Formations, , spired by events which had taken place in the Mycenaean age., There can be no doubt that some of the stories in these epics, are derived from the period when the Mycenaean civilization, flourished. There is awareness of an earlier era in which great, heroes, kings and warriors lived. It was thought that the, Homeric epics •were essentially a portrayal of Mycenaean, society. The reinterpretation of these poems, particularly in, the light of more exhaustive archaeological evidence, has, allowed scholars to view Iliad and Odyssey as works of the, later 'dark ages'., Whereas the legends contained in the epics might have, had their origin in the Mycenaean age, these legends would, have been transformed in the process of being handed down, orally from generation to generation. Some features would, have been added and some would have been lost in the process, of retelling tales of the heroic deeds of the Mycenaeans. The, tradition of epic poetry was a form of entertainment. Bards, or poets composed and recited the poems before an audience,, selecting stories with which the listeners were familiar. We, cannot rule out the possibility of some of the stories being, based on real events. In any case around 800 BC someone, composed or compiled many of the legends which were in, circulation and wrote them down in the form of Iliad and, Odyssey. Since they were composed towards the end of the, 'dark ages' the actual details of everyday life relate to that, period., We find that the so-called 'dark ages' were not so dark, after all. The period from 1200 to 800 BC can be divided into, two subperiods: i) 1200 to 1050 BC and ii) 1050 to 800 BC. In the, first subperiod centres of Mycenaean power were overrun by, tribal invaders. Urban habitations disintegrated and the, development of writing received a setback. From 1050 BC, onwards there were some signs of recovery. Greek speaking, people occupied the whole of continental Greece and colonized, the Aegean Sea. The Aegean islands and the western.coast of, Anatolia was incorporated in the Greek ~istic zone. With, Greek speaking communities settled i:ti? Crete, mainland
Page 157 :
From Bronze Age to Iron Age: Anatolia and Greece, , I, , 'JAi, , Greece, the Aegean and the coastal portion of western Anatolia, this entire area was culturally unified. The major Greek dialects, evolved in this period. There were three important dialects:, Ionic, which included the subdialect Attic spoken in Athens;, Doric; and Aeolic. The Homeric epics were written in a form, of Ionic., In the 'dark ages' the Greeks were politically divided into, a large number of petty-states. These states were ruled by, kings or chiefs with limited authority. There might have been, a couple of powerful kings, but during the latter half of the, 'dark ages' the overall trend was in the direction of weakening, of monarchical control. The great heroes of Iliad and Odyssey, are in fact warrior chieftains ruling over small principalities., It is apparent that their authority is not supreme within the, respective communities to which they belong. These chiefs, often have to share political power with other members of, the warrior aristocracy. The oligarchical political structure, which became widespread in Greece after the 'dark ages' had, its roots in these traditions., The Odyssey provides an insight into the kind political, system which emerged in Greece after c. 1000 BC. Odysseus,, the hero of this epic, is capable of performing superhuman, feats of strength and bravery. He is depicted as a mighty, warrior who is feared throughout Greece. But his own position, is quite insecure in the kingdom over which he rules. The epic, shows Odysseus as the ruler of the tiny principality of Ithaca., While he is away on the Trojan campaign his family is constantly, harassed. Rival clan leaders take advantage of his long absence, to try usurping his power. If we closely examine the status of, Odysseus we find that he is nothing more than a petty warrior, chieftain who has to constantly struggle to retain his position., We may add over here that the excavations at Troy revealed, that most of the Greek kings of the later 'dark ages' ruled, over territories with meagre resources. The fabled city of Troy, turned out to be a big disappointment. In the words of M. I., Finley (The World of Odysseus) the Troy settlement which, corresponds to the period of the Iliad, Troy VII, was a 'pitiful
Page 158 :
1Ml, , I, , Early Social Formations, , poverty-stricken little place, with no treasure, without any, large or imposing buildings, with nothing remotely resembling, a palace'. The Greek rulers of the 'dark ages' therefore, frequently carried out raiding expeditions to obtain booty and, the Trojan war (if it actually took place) was one such incident., The end of the 'dark ages' saw the revival of writing in, Greece. After 1200 BC the Linear B script used by the, Mycenaeans was abandoned. For several centuries till the, Homeric age there are no written records. It is possible that, the disruption of trade following the decline of the Mycenae ans, made writing irrelevant. This is all the more likely because, the Linear B tablets mainly contain accounts and inventories., When the Greeks again began using a script towards the end, of the 'dark ages' it was not the same as that employed by the, Mycenaeans. The new script was borrowed from the, Phoenicians. The Phoenicians, as we have noted, were a, Semitic people who were a branch of the Canaanites., The Phoenicians had their roots in trading settlements, along the Lebanese coast at Tyre, Sidon, Byblos, and Ugarit., Apart from their lasting contribution to human civilization ·in, developing an alphabet, the Phoenicians were catalysts for, promoting exchanges in the Mediterranean. From c. 1000 BC, they set up trading settlements throughout the eastern, Mediterranean and subsequently in the western, Mediterranean. Apart from becoming the leading middlemen, of the Mediterranean they also produced certain commodities like glass and a type of purple dye. In the ninth century BC, the Phoenicians founded the settlement of Carthage in north, Africa (modern Tunisia). Carthage was to become the leading, political power in the western Mediterranean. The Romans, had to wage a long struggle for over a century to destroy the, Carthagian empire of the Phoenicians. This empire lasted till, 200 BC., The Phoenicians had evolved a script (c. 1500 BC) which, suited their need to maintain accounts. This was a purely, phonetic script in which the symbols,~od for different sounds,, i.e., it was an alphabetic script. Thereiwere 22 symbols in the
Page 159 :
From Bronze Age to Iron Age: Anatolia and Greece, , I, , 149, , Phoenician alphabet. The Phoenician script had symbols only, for consonants. It was written from right to left (Linear B was, written from left to right). The Greeks took over the, Phoenician script and modified it by adding symbols for, vowels. The Homeric epics were written in the new Greek, alphabet., ·, , V, The most important achievement of the later 'dark ages' was, the shift from bronze to iron. Between 1050 and 800 BC iron, technology was disseminated in Greece and the Aegean. This, period marks the transition to the iron age. The origins of, iron technology are shrouded in mystery. However the, archaeological evidence which has accumulated over the years, indicates that Anatolia and northern Mesopotamia pioneered, the .use of this metal. The technology involved in making iron, objects is much more complex than that of copper or bronze., It took some time to acquire proficiency in ironmaking. In, West Asia and the eastern Mediterranean the introduction of, iron was spread over many centuries, from the fifteenth to, the eighth centuries BC., It is not possible to pinpoint one particular place where, the technology was 'invented'. It was earlier thought that the, Hittites were the first people to use iron extensively, especially for military purposes, and that they kept this technology a, closely guarded secret. The collapse of the Hittite empire c., 1200 BC and the tribal movements in Anatolia and the eastern, Mediterranean resulted in the transmission of iron techniques, to new areas. Scholars no longer hold the view that the Hittites, had a monopoly of this technology or that migrations by tribal, groups carried knowledge of ironworking to new areas. We, know that iron was not completely unknown to West Asians,, Egyptians and the eastern Mediterranean world prior to 1200, BC. Some familiarity with this metal had definitely been acquired, between 2000 and 1500 BC. A handful of small iron objects or, fragments of the metal have been found at various sites spread
Page 160 :
150, , I Early Social Formations, , over a wide belt in West Asia. After 1500 BC iron objects,, though still rare, exhibit improved metallurgical skills. An, outstanding example is a dagger with an iron blade buried, with the remains of the pharaoh Tutankhamen (1350 BC)., Although there is still a lot of difference of opinion among, historians over the question of whether copper and bronze, technology could have directly led to ironmaking, it cannot, be denied that copper and bronze metallurgy led to advances, in pyrotechnology (the technology of regulating fire and heat;, attaining/ controlling high temperatures in furnaces) which in, turn facilitated the transition to iron. On the other hand unlike, copper and bronze, ironmaking involves a number of, complicated steps. Moreover, there is considerable room for, variations at each step so that we come across diverse, techniques being applied to iron production. It would be, wrong to assume that there was a uniform method which was, adopted throughout West Asia. Different cultures made the, transition to iron by traversing their own specific technological, paths., Iron invariably occurs in an impure form. It has to be, extracted from ores. There are several types of iron ores with, varying quantities of iron. Haematite and magnetite ores, contain the highest percentages of iron, but depending on the, availability other ores with much lower iron content are also, used to produce the metal. For extracting iron the ore should, ideally be heated to over 1500° C so that the iron melts and, can then be drawn off. The melting point of iron is 1540° C,, which is much higher than that of copper (about 1100° C)., Initially it ·was not possible to have furnaces where, temperatures of over 1500° C could be obtained. Nevertheless, it is technically possible to procure small quantities of, somewhat impure iron even at much lower temperatures. Two, further processes are necessary to m*~ the iron economically, useful. These two processes are carb'fuization and tempering., When iron is brought in contact with carbon while it is hot it, undergoes physical changes to become steel. Tempering refers, to fast cooling of the iron which has absorbed carbon.
Page 161 :
From Bronze Age to Iron Age: Anatolia and Greece j 151, , Carburization and tempering enable iron to acquire hardness, and strength. This renders it a superior metal for manufacturing tools and weapons., Ancient metallurgists discovered that carbon was added, to iron when the metal was heated in the presence. of burning, charcoal. But it was only gradually that this method became, popular. One of the constraints of iron technology was the, need to have access to large quantities of fuel. As much as, eight tons of charcoal would have been required for carburizing, one ton of iron. Anatolia and Syria had adequate supplies of, iron ores and fuel and the original breakthrough in, carburization might have been made in this region c. 1200 BC., It was after 1200 that the new technology spread to the eastern, Mediterranean. By 1000 BC carburized iron was being widely, used in Greece., Gordon Childe has labelled iron as a 'democratic' metal., This is because unlike copper, iron ores are well distributed, throughout the world. The raw material could usually be, procured locally and it was not necessary to rely on an, elaborate trade network to obtain the ores. This is the reason, for the cheapness of the metal as compared to copper and, bronze. Once the technology was in place more people would, have had access to iron. It is in this sense that Childe calls it a, democratic metal., It is not difficult to explain the rapid advance of iron in, Greece. For making bronze the Greeks had to depend wholly, on imports for their supplies of copper and tin. The decline of, eastern Mediterranean trade after 1200 BC created problems, for Greek metallurgy because the supply of copper and tin, could not be maintained. The introduction of iron offered a, viable alternative. Since Greece had its own iron ore deposits, the Greek state.:; with their limited resources would have, preferred to use this metal rather than exchange their small, surpluses for imported copper and tin. Within a short time, iron demonstrated its tremendous advantages as a metal., Apart from its cheapness it could be given stronger and sharper, edges for making tools and weapons. Iron was much more
Page 162 :
152, , I Early Social Formations, , suitable for making swords than bronze. Iron axes were also, more effective as were agricultural implements like iron, ploughs. It should not be assumed that iron immediately ousted, copper and bronze. The adoption of iron was a slow process, in Mesopotamia ~nd Egypt. In Mesopotamia the iron age began, after 800 BC and in Egypt more than a century later. In most of, West Asia iron and bronze existed side by side for a long, time. But in the context of Greece this new technology became, one of the factors which contributed to the development of, productive forces after 800 BC.
Page 163 :
'O, , 'i:, , ~, C:, (,:I, , 2"', , ", w, V, ,,,, L-J, , 0, OI.J, 0, , <t:, c;,, , .!:;, , r', , /., 0., ~, , ~
Page 165 :
t':::i-__, .A, , . /l'r, , 1-r.,- 'Ya, , -~--), , ~\, , .~;', s:, , 1'.Ha, , ......\..., \-, , A\S'·, , r t, , e, , ., , HANAT, , I, 1, , \1, \r, 1,., 1, , ~, , \, ,,-,~./, , ~ij, , .,, __, , l
Page 167 :
3
Page 168 :
THESSAL Y, , ........., , Al!TOLIA, , t, , ....., Map 4 : Greece and the Aegean
Page 171 :
,, , SYR.IA, , ~,, ~ETE, , s, , m, Damascus, , .,, , R., , E A, , JU, , /, , •Petra, , A, , AR.AB J A, D.ES ER.TA
Page 173 :
~, , ., , \t~:J, ~·, , WESTERN ', , DESERT (, , SUDAN, , ,-, , ., , '~, , ETHIOPIA, , fRANSOXANIA, , .
Page 176 :
URINGIA, ..J, Cl), , 0, , 0, , 200, , 250 miles, NORTHERN EUROPE •, , &., , 6 00
Page 179 :
Chapter Seven, , ARCHAIC AND CLASSICAL GREECE, , THE foundations of classical Greek civilization were laid in, the Archaic Period (c. 750-500 BC). The classical age, the glorious, era of Greek civilization, lasted from c. 500 BC to the, establishment of Macedonian supremacy over Greece in 338, BC. In the previous chapter we saw that when the Homeric, epics were written Greece was a conglomeration of numerous, independent states. The common bond between these states, was the Greek language and some shared beliefs and myths., There was no such thing as a politically unified Greek state, till the Macedonian conquest in the fourth century BC. For a, long time the Greeks did not even have a collective name to, describe themselves. In Iliad and Odyssey various terms are, used. The people who formed the coalition against Troy are, frequently called Achaians (see chapter six). Eventually the, word 'Hellene' came to denote the Greek speaking people., The Greek speaking communities collectively called themselves, 'Hellenes' and the territory inhabited by them was known as, 'Hellas' (even today the official name of the country, in the, Greek language, is Hellas). Later on, the Romans designated, them as 'Graeci'. This name became popular in other parts of, Europe and it is from 'Graeci' that the appellation 'Greek' is, derived., Greece proper is an irregularly shaped peninsula in southeastern Europe. It is surrounded by the Aegean Sea in the, east, by the Ionian Sea in the west and by the Mediterranean, sea in the south. The southernmost part of mainland Greece is
Page 180 :
154, , I Early Social Formations, , a palm-shaped extension into the Mediterranean, called the, Peloponnese. Sparta was the most important state in the, Peloponnese. The Peloponnese, which is virtually an island, is, separated from the rest of mainland Greece by the Gulf of, Corinth. A narrow strip of land in the north-eastern comer of, the Peloponnese connects the two parts. Corinth is situated, strategically at the junction of the Peloponnese and continental, Greece. Megara was another well known state located on the, strip of land joining the Peloponnese with the mainland., Beyond the Gulf of Corinth, at the south-eastern extremity of, continental Greece, lies the region of Attica. Athens is located, in Attica. To the immediate north-west of Attica is an area, called Boeotia (central Greece). Thebes was the dominant city, of Boeotia. Further north, along the Aegean coast, is the region, of Thessaly. Thessaly is endowed with open plains which are, suited for cultivating wheat and rearing cattle. The extremes, of climate in Thessaly make olive and vine cultivation difficult, in this area., Moving in a clockwise direction from Thessaly we come, to Macedonia, Thrace and the western coast of Anatolia., Macedonia (the home of Alexander the Great) is now shared, between Greece, Yugoslavia and Bulgaria. This region too, h,as extensive plains and was renowned for its horses., Thrace, part of which is now included in the European part, of Turkey, is the easternmost part of southern Europe., Thrace was a relatively backward area as compared to, southern Greece but it was endowed with silver and gold, mines. The western coast of Anatolia had several Greek, states. The Greek speaking inhabitants of Anatolia and the, islands in the eastern Aegean Sea were referred to as, Eastern Greeks. In the Aegean Sea itself there are a large, number of islands of varying sizes. There is a group, concentrated in the southern Aegean. The islands of this, group are collectively called the Cyclades. Crete is situated, south of the Peloponnese and the Cyclades. In the process, of their expansion, the Greeks had colonized some areas of, southern Italy and Sicily. The Greek settlers of southern
Page 181 :
Archaic and Classical Greece, , I, , 155, , Italy and Sicily are together known as Western Greeks., The Greek states which had emerged at the end of the, 'dark ages' may be described as city-states, although it, would be more appropriate to use the term polis which the, Greeks themselves used for these political formations. Polis, indicates not merely the territory but the system of, governance which prevailed in these states. The nucleus of, the polis was an urban centre, but there were variations in, levels of urbanization. The polis included the city and the, neighbouring countryside and as a historical phenomenon, should not be confused with the later Italian city-states., Unlike the Italian city-states which derived the bulk of their, wealth from trade and commerce, the economic basis of, the polis was essentially agrarian. The distinctive feature of, the polis as a political unit was its relatively small size and, the high level of participation by large sections of the, population in the political process., , I, The Archaic Period witnessed a prolonged struggle between, the landed aristocracy and the peasantry throughout Greece., The genesis of this struggle goes back to the later 'dark ages', when historical changes had placed landowning aristocrats in, a strong position. The ruling class of the Mycenaean states, was composed of the king, the priests, the bureaucrats, and, the warrior aristocracy. Tribal movements and the decline of, trade had led to the collapse of the Mycenaean social and, political structure after 1200 BC. The system of production and, redistribution under the supervision of the palaces broke, down. The bureaucracy which organized this system lost its, control. Subsequently in many of the Mycenaean states the, kings were forced .to surrender some of their privileges to, powerful clan chiefs and landed aristocrats. Given the small, surpluses that many of the Greek states produced, these rulers, were not in a position to find resources for maintaining large, armies to strengthen their authority, to defend their territory
Page 182 :
156, , I Early Social Formations, , and to carry out raids for plunder. They had to rely on the, support of the clan chiefs and big landowners to mobilize adult, males for military campaigns. By the beginning of the Archaic, Period the institution of monarchy had been considerably, weakened in Greece. Effective power was passing into the, hands of oligarchies (government by a small group of people,, in this case aristocrats)., We are not very certain about what exactly happened, during the 'dark ages', but it is possible to say with some, confidence that after 1000 BC kingship as a form of, government was gradually replaced by oligarchical rule of, the landed aristocracy in many of the Greek states. By the, beginning of the Archaic Period, older clan and tribal ties, had further weakened and no longer played an important, role in the socio-economic structure. Scholars have, identified another institution-the oikos-as being the basis, of social organization and production during the later 'dark, ages'. The oikos was the main social unit, and may roughly, be translated as 'household'. The oikos was simultaneously, an economic unit (the word 'economy' is derived from, oikos). The oikos referred to a family, its property, its, belongings and all those who were engaged in working for, the household. The last category included domestic servants,, labourers working in the fields belonging to the oikos, and, slaves. The oikos of the aristocracy would additionally have, a number of retainers. Just a:s we can have rich households, and poor households, so also at one end of. the scale were, the oikos of the aristocracy, and at the other end were the, oikos of the small peasantry comprising the majority of the, oikos of the community., The oikos was a social unit and at the same time a production, unit. It comprised both the people and the goods of the, household. The core of the oikos was the family. Besides the, members of the family, there were other i members of the, oikos who were not directly related to the family. They were, dependent upon the 6ikos for their livelihood and in return, they provided their labour to the oikos. The oikos was strictly
Page 183 :
Archaic and Classical Greece, , I, , 157, , pabiarchal and the head of the family, whow was also head, of the oikos, exercised unlimited authority over all the, members. Complete loyalty and obedience was expected from, them., The oikos tended to be a self-sufficient production and, consumption unit. Its economic activities were primarily, centred around land. The aim of the oikos was to maximize, output from scarce arable land. The better off landowners, seem to have been quite successful at this towards the end of, the 'dark ages'. The big landowners were better placed to, augment their yield due to the extra labour (free and unfree), at their disposal. In addition to the resources of their oikoi, the, aristocrats used their political position to acquire more land, at the expense of the small landowners. Moreover, by having, access to retainers they could participate in raiding expeditions, and increase their wealth by appropriating large shares of the, booty. At the beginning of the Archaic Period the heads of, the richest oikoi had become a close-knit hereditary elite. It, was this elite that dominated the oligarchical political structures, of those Greek states in which monarchy had been eliminated, or pushed into the background., From c. 750 to 600 BC the landed aristocracy consolidated, its hold over land. This led to the impoverishment of small, landholders. In their desperation the small landholders put, up a tough fight against the aristocracy. The constant upheavals, caused by this struggle reached a point of crisis c. 600 BC., Sections of the aristocracy finally realized that unless some, solution was found to this state of affairs their own prosperity, would be threatened. Consequently they were forced to initiate, reforms which incorporated concessions to the peasants., The plight of the peasantry can be glimpsed from, contemporary writings. Greek literature of the eighth century, BC is no longer preoccupied with the exploits of warrior heroes, but focuses on the everyday life of the ordinary peasant. This, shift can be seen in the theme of the major literary work of, the early Archaic Period, Hesiod's Works and Days. Hesiod, was a Greek poet from Boeotia. He was born near Thebes.
Page 184 :
158, , I Early Social Formations, , Two of his writings have survived: Works and Days and Theogony., The nature of these poems is very different from the epic poetry, of the Homeric age. Works and Days is concerned with the, routine of the farmer. This long poem contains details about, the agricultural cycle and gives advice to the peasant on how, to cultivate the land efficiently. Hesiod expresses an intense, dislike for the rich landowners and describes the toil and hard, work of the small peasant., The resistance put up by the impoverished peasants of, Greece made it difficult for the aristocracy to ignore the, demands of this class. They had to take some steps to improve, the conditions of the peasants for reducing tensions in society., We have a fairly detailed account of the reforms undertaken, at Athens. These give us some idea about the developments, which took place during the latter half of the Archaic Period., The information on Athens is supplemented by references to, other poleis which indicate that similar processes were at work, elsewhere too. It needs to be kept in mind that monarchy had, been abolished at Athens in 752 BC. At the beginning of the, Archaic Period the term frequently used for kings was basileus., In many Greek states the basileus was either removed or, divested of authority. Hereditary monarchy with absolute, power was no longer the norm. At Athens the government, was placed under officials called archons. The archons were, chosen from among the aristocracy., Once they had established their control over the, Athenian state the aristocrats increased the burden on the, small landholders. They occupied the most fertile land and, pushed the peasants to marginal areas. The aristocracy, sought to exploit the labour of the peasants by exerting, pressure on them to work on their estates. Impoverished, peasants often had to take loans from wealthy landowners,, many of whom were engaged in trade and moneylending., When the poor peasants failed to pay their debts they,, alongwith their families, were forced into bondage. Not, only were the peasants being deprived of their land but, they were being reduced to the status of slaves. The
Page 185 :
Archaic and Classical Greece I 159, , worsening condition of the small landholders provoked a, widespread reaction. Athens was almost in a permanent, state of unrest which the aristocracy was unable to suppress., Contemporaries referred to this situation as stasis, or, stalemate. The principal demands of the peasantry were, redistribution of land and abolition of debt bondage. When, the discontent tended to go out of control a section of the, aristocracy proposed some reforms. In 594 BC the Athenians, resorted to the device of appointing an arbitrator, named, Solon, to carry out these reforms. With the agreement of, both sides Solon was to have dictatorial powers for a, specified duration. The sweeping powers of the arbitrator, gave him a free hand to deal with the crisis., The most radical reform of Solori was the abolition of debt, bondage. This meant that henceforth Athenian free persons, could not be enslaved if they failed to repay their loans. The, existing loans of the peasants were written off. However Solon, did not carry out redistribution of land. Secondly, Solon, introduced constitutional changes which gave all Athenian, citizens the right to participate in the political process. The, details of the nature of this participation will be discussed, later. Thirdly, there were changes in the administration of, justice. The aristocracy lost some of its special privileges in, terms of the legal system, an important step in the direction, of treating-all citizens as equal in the eyes of law. According, to another legal reform, in case an offence had been, committed, ev_~n someone who was not the aggrieved party, could approach the court for justice. Solon also introduced a, law by which an appeal could be made against judicial, sentences. Solon took various measures to improve th~, economy. Silver production was increased which in turn, stimulated trade benefiting artisans· and traders. Restrictions, were placed on the export of wheat so that food prices were, reduced., Solon's reforms helped to ameliorate the conditions of the, peasantry for the time being. However, since they were not, comprehensive enough, these measures kept the discontent
Page 186 :
160, , I Early Social Formations, , in check only temporarily. The abolition of debt bondage, prevented the enslavement of the impoverished peasants, but, in the absence of land reforms the aristocracy continued to, possess a disproportionately large share of cultivable land., As we shall see, after 594 BC there was a shortage of labour,, especially unfree labour, because Athenian citizens could not, be forced into bondage if they were unable to repay their, loans. The big landowners solved their problem of labour by, increasingly employing slaves brought from outside., Within a few decades of Solon's reforms there were fresh, upheavals in Athens. Similar conditions prevailed in other, states where incomplete reforms or no reforms had taken, place. Taking advantage of the disturbed conditions some, p<i>litical leaders staged a series of coups and assumed, dictatorial powers in their respective states. Peisistratus was, the person responsible for the coup at Athens. He first, attempted to seize power in 561 BC, but was unsuccessful and, had to flee from the city. He managed to succeed in 545 BC., Peisistratus installed himself as supreme ruler of the city,, ignoring the existing constitutional arrangements and defying, the oligarchical institutions., This was a new form of government for which the, Greeks used the term 'tyranny'. Rulers like P;eisistratus who, had usurped power in this manner were tailed 'tyrants'., An interesting aspect of Greek tyranny was that its social, base was the impoverished peasantry. Peisistratus had the, support of the Athenian small landholders and povertystricken citizens. When he became tyrant he took over public, wastelands which had been occupied by the oligarchs and, distributed these among the small or dispossessed peasants., He also confiscated the property of some of the oligarchs, who had gone into exile due to the establishment of tyranny,, and handed these to needy farmers. The policies pursued, by Peisistratus had a twofold outcome. First, the position, of the peasantry was stabilized. Second, the monopoly of, the landed aristocracy over the political structure was, destroyed. Peisistratus died in 527 BC. He was succeeded
Page 187 :
Archaic and Classical Greece I lM, , by his son Hippias. This was clearly a move to transform, tyranny into a hereditary monarchy. Naturally this, generated much resentment among the people. In any case,, it has been pointed out that after a brief period tyranny, had lost its historical relevance. In 510 BC Hippias was, overthrown. This date marks the beginning of classical, democracy at Athens., Tyranny has an entirely negative connotation. The people, who had earlier supported this form of government began to, dislike it when it became oppressive and helped to overthrow, it. The oligarchy hated tyranny because it had destroyed its, power. In the Classical Period the Greeks generally recalled, the age of tyranny with aversion. Yet we must remember that, tyranny speeded up the transition from oligarchy to democracy. The, tyrants helped to dismantle the institutions through which, the oligarchy had exercised its power. This phenomenon was, not confined to Athens alone. At Corinth the tyrant Periander, came to power c. 600 BC. Some time before Periander, Cypselus, had overthrown the ruling aristocratic group at Corinth. We, also hear of other tyrants: Polycrates, the tyrant of Samas, c., 545 Bc; and Lygdamis who was tyrant at Naxos around the, same time. Everywhere tyranny undermined the power of, the landed aristocracy and stabilized the position of the, peasantry. George Thomson is of the opinion that tyranny, also gave a share of political power to the traders. Thomson, has drawn attention to the close links between the tyrants, and the merchant class and has emphasized the trading, interests of the tyrants themselves., The tyrants were instrumental in doing away with the, traditional hereditary basis of political power. We have, referred to the fact that the Greek aristocracy was a closeknit hereditary elite. They enjoyed power not merely, because they were wealthy but more significantly by virtue, of their birth. The aristocratic families automatically held, all executive, judicial, and military offices. They completely, monopolized the organs of the state. The tyrants struck at, the roots of this monopoly thereby creating favourable
Page 188 :
162, , I Early Social Formations, , conditions for more extensive democratization of the Greek, polis. Tyranny outlived its utility the moment the, government was freed from the clutches of the oligarchy., If tyranny had become permanent it would have, degenerated into monarchy. The people withdrew their, support to the tyrants after a short while. G. Glotz (The, Greek City and Its Institutions) observes: 'The people regarded, tyranny only as an expedient. They used it as a batteringram [a heavy wooden beam used for breaking down walls, or gates] with which to demolish the citadel of the oligarchs,, and when their end had been achieved they hastily, abandoned the weapon'. In other words, tyranny was only, a convenient instrument for breaking the monopoly of the, oligarchs and when this was accomplished the people got, rid of the tyrants., In this regard Sparta was an exception because, strictly, speaking, it never passed through the stage of tyranny. But, then Sparta never made the transition to democracy. It, remained stuck with an oligarchical form of government. In, fact it even had kings. The Spartans had a very strange kind, of kingship, a 'dual' monarchy, which we will examine, subsequently. We do have references to an arbitrator,, Lycurgus, who is credited with reforms at Sparta. Our, information about Lycurgus and his laws is quite vague., Historians are not even sure about his date, which is probably, sometime during the century c. 700 to 600 BC., At Athens, after Hippias has been ousted in 510 BC, major, constitutional changes were introduced. These changes, provided the framework for a qualitatively new political, structure. The foundations of this framework were laid by, Solon and Peisistratus. The person who built the edifice of, Athenian democracy was Cleisthenes whose reforms from c., 507 onwards had far-reaching implications. Before discussing, the evolution of Greek democracy during the Classical Period, it would be worthwhile to mention some key political events, of Greek history from c. 500 BC down to the Macedonian, conquest.
Page 189 :
Archaic and Class~cal Greece I 163, , Greek history at the beginning of the Oassical Period has, to be viewed against the backdrop of the westward expansion, of the Persian empire. The internal history of the Persian, empire falls outside the purview of our study. It is sufficient, to note that in the mid-sixth century BC the Persians under, king Cyrus created a vast empire which included Iran and, Mesopotamia. The empire was ruled from Susa (Shush) in Iran., Cyrus and his successor Darius I extended the boundaries of, the Persian empire to the eastern Mediterranean. The Persians, conquered most of West Asia and Anatolia. In 546 BC Cyrus, defeated Croesus, the ruler of Lydia. Lydia was one of the, prominent kingdoms of western Anatolia and the annexation, of this state made Persia the most formidable power in the, eastern Aegean Sea. Many of the Eastern Greek settlements, were soon placed under direct or indirect Persian rule., It was obvious that the states of mainland Greece would, be the next target of Persian expansion. Just at the time when, democratic reforms were being initiated by Cleisthenesr, Athens had to mobilize its military resources to defend itself, against the Persians. From 500 to 480 the Greek states were, locked in a fierce combat with Persia. Sparta was the foremost, military power on land. Athens was the main military power, at sea. The Athenians had built a strong navy which played a, leading role in the conflict with Persia. The Greeks pooled, together their resources under the leadership of Athens and, Sparta in order to resist Persian domination., The Persians under Darius (521-486 BC) had launched a, massive offensive to bring the whole of Greece under their, control. Having made the Eastern Greeks and Thrace a part, of the Persian empire, Darius proceeded to subjugate the entire, Aegean Sea and the Greek peninsula. The Athenians, successfully repulsed the Persian army at Marathon in 490 BC., After this setback the Persians renewed their campaign for, the conquest of Greece under Xerxes, who had succeeded, Darius in 486 BC. When Xerxes attempted a two-pronged attack, from both land and sea to capture the mainland; the Athenian, navy under Themistocles routed the Persian fleet at Salamis, , ac
Page 190 :
164 j Early Social Formations, , (480 BC). It might be mentioned here that Themistocles was, the architect of Athenian naval strength., The battle of Salamis in 480 BC was the turning point of the, Persian wars. It. dashed Persian hopes of controlling the, Aegean Sea. This engagement at sea was followed by a, decisive victory of the combined Greek armies on land, at, Plataea in 479 BC. At Plataea the Greek allies were led by, Sparta., Salamis and Plataea halted the Persian advance., However the threat of more Persian invasions remained., The Greek states realized that they would have to pool, their resources on a regular basis to thwart aurther attacks., It was beyond the capacity of any single state to fight the, Persians entirely on its own. On the Ploponnese there was, already a strong military alliance under the leadership of, the well organized Spartan army. With this arrangement, the Peloponnesians were better placed to defend themselves., The problem was much more serious for the Aegean islands, and the coastal states since they had no such mechanism. It, was as a solution to this problem that Athens, after the, battle of Salamis, took the initiative to form a confederation, of states under its own leadership. This confederacy has, come be known as the Delian League. The Delian League, derived its name from the island of Delos where the main, treasury of the cerfederacy was originally located. It was, formed in 478 BC. The Delian League was primarily intended, to maintain a strong navy in the Aegean 'Sea. The Members, or the League were required to contribute towards the, building and upkeep of the navy., Due to reasons which it is not necessary to go into over, here, there were no further Persian campaigns in the Aegean., Once the Persian threat had receded, the Athenians, transformed the character of the League. They began to use, the resources of the Delian League to exclusively promote, their own interests. Antony Aridrewes remarks that 'as time,, went on, most of the allies found it burdensome to contribute, their own ships and men to League expeditions, and the
Page 191 :
Archaic and Classical Greece I 165, , nominally allied force turned increasingly into an Athenian, navy, financed with allied money'., From a voluntary confederation the Delian League, gradually became an empire ruled by the Athenians. The, members of the League were forced to accept the supremacy, of Athens and lost their political independence. Whenever, a member of the League wished to withdraw it was forcibly, prevented from doing so. The most well known example is, that of Naxos which was compelled to stay in the Delian, League (468 BC). The process of converting the Delian League, into an Athenian empire culminated in the shifting of the, treasury of the League from Delos to Athens in 454 BC., Henceforth the resources of the League were reserved for, the benefit of the Athenians. The voluntary contributions, to the League now became enforced tribute payable to, Athens. All access to the Aegean Sea was strictly regulated, by Athens. The trade of the entire area passed into Athenian, hands. At times fertile land in various states would be taken, over and given to Athenian citizens. The prosperity which, the empire and monopoly over the Aegean brought to, Athens was crucial for sustaining its democratic traditions, in the Classical Period., Having established its hegemony over the Aegean, Athens, tried to expand its empire by including the Peloponnese in it., This naturally brought it into conflict with Sparta which was, the dominant Peloponnesian power. A prolonged contest, between the two states ensued. The rivalry between Athens, and Sparta for domination over Greece resulted in a major, war-the Peloponnesian War. There were two phases of the, war: the First Peloponnesian War (431-421 BC) and the Second, Peloponnesian War (421-404 BC). By 404 BC Athens has been, defeated and its navy was destroyed. At the end of the, Peloponnesian War Sparta emerged as the main political and, military force in Greece. But the supremacy of Sparta did not, remain unchallenged. It had to face a challenge from Thebes, which was the leading state in Boeotia. Down to 362 BC Sparta, and Thebes fought for establishing their supremacy over
Page 192 :
166, , I, , Early Social Formations, , Greece, although neither of them managed to gain an upper, ., hand in the struggle., By this time a new development of great historical, significance was taking place in northern Greece. This was, the rise of Macedonia. Using improved military techniques, and the rich resources of the Macedonian plains, king Philip II, (382-336 BC) founded an empire which included most of the, Greek states. In 338 BC, just two years before his death, Philip, defeated the Greek city-states at Chaerohea. With the, subjugation of the Greek states, the Classical Period of Greece, and the era of the polis came to an end. Philip II was succeeded, by his son Alexander the Great who created a vast empire., The Greek states lost their independence and were placed, under Macedonian rule. Later, they were to become part of, the Roman empire., , II (a), During the course of the Archaic Period a number of Greek, states evolved into democracies. Some of the earliest, democracies we have reference to are Chios (600 BC) and, Megara (590 BC). Even though the degree of democratization, varied form state to state, it does appear that in early, classical Greece the people participated in the political, process to a much greater extent than what we come across, in other contemporary societies. This was a fundamentally, new system of governance, especially for societies with class, differentiation. Some general features of Greek democracy, may be noted. Polis was the term most frequently used to, denote those political entities in ancient Greece which had, some aspects of democratic functioning. The forms of, government of the various polis ranged from purely, oligarchical on the one hand, to the mature democracy of, Athens on the other. In between stood the states, probably, the majority, with elements of oligarchy and democracy,, combined in varying proportions. The states about which, we have information do not exhibit any homogeneity in
Page 193 :
Archaic and Classical Greece, , I, , 167, , the structure of the polis. The historical data is also quite, uneven., Contemporary sources have a lot to tell us about Athens, and Sparta, but we know almost nothing about democracy in, important states like Corinth and Syracuse., The polis was territorially a small area. Moreover, as has, already been mentioned, the size of population was also, relatively small. One should bear in mind that democracy was, an entirely new concept in this period. The mechanism for, making this system function efficiently was still in the process, of being crystallized. Given the constraints of ancient society,, democracy would not have been functional had the polis been, large either territorially or in terms of its inhabitants. This, brings us to an important feature of Greek democracy. In, modern democracy the people choose their representatives, who then deliberate, legislate and govern on their behalf. In, ancient Greece, democracy implied participation by all the, people in meetings of the assembly., The assembly of the people was the basic institution of, democracy. 'People' did not mean all the inhabitants of a, polis-not even all the free inhabitants. It meant only those, whom we may call citizens. First of all, women were excluded., Second, only adults, i.e. male adults, enjoyed the privilege of, being citizens. Third, those who were not original residents, of the polis, or were considered outsiders for some reason or, the other, did not form part of the assembly. In Sparta the, free non-citizens were called perioikol; at Athens they were, known as metics (metoikoi). Many of the traders sattled at, Athens were metics. Of course slaves had no rights, whatsoever., The definition of the community which enjoyed citizenship, rights differed from one polis to another depending upon, historical circumstances. At one extreme were the Spartans, who fiercely guarded the rights of citizenship of the Dorian, tribal ~ommunity to which they belonged, making the citizens, a small closed group. In the later 'dark ages' Sparta annexed, two large territories in the, southern Plopannese, Laconia and
Page 194 :
168, , I Early Social Formations, , Messenia, and totally divested the Laconians and Me~senians, of all their rights. The entire population of these territories, was enslaved., Apart from the enslaved Laconians and Messenians, Sparta, had a large number of free non-citizens (perioikoi) as well. But, the numerical strength of the citizens remained exceedingly, small. At the other extreme is the example of Thebes. In Boeotia,, where Thebes was the dominant polis, the states had come, together to form a Boeotian confederacy. The members of the, confederacy retained their own governments. The citizens of, these states had dual citizenship rights, both as citizens of their, respective polis, as well as of the political institutions of the, Boeotian confederacy. As for Athens, when it initially expanded, its territory in Attica it deposed the local governments of, Marathon, Eleusis, etc. which were then in existence in that, region, but incprporated these communities within its own polis, and extended full citizenship rights to them., The citizens of the Greek polis could exercise their right to, participate and vote in the assembly, which was the basic right, of citizenship, by personally attending the meetings of the, assembly. One had to actually go the agora, a designated open, place in the city where the meetings of the assembly were, held, in order to exercise this right. This would have caused, some inconvenience to people living at a distance from the, city. Such a conception of democracy would have been, unworkable if the respective Greek states possessed a very, big area. No wonder then that contemporary political thinkers, always had in ·mind a community of manageable size when, they talked of the polis. Plato worked out the figure of 5040, citizens for an ideal polis while Aristotle; suggested that a polis, should comprise not less than ten and not more than ten, thousand citizens. In both cases the emphasis is on keeping, the numbers within sensible limits., Another feature of the polis was the presence of a council,, a much smaller body than the assembly, which held concrete, charge of the government. The council of elders and heads of, prominent clans had been an advisory body under monarchy
Page 195 :
Archaic and Classical Greece, , I, , 169, , during the 'dark ages'. 1n Iliad and Odyssey the kings consult, the council on crucial issues. With the decline of monarchy,, real power passed into the hands of oligarchical councils., It was not possible for the assembly to meet frequently ., .Even when it met it could only debate and vote on few issues., This gave the council wide ranging authority for intervening, in the functioning of the assembly. Usually the council, convened the assembly, prepared its agenda, and guided its, sessions. The particulars of various matters were worked out, in the council or smaller committees (probouloi was the term, commonly used for committees). The system of probouleusis, or, prior consultation in the council before a matter was submitted, to the assembly for approval, was adopted by mariy states., According to Andrewes the 'probouleutic system of government',, as this has come to be called, was intended to be a check on the, assembly. The council was a very powerful body in most states, and was often dominated by the landed aristocracy. But it could, also be genuinely representative as at Athens., Athen~ has a special significance in a discussion on Greek, democracy due to the scope of its accomplishment. Moreover, our knowledge about the political structure of Athens is more, extensive than that of other states. In a sense Athens is more, an exception than the rule. We saw that the reforms of Solon, (594 Be) were an important stage in the evolution of Athenian, democracy. The Athenian assembly had not met for a long, time and had ceased to function. Solon convened the assembly, of the citizens, thereby reviving this body. He constituted a, new council of four hundred members. The new Athenian, council was called boule. The old Athenian council, called, Areopagus, was an organ of· the· oligarchy. The Areopagus, was not abolished, but its functions were curtailed till, eventually it ceased to play an important role. The boule was, now the main centre of political power. Membership of the, boule was based on property qualifications and not on, hereditary right, which in itself was something new. To be a, member of the old council, the Areopagus, one had to belong, to aristocratic clans., ·
Page 196 :
170, , I Early Social Formations, , Solon divided the Athenian citizens into four classes. The, property or wealth possessed by a citizen determined his class., Right at the top were the pentacosiomedimni, who possessed, property which yielded at least 500 medimnoi (a unit for, measuring the quantity of grain) of wheat, or its equivalent, value in wine or oil. Next were the citizens whose property, yielded at least 300 medimnoi, The third category was that of, owners of property yielding at least 200 medimnoi. Those, belonging to this class were called the zeugitai. The zeugitai, were the small and middle peasants, who, as we shall see,, also constituted the main strength of the Athenian army and, could not therefore be easily ignored. Right at the bottom, were the thetes who had property yielding less than 200, medimnoi. The thetes were the poorest class among the citizens., This class included poor peasants, artisans and the landless., Membership of the boule was open only to the first three, classes. The impoverished sections, i.e. the thetes, were, excluded from the council. Qualifications for public offices, corresponded to this four-fold division. The first two classes, held the principal posts, including the archonships. The zeugitai, held minor offices. The thetes only had the right to participate, in meetings of the assembly. Despite these reforms some of, the major priestly positions continued to be the monopoly of, the aristocracy., After the overthrow of Hippias in 510 BC, Cleisthenees, carried forward democratic reforms at Athens. His main aim, was to reorganize, the citizens in such a manner that the, aristocracy would find it difficult to use clan and kinship, organization to maintain its hold over the political system. It, should be understood that even after the reforms of Solon,, kinship groups continued to play a decisive role in ensuring, that the aristocracy monopolized the leading official positions., The property qualifications laid down by Solon decided the, kind of political rights that a citizen had. Nevertheless, the, selection of candidates was done within the kinship group to, which a citizen belonged., The citizens were traditionally divided into four Ionian
Page 197 :
Archaic and Classicnl Greece, , I, , 1 il, , tribes. These traced their descent from the tribes or clans, (' phratries') which had originally settled down in Attica. The, Ionian tribes of Athens were kinship groups. The four Ionian, tribes (phylai) into which the citizens were divided should not, be confused with the four-fold classffication of Athenian, citizens by Solon which was based solely on property, qualifications. Following the reforms of Solon, the political, role of these tribes had been reduced but not abolished. Each, tribe sent one hundred members to the boule. The aristocracy, was still able to exploit kinship ties, clan loyalties and its own, traditional influence in these tribes to manipulate selection of, candidates in their favour (members of the council and for, various posts were usually chosen by draw oflots). Peisistratus,, by concentrating all power in his hands, made oligarchical, control over the phylai irrelevant., Cleisthenes discarded the kinship principle for grouping, the citizens. The four kinship based phylai were abolished., They were replaced by ten residential phylai (507 BC). These, new phylai were based on a radically new concept. Whereas, the older terminology was retained, the phylai of Cleishthenes, had nothing to do with the former method of organizing the, citizens. From now on the phyle to which a person belonged, was determined by the place where be resided and not by his, kinship ties. The original tribal groupings had already been, weakened during the sixth century BC because when citizenship, rights were extended to some sections which had been hitherto, excluded, they were accommodated in the existing tribes. Thus, there were already quite a few members within the preCleisthenes phylai who had no kinship ties with other members., Thomson has suggested that this problem became particularly, acute when Peisistratus made many artisans and traders, (including metics) citizens of Athens. Therefore, the reform of, the phylai assumed great urgency. It is in this context that we, should view the top priority which Cleisthenes accorded to, this question., The primary unit of the democratic structure established, by Cleisthenes was the 'deme': Every citizen was first and
Page 198 :
172, , I, , Early Social Formations, , foremost a member of a particular deme. The deme was the, smallest geographical unit into which the polis of Athens was, divided for political purposes. There were nearly two hundred, demes (demoi) in all. The demes were responsible for, maintaining registers of citizens. They had their own elected, governments, including an assembly, and officials. The local, governments were headed by the demarchos or chief of the, deme. In the words of Thomson, 'Cleisthenes could not have, devised a better way of filling the void left in the minds of, the people by the dissolution of the clan'. 'Depending on the, location of the demes, they were grouped together to form, ten residential phylai. A slightly complicated arrangement was, made by Cleisthenes for grouping the demes into phylai. There, were three types of demes: coastal demes, city demes and, rural demes in the interior. All the phylai got some share of, the three types of demes. Thus one-third demes (trittyes) of, the phylai would be coastal demes; one-third demes would be, urban; and one-third demes would be those located in the, interior. This was the system of dividing phylai into trittyes or, thirds. The three trittyes were coast, town and interior. This, division of phylai into trittyes, i.e. demes of three types, balanced, the resources of the phylai., Corresponding to the reform of the phylai, Cleisthenes, made changes in the composition of the boule. The strength of, the boule was raised from four hundred to five hundred, members. Fifty members were selected from each of the ten, phylai. Within the respective phylai the fifty members of the, council were chosen by draw of lots from among the demes, in proportion to the population of each deme. Membership of, the boule was thrown open to all citizens, including thetes. Any, citizen over the age of thirty could be a member of the boule., Members served for one year and could be selected for a, second term only after a gap., The boule had enormous executive, judicial and, administrative responsibilities. It had to meet everyday for, transacting business. The collection of taxes was supervised, by the boule. It looked after foreign relations, maintained ships
Page 199 :
Archaic and Classical Greece I 173, , and ports, and regulated trade. The meetings of the assembly, were guided by the boule. Membership of the boule was a fulltime job and it has been correctly observed that only the, wealthier citizens would had the time and leisure to serve on, the council. Over a period of rime the Athenian boule came to, be dominated by the more affluent sections of the citizens. By, c. 450 B<;:, when Pericles became the dominant figure in Athenian, politics (Pericles was the leading politician of Athens from c., 450 BC till his death in 429 BC), there was definitely an attempt, to restrict the access of the lower classes to political power., The Athenian assembly was called ecclesia. All the citizens, (i.e. those whose names were recorded in the registers of, citizenship kept in the demes) had the right to participate and, vote in the assembly. The minimum age for membership of, the ecclesia was eighteen years. It has been estimated that during, the fifth century BC there were a:bout 45, 000 citizens in Athens., However, Andrewes notes that normally about 5000 to 6000, citiz~ns actually attended the meetings of the ecclesia. The, sessions of the ecclesia were called by the boule, which also, fixed the agenda for these meetings. The proceedings of the, ecclesia were conducted by the current presiding officer of the, boule (the chairman of the boule was chosen on a daily basis, since the council was expected to meet everyday). For the, sessions of the assembly, members of the Athenian ecclesia, assembled at a place called Pnyx or else at another location, which was known as the 'theatre of Dionysus'. Incidentally,, these sessions were one-day affairs. Whenever the assembly, was expected to vote on something, it met in the agora., The agora had been traditionally associated with the, meetings of the assembly. This was a large open space in the, city centre which otherwise served as a marketplace. When, Cleisthenes began his reforms in 507 BC, all the free adult, males who were original inhabitants of the demes were, registered as citizens. Subsequently, as and when the male, descendants of these citizens attained the age of eighteen, they too were enrolled as citizens. Till 450 BC it was sufficient, for a person to have an Athenian father to become a citizen.
Page 200 :
174, , I Early Social Formations, , In 450 BC Pericles restricted citizenship rights to free adult, males both of whose parents (mother and father) were of, Athenian origin., We saw that in 752 BC the Athenian kings (basileus) had, been removed from power. The basileus was substituted by, officers who were chosen from among the oligarchy. These, officers were called archons. Initially the archonship was for, a period of ten years, but it was subsequently made annual., The archons were invariably from the aristocracy. In 487 BC, the archonship was made an elective post. After another, reform in 456 BC even ordinary people could aspire to these, positions., Sparta had a somewhat unusual government which, combined elements of monarchy, oligarchy and democracy., The overall character of Spartan government was oligarchical., The Spartan citizens were a very small group among the, inhabitants of the polis. At the beginning of the Classical, Period Sparta is reported to have had about 8000 citizens, and their numbers declined considerably within a century., Unlike Athens, Sparta never accommodated new groups, within its political structure. At the same time it is significant, that from a very early date the entire body of citizens had a, role to play in the government. Theoretically they were all, equal. The Spartan assembly was an active organ of the state, even at the beginning of the Archaic Period. There are, references to meetings of the Spartan assembly held on the, occasion of a festival which was dedicated to the Greek god, Apollo. Hence the Spartan assembly is sometimes referred, to as apella., The council in Sparta was a powerful oligarchical body, called the gerousia. The gerousia had thirty members. Two of, the members of the gerousia were the Spartan kings. Sparta, had a peculiar monarchical system. Two kings, belonging to, two different clans (the Agiads and the Euryponrids), ruled, simultaneously. This in itself is an indication of the limited, authority of the kings. The kings were ex officio members of, the council. In the council they had no special privileges. The
Page 201 :
Archaic and Classical Greece I 175, , remammg twenty-eight members were drawn from, aristocratic families. These twenty-eight members were called, gerontes (geron, old man) and were required to be above sixty, years of age. Membership of the gerousia was for life; although, at a later date it was made annual. The main officers of the, state (corresponding to the archons of Athens) were called, ephors. There were five ephors. The Spartan ephors were, magistrates with wide ranging exec~tive, judicial and police, powers. They were elected for a period of one year from, among all the citizens. We can assume that the aristocracy, would have had a better chance of becoming ephors. It is likely, that the ephors also had the right to attend sessions of the, , gerousia., , Il(b), A distinctive characteristic of Greek democracy was the close, link between citizenship rights and the military system. The, Greek states did not maintain standing armies of professional, soldiers. To a large extent this was because they lacked the, resources for financing such an army. All free adult males, were expected to render military service. This in effect meant, that the citizens were simultaneously soldiers. The entire adult, nwle population of the community constituted the army. At, the beginning of the Archaic Period the assemblies were often, summoned to discuss issues relating to war and defence. If a, raid was being planned the assembly would meet to discuss, strategy. In the Homeric epics the warrior chiefs submit, proposals for making.peace or for launching campaigns to their, respective assemblies for approval. We can see that these are, assemblies of citizens which on such occasio~ may be regarded, as assemblies of soldiers., To be a member of the assembly carried with it military, duties. At Athens free adult males were eligible for, membership of the assembly only when they had put in two, years of military service after they came of age. At Sparta the, provisions for young offspring of citizens undergoing military
Page 202 :
176, , I Early Social Formations, , training were even more stringent. A person had to 9o through, a tough military course before he could be accepted as a citizen., Sparta placed great emphasis on imparting martial skills of an, exceptionally high standard to its citizen body, making the, Spartans a formidable fighting force on land., The nucleus of the Greek armies was the hoplite infantry., Hoplites were soldiers who paid for their own military, equipment. This kind of soldier became common in most of, the Greek states. Since a citizen had to mobilize his own, resources to furnish himself with his fighting gear, it was, necessary thc1t he should have the requisite means at his, disposal. The overwhelming majority of the hoplites were, small and middle farmers. In the context of Athens it was, the zeugitai who formed the hoplite infantry. In other words, the Greek armies were essentially armies of peasant soldiers., As these peasant soldiers were vital for the survival of the, Greek polis they could not be easily ignored by the ruling, class. This was one of the factors which assured them a certain, degree of participation in the political system. The, impoverishment of the peasantry did create a shortage of, hoplites because the poor and the landless (the thetes) did, not have the means to procure armour or weapons. The, Athenians kept the metics as a reserve army while Sparta, began to enlist the perioikoi., The hoplites were foot soldiers who wore a heavy armour., This heavy armour included a mask-like helmet. The spear, was the main weapon of the hoplites. They also carried a short, sword and a shield. The key to the effectiveness of the hoplites, lay in the manner in which they were arranged on the, battlefield. This formation was the phalanx in which eight, columns of soldiers were ranged very closely side by side., The idea was that the hoplites should be so tightly packed in, the phalanx that their combined unified thrust would have, great force. The engagement was supposed to be short and, decisive., The hoplite phalanx was best suited to open plains. Heavy, armour would have been cumbersome in hilly areas. This
Page 203 :
Archaic and Classical Greece, , I, , 177, , posed a problem for the Greeks because much of their terrain, is mountainous. Usually a brief battle in some open field (the, venue was at times agreed upon by both sides before the, fighting took place) decided the issue. A more serious, disadvantage of having an army of peasant soldiers was that, frequent military mobilization would interfere with the, agricultural tasks of the farmers. Most of the campaigns, therefore took place at those times when the peasants were, not busy in the fields. Ordinarily these campaigns were raids, into neighbouring territories for booty, or encounters to settle, border disputes. M.I. Finley has argued that the notion of a, ten-year long Trojan war in Iliad is too far-fetched. The normal, practice was to go in for short expeditions to obtain booty., The Peloponnesian War was an exceptional case. This long, war devastated the countryside· of Attica, Megara and, Corinth., A partial solution to the problem of relying exclusively on, peasant soldiers was worked out by Athens at the beginning, of the Classical Period. It made the navy an additional wing, of its armed force. The naval force was centrally financed., Circa 500 BC Athens invested some of its silver, which was, extracted from the rich mines of Laurium, in building a large, naval fleet. It may be recalled that Themistocles was the person, who initiated this project. The main strength of the Athenian, naval fleet was a new type of ship called 'trireme'. The trireme, had 170 oars and could move with great speed. The Athenian, navy made a noteworthy contribution to Greek victory in the, Persian wars and was the basis of its control of the Aegean, after 480 BC., The rowers for the triremes were recruited largely from, amongst the thetes. They were paid by the state. The thetes, who sought employment on the triremes were landless citizens, who were easily available for such work, or were poor peasants, who could not afford to be hoplites. The tribute realized from, the members of the Delian League sustained the Athenian, navy. It has been suggested that one of the reasons why the, Peioponnesian Wars got prolonged was because of the military
Page 204 :
178, , I Early Social Formations, , stalemate till the closing phase of the war. This stalemate, was caused by the fact that for a long time the Spartans were, not militarily in a position to take on the Athenians at sea,, while the Athenians did not have the capacity to destroy, Spartan supremacy on land. It is worth noting that even after, Sparta had vanquished Athens, Spartan armed strengthwas, insufficient for it to become the master of the whole of Greece., It faced opposition from various states, particularly Thebes., Eventually the Macedonians, who relied on a professional, army financed by the state anq had a superior military, organization which included a strong cavalry, managed to, overwhelm the Greek states and established their ascendancy, over the region., , III, The ancient Greeks were the first to use slaves on a large, scale in all sectors of production. All the civilizations which, we have discussed so far (Mesopotamian, Egyptian, Hittite,, Minoan, Phoenician, Mycenaean, Persian) employed slave, labour. In these civilizations, unlike Greece, slave labour, played a limited role in production. Class differentiation,, surpluses, state formation and warfare had created the, conditions for slavery. Gerda Lerner in her study The Creation, of Patriarchy has argued that patriarchal society (a society in, which women are subjugated to men) was an important, precondition for slavery. She has shown the interconnection, between the rise of patriarchal society, and the origins of, slavery. According to her, historically patriarchal society came, before slavery. Humans first introduced permanent inequalities, in their societies by establishing unequal gender relations. The, subjugation of women provided the model for subjugating, fellow human beings. When this model was extended to other, communities to reduce people to bondage the institution of, slavery was born. The initial pool of slaves was formed of, prisoners of war. This source might be supplemented from, within the community by those who were enslaved due to
Page 205 :
Archaic and Classical Greece, , I 1i9, , their inability to repay loans (debt bondage). Wars however, brought captives in -large numbers. Moreover it was easier to, enslave outsiders· since they did not have any bond or status, within the community and could be exploited ruthlessly (see, chapter four, above)., In chapter four we noted that the first slaves were women., After a group was defeated in war, the tendency was to, slaughter the adult males and make the women and children, captives. Only when a society had access to armed force on a, sufficiently large scale did it begin to enslave meh. Scholars, have pointed out that the enslavement of a substantial group, of men from a different community was relatively difficult, for two reasons. Firstly, many of these men had some kind, of fighting skills so that any attempt to keep .them captive on, a permanent basis would have to be backed by adequate, force. Remember that patriarchal society had already come, into existence and in the unequal division of labour that took, place, all the fighting was done by males. Secondly, women, slaves could be compelled to develop new ties within the, community that had captured them. For instance, they were, forced to bear children (rape was the most widely used, instrument of coercion). While the women, especially if they, had children, might be made to have some artificial bond, with the enslaving group, this was unlikely in the case of, men., This pattern of development of slavery cart be seen in, Greece. In Mycenaean society female slave labour constituted, a part of the workforce in the palaces. For example, the palace, at Pylos had at least 550 women slaves engaged in textile, production. In the Linear B tablets the term used for slaves is, doeri. In the 'dark ages' the phenomenon of slavery was quite, widespread. The Iliad and Odyssey contain numerous references, to women being made captive during wars. Women slaves, figure prominently in the Homeric epics. Women were used, for domestic work and for manuf~ctuting textiles., The scale on which slave labotir was exploited in Archaic, and Classical Greece was fundamentally different from that
Page 206 :
180, , I Early Social Formations, , of earlier civilizations. Slaves were to be found in every area, of production. They were occupied predominantly in, agriculture. Mining and handicraft production were two other, sectors in which slave labour was important. Some historians, believe that the role of slavery in Greek agriculture has been, exaggerated and that free peasants sustained the agrarian, economy. We will examine this debate after we have discussed, Roman slavery, but it should be noted that the Greeks, employed slaves in agriculture much more extensively than, earlier societies., In the later 'dark ages' Sparta was already using slave, labour in a manner that was unprecedented. After the conquest, of Laconia and Messenia towards the end of the 'dark ages',, Sparta converted the entire population of these two regions, into slaves. The Spartans introduced a peculiar form of slavery, called 'helotry'. Helots were slaves who were owned by the, state. The Laconians and Messenians became helots, i.e., they, were the collective property of the Spartan citizens. They were, forced to work for the Spartans. The Laconian and Messertian, helots worked in the fields, tended flocks of sheep or goats, and did domestic work. Their land was taken over by Sparta, and divided into holdings called kleroi. The kleroi were allotted, to families of Spartan citizens. These were cultivated with the, labour of the helots., Given the aristocratic nature of Spartan society it is unlikely, that there was an equitable distribution of the kleroi. The, aristocracy had much larger holdings. The distribution of, helots was regulated by the state. The state assigned a certain, number of slaves to each family depending upon its, requirements for labour. Naturally the aristocracy got the, largest share. The difference between helotry and other types, of slavery was that these slaves were not owned individually., Moreover they were allowed to maintain family ties. The, children born to the helots had the same status as their parents., This meant that Sparta was able to meet its requirements of, slave labour from among the Laconians and Messenians over, a long period of time. On the other hand such a large
Page 207 :
Archaic and Classical Greece, , I, , 181, , population of helots-who still had bonds of communitycould be kept in servitude only by mobilizing force on a massive, scale. The Spartan slaves far outnumbered the Spartan citizens., The rigorous military training imparted to the citizens of Sparta, kept them in a permanent state of military preparedness. With, this kind of force at their disposal the Spartans could keep the, Laconians and Messenians enslaved for several generations., Helotry may be regarded as a more primitive form of, slavery which in turn was a reflection of the relative, backwardness of Spartan economy. Trade and handicraft, production remained underdeveloped in this area so that, helotry, which was best suited to a simple agrarian economy,, could survive as the dominant type of slavery in Sparta. It, must be remembered that privately owned slaves brought, from outside presuppose, among other things, an active, trading network, sufficient development of individual, property, and some amount of petty-commodity production., Helotry was prevalent in other Greek states as well, as for, instance in Thessaly, Crete and Argolis. In Thessaiy the helots., were called penestai., Elsewhere, privately owned slaves increasingly became a, typical feature of Greek society and economy. Several terms, were in use to describe such slaves, the most common being, doulos. Privately owned slaves were present since Minoan and, Mycenaean times. There is evidence of slaves being used, extensively for agricultural production on the island of Chios, inc. 600 BC. We know that there was a flourishing slave trade, in the eastern Mediterranean. The Phoenicians were actively, involved in this trade The Archaic Period saw an expansion in, the number of slaves (doulos), especially at Athens. We have, already noted that by c. 600 BC debt bondage due to, impoverishment of the peasantry had produced a serious crisis, at Athens. The crisis was temporarily resolved when Solon, abolished debt bondage in 594 BC. The problem must have, become very acute around this time because abolition of debt, bondage was a major demand of the Athenian peasantry in, their struggle against the aristocracy. The worst affected were
Page 208 :
182, , I Early Social Formations, , a section of the peasantry called the hektemoroi. The hektemoroi, were poor peasants who were allowed to cultivate their, holdings on the condition that they would hand over onesixth of the produce to a class with superior rights in the land, they tilled (Thomson has interpreted the term as meaning that, these cultivators could retain only one-sixth ~f the produce, and had to hand over five-sixths). If they were unable to pay, their share they, along with their families, were enslaved. This, was one of the ways in which the landed aristocracy solved, its problem of labour., The abolition of debt bondage under Solon had momentous, implications for the subsequent evolution of the Athenian social, structure. After 594 BC it was no longer possible to coerce, someone from within the Athenian community to become a, slave. This created a shortage of labour for the big landowners., They now .began importing slaves in large numbers for, working on their estates. It should be understood that a, shortage of labour does not necessarily or automatically lead, to slavery. The point is that this was the remedy which the, ancient· Greeks adopted in their specific historical, circumstances., M. I. Finley has put forth the view that slavery becomes, widespread in an economy (particularly an agrarian, economy) when two preconditions are present. Firstly, the, internal supply of labour in a given society should be, severely deficient in relation to its demand for labour., Secondly, on the one hand there should be considerable, concentration of landed property in the hands of a small, group, and on the other hand there should be a number of, small proprietors. This means that, to start with, there has, to be a class of big landowners who require labour to, cultivate their fields. However, if there is a substantial class, of small peasant proprietors it will be hard to find additional, labour as these peasants would not be inclined to work on, the holdings of the rich landlords. Of course there might, be some landless labourers who could be employed on the, big estates. Finley notes that in ancient Greece hired free
Page 209 :
Archaic and Classical Greece, , I, , 183, , labour was involved in all types of production. Furt~er,, there were many poor peasants (e.g. thetes) whose holdings, were so meagre that they had to seek seasonal employment, on the estates to supplement their income. Buf the, workforce provided by this labour was insufficient. In, Athens, after the reforms of Solon and the stabilization of, the peasantry under Peisistratus it became even more, difficult to procure labour internally. Hence the growing, tendency to get slave labour from outside. ,, The fact that various types of slavery were.well established, in Greece since the Minoan-Mycenaean age made it easier to, go in for this form of unfree labour. Slavery had be'en, institutionalized (the machinery of the state was used to, enforce this status) and by the Archaic Period there was a set, of legal provisions pertaining to slaves. Slaves were clearly, recognized as property. The growth of democracy made the, contrast between free and unfree status much sharper. Here, it is necessary to add that the prior existence of an organized, slave trade enabled the big landowners to get regular supplies, of slaves throughout the Archaic and Classical era. The, demand for slave labour multiplied manifold after the Persian, wars when the aristocracy acquired land in different parts of, the Athenian empire'., Warfare, piracy, and raids conducted in areas where, primitive tribal communities lived, nurtured the lucrative trade, in slaves. At the beginning of the Archaic Period most o! the, slaves had been Greeks; in the Classical. Period the majority, were non-Greeks. Our information about the places of origin, of these slaves is scanty, but it seems that southern Russia, the, area around the Black Sea, Thrace, central Europe, Syria and, Italy were the main areas from where slaves were captured., Being non-Greeks, the slaves were complete outsiders and, this made it difficult for them to forge ties among themselves, thereby precluding the possibility of revolts., The prosperity of Athens during the Classical Period rested, on the expansion of slave labour. Slavery provided the, Athenian ruling class sufficient resources and leisure for the
Page 210 :
184, , I Early Social Formations, , pursuit of culture. Historians have offered figures for Athenian, slaves during the fifth century BC ranging from 60,000 to 110,, 000. It has been estimated that of these nearly 20, 000 to 30,, 000 worked in the silver mines of Laurium. Laurium, located, at the southern tip of Attica, was the richest source of silver in, classical Greece. These mines were owned by the state. The, slaves were hired out to the state on contract by big slave, owners. The silver produced by these mines with the labour, of a huge slave workforce was a major factor in establishing, the economic supremacy of Athens in the Aegean. Besides, agriculture and mining, slaves dominated handicraft, production. Slaves were also made to do routine administrative, tasks. The Athenian state owned some slaves for this purpose., Slaves were employed as policemen and prisons wardens., Lastly, they did various kinds of domestic and menial work., Agriculture was the mainstay of the Greek economy. Due, to the nature of the terrain plots were generally small. The, average holdings were between 5 to 15 acres. Much of the soil, is of poor quality and a lot of physical labour is required to, cultivate it. In many places small canals had to dug to irrigate, the fields. In the mountainous parts of the country terraces, had to be cut into the hillsides to form agricultural fields., Since the soil is light' and dry and the fields were not too, large, the hoe was preferred to the plough for loosening the, soil. This was particularly true of the poorer farmers. Wheat,, olive, vine and flax were the principal crops. Goats, sheep, and pigs were also reared., With the end of the 'dark ages' the seaborne trade of the, Aegean and the eastern Mediterranean had revived. From c., 600 BC there was a vibrant commerce in this region, a large, proportion of which was in Greek hands. The Eastern Greek, states, Athens and Corinth were some of the leading, participants in this trade. The Greeks traded in olive oil, wine,, wheat, vases, textiles, gold, silver, slaves, and various kinds, of luxury items. After the Persian wars Athens dominated the, commerce of the Aegean. Peiraeus was the chief port of Athens., Pefraeus remained one of the busiest ports of the eastern
Page 211 :
Archaic and Classical Greece, , i, , 185, , Mediterranean throughout the Classical Period. The trade of, this region received a boost as a result of a significant, breakthrough. This was the introduction of coinage. For the, first time in history money became the medium of exchange., The state of Lydia in western Anatolia is credited with having, made this innovation. The Lydians began striking coins around, 600 BC. Soon other Greek states, including Athens, adopted, this new medium of exchange. The coins were made of silver, and electrum (an alloy of gold and silver). With the vast silver, output of the Laurium mines at its disposal, Athens could mint, coins of a uniformly high quality. These had wide acceptability,, which reinforced its premier position in the trading network, of the area., , IV(a), The Classical Period of Greece was an age of brilliant, achievements in philosophy, science and art. The democratic, traditions of the Greek polis provided the right setting for the, development of thought. The freedom which democracy gave, to the citizens of the polis allowed new ideas to blossom., Slavery gave a section of the citizens the means to enjoy leisure, and thereby promote culture. Ancient Greek thought, represented a great leap forward in the endeavour of the, human mind to understand nature and the meaning of, existence., The first clearly identifiable attempt in this direction was, the Ionian school of thought which flourished around 600 ec, in the Eastern Greek settlement of Miletus. The three names, associated with this school are Thales, Anaximander and, Anaximenes. These three are considered to be founders of, Western philosophy. Thales, Anaximander and Anaximenes, were concerned with the problem of what constitutes nature,, i.e., the basic element or elements of which it is formed, and, its driving force. Thales held that water, or rather 'the moist',, was the basic element of nature and that everything had, evolved out of water. Anaximander spoke of hot, cold, wet
Page 212 :
186, , I Early Social Formations, , and dry together being the main principle underlying the, universe. He had a theory of opposites (hot and cold; wet, and dry). Their interaction led to a cyclical process of, transformation of wet to dry through the intervention of heat, and so on. For Anaximenes air was the primary substance of, the universe., The second important trend in early Greek thought was, that of Pythagoras and his followers (Pythagoreans)., Pythagoras was an Eastern Greek from the island of Samos., He emigrated from Samos and settled down in Croton, which, was a Western Greek colony in southern Italy (c. 530 BC). In, Croton Pythagoras became the founder of a new religious, sect. During the Archaic Period there were a number of, religious sects or orders in different parts of Greece. These, sects resembled secret societies. Their membership was open, only to a select few who had understood and accepted the, principles of the sect. New members had to undergo an, elaborate admission procedure. The sects had specific rituals, and practices in which only members of the sect could, participate. The sects revolved around certain cults and the, worship of particular deities. An interesting feature of these, sects was the mixture of early tribal beliefs with Greek religion, of the Archaic Period., One of the well known cults of this period was that of the, Orphics, which was centred around Orpheus. Orpheus was a, tragic figure in Greek mythology who was closely associated, with music and ·poetry. The Orphic cult was Thracian (or,, perhaps, Egyptian) in origin but had become popular in large, parts of Greece. Orphic beliefs were characterized by, mysticism, a sense of sin and the notion of atonement., Pythagoras was strongly influenced by Orphic mysticism. His, religious sect was organized along the same lines as the Orphic, fraternity, i.e., it functioned like a secret society. The two sects, -shared some common practices like restrictions on eating meat., Pythagoras borrowed the concept of the immortality of, the soul from the Orphics. He modified this idea by suggesting, that after the death of human beings their souls enter the bodies
Page 213 :
Archaic and Classical Greece, , I, , 187, , of animals. The Pythagoreans (and to some extent even the, Orphics) believed in the transmigration of souls. In other, words, the soul was supposed to be independent of the body., Pythagoras laid einphasis on achieving harmony for the soul, For this he preached the principle of 'the mean', or creatively, evolving a middle path between two extremes. 'The mean', was the key to harmony. The search for harmony and 'the, mean' led Pythagoras to a study of nature, the musical scale, and mathematics. Pythagoras attached special importance to, particular numbers and symmetry. It is as a mathematician, that Pythagoras is most familiar, mainly because of hiF famous, geometrical theorem which states that, in a right-angled, triangle, the square of the length of the hypotenuse is equal to, the sum of the squares of the other two sides. Pythagoras's, interest in geometry was a by-product of his religious ideas., Among the other early Greek thinkers mention should be, made of Democritus (c. 470-400 BC). Democritus tried to, understand nature in more rational terms. He concluded that, everything in nature was made of 'atoms'. This should not be, confused with the modern scientific theory of atoms because, Democritus's notion of atoms was not based on observation, or experimentation. His notion of atoms was only a, philosophical concept which referred to the basic element of, nature. However, Democritus asserted that everything in the, universe was ultimately some form of matter. He also stated, that everything-in nature was constantly undergoing change., The flowering of ideas had its impact on science, medicine, and the writing of history. The growth of rational trends in, Greek thought helped to release these disciplines from, superstition. In medicine, Hippocrates of Cos (469-399 BC) was, the most outstanding figure of the Classical Period., Hippocrates removed medicine from the realm of magical cures, and tried to give it a scientific foundation. As a physician he, treated diseases by carefully examining the symptoms and, arriving at a diagnosis based entirely on the observed, symptoms. For Hippocrates diseases had natural causes which, could be subjected to scientific investigation. The line of
Page 214 :
188, , I Early Social Formations, , treatment ·was determined by the diagnosis., The writings of Herodotus and Thucydides gave a new,, and more modern, meaning to history as a distinct branch of, knowledge. So far, historical accounts had been a mixture of, facts, fiction, myths, legends, stories, fables and anecdotes., With Herodotus historical method as we understand it was, born, for which reason he is often called 'the father of history'., Herodotus was born in Anatolia, c. 490 BC. He wrote on Greek, history from the mid-sixth century BC. He presented a detailed, account of the Persian wars. Herodotus travelled widely and, gathered historical information about several countries,, including Egypt. He tried to verify and evaluate his evidence, before recording it. Thucydides wrote during the latter half, of the fifth century BC. He was an Athenian (c. 460-399 sc)., Thucydides prepared a history of the Peloponnesian Wars., He himself was a participant in these wars and was therefore, an eyewitness to many of the events. Significantly he wrote, from the standpoint of an impartial observer. Thucydides's, history is both a traightforward narrative and incisive analysis, of the contemporary political situation of Greece., In the development of science the Greeks were more, concerned with theory. As a matter of fact Greek thought, right from the time of Thales down to the philosophers of the, Classical Period is not easily distinguishable from science, because it is directed towards comprehending the principles, of nature. In the long run this led to greater emphasis on pure, contemplation . at the cost of applied science and, experimentation. On the other hand such a tendency led to, the refinement of ideas., The golden era of classical Greek philosophy began with, Socrates, around 400 BC. Athens was the main centre of the, intellectual activity of this era. Socrates, Plato and Aristotle, were the philosophers who took Greek thought to towering, heights. With Socrates, who was the teacher of Plato, there, was a shift from thinking about nature to thinking about the, nature of human existence. In the process, Socrates clarified, several philosophical categories which in turn led to a more
Page 215 :
Arcmiic and Classical Greece I 189, , sophisticated level of thought and argument. Socrates marked, such a major break with the ·past that all the Western, philosophkal traditions before him are simply classified as, 'pre-Socratic'., Plato (427-347 BC) had studied .under Socrates. Plato set, up an institution (the Academy) at Athens where he taught, philosophy. Plato's philosophy is regarded as 'idealist'. He, argued that things have no independent existence outside our, minds. -Whatever we perceive is actually a product of bur, thought process. He held that experience is unreal, only ideas, are real. Reality can only be grasped through contemplation., The manner in which Plato posed the question of the, relationship between mind and matter was his lasting, contribution to philosophy. Plato exerted a powerful influence, on later Western and Arab thought., Aristotle (384-322 Be) was a disciple of Plato but he, developed ideas which were different from those of his, teacher. After the death of'Plato he left the Academy. Several, years later he founded a new institution (the Lyceum) at, Athens. Aristotle never completely abandoned the ideas of, Plato, but he rejected Plato's view that experience was, unnecessary to understand reality. Aristotle, it should be, noted, was a keen student of science. His main area of interest, was biology. He made a careful study of plants and animals., Scientific observation was an integral part of his method., Aristotle's school of thought is called 'Peripatetic'., Plato and Aristotle were products of the years which, followed the defeat of Athens in the Peloponnesian Wars. This, was a period of demoralization for the Athenians. Athens had, lost its empire and opportunities for its ruling class were, restricted. This background accounts for the conservative, nature of the political and social ideas of the two thinkers., They were opposed to involving the masses in the decisionmaking process. In the ideal polis visualized by them the people, would have a limited role to play in the government. The, undemocratic elements in their political thought were a, reflection of the mood of the Athenian elite which, after 400
Page 216 :
190, , I Early Social Fonnations, , wanted to curtail the democratic rights of the ordinary, citizens., , BC,, , IV(b), We observed at the beginning of this chapter that though, Greece was not a politically unified entity yet as a people the, Greeks shared many cultural traditions. This was especially, true of Greek religion. The Greeks had a common religious, tradition. Some of their religious beliefs were a part of the, universal heritage of the eastern Mediterranean. The basic, framework of Greek religion of the Archaic and Classical, Periods can be seen in the Homeric epics. Iliad and Odyssey are, not religious texts, but they give almost a complete picture of, Greek religious mythology as it had evolved by the end of, the 'dark ages'., The Homeric epics, together with Hesiod's Theogony,, carried out the task of systematizing Greek religion. Greek, religion as outlined in Iliad and Odyssey was a religion that, was acceptable to the upper classes. Since Homer was mainly, concerned with the doings of the Mycenaean warrior, aristocracy he depicted the religion which was practised by, the aristocracy of his own times (i. e. later 'dark ages')., Consequently he might have excluded those aspects of Greek, religion which were popular at the level of the poor folk., However the influence of the epics was so great that the, version of Greek religion presented by him had a wide appeal, throughout the Archaic and Classical Periods., Greek religion was pantheistic (pantheism may be defined, as 'readiness to believe in all or many gods'). There were, twelve main gods. The Greeks believed that .these gods lived, on Mount Olympus located in Thessaly. Hence they are'called, Olympian gods. The twelve Olympian deities mentioned in, Homer are Zeus, Poseidon, Apollo, Ares, Hermes, Hephaestus,, Hestia, Demeter, Hera, Athena, Aphrodite, and Artemis. Of, these Hephaestus, Hestia, Demeter, Hera, Athena, Aphrodite,, and Artemis were female deities. Zeus was the head of the
Page 217 :
Archaic and Classical Greece, , I, , 191, , pantheon, the king of gods. His weapon was a thunderbolt., Poseidon was the elder brother of Zeus and the god of the, sea. Apollo was the son of Zeus and was considered to be, extremely handsome. Apollo was associated with archery,, prophecies, song and music. Hera was the wife of Zeus., Originally she had been a mother-goddess. Demeter had also, been a mother-goddess and was later worshipped as the, goddess of grain, especially wheat. An important festival, the, Eleusinian Festival, was celebrated in her honour in Attica., Eleusis, near Athens, had a large templ~ of Demeter. The Greek, cities adopted particular gods or goddesses as their patron, deities. Athena was the patron goddess of Athens. This does, not mean that the worship of Athena was confined to Athens, alone. The patron deities might enjoy a special status in the, respective cities which had chosen them, but they were, worshipped in other states also. Homer portrayed the Olympian, divinities as having almost human characteristics and emotions., The gods and goddesses had their loves, their jealousies, their, rivalries, their conflicts and their struggles for power., Greek religion was not c;l.ominated by a priestly class. There, were priests, but they did not monopolize religious rituals, and ceremonies. The minor role of the priests had been further, reduced by the Classical Period. Public religious events were, the concern of the state. There were some aristocratic clans, which traditionally supplied the priests for these occasions,, but over a period of time ordinary citizens too got the right, to conduct official rituals. A few priestly positions became, elective posts. It was not always necessary for specialists in, ritual to carry out rites at collective public worship of gods, and goddesses., Public worship took on the shape of festivals in which, people from the entire polis, or from an entire region, would, participate. There ,would be sacrifices of animals and the meat, would be distributed among the participants. Music, theatre,, poetry-recitation, and sports were an integral part of these, festivals. Greek drama owes its origin to some of these festivals, where plays were enacted in the course of the celebration.
Page 218 :
192, , I Early Social Formations, , The Homeric epics were recited at the festival of Athena (called, Tanathenaea') in Athens. Similarly, the Olympic games were, organized at the time of the festival of Zeus held in Olympia, (the Olympian plain where this festival was held is in the, Peloponnese and should not be confused with Mount Olympus, in Thessaly). The Olympian festival was held every four years, and was probably well established by the beginning of the, Archaic Period (776 BC is the traditional date of the first, Olympiad). Athletic competitions took place at this festival, and attracted contestants from all over Greece. Some of the, other notable festivals where such games were held were the, festival of Apollo at Delphi and the festival of Poseidon in, Corinth., The Greeks constructed temples dedicated to their gods, and goddesses. The temples were regarded as abodes of the, respective deities. The worshippers did not go inside the, temple for religious ceremonies. The ritual was performed, outside the temple, usually in the open. The construction of, elaborate temples stimulated Greek architecture. Some of ths, finest examples of classical Greek architecture are the temples, of this period. In the age of Pericles the Athenians produced a, number of architectural masterpieces. A huge temple dedicated, to the Olympian deities was built at this time. This temple,, called the Parthenon, is a vast structure with a high roof resting, on numerous pillars. The Parthenon was decorated with, beautiful sculpture. Since arches were unknown to Greek, architecture, heavy roofs of large buildings had to be supported, by pillars which were placed close to each other. The use of, the arch permits wider space between supporting pillars. This, is why buildings like the Parthenon were so overcrowded, with pillars. Nevertheless the Greeks tried to relieve the, monotony of the pillars by introducing varied designs for them., Distinctive styles of pillars came to denote architectural styles,, e.g. Corinthian, Doric and Ionii::., Apart from public worship, usually sponsored by the state,, there were private religious ceremonies in which individuals, or families appealed to particular deities for various purposes.
Page 219 :
Archaic and Classical. Greece, , I, , 11>3, , The ceremony might just consist of a ritual sacrifice to propitiate, a god or goddess. As we have noted there were also mystical, cults which believed in a more personal relationship with the, divine. Moreover, there were local deities and older mothergoddess cults which coexisted with the Olympian gods. The, cult of the bull (worship and sacrifice of bulls), which was, widespread in Greece since· Minoan times, remained an, enduring feature of Greek religion at all levels., Another aspect of Greek religion was the practice of, seeking intimation of one's future, and advice, from a god. it, was held mat the gods revealed the future in the form of, signs which could only be interpreted by specialists. These, specialists were associated with certain sacred places called, oracles. The oracle at Delphi was famous throughout Greece,, This was an ancient shrine of Apollo which had a stone known, as the omphalos. The omphalos was regarded by the Greeks as, the navel or centre of the world. Apollo was the god of, prophecies and oracles and it was he who communicated the, will of the gods to humans through the priests of Delphi. There, were other oracles as well., In the Archaic Period another god was added to the group, of Olympian deities. This god was Dionysus. The rise of the, Dionysus cult is one of the most fascinating aspects of Greek, religion in this period. The worship of Dionysus was rooted, in the remote past. It was a major cult at the popular level, but, was not patronized by the aristocracy for which reason Homer, did not include Dionysus among the Olympian gods. But it, was too powerful a cult to be easily ignored. It is generally, recognized that the Dionysus cult originated among the :n:iore, primitive communities of Thrace and then spread to other, parts of Greece during the Archaic Period. By the Classical, Period it had been fully incorporated into Greek religion and, had been endorsed by the ruling classes. There were various, facets of Dionysus. He was the god of wine, pleasure and, intoxication. He was also called Bacchus. Besides, he was the, god of tragic art. The Dionysus cult had a large following, among women. The practices of the cult involved drinking of
Page 220 :
l 94, , I Early Social Formations, , wine, wild dancing, and going into an ecstatic state. Dionysus, was the principal deity of the Orphics. Orphism, with its, emphasis on mysticism, represents the mystical side of the, Dionysus cult., In the late Archaic Period Dionysus was raised to the status, of an Olympian god. The evidence suggests that at the same, time the goddess Hestia was dropped from the Olympian, pantheon. In the Classical Period festivals of Dionysus became, major cultural events. Plays, especially tragedies, would-be, performed at these festivals. The Dionysian festivals gave birth, to the great tradition of Greek tragedy. Classical drama, reached its peak in the fifth century BC. Aeschylus, Sophocles, and Euripides were the masters of tragedy while Aristophanes, wrote comedies. The plays made use of Greek myths and, legends for their themes, but some of them also commented, on contemporary society. Oedipus the King, written by, Sophocles, is a fine example of the vast literary output of the, classical age., , V, The Macedonian triumph at Chaeronea under Philip II (338, wiped out the independence of the Greek states. As a, political entity the polis ceased to exist after 338 BC. The Greek, states were absorbed within the Macedonian empire. Philip, was assassinated two years after this event. In 336 BC, Alexander succeeded his father as the ruler .of Macedonia., Unlike the rest of Greece, Macedonia had a strong monarchical, state which could mobilize the resources for a highly efficient, standing army. The troops came mainly from Macedonia itself., These included excellent riders. The cavalry was a crucial wing, of the army. The Macedonians had recruited skilled archers, from Crete. The speai: used by this army was longer than that, of the hoplites. The size of the spear had been increased from, 8 feet to 14 feet, while the size of the shield and the weight of, the armour was reduced. The overall speed of the Macedonian, formations was much faster than that of the Greek ·hoplitc, BC)
Page 221 :
Archaic and Classical Greece, , I, , 195, , infantry. However Macedonia was culturally and economically, a backward area as compared to southern Greece., Alexander launched a massive expansionist programme, following his accession. His primary aim was to destroy Persian, power in West Asia so as to consolidate Macedonian rule over, the entire region. By 330 BC Alexander had conquered the, Persian empire after defeating Darius III (last of the Persian, emperors), and had annexed Mesopotamia and Egypt to his, territories. His subsequent campaigns brought him to the, banks of the Indus. Alexander died ai Babylon in 323 BC. The, eastward expansion of the Macedonian empire under, Alexander had made Anatolia, Syria, Mesopotamia, Egypt,, Iran, Afghanistan and some parts of Central Asia and northwest India Greek ruled territories. Following the death of, Alexander some of the outlying regions of the empire were, lost but the greater part of Alexander's territories remained, under Greek control., Alexander had left no heir to his vast empire and had, made no arrangements for appointing a successor. A bitter, power struggle among his leading military commanders, ensued which lasted almost till 275 BC. The empire was, eventually partitioned among three of Alexander's generalsSeleucus, Ptolemy and Antigonus. The dynasties of these, generals ruled over their respective portions of the empire:, the Seleucids in Persia (mainly Iran and Iraq); the Ptolemies in, Egypt; and the Antigonids in Macedonia. While Seleucid, control over Persia was relatively shortlived, the Antigonids, ruled over Macedonia till the Romans extended their, hegemony over Macedonia and Greece between 196 and 146, BC. The Ptolemies remained in power in Egypt till 30 BC when, Cleopatra, the last ruler of the dynasty, was defeated by the, Romans., The period from the death of Alexander and the founding, of the Seleucid, Ptolemid and Antigonid empires down to the, time when Rome became the supreme power in the eastern, Mediterranean (c. 300 to 30 BC) is referred to as the Hellenistic, age. The successor states which came into existence as a result
Page 222 :
1%, , 1·, , Early Social Formations, , of the division of Alexander's empire are called Hellenistic, kingdoms. The Hellenistic kingdoms were governed by a, Greek ruling elite and Greek became the official language of, Persia, West Asia, Egypt and the eastern Mediterranean. Greek, also became the chief language of intellectual discourse in this, area. The Hellenistic kingdoms created conditions for disseminating the accomplishments of classical Greek civilization over, a large part of West Asia and in Egypt. Since the Asian and, north African territories of the Hellenistic kingdoms were, centres of grand ancient civilizations, the Greek ruling classes, of these empires adopted several customs of their subjects., This gave rise to a dynamic cultural tradition which may be, conveniently labelled as Hellenistic civilization. (The, civilization of Greece proper, especially during the Archaic, and Classical Periods, is called Hellenic civilization, while the, civilization of the Hellenistic kingdoms is called Hellenistic, civilization)., To the east of these kingdoms the Hellenistic world had a, live contact with India. Ever since Alexander's invasion there, was a Greek presence in Iran, Central Asia, Afghanistan and, north-west India. The impact of this Greek presence on Indian, art and culture left its imprint on early Buddhist art. It is, generally recognized that the Gandhara and Mathura schools, adopted several Hellenistic/ Greek motifs. Moreover, the IndoGreek heirs of Alexander in north-west India have left behind, vital literary and numismatic evidence (coins) which is crucial, for reconstructing the history of the post-Asokan period., The interaction of the Egyptian, Mesopotamian, Persian,, Central Asian, Anatolian and Greek civilizations produced 'a, rich synthesis which found expression in the culture of the, Hellenistic kingdoms. New centres of learning came up in this, period. The city of Alexandria (initially founded by, Alexander), on the north-western coast of Egypt, replaced, Athens as the leading city of thinkers and scholars. Alexandria, was a major Mediterranean port too. The first two Ptolemies, initiated the setting up of libraries maintained at state expense, where scholarly works of the Hellenistic world were preserved
Page 223 :
Archaic and Classical Greece ! 197, , and copied. The library at Alexandria was renowned for its, enormous collection of books. This city attracted thinkers,, scientists, mathematicians and historians from all over the, Mediterranean region. Students came to Alexandria for, schooling and instruction in various branches of knowledge., Archimedes, best known for his discovery of the law of, physics called 'Archimedes' PrincipJe' (pertaining to the, displacement of liquids), was a product of Alexandria. Another, distinguished scholar of Alexandria was the geometrician, Euclid. Euclid's compilation of geometrical theorems (it was, through this book that the theorem of Pythagoras has come, down to us) remained the standard textbook for students of, geometry down to modem times. Besides Alexandria,. many, other Hellenistic cities, for example Pergamum in Anatolia,, had large libraries which promoted the exchange of ideas and, knowledge. Although Athens had lost its former glory, it still, retained its reputation for philosophical ideas. The two leading, schools of thought in the Hellenistic period were those of the, Stoics and the Epicureans. The philosopher Zeno was the, founder of Stoicism, and Epicurius was the founder of, Epicureanism. Both these philosophers taught at Athens. Of, these two schools of thought, the Stoics had a bigger following, than the Epicureans in the Hellenistic age., By the time Roman hegemony was established in the, Mediterranean, the Hellenistic world had a truly composite, culture. It was this composite culture which became the basis, for classical Rome. For a very long time major inputs for this, culture came from the east-Egypt, Palestine, Syria, Anatolia,, Iraq, Iran and even north-west India. In the words of W.W., Tam, 'the Greece that taught Rome was not the older Greece, but contemporary Hellenism'. We will discuss Roman, civilization in the following two chapters.
Page 224 :
Chapter Eight, , ANCIENT ROME (I), , THE civilization of Rome succeeded that of Greece as the major, ancient European civilization. The nucleus of the Roman social, formation was Italy, and later, the entire Mediterranean. Food, production had developed in southern Italy c. 7000 BC, and in, northern Italy c. 6000 BC. By 2000 BC Italy was inhabited by, several tribes, many of which had an Indo-European origin., We have already noted in the previous chapter that there were, a number of Greek settlements in southern Italy. Two major, groups of Indo-European tribes were· to be found in central, and northern Italy. In the western portion of central Italy were, people who spoke Latin and related dialects. The middle of, the peninsula is dominated by the Apennine mountains, (referred to as 'the backbone of Italy') extending from, northern to central Italy. This region was the domain of another, group of Indo-Europeans, the Osco-Umbrians. The OscoUmbrians comprised tribes which spoke Oscan, Umbrian, or, languages which had a close affinity with Oscan. The Oscanspeaking tribes were also referred to as Sabellians. There were, two major tribes in the area which were linked to the Oscans / Sabellians and spoke Oscan dialects. These were the, Sabines and the Samnites, both of which played an important, role in the early history of Rome. Some of the Oscans/, Sabellians gradually spread to the west coast and took over, the very fertile region of Campania. The Volsci and the Aequi, were ancient tribes which lived on the periphery of the Latin, zone (Latium). In the eastern part of Italy, Indo-European
Page 225 :
Ancient Rome (I) I 199, , tribes which spoke Venetic and Messapic were prominent., The northernmost part of Italy contained Celtic tribes like, the Gauls. The main non-Indo-European people of Italy were, the Etruscans. The Etruscans were concentrated in northwestern and central Italy and their territories extended into, Latium., From c. 1200 BC Italian bronze age cultures appeared in, the Apennine region. The most well-known of these cultures, was the Villanonvan culture which was first identified at the, site of Villanova lying north of the Apennines. By c. 1000 BC, there were several Villanovan bronze age settlements in, northern Italy. The Villanovans were primarily villagers and, relied on sheep and cattle-breeding. They had a regular cycle, of migration between the mountainous areas and the more, fertile plains in the west., ·, Around 800 BC there were some new trends. The area, inhabited by the Etruscans was rapidly undergoing a transition, which led to urbanization and the growth of an agricultural, economy based on the exploitation of the fertile plains of northwestern and central Italy. From the eighth century ac the use, of iron became widespread. The Etruscans, who may be, regarded as the most advanced people of pre-Roman Italy,, produced a rich civilization between 800 and 700 BC. During, this period they occupied most of central Italy. Several Etruscan, cities came into existence. Veii, Tarquinii and Vulci were some, of the prominent Etruscan urban centres., The Etruscans did not create a politically unified state but, lived in self-governed cities with their own independent, territories. Many of these cities had mixed populations of, Etruscans and diverse Italian Indo-European tribes. The cities, were dominated by a wealthy Etruscan warrior aristocracy., Some of the Etruscan cities (city-states) were ruled by kings., We find considerable social differentiation in these cities. The, rulers lived in palatial houses. The Etruscan aristocracy built, huge stone tombs with large chambers for burial. The walls, of these chambers were decorated_ with paintings which, exhibit the affluent lifestyle of the aristocracy. Beautiful objects
Page 226 :
200, , I Early Social Formations, , made of silver, bronze and ivory were buried with dead, bodies in these tombs., The Etruscan towns were well-planned and fortified. They, contained drains and had carefully laid, out streets. The Etruscans adopted several features of Hellenic (Greek) civilization,, including a script which was based on the Greek alphabet., They engaged in trade and had extensive commercial dealings, with Greek cities. The Etruscans had a profound influence on, the Latin speaking people whose territories in west-central, Italy frequently overlapped with the centres of Etruscan, civilization. A few Latin villages had grown into towns. Some, of the Latin towns were fortified along the pattern of Etruscan, cities. Rome was one such Latin city. Praeneste was another, urban centre in Latium., The foundation of the city of Rome was traditionally supposed to have taken place in 753 BC. According to the traditional, history of the city, settlements on seven hills along the river, Tiber (these seven hills are: Aventine, Caelian, Capitoline,, Esquiline, Palatine, Quirinal and Viminal) were enclosed by a, wall in 753 BC. This marked the beginning of the city and,, Roman dates were often reckoned from this event. Many, Roman chronologists used the era starting in 753 (AUC or Ab, Urbe Condita, i. e. 'since the founding of the city'). However,, the historicity of this date has not been established. It is much, more likely that the seven hills of Rome were fortified at a, later period. The archaeological evidence suggests that the, city was first fortified c. 550 BC. Possibly it is around this time, that the population of the settlements on the seven hills began, to expand. The area at the bottom of these hills was covered, with marshes and swamps which had to be drained before, the low lying foothills could be occupied. Once the marshes, had been cleared and a wall was erected, the rural settlements, were soon transformed into a major urban centre., The early history of Rome is somewhat obscure. It seems, that the city borrowed several elements of Etruscan social, and political organization. The etruscanization of Rome was, speeded up by the fact that some Etruscan families became
Page 227 :
Ancient Rome (I), , I, , 201, , politically dominant in the city. Rome acquired a monarchical, form of government and for some time it was ruled by kings, who were of Etruscan origin. Not much is known about the, political history of the monarchical period. We do not even, possess a list of all the kings. Although later historians, provided names of some of the Etruscan rulers of Rome, it is, difficult to corroborate these naines on the basis of, contemporary sources. It is not clear whether these kings belonged to a single dynasty. There were some rulers who bore, the name Tarquin., In 510 BC monarchy came to an abrupt end in Rome. Two, events occurred simultaneously. Firstly, the Etruscan king, Tarquin the Proud (Tarquinius Superbus) was overthrown., This marked the end of Etruscan rule over Rome. Secondly,, monarchy was abolished. Rome ceased to have a monarchical, form of government and became a republic. 510 BC is the, traditional date for the beginning of the Roman republic. The, movement against Tarquin was not just directed against, Etruscan rule, but against the very institution of kingship., Subsequently Tarquin the Proud tried to restore monarchy at, Rome with the help of Lars Porsenna, the ruler of the, neighbouring state of Chiusi. This attempt failed. Henceforth, the city was not ruled by a king (rex was the Roman title for, king) but by an oligarchy consisting of the wealthy Latin, aristocracy of Rome. The government was headed by two, consuls who were elected annually. The main instrument of, aristocratic power was the oligarchical council or senate. The, senate emerged as the supreme body of the Roman state with, extensive political, legal and military authority. There were, also assemblies of citizens, though at the beginning of the, republic they had virtually no share in governance. The Roman, republic lasted from 510 to 27 BC. During this long period of, nearly five centuries there were significant changes in the, structure of the republic. Before examining the history of the, Roman republic it would be useful to briefly outline the, territo~al expansion of Rome.
Page 228 :
202, , I, , Early Social Formations, , I, For over two centuries, from c. 500 to 280 BC, Rome was, engaged in bringing the entire Italian peninsula under its control. The first phase of Roman expansion was in central Italy,, primarily in Latium. Rome forged an alliance with the Latin, speaking people whereby the Romans were able to extend, their influence to the Latin communities. This alliance provided, the Romans with the resources to resist invasions by the, Etruscans, the Sabines, the Volsci and the Aequi. The turning, point in the struggle against the non-Latin states came in 396, BC when Rome managed. to occupy the Etruscan city of Veii., Veii, situated close to Rome, had- for a long time been the, major rival of Rome. The conquest of Veii gave the Romans, access to more territories in central Italy. Further, with the, land and other resources of Veii at its disposal, Rome could, now assert itself more aggressively over its neighbours., At this point Roman expansion was briefly halted due to a, major setback caused by the invasion of Italy by Celtic tribes, from the north. Over a period of time Celtic speaking IndoEuropean tribes, especially the Gauls, had penetrated northern, Italy. Between c. 450 and 350 BC they occupied the area between, the Alps and the river Po. In 390 BC the Celts (Gauls) entered, and plundered Rome. After this invasion the city had to be, rebuilt. A new defensive wall was cons~ructed. By the middle, of the fourth century BC the Romans had recovered and they, launched a vigorous expansionist programme. They started, by tightening their grip over their Latin allies. This was resisted, by the Latin states resulting in a series of Roman campaigns in, Latium. These campaigns lasted till 338 BC by which date Rome, succeeded in subduing the Latin states. Rome now attempted, to bring other parts of Italy under its rule. Its first target was, the fertile plain of Campania. This new phase of expansion, involved fiercely fought wars with neighbouring communities., Rome was continuously at war with the Samnites till 295 BC, before it could consolidate its position in central Italy. By 295, BC the Romans had also brought most of the Etruscan territories
Page 229 :
Ancient Rome (I) I, , 203, , under their control. After this they focused their attention, southern Italy., The Greek states of southern Italy strongly opposed Roman, expansion into the area. One of the Greek states of southern, Italy which decided to confront Rome was the state of, Tarentum. In 282 BC hostilities broke out between Rome and, Tarentum. Tarentum appealed to other Greek states for, assistance. Pyrrhus, the ruler of Epirus (a state in the northwest, part of mainland Greece), responded to this request. Pyrrhus, had been trying to unify the Western Greeks for a struggle, against Rome and he now mobilized troops to prevent the, Romans from taking over southern Italy. Initially he was, successful, but the early victories of Pyrrhus were at a very, great cost in terms of men and resources (hence the term, 'pyrrhic victory', i.e. a .victory won at such a great cost that it, cannot really be regarded as a victory). Eventually the Romans, defeated Pyrrhus in 275 BC and southern Italy came under, their control. This completed the first major phase of Roman, expansion. At the end of this phase the entire Italian peninsula, had accepted Roman supremacy., The conquest of southern Italy brought the Romans to the, edge of the western Mediterranean and face-to-face with the, large island of Sicily off the southwestern tip of Italy. The, western Mediterranean had been dominated by the state of, Carthage for several centuries. In chapter six we noted that, Carthage was a Phoenician settlement. This settlement had, grown into a vast Carthaginian empire. Sicily was a, Carthaginian territory. Phoenician traders from the eastern, Mediterranean city-state of Tyre (on the Syrian-Lebanese, coast) are supposed to have set up a trading outpost at, Carthage in the ninth century BC. The traditional date for the, founding of the settlement is 814 BC, although scholars are of, the view that it was founded somewhat later. Carthage (KartHadasht), situated close to modern Tunis on the north African, coast, lies almost midway between the eastern and western, Mediterranean. The excellent location of the site gave the, Phoenician traders of Carthage an opportunity to act as
Page 230 :
204, , I Early Social Formations, , intermediaries in the trade between the two parts of the, Mediterranean. The Carthaginian traders built~ up a vast, commercial network and opened up trade with communities, in northwest Africa and Spain., The economic prosperity of Carthage was not merely based, on trade, but also on the exploitation of the resources of the, Tunisian hinterland. From the fifth century BC the Phoenicians, began to develop agriculture in the fertile interior of Tunisia, which lay south of Carthage. The Carthaginians then went on, to create an empire which included southern Spain, Sardinia,, Corsica, Sicily, and territories in north Africa. The tribute which, was realized from these possessions added to the immense, wealth of Carthage. Carthage maintained an efficient army, which was recruited from all over the Mediterranean., Carthage, like most Phoenician states, was ruled by an, oligarchy which was dominated l;>y rich merchants. Two, magistrates, called shophets, were chosen annually from among, this oligarchy. The shophets were the chief officials of the state., Carthage adopted many features of Greek and Hellenistic, civilization in the development of its culture., When Rome attempted to gain control over Sicily, it, naturally came into conflict with Carthage. Roman expansion, into the Mediterranean could only have taken place at the, expense of Carthage. For over a century Rome fought a series, of wars against the Carthaginians. These wars are known as, the Punic Wars (the word Punic is etymologically linked to, Phoenician). There were three Punic wars: the First Punic War, (264-241 Be); the Second Punic War (218-201 Be); and the Third, Punic War (149-146 Be). Of these three wars, the Second Punic, War was the most fierce contest between Rome and Carthage., The prolonged wars against Carthage were a huge drain on, the financial and human resources of Rome. Nevertheless, the, Punic Wars resulted in the total annihilation of Carthage and, the acquisition of overseas territories by the Romans., The First Punic War, which started soon after the Roman, victory over Pyrrhus and the Western Greeks, lasted from, 264 to 241 BC. At the end of this war Carthage was forced to
Page 231 :
Ancient Rome (I) / 205, , surrender Sicily to the Romans. Sicily became the first' province', of Rome. Roman provinces were specific administrative units, of the Roman empire (it needs to be clarified here that when, we use the ferm 'Roman empire' in the context of the, republican period we are only referring to a large territorial, unit, and not to empire as a type of state ruled by an emperor)., Those Roman territories outside Italy which were directly, administered by Rome were organized as provinces. Roman, provinces were distinct from protectorates, which were not, directly governed by Rome. Sicily was the first overseas, territory to be organized as a province., After the First Punic War the Phoenicians took steps to, strengthen themselves militarily so as to check Roman, expansionism. The main architect of Carthaginian military, reorganization was a brilliant general named Hannibal., Hannibal mobilized a large and well-trained army for waging, a war against Rome. Instead of attacking Rome by the sea, from the south, he worked out a bold plan to march across, western Europe to the Alpine mountains in northern Italy. In, 218 BC (which marks the beginning of the Second Punic War), Hannibal reached the Alps with an army of about 40,000 troops, with the objective of launching an offensive against the Romans, from the north. This was some.thing that the Romans were, totally unprepared for. Hannibal successfully crossed the high, altitude Alpine mountains with his large army and entered, northern Italy. Here he made an alliance with several, communities which had been subjugated by the Romans., Hannibal marched southwards in the direction of Rome and, in 216 BC he completely routed the Roman army at Cannae in, south Italy. However he was not successful in capturing the, city of Rome., The defeat at Cannae was a big blow for the Romans. It, took them some time to recover from this shock. When they, had regrouped their army the Romans launched a campaign, against Hannibal. The leader of this campaign was Scipio, Africanus. Hannibal was compelled to retreat from Italy. Scipio, then entered Spain and pushed back the Carthaginian army.
Page 232 :
206, , I Early Social Formations, , Hannibal had to rush to north Africa to defend Carthaginian, possessions there. Hannibal's army was finally defeated at, the battle of Zama, near Carthage, in 202 BC. The Second Punic, War ended in 201 BC with Carthage accepting Roman peace, terms. Carthage had to surrender its territories in Spain. Spain, (mainly the Mediterranean coast of Spain at this time) became, another Roman province. In addition, Carthage had to destroy, its naval fleet and was made to give a large sum to Rome as, compensation for the war. Carthage ceased to be a major, power after this, while Rome now dominated the western, Mediterranean. After the Second Punic War the Romans, ruthlessly subjugated the communities in the northern parts, of Italy which had provided assistance to Hannibal. These, communities included the Gauls who lived in the area between, the Alps and the river Po. This region, which contained the, fertile Po valley, was called Cisalpine Gaul Roman rule now, extended to Cisalpine Gaul, Once Rome had become had become the foremost power, in the western Mediterranean it turned towards the eastern, Mediterranean. The political situation in this region was, favourable for Roman expansion. Rome sought to take, advantage of the weakening of Hellenistic state~ in the· l~_st, quarter of t1'e third century BC (see chapter seven). The, Hellenistic kingdoms of Macedonia, Egypt and West Asia,, ruled by the Antigonids, Ptolemids and Seleucids respectively,, dominated the eastern Mediterranean. Of these three, kingdoms, Egypt was the most stable and had managed to, keep most of its original possessions intact. The Macedonians, were facing problems of which the Romans took advantage,, whereas the Seleucids had lost most of their territories in. the, east. The Seleucids had to give up Iran and Iraq to the Parthians, (whom we will discuss in more detail below), and independent, principalities had been established in those parts of Anatolia, which were earlier ruled by the Seleucids. The Seleucid, kingdom was just confined to Syria and at the time of the, Second Punic War Antiochus III was the reigning king of the, Seleucid dynasty. Philip V of the Antigonid dynasty was his
Page 233 :
Ancient Rome (I), , I, , 207, , contemporary in Macedonia., , Roman expansion into the eastern Mediterranean was, directly linked to developments during and immediately after, the Second Punic War. Hannibal had come to an understanding, with Philip V of Macedonia who was hostile to Rome., Macedonia was resentful of growing Roman interference in, its internal affairs. The Romans sent troops across the Adriatic, Sea to safeguard the eastern (Adriatic) coastline of Italy. Since, the troops were stationed in the Macedonian sphere of, influence, a confrontation between Rome and Macedonia, ensued. Coinciding with the Seco~d Punic War, the Romans, also fought a war against Macedonia. The war with Macedonia continued after the Punic war and in 196 BC Philip V was, defeated. It needs to be mentioned here that the Greek states, formed part of the Macedonian kingdom. In 196 BC, following, the defeat of Philip V, the Romans declared that the Greek, states were independent of Macedonia. After 196 BC Rome, tightened its grip over the Greek states., Even after their defeat in the Second Punic War the Carthaginians had not given up their opposition to Rome. Hannibal, (who was alive till 182 BC) carried out a series of reforms aimed, at improving the condition of the state. He held the office of, shophet (chief magistrate) of Carthage in 197 and 196 BC. During, his tenure he curtailed the authority of the ruling oligarchy., He strengthened his alliance with Philip V by forging ties with, Antiochus III of Syria. Rome looked upon Hannibal's actions, with growing suspicion and began to exert pressure against, him. Hannibal was forced to leave Carthage and seek shelter, with Antiochus III. This became the pretext for a successful, Roman campaign against Syria. The Roman campaign was, essentially prompted by the fact that the Seleucids still had, some influence over parts of Anatolia and Eastern Greek states., The defeat of Antiochus III in 189 BC enabled Rome to, consolidate its hold over Greece. Antiochus III was allowed, to retain Syria but Rome now emerged as a major force in, West Asian politics. The formal annexation of Syria by the, Romans was completed more than a century later.
Page 234 :
208, , I Early Social Formations, , Having dealt with Antiochus III the Romans once again, shifted their attention to Macedonia. Yet another war was, waged against the Macedonian kingdom, which was now ruled, by the successor of Philip V. At the conclusion of this war, (referred to as the Third Macedonian War, 172-167 BC) the, king was removed and Macedonia was split into four republics, which had to pay tribute to Rome. The final phase of the, Roman subjugation of Macedonia took place simultaneously, with the Third Punic War of 149-146 BC., While Rome had been busy with eastern Mediterranean, affairs the Carthaginians had been successful in reviving their, trade. On the other hand there was a very powerful lobby at, Rome which had been demanding that the state of Carthage, should be completely destroyed. It was in this situation that, the Third Punic War broke out in 149 BC. By 146 BC Carthage, had been defeated and it ceased to exist. The territory of, Carthage in Tunisia was reorganized as the Roman province, of Africa (not to be confused with the continent of Africa). As, for Macedonia, there were anti-Roman upheavals in the newly, formed republics, as well as in Greece, while the Third Punic, War was going on. The Romans crushed these upheavals and, annexed the whole of Macedonia in 147 BC. The Greek rebellion, was also suppressed and Corinth was destroyed in 146 BC. In, fact Corinth and Carthage were destroyed by the Romans in, the same year (146 BC)., Macedonia became a Roman province while the Greek, states were placed under indirect Roman rule. The Macedonian, province was to supervise the administration of the Greek, states. By this time Egypt had also been made a Roman, protectorate, i. e. its foreign policy was guided by the Romans., Western Anatolia had come under Roman rule and was, organized as the province of Asia (not to be confused with, the continent of Asia). Thus, by the middle of the second, century BC Roman influence was predominant in the entire, Mediterranean. Of course Syria, Palestine, Egypt and some, parts of north Africa had not yet been annexed. The next phase, of large-scale expansion was closely linked to the internal
Page 235 :
Ancient Rome (I) I 209, , politics of Rome which we will discuss in the next section., , II, When the Etruscan monarchy was ousted from Rome in 510, political power passed into the hands of the aristocracy., The aristocracy initially set up an oligarchical government., The oligarchy exercised its power through an oligarchical, council, called the senate. Throughout the Roman republic the, senate was the single most important centre of authority., However, as we shall see, the senate was gradually forced to, share some of its authority with other institutions., We should bear in mind that it is not possible to speak, with much certainty about the chronology of the early republic., A few scholars like A. Alfoldi have argued that after the, Second Punic War some Roman writers produced historical, accounts of the early republic in which Romans were shown, to have been a great and superior people at a very early date., The purpose. of these accounts was to demonstrate that Rome, had always enjoyed a preeminent position. In the process, the, chronology of early Roman history was pushed back., According to Alfoldi we actually know very little about early, Rome. Much of our information is based on the work of Fabius, Pictor. Pictor was a Roman historian who participated in the, Second Punic War. He produced a history of Rome written in, the Greek language and intended primarily for a Greek, audience. Alfoldi is of the opinion that Pictor fabricated a, chronology to glorify early Rome. This chronology placed the, rise of Rome in the sixth century whereas actually Rome, became prominent at least a century later. But most scholars, have not accepted this argument and have drawn attention to, the difficulties that would be created if the chronology was, revised, particularly as the sequence of certain events cannot, be reconciled with later dates. Nevertheless there has been, some scepticism over dates like. that of the founding of the, Roman republic. It has, for instance, been noted that it is too, much of a coincidence that the date for the end of monarchy, BC
Page 236 :
210, , i Early Social Formations, , at Rome (510 ac) is precisely the same as that of the, establishment of classical democracy at Athens after the, overthrow of the tyrant Hippias., What we are certain about is that right from the beginning, of the republic, there was an intense struggle between the, landed aristocracy and the common people of Rome. Roman, society was clearly divided along class lines and the less, privileged sections, particularly the ordinary peasants,, resented the monopoly of political power which the aristocracy, enjoyed. This resulted in a prolonged conflict. As in the case, of the Greek states, the Roman aristocracy was not in a position, to completely suppress the struggle of the peasantry and this, struggle became a recurring feature of the republic throughout, its history., ·, To begin with, the aristocracy lacked the resources to, mobilize a large standing army consisting of professional, warrior and could not therefore effectively deal with the unrest, among the peasantry. Moreover, Roman military organization, was heavily dependent on the peasants who constituted the, main fighting force. The Roman army comprised unpaid, soldiers who were primarily recruited from the peasantry., These soldiers, like the Greek hoplites, had to supply their, own fighting equipment and had to utilize their own~means, to sustain themselves for the duration of a campaign. All ablebodied adult males had to render military service. We have, seen that this was the pattern of military organization in ancient, Greece as well. The military burden on the Roman peasantry, was several times more due to the sheer scale of Roman, expansion which was almost unprecedented in antiquity. We, should remember that Rome kept on acquiring new territories, for over six centuries. Of these six centuries nearly four, hundred years were spent annexing territories outside Italy,, some of them in far-flung areas of Europe, West Asia and, northern Africa., Rome required a huge army not only to create its empire, but also to maintain and defend it. It is not difficult to s~e, why the peasantry could not be ignored. The Roman
Page 237 :
Ancient Rome (I), , I, , 21 l, , aristocracy, having failed in the early years of the republic to, concentrate enough wealth in its hands to form a professional, standing army financed by the state, had to seek the support, of the peasantry to defend the city from the onslaught of, neighbouring tribes (Etruscans, Volsci, Aequi, Sabellians, Gauls, etc.) and subsequently to expand into central Italy. The, successful resistance put up by the peasantry against the, attempt by the aristocracy to monopolize political power was, itself an important factor which was responsible for the failure, of the aristocracy to create a political and military structure, that could be controlled exclusively by the rich. As Rome began, to expand, the need to have the support of the peasant soldiers, increased. Initially the peasantry also derived some small, benefits from this expansion. For instance when the Etruscan, city of Veil was conquered in 396 BC, a lot of land in and around, Veil was distributed.among the poorer Roman peasants. This, gave these peasants the means to procure military equipment, for later campaigns. At the same time it has to be emphasized., that the· aristocracy was the biggest beneficiary of Roman, expansion. The growth of the empire made the aristocracy, fabulously wealthy and widened the gap between rich and, poor., In the early phase of Roman expansion the aristocracy was, fully dependent upon the peasant soldiers. And it was in this, phase, i. e. when Rome was engaged in conquering the Italian, peninsula, that the peasantry extracted major political concessions. Through these concessions a small section of the peasantry, got some share in political power. To understand the nature, of these concessions we have to examine the evolution of the, Roman republic and see how the conflict between the, aristocracy and the peasantry modified the structure of the, Roman state., As already mentioned, the senate became the most, important body of the Roman state after monarchy was, abolished. Under the kings the Roman senate had functioned, as an advisory council. The senate was a council of elders,, consisting of heads of prominent families. After 510 BC the
Page 238 :
212, , I, , Early Social Formations ·, , aristocracy ruled over Rome through the senate. At the, beginning of the republic the senate was an oligarchical body, from which the common people were completely excluded., Here we must make a reference to a peculiar feature of Roman, society. Roman society was divided into two groups or, 'orders': the patrician order and the plebeian order. The patricians constituted a small close-knit elite while the plebeians, were the common people. Nevertheless both the orders were, included in the category of Roman citizens (we will discuss, the nature of Roman citizenship later). To a large extent the, struggle between the aristocracy and the peasantry was a, struggle between the patricians and the plebeians and is often, referred to as 'the conflict of the orders'., Patrician social organization was based on kinship groups, called gentes (singular, gens}, which may be regarded as the, Roman equivalent of clans. Each gens traced its origin to a, common ancestor. The division of the Romans into two orders, shares a few similarities with the Indian. caste system. This, division had a permanency which resembles the permanency, of being born into a particular caste. A citizen was born a, patrician or a plebeian. One could not become a patrician, merely by acquiring wealth or political power. Kinship and, marriage too were closely linked with the division of Roman, society into two orders. Till 445 BC marriages between, patricians and plebeians were prohibited by law and for a, long time after that such marriages were rare., Historians are not very sure as to whether the existence, of the two orders was a prominent feature of pre-republican, Rome. Some scholars have suggested that at some point of, time, during the period of monarchy, citizenship rights, extended only to the patricians, but most historians have, rejected this view. It is generally recognized that in the early, republic the patricians formed an exclusive aristocratic group., Entry into the patrician order was practically impossible for, non-patricians. A person had to be born into a patrician gens, and had to be the offspring of a marriage whic\l was, recognized as valid by Roman law. Kinship ties played a
Page 239 :
Ancient Rome (I), , !, , 213, , particularly important role at the level of patrician social, organization. Their closed kinship structure was so strictly, regulated that during the course of the republic the number, of gentes was steadily decreasing. The evidence indicates that, in the fifth century BC there had been 50 gentes in all. By c. 367, BC the number of gentes had diminished to 22 gentes, divided, into 81 families. At the end of the republic the number had, fallen to 14 gentes with 30 families. Some of the most renowned, gentes were Aemilia, Claudia, Cornelia, Fabia and Julia (the, middle name of a Roman was that of the gentes; thus Caius, Julius Caesar-the famous Julius Caesar-belonged to the gens, Julia). Patrician gentes were patrilineal (i.e. descent was, determined in the male line) and rigidly patriarchal. Even after, the restriction on patrician-plebeian marriages was removed,, the offspring of a marriage between a ·patrician woman and a, plebeian man was not- regarded as a patrician. On the other, hand children of a patrician father and plebeian mother would, be patricians., Whereas the Roman orders were not, strictly speaking,, classes, it is nevertheless true that the patricians were the, economically, politically and socially dominant group. Orders, might not have been classes but they approximated to classes., During the last phase of the republic a small section of the, plebeians was given a share in political power, but the vast, majority of them remained a deprived class with very little, control over land or other means of production. For most, to, be born a plebeian meant belonging to an underprivileged, class. On the other hand, being born a patrician meant automatic, access to wealth, political power and a high social and ritual, status. Patricians were able to exercise a high degree of control, over Roman religion. Many of the important priesthoods, remained closed to the plebeians even after sections of the, plebeians had forced the patricians to make major political, concessions., When the republic came into existence the patricians converted the senate into an exclusive oligarchical institution for, governing Rome. Membership of the senate was by cooption,
Page 240 :
214, , I Early Social Formations, , i.e. the original members themselves chose additional or new, members of the senate. The original members must have been, those who took over the Roman state after the overthrow of, Tarquin the Proud. Only patrician males could be members of the, senate. In the early republic the senate had 300 members. In, the later republic the number went up to 600 and then to 900, and was eventually stabilized at 600 after the republic came, to an end. A person who had been made a member of the, senate remained senator for the rest of his life. The senate, had wide-ranging powers, most of which were not formally, defined. It gave duties to the magistrates (but did not elect, them), advised them on legislation, financial and military, matters, and generally supervised the functioning of the state., Juries for major trials, especially criminal trials, were composed, of senators. The overwhelming majority of the senators were, big landowners. Senators wore a distinctive dress with a wide, purple-coloured border (laticlavia). They were not allowed to, go out of Italy without the permission of the senate and were, expected to be regularly available to attend sessions of the, senate., The highest officials of the Roman republic were called, consuls. There ·were two consuls and they held office simultaneously. The consulship was an elective post and Eslections took, place on an annual basis. The two consuls remained in office, for one year after which fresh elections were held. Roman, years were usually named after the consuls for the respective, years. The authority of the Roman state was vested in the, consuls. They presided over the senate and performed, executive, judicial and military functions. We know that in, the later years of the republic the minimum age for consulship, was forty-two years. Consuls could seek re-election without, any restrictions. Till 367 BC only patricians could be consuls., One of the important demands of the plebeians in the conflict, of the orders during the early republic had been that plebeians, should also be allowed to hold the office of consul. In 367 BC, one of the consulships was opened to the plebeians. For a long, time this provision remained a mere formality because the
Page 241 :
Ancient Rome (I), , I, , 215, , patricians controlled the electoral process and could manipulate, the choice of candidates. It was only in the late republic that, plebeians actually started getting elected to the consulship., Besides the consuls there were several other magistrates, who looked after various aspects of administration. Mention, may be made of two very powerful magistrates who were, called censors. Two censors were elected once in every five, years. They held office for eighteen months. During the, eighteen months that they held office the two censors were, required to conduct a census of Roman citizens. The censors, recorded the names of citizens and the amount of property, possessed by each citizen (only the names of males were, registered). This census determined the eligibility of a citizen,, depending upon the value of his property, to hold various, elective offices of the Roman state. The censors also controlled, public morality and had the right to take action against any, citizen who violated norms of public morality. The censors, had a few other functions like leasing public lands and giving, state contracts. All these functions combined to make the, censorship a very powerful office. In the early republic only, patricians (mainly former consuls) could be elected as censors., Later, just as in the case of the consulship, plebeians also, became eligible for this magistracy. It seems that in the last, decades of the republic the importance of this position declined, and the census of citizens itself became irregular. Shortly after, the republic came to an end this office was revived for a brief, period, but gradually it was abandoned., In addition to the consuls and censors there were junior, magistrates, as for instance aediles and quaestors. Four aediles, were elected annually. They were in charge of public works, and had to maintain roads, drains, and market places. The, aediles had to make arrangements for public festivals as well., Quaestors assisted the higher magistrates in the discharge of, their duties. One of their main responsibilities was to look, after the state treasury and maintain public accounts. The posts, and duties of Roman officials multiplied as the empire, expanded. Moreover, as we shall see, the struggle of the
Page 242 :
216, , I Early Social Formations, , plebeians resulted in the creation of some very important, magistracies which were meant specifically for this order., While the magistrates had to serve in an honorary, capacity-they did not receive any remuneration-the, government had a host of salaried minor officials for routine, day-to-day tasks. These officials were collectively called, apparitores. They-were paid their salaries by the state. Unlike, the magistrates, the apparitores were not elected. Technically,, their appointment was for one year (the entire machinery of, the republic operated on an annual basis), but in actual practice, the apparitores occupied their positions for a much longer, duration since it was too cumbersome to make annual, appointments. These public servants were recruited from, among the relatively poorer sections of the population. The, apparitores included scribes and lictors. Lictors were officials, who escorted consuls (or the even more superior magistrates, called dictators who were appointed in exceptional, circumstances with extraordinary powers). The lictors carried, with them bundles of wooden rods known as fasces, sometimes, with and sometimes without an axe, which were the symbol, of the authority vested in the consuls. Lictors carried twelve, fasces, or bundles, for consuls, twenty-four fasces for dictators,, and six fasces for the junior magistrates. This was a way of, announcing the status of the magistrate to the people and, indicating that his orders must be respected and complied, with. In the twentieth century this symbol was revived by the, Italian head of state Mussolini who distorted the concept of, the fasces to legitimize his authority. Mussolini named his, movement 'fascism', a term derived from the ancient Roman, , fasces., Due to the growing power of the senate and the patrician, magistrates after the establishment of the republic, the plebeians began to assert themselves and demanded that they, should also have a say in the political process. The patricians, had worked out a system which totally excluded the plebeians, from governance. But, given the role which the plebeians, played in Roman military organization, they were able to
Page 243 :
Ancient Rome (I) I 217, , successfully organize themselves to press for their demands., The political structure of the city of Rome included a tribal, assembly which had been in existence since the time of the, kings. The members of this assembly were all male adults of, the communities which were initially settled at Rome. The, Roman assembly, i. e. the assembly of citizens, was called, comitia curiata. When the patricians assumed power and set, up an oligarchical state the comitia curiata became defunct. It, continued to exist formally but it had no real power. The power, enjoyed by the kings had been transferred to the senate and, the magistrates and not to the assembly., · The comitia curiata got its name from a kinship based social, unit called curia into which the primitive inhabitants of Rome, were divided. The curiae were extended clans which included, plebeians and should not be confused with the patrician gentes., At the beginning of the republic there were thirty curiae which, were grouped into three tribes. This grouping into three tribes, corresponded to the three original tribes which lived in the, area that became the city of Rome: Tities, Ramnes and Luceres., It should be clear that this is an oversimplified picture and we, have to be very cautious while dealing with early Roman social, organization considering the paucity of information about this, remote period. Whatever might have been the pattern of social, organization reflected in the comitia curiata, the classification, of all citizens into thirty curiae which formed three tribes of, ten curiae each had become fixed soon after the abolition of, monarchy. As the population of Rome had increased, the curiae, would have included some citizens who did not have kinship, ties with the members. Each curia elected its own head called, curio who was supposed to be bver fifty years of age. The, position of the curio was for life. The chief curio was the curio, maximus, who was always a patrician till 210 BC., The patricians were able to influence the proceedings of, the comitia curiata by choosing appropriate presiding officers., Voting in the assembly was not according to the principle of, 'one member, one vote'. Each curia voted collectively so that, only the opinion of the curiae (and not of individual members)
Page 244 :
218, , I, , Early Social Formations, , was sought. Using their kinship ties patricians dominated, the respective curiae. They would speak on behalf of the entire, curia. The other citizens were reduced to mere onlookers., So irrelevant did the meetings of the comitia curiata become, that eventually one official representative from each curia, was sent to attend its sessions and vote on matters placed, before it., The plebeians found that the comitia curiata could hardly, be expected to take care of their interests. As a result of, growing pressure from the peasant soldiers of Rome, who, invariably happened to be plebeians, the citizens were., regrouped to form a new assembly. This assembly was called, comitia centuriata. The comitia curiata was not abolished but, the new assembly was created in addition to it. The comitia, centuriata, like the comitia curiata, was an assembly of all, Roman citizens. The difference between the two lay in the, manner in which the citizens were grouped. For the purpose, of the comitia centuriata the citizens were grouped into, 'centuries'. A century was the smallest unit of the Roman army, and was technically supposed to consist, as the name indicates,, of one hundred men though in practice the number might, have varied. In the initial stages the comitia centuriata would, have resembled a military formation. In all likelihood its first, meetings were held at the time of a military expedition, or, when the city needed to be defended, and•the opinion of all, combatants including the vital peasant soldiers was sought., All male adults were assembled according to the unit, i. e., century, to which they belonged. The military origin of this, assembly is further suggested by the fact that its usual meeting, place even in the later republic was the Campus Martius, a, large field on the outskirts of Rome dedicated to Mars, the, Roman god of war. This field was primarily used for military, drills., For most of the republican period the comitia centuriata, was the main assembly of citizens. This was the assembly, which elected the consuls and censors. Legislation had to be, passed by the comitia centuriata. War and peace were the
Page 245 :
Ancient Rome (I) I 219, , prerogative of this assembly. All major decisions of the state, had to have the approval of the comitia centuriata. The comitia, curiata now only looked after a few matters of a social and, religious nature. Some issues pertaining to marriage, adoption,, and inheritance were taken up by this assembly and wills were, recorded there. Several officials who performed priestly, functions were elected by the comitia curiata. But politically it, was an insignificant body., It is believed that the comitia centuriata was formed c., 450 BC. The working of the new assembly was such that, ultimately it did not solve the problem of giving a share of, political power to the plebeians. The comitia centuriata, contained 193 centuries. Each century had one vote. As in the, comitia curiata, the system of voting in the new assembly was, not based on the principle of 'one member, one vote'. The, collective vote of each century was taken. The arrangement, of the centuries was such that the patricians controlled the, majority of votes in the comitia centuriata., The centuries were grouped into five classes. These classes, were con~tituted on the basis of property qualifications. The, 193 centuries of the comitia centuriata were not distributed, equally among the five classes. The largest number of centuries, were placed in the first three classes, which were classes of, the aristocracy and the wealthy. In other words the first three, classes possessed the majority of votes. Originally the centuries, might have been units of one hundred but in the latter half of, the fifth century ac a century did not actually contain one, hundred citizens. In the comitia centuriata it was a notional, unit. This should be obvious from the fact that the total of 193, centuries works out to 19, 300 citizens, an unrealistic figure, when we take into account the territorial expansion of Rome, in Latium after 500 BC. Each century did not have the same, number of citizens. The centuries of the first two classes had, very few citizens in them. At the other extreme were the, propertyless citizens. These citizens were labelled as proletarius,, i. e. those whose only function was to bear children or proles, (proles means offspring). The proletarii were placed in the lowest
Page 246 :
220, , I Early Social Formations, , class. This class, though numerically large, was assigned just, one century. With this kind of classification the participation, of the poorer citizens in the assembly had no meaning, whatsoever., The patricians thus cleverly saw to it that despite being, numerically very small they dominated the new assembly., They further ensured their hold over the comitia centuriata, by laying down elaborate rules for its functioning. Meetings, of the comitia centuriata were formally called by magistrates., The magistrates prepared the agenda for the assembly, beforehand and citizens were only expected to vote without, any discussion. Members could not initiate legislation in the, assembly. Lists of candidates for magistracies were presented, to the assembly for voting. These lists contained names of, candidat~s that the patricians had chosen from among, themselves. We cannot deny that the evolution of_a political, structure of this type represented a historical achievement,, yet we must be aware of the limits of democracy in the Roman, assembly., Having failed to get a share of political power through, the comitia centuriata, the plebeians organized themselves into, a body of their own. This body came to be called the concilium, plebis. The concilium plebis was an assembly of plebeians. It, discussed various issues which concerned the-plebeians. Soon, the concilium plebis got institutionalizeeJ. and evolved its own, structure. It had regular procedures and elected its own, officials. In 494 BC the plebeians forced the Roman state to, formally accept two officers elected by the concilium plebis,, known as tribunes, as spokesmen of the plebeians., The most powerful weapon in the hands of the plebeians, was the refusal to render military service. This refusal was, referred to as secessio by contemporaries. There are at least, five recorded instances of secessio. The first occasion when the, plebeians resorted to secessio was in 494 BC. They refused to, serve as soldiers unless their demands were accepted. They, wanted the Roman state to acknowledge the existence of the, concilium plebis and recognize the tribunes. It was only after
Page 247 :
Ancient Rome (I), , I, , 221, , the Roman state had agreed to these demands that the secessio, was called off. The responsibjlities of the tribunes gradually, multiplied leading to an increase in the number of tribunes., As the sphere of their activities expanded they acquired, greater authority. By 448 BC the number of tribunes had risen, to ten. The tribunes were elected annually by the concilium, plebis. For the better off plebeians this became a much sought, after office. Being elected a tribune gave to a plebeian some, access to political power, something which was otherwise not, possible at the beginning of the republic., Following the victory of 494 BC there were four other important landmarks in the struggle of the plebeians during the, early republic. One of the major demands of the plebeians, was that there should be a written code of law so that there, was no arbitrary exercise of judicial authority. The patricians, had consistently abused their judicial powers by enforcing, laws according to their own will. There were no written laws., The plebeians threatened the senate with another secessio if it, did not initiate steps to create a proper legal framework for, the Roman state. The senate set up a ten-member commission, (the members of this commission therefore being called, 'decemvirs') presided over by Appius Claudius. The decemvirs, prepared a set of laws for the Romans. This set of laws is, known as the Code of the Twelve Tables. It was introduced, in 450 BC, around the same time as the establishment of the, comitia centuriata. The Twelve Tables were the foundation, on which the vast edifice of Roman law was built., Unfortunately, the full text of the Twelve Tables has not been, preserved. Roman law, which became the basis of the entire, legal system of western Europe, is one of the lasting contributions of Rome to human civilization. Even today a large number, of Roman legal terms are in use throughout the world., We have already referred to the second landmark in the, conflict of the orders. In 367 BC the patricians conceded one of, the consulships to the plebeians. The actual election of a plebeian to the post of consul came much later. Since the consuls, were elected by the comitia centuriata and·the names of candi-
Page 248 :
222, , I Early Social Formations, , dates were proposed by the senators it was not easy for a, plebeian to be elected to the highest magistracy of the Roman, state. It was only in the last hundred years of the republic, that plebeians began to regularly hold consulships. The tenure, of a consul was one year, but the consulship carried with it an, additional advantage which was of a permanent nature., Consuls were eligible for becoming members of the senate., Hence, even though plebeians could not become senators in, the normal course right till the end of the republic, election to, the consulship provided them with an opportunity to enter, the senate. Membership of the senate, it may be recalled, was, for life. A few plebeians climbed to the rank of senator via the, consulship. By utilizing this route a handful of senatorial, plebeian families rose to prominence in the late republic (e. g., Gracchus brothers, Mark Antony). Then in 326 BC another crucial reform took place. Roman, law had a very harsh provision which applied to the strict, enforcement of formal contracts or nexum. If a Roman entered, into a formal agreement or nexum while contracting a loan in, which the debtor's person was pledged as security, failure to, honour the agreement automatically meant debt bondage., Debts incurred due to frequent participation in wars, as well, as to meet diverse economic needs, had made indebtedness a, chronic peasant problem. When the peasants and other poor, people were unable to repay their loans they were enslaved., Nexum thus became a device for the big landowners to convert, free peasants into unfree labour. Growing deprivation by the, mid-republican period aggravated the problem. The plebeians, had to agitate for the abolition of nexum. Finally, a law of 326, BC prohibited the enslavement of a Roman citizen for nonrepayment of debts. This law stabilized the position of the, Roman peasantry for some time., The fourth, and perhaps politically the most important,, landmark in the prolonged contest between patricians and, plebeians during the early republic was a legislation of 287 BC, which gave the plebeian tribunes full-fledgep. magisterial, powers. There seems to have been a serious crisis at this stage
Page 249 :
Ancient Rome (I), , I, , 223, , which culminated in another secessio by the plebeians. The, political crisis within the republic coincided with the plan to, bring the Greek states of southern Italy under Roman control., The situation was so serious that a dictator-who was an, elected magistrate with absolute powers appointed at times, of crisis for a short. duration (usually six months)-was chosen, to find some solution to the conflict of the orders. Quintius, Hortensius was elected dictator with the specific objective of, resolving the crisis. Quintius Hortensius enacted a law which, made the decisions of the concilium plebis binding on the, Roman state. The tribunes were authorized to enforce the, decisions of the condlium plebis with appropriate punishments, for violation. The reform of Hortensius, known as Lex Hortensia, (Roman laws were named after the magistrates who initiated, them), were of immense historical significance. The concilium, plebis was now at par with other Roman assemblies. Its, decisions had full legal authority. The tribuneship became a, powerful magistracy. Lex Hortensia brought to an end one phase, of the class struggle in the Roman republic. After 287 BC the, struggle continued but the nature of the conflict underwent, changes., The developments of 287 BC probably necessitated a, reorganization of the Roman assembly. A new assembly was, constituted around this time, though the actual date is not, known. This assembly was the comitia tributa. The comitia, tributa was an assembly of all Roman citizens in which the, citizens were grouped according to tribes (tribus). The term, tribus·is somewhat misleading because these were not kinship, groups. For the purpose of the comitia tributa the citizens, were classified on the basis of their residence. The tribes of, the comitia tributa were essentially residential tribes. The, concept of these residential tribes had evolved over a long, period of time. The practice of grouping Roman citizens, according to residential tribes had a long history, but it was, only in the third century BC that this grouping by tribes became, relevant for voting in the assembly. As we have seen, in the, other assemblies the citizens were grouped either on the basis
Page 250 :
224, , I Early Social Formations, , of centuries or on the basis of curiae and kinship tribes. The, unit of the comitia hibuta was the residential tribe., We cannot rule out the possibility of there having been, originally a connection between the kinship hibes and residential tribes. In the remote past all those who belonged to the, first ethnic tribes which dwelt in and around Rome were, regarded as citizens. There were three such tribes, namely,, Tities, Ramnes and Luceres. The three tribes of the comitia, curiata corresponded to the three tribes which initially settled, Rome. As the city increased in size these three tribes were, reorganized, though the structure of the comitia curiata itself, remained unchanged. The city was divided into four quarters, with one hibe in each quarter. These tribes were residential, tribes although the dominant kinship groups of the respective, quarters must have been the nucleus of the residential hibes., Subsequently sixteen rural residential tribes were added to, the four urban hibes and the number of hibes rose to twenty., In the early republic the residential tribes were just a, convenient method for compiling lists of citizens in accordance, with their place of residence. This categorization was useful, for census and for taxation. As Rome expanded into central, Italy and selectively extended citizenship rights to other, communities it became necessary to form more residenti~l, tribes to accommodate new citizens. The number of tribes, gradually increased by stages from twenty to thirty-five. We, learn that there were thirty-five tribes in 241 BC and that after, that date no new tribes were created. Fresh citizens were, accommodated in the existi:t:tg tribes, sometimes quite, arbitrarily, so that ultimately the tribe in which a new citizen, was placed did not always correspond to his place of residence., It would appear that within the concilium plebis the plebeians were grouped according to the tribes to which they, belonged. The concilium plebis is sometimes referred to as, concilium plebis tributa. Ever since it came into existence the, concilium plebis had evolved its own procedure. We should, not forget that the concilium plebis had a formal position. It, elected tribunes who possessed some· authority even prior to
Page 251 :
Ancient Rame (I) I 225, , 287 BC. The concilium plebis voted on proposals concerning, the plebeians. Members of the plebeian assembly did not vote, individually. The plebeians used the principle of voting, prevalent in other Roman assemblies and voted collecijvely, in groups. The most obvious and suitable units into which the, plebeian citizens could have been divided were the residential, tribes., In a sense the comitia tributa was an extension of the, concilium plebis. All that had to be d~ was to include the, patricians. When a Roman assembly comprising both plebeians, and patricians met and the citizens were grouped according, to residential ·tribes it became the comitia tributa or the, assembly of Roman tribes. This form of convening meetings, of all Roman citizens gained more and· more popularity after, Lex Hortensia had made the decisions of the concilium plebis, mandatory for the Roman state. The comitia tributa was a, more egalitarian body as compared to the cornitia curiata and, the cornitia centuriata. Birth and wealth did not determine, the grouping of citizens. In the later republic the most, important issues which required the opinion of the citizens, were submitted to the comitia tributa for approval. The comitia, tributa elected some magistrates like aediles and quaestors. It, also had the power to conduct minor trials. With the passage, of time the aristocracy began to dominate the comitia tributa, too by managing its procedures., It will be clear from the above account that the senate, never completely surrendered its privileges. It made some, concessions by allowing the assemblies of Roman citizens, (comitia curiata, comitia centuriata and comitia tributa), the, concilium plebis, and the tribunes to have some say in the, affairs of the Roman state. As new institutions were created, the older ones were not formally abandoned. The senate, coexisted with the concilium plebis; the cornitia curiata and, cornitia centuriata coexisted with the comitia tributa; and the, consuls coexisted with the tribunes. The functions of some of, the older bodies were curtailed or modified. Yet there were, other features which remained constant. The cornitia curiata
Page 252 :
226, , I Early Social Formations, , retained its archaic oligarchical structure, the comitia centuriata, continued to elect the consuls, the senate remained, theoretically closed to plebeians, and the consulship was still, the most powerful magistracy at the end of the republic. The, overall picture which emerges from this is that by the midrepublic there were multiple centres of power and this gave, rise to much instability. Political instability at home went hand, in hand with large-scale territorial expansion from 280 BC onwards., , III, Between,280 and 146 BC Rome was constantly at war. The, Punic and Macedonian wars laid the foundations of Rome's, Mediterranean empire. Lex Hortensia had temporarily reduced, social and political tensions at home. This allowed the Roman, state to :i;nobilize resources for fighting its wars. The empire, brought some relief to the plebeians. The dissatisfaction, among them could therefore be kept in check for the time, being. For instance after 167 BC Roman citizens residing in, Italy did not have to pay any direct tax. All Roman citizens, had to pay a direct tax called tributum. The tributum was, abolished within Italy in 167 BC. The newly conquered, territories were also a source of agricultural land for the, Romans. A proportion of this land was given to poor farmers, many of whom settled down in the provinces. At the same, time continuous wars were a big burden on the peasant, soldiers. In the long run we find that the wars impoverished, the peasantry while they enriched the aristocracy., It is hardly surprising that after 146 BC the contradictions, between the aristocracy and the peasantry sharpened, leading, to a violent and bitter struggle. For over a century the Roman, republic was in a perpetual state of unrest which at times, assumed the shape of civil war. We must not think of the, plebeians as a homogeneous class. At the beginning of the, republic most of the plebeians had been peasants. By the late, republic the plebeians had become socially differentiated. At
Page 253 :
Ancient Rome (I), , I, , 227, , one end there was a tiny elite among the plebeians which had, used the concessions made to the plebeians, to accumulate, wealth and become politically powerful. This phenomenon, had produced a handful of plebeian senatorial families which, enjoyed almost the same status as the patrician aristocracy., The plebeian elite had access to the senate, to all magistraciesincluding the consulship-and had the added advantage of, being able to manipulate the concilium plebis to suit its interests., Plebeian senators owned large amounts of land. They, commanded armies and held high positions. The tribunes were, frequently elected from among this group. This small section, of the plebeians had fully become a part of the ruling oligarchy, of Rome by the late republic. The plebeian elite had little in, common with the rest of the plebeians and were no longer, interested in struggling for the rights of the .peasantry., At the bottom were the propertyless citizens. In the early, republic most of the plebeians had owned some land, but by, the third century BC many of them had lost their holdings. In, the comitia centuriata the propertyless citizens were placed in, the century of the proletarii. As the peasantry got impoverished, the class of landless plebeians increased steadily, especially, towards the end of the republic. In between the plebeian elite, and the landless class stood the peasantry. The Roman small, peasants were termed assidui. In the comitia centuriata the, small peasants were classified as assidui on the basis of the, value of their holdings. The assidui were the backbone of the, Roman infantry. We may regard them as the Roman equivalent, of the Athenian zeugitai. This class had been finding it difficult, to retain its land., The abolition of debt bondage in 326 BC placed restrictions, on the enslavement of peasants for non-repayment of debts., But the peasants were forced to hand over their land to their, creditors when they were unable to pay back their loans. In, this way the assidui lost more and more land to the big, landowners, a trend which became pronounced during the, Punic and Macedonian wars. For the peasants these were years, of great adversity. The wars were rapidly reducing the assidui
Page 254 :
228_ ·1 Early Social Formations, , to the status of the proletarii., After 146 BC the struggle of the peasants centred around, the question of land reforms. The question of land reform, had assumed urgency not only due to the desperate situation, of the assidui but also because without land the peasants could, not render military service. The assidui were demanding, redistribution of land. A section of the ruling class also felt, that some land reforms would have to be undertaken in order, to stabilize the position of the peasantry. However the more, conservative sections of the oligarchy were opposed to any, kind of land reform, provoking a bloody conflict on this issue., Two brothers (Tiberius and Gaius Gracchus), belonging, to a plebeian oligarchical family which bore the name Gracchus,, led the movement for land reforms. Tiberius Gracchus was, elected tribune in 133 BC and initiated a programme for giving, land to the peasants. The land which he proposed to distribute, among the poor was actually public agricultural property, which had been illegally taken over by the aristocracy. This., category of land was known as ager publicus. The origins of, ager publicus go back to the beginning of Roman expansion., When Rome subjugated a state after a military campaign, it, tended to confiscate some of the agricultural land situated in, the territory of that state. This was a sort of penalty imposed, on the conquered state for resisting the Roman army. Upto, ont-third of the cultivable land might be confiscated. The, confiscated land was called ager publicus and was the collective, property of all Roman citizens. The ager publicus was managed, by the state., A part of the ager publicus was distributed among poor, peasants (this was necessary to sustain the army) while the, rest was leased out by the state, mainly to big landowners, and the aristocracy. The leasing was supervised by the censors., The best lands were cornered by the aristocracy. The issue of, aristocratic control over the ager publicus had been raised from, time to time. In 367 BC a law was enacted which placed an, upper limit on the area of the ager publicus which an individual, could take on lease. The size of the holding could not be more
Page 255 :
Ancient Rome (I), , I, , 229, , than 500 jugera Qugerum was a Roman unit for measuring, area, roughly equal to two-thirds of an acre). This law was, generally violated by the aristocracy and they occupied large, tracts of the ager publicus for long durations. What is more,, they regularly defaulted on the payment of dues for the leases., The age:· publicus had thus been converted into private estates, by the aristocracy., When Tiberius Gracchus assumed office in 133 BC he set, up a commission to take back all the ager publicus which was, under illegal occupation. The resumed land was then to be, distributed among small peasants. The peasants were to be, given occupancy rights and had to pay dues to the state for, this land. The aristocracy strongly resisted this reform and, unleashed violence on a massive scale in the city of Rome., Tiberius Gracchus was prevented from seeking election to the, tribuneship for another term. When he persisted he was killed, alongwith three hundred of his supporters. Shortly afterwards, Tiberius's younger brother Gaius Gracchus became tribune in, 123 BC. Gaius carried forward the reforms by implementing, the agrarian laws of Tiberius. To improve the lot of the, dispossessed citizens Gaius started sale of cheap grain, subsidized by the state. Later on this developed into a system, of free grain distribution to the poorest sections of the Romans., Gaius al~o settled a large section of poor citizens in the newly, conquered territories of Carthage., Gaius was murdered in 121 BC and his followers were, brutally massacred. In 119 BC the commission for redistributing, the ager publicus was disbanded. This ended the last major, attempt to carry out land reforms in Rome. The struggle for, improving the conditions of the assidui was unsuccessful. By, the end of the republic the small peasantry became an, insignificant class. On the other hand the ranks of the proletarii, swelled. We can say that in the last hundred years of the, republic the overwhelming majority of the plebeians had, become landless citizens. This process had been going on for, a long time. P. A. Brunt (Social Conflicts in the Roman Republic), has argued that by the time the Second Punic War began the
Page 256 :
230, , I, , Early Social Formations, , bulk of the citizens were already landless. He points out that, the size of peasant holdings had decreased considerably by, the second century BC. The assidui found it difficult to support, themselves. When this is viewed in the context of the military, campaigns in which they had to participate, which led to the, physical· elimination of large numbers of assidui soldiers, we, can easily understand how a class which formed the majority, of the citizens when the republic was established virtually, disappeared in the final years of the republic., In the second century BC the qualification for the assidui, was property with a value of at least 400 denarii (the· silver, denarius was the standard Roman currency in the republican, period): Brunt has calculated that in this period 400 denarii, would have been the value of about one acre of cultivable, land. The yield from one acre of land was much less than the, bare minimum that was necessary for survival. Brunt compares, this situation with peasant holdings in the early republic when, the average size of the holdings was approximately 5 acres., Moreover, the small peasants had been pushed to marginal, and less fertile areas by the big landowners. Under these, circumstances it was impossible for the peasants to make a, living out of their land. Peasant holdings in Italy eventually, passed into the hands of the aristocracy. This trend was, facilitated by the indebtedness of the assidui who had to often, raise loans for performing their military duties. The long, absence of able-bodied adult workers from their fields during, campaigns and their death in wars completed the ruin of the, Roman peasantry., The failure to carry out land reforms and the dwindling, size of the assidui class necessitated an immediate solution to, the problem of recruiting soldiers. After all, landl~ss citizens, could not be expected to render military service out of their, own resources. Earlier, a partial solution to this problem had, been found by rming auxiliary contingents from subjugated, territories. A portion of the cavalry was also maintained at, state expense. In 100 BC Marius, who held the post of consul, for several terms and was a leading political and military
Page 257 :
Ancient Rome (I), , I, , 231., , figure, reformed the Roman army by inducting paid troops., Henceforth Roman troops received a salary from the state., Landless citizens could now serve as soldiers., The creation of a semiprofessional army which was, commanded by military leaders drawn from the oligarchy, gave a new dimension to the political conflicts in Rome., Previously the assidui soldiers would return home after a, campaign and go back to their fields. Now the soldiers were, permanently engaged in campaigns and were stationed for, long periods outside Italy in distant parts of the empire. The, army units developed an identity of their own. They were, fiercely loyal to their commanders to whose planning and, strategy they attributed their achievements. This was, particularly the case with the more successful commanders., Victory in war gave a chance to the soldiers to loot and, plunder. With large well-trained armies under them the, military leaders of the oligarchy could violently assert, themselves for controlling the policies of the Roman state., There were several such commanders in the period between, 100 BC and 27 BC: Marius himself, Sulla, Crassus, Pompey, Julius, Caesar, Mark Antony and Augustus. The army was, increasingly deployed to suppress discontent and to promote, the interests of the aristocracy. It was also used in personal, factional conflicts by the oligarchy. The army itself became a, factor in the politics of Rome., The elimination of the assidui as a class transformed the, character of the Roman republic. Roman citizens in central, Italy were now mainly propertyless plebeians. Having no, means of subsistence at their disposal they congregated in the, city of Rome where cheap rations were available. Considering, that most of the proletarii could not afford even subsidized, grain the Roman state began to distribute free grain to the, most destitute citizens. Brunt in his important work entitled, Italian Manpower has estimated that c. 50 BC about 320, 000, citizens were receiving free grain., The largest chunk of participants in Roman assemblies now, was of unemployed poverty-stricken members who subsisted
Page 258 :
232, , I, , Early Social Formations, , on free grain distribution. But their physical presence in the, city of Rome could not be ignored. As citizens they had some, role to play in the affairs of the state. Mobs of. discontented, proletarii were a destabilizing factor. Free grain distribution, took care of their very basic need for food. Otherwise, they, were a potential source of unrest. Plebeian mobs at times turned, violent and disrupted meetings of the assembly. They were, manipulated by the individual politicians to capture political, power. In fact, the plebeian mobs had been used by the, aristocracy in the violence against the Gracchus brothers. It, was with the help of these landless citizens that the programme, for land reform was scuttled. Commenting on this Perry, Anderson says (Passages from Antiquity to Feudalism): 'While, the [Roman] countryside became chequered with large noble, domains, the city conversely became populated wHh a, proletarianized mass, deprived of land or any other property., Once fully urbanized, this large and desperate underclass lost, any will to return to a small-holder condition, and could often, be manipulated by aristocratic cliques against projects for, agrarian reform backed by the assidui farmers. Its strategic, position in the capital of an expanding empire ultimately, obliged the Roman ruling class to pacify its immediate material, interests with public grain distributions. These were, in effect, a, , cheap substitute for the land distribution which never occurred', (emphasis added)., , IV, For seventy years from 100 BC onwards Rome witnessed a, series of violent upheavals. In 91 BC there was a widespread, revolt in Italy against Roman rule. A' regular war broke out, between Rome and several Italian communities which had, been subjugated by the Romans. The Marsi and Samnites were, the most formidable opponents of the Romans in this war., This war is called the Social War (91-89 BC). The word 'social', here refers to the socii Italici or Italian allies (socius means ally,, companion). In other words this was a war with Rome's Italian
Page 259 :
Ancient Rome (I) I 233, , allies. When Rome established its domination over Italy it, either went in for direct annexation of territories or else, imposed unequal alliances on the Italian states. Annexed, territories were mainly located in central Italy and these were, the earliest conquests of Rome. These states or tribal, communities ceased to be independent. They were directly, administered by Rome. The communities inhabiting these, territories were integrated with the Romans. The allied states,, i. e. socii Italici, were however allowed to retain their own, governments which were more or less autonomous in matters, of internal administration. The foreign affairs of the allies were, subject to Roman control. Relations with allies were governed, by formal treaties which acknowledged Roman supremacy., The allies had to render military assistance to Rome. The nature, of this assistance was specified in the agreements., When the Social War began only one-seventh of Italy was, directly governed by Rome. This implies that most of Italy, was allied territory. The emergence of a mighty Roman empire, had a profound impact upon Roman relations with the Italian, allies. Roman interference in the internal affairs of these states, had increased over the years since they were too weak to, offer effective resistance. The allies lost much of their, autonomy. What these states resented even more was the, growing military and financial burden placed on them by, Rome. The provisions of the treaties with allies were ignored, by the Romans. The socii felt that their loss of autonomy could, be remedied if they also had a right to participate in the, decision-making process of the Roman state. This was not, possible since the allies were not Roman citizens. The main, demand of the allies during the Social War was that Roman, citizenship rights should be extended to the socii Italici,, although there were some Italian communities like the Samnites, who fought the war with the objective of regaining their, independence., The Roman conception of citizenship should not be thought, of as something fixed or static. Roman citizenship had evolved, over many centuries and was still evolving towards the end
Page 260 :
234., , I Early Social Formations, , of the republic. As in the case of any ancient society having, some sort of democratic structure, male adults belonging to, the original community or communities settled in a given, territory for a long time constituted the original citizen body;, These primitive communities were socially organized as tribes, or clans and the citizens invariably had kinship and marriage, ties with other members of the citizen body. Similarly in Rome, the initial citizens belonged to the tribes settled within the, city. The three tribes of the comitia curiata reflected the early, social and political organization of the Romans. Of course class, differentiation and the rise of a well-organized state ha·d, modified this organization by introducing clearcut class, distinctions within the tribes and curiae. The most obvious, division was between the patricians and plebeians. Despite, these class distinctions citizenship rights at the beginning of, the republic extended to all male adults of the communities, settled in Rome., This narrow conception of citizenship suited relatively, small territorial units. It was not workable for larger states., We saw in the previous chapter that when Athens expanded, its territory in Attica it incorporated the neighbouring, communities of Eleusis and Marathon with the citizen body, of Athens. To some extent this was also true of Thebes in, Boeotia. Sparta was an exception among the larger Greek states, in resorting to the wholesale enslavement of Laconians and, Messenians. The citizens of Sparta remained a small closed, group, but they had to pay a heavy price in terms of devoting, so much time to military training in order to keep the, Laconians and Messenians in a state of permanent slavery., The Romans preferred to extend citizenship to the, communities which it subdued during its expansion in Latium., To some extent this was unavoidable because Rome was still, a very weak state in fifth century BC. It was impossible for it, to reduce neighbouring communities to helotry as the Spartans, had done. Rather, Rome desperately needed the cooperation, of Latin communities which lived in the neighbourhood of, the city to defend itself against raids by Etruscans, Oscans,
Page 261 :
Ancient Rome (I), , I, , 235, , Umbrians and Volscians. To start with it formed a, confederation with the Latin people and later when it had, become sufficiently strong it ended the independence of the, Latins. In return the Latins were given citizenship rights. This, made them a formal part of the Roman state. At the same, time they were obliged to be soldiers in the Roman army., This was a long drawn-out process and there were some Latin, people who submitted to Rome voluntarily while others were, subjugated after being defeated in battle. The extension of, citizenship rights to the Latin speaking people established a, special relationship between the Romans and other Latins., The extension of citizenship rights to the Latins did not, necessarily mean that all of them got the right to vote in the, assembly. As the Roman concept of citizenship ;volved, two, different types of citizenship came into existence. Citizens, either enjoyed full citizenship rights or were inferior· citizens, (or half citizens). Full Roman citizenship implied two types of, rights: political rights (jura publica) and civil rights (jura privata)., The political rights of citizenship gave a citizen the right to, participate and vote in the assembly. These rights entitled, him to be elected to various public offices, subject to certain, qualifications. Civil rights pertained to marriage, inheritance,, ownership of property, and enforcement of contractual, obligations. Roman law only recognized the validity of marriages between citizens (i. e. a person had to belong to a family, of a citizen in order to marry someone from another citizen's, family). This did not mean that marriage between citizens, and nop-citizens was prohibited. It meant that marriages, among citizens and non-citizens, unless they had been explicitly, sanctioned by the state, would not give the offspring born of, such marriages the rights of citizenship and inheritance. Only, citizens possessed the right to a Roman marriage, called, conubium. Marriages with conubium allowed the children to, have rights of citizenship and to inherit property., The question of inheritance was important because it was, linked to ownership. The civil rights of citizens allowed them, to have full ownership rights which included the right to sell
Page 262 :
236, , I Early Social Formations, , and inherit property. It may be mentioned here that Roman, law clearly distinguished between possession (possessio) and, ownership (dominium) of property. Only citizens had full, ownership rights. Further, civil rights included commercium, or the right to enter into contracts with other citizens and to, have such contracts enforced in a court of law. In the absence, of commercium a contract had no legal validity before a Roman, court. Thus, jura privata automatically conferred conubium,, commercium and dominium on a citizen., Citizens with full citizenship rights enjoyed both political, rights and civil rights. Inferior citizens, whom we may call, half citizens, only had civil rights. They could not vote or get, elected to Roman magistracies. Initially when citizenship rights, were given to the Latins only civil rights were intended. This, enabled intermarriage between Romans and other Latin, communities and allowed Latins to hold property in full, ownership. The unique association between the Romans and, other Latins gave rise to a special prerogative called jus Latii, (Latin right) which indicated the right of the Latins to enjoy, Roman jura privata. Subsequently some sections of Latin, communities outside Rome were given political rights as well, making them full citizens. To begin with this must have applied, to ruling classes of the Latin communities. This arrangement, was extended to some Italian states when Rome brought most, of central Italy under its control. If a state was permitted to, have an autonomous local government under the overall, supervision of Rome it was referred to as a municipium. The, municipium usually had an urban centre and later the term, acquired the meaning of 'free city'. The foreign policy of a, municipium was regulated by Rome and it had to provide, military assistance as and when called upon to do so. Inferior, citizenship rights were extended to the municipium, though a, small section might be made full citizens. The Roman oligarchy, tended to forge alliances with the aristocratic sections of, conquered territories in central Italy by giving them a place in, the structure of the Roman state. This tendency can be seen in, other parts of Italy also. It should be emphasized that for an
Page 263 :
Ancient RDme (I) . I 237, , entire state or community to gain full citizenship it had to, give up its autonomy and completely merge with the Roman, state., Depending upon the relations with a particular community, some were given full citizenship rights while others were given, inferior citizenship rights. Generally speaking full citizens were, mostly concentrated in central Italy particularly in areas, inhabited by Latins. It was rarely that Rome gave full citizenship rights outside this core area. Beyond Italy there was no, question of granting any kind of citizenship. In terms of citizenship rights jus Latii and municipium denoted basically the, same thing, i. e. inferior citizenship rights. The main point of, difference between them and the socii Italici was that ordinarily, the inhabitants of allied territories did not have Roman civil, rights. Technically the socii Italici stood outside the Roman, state, while the Latins and the municipia were an integral part, of the Roman state., While discussing Roman citizenship we must refer to, another feature of Roman expansion in Italy. When Rome had, annexed a territory it sometimes sent out a group of Roman, citizens to settle in that territory. This body of citizens, established a Roman colony (colonia) in the conquered area., The colonies acted as garrisons to ensure Roman control. The, Roman citizens in these colonies retained all their citizenship, rights while local inhabitants were made inferior citizens. We, are told about a colony of 300 Roman citizens. being first set, up at Ostia, the main port of the city of Rome. The colony of, Ostia had well-defined garrison duties. Many more colonies·, were set up along the sea to protect the coastline. When Rome, embarked upon expansion outside Latium after 338 BC, colonies, were established on a large scale in central Italy. This was a, strategy to consolidate Roman rule in newly annexed, territories. In addition to Roman colonies there were now, several Latin colonies. These were somewhat different. The, Latin colonies were relatively bigger. They were made up of, a mixture of full and half citizens. from Latin areas together, with some Romans. The Latin colonies were organized into
Page 264 :
238, , I Early Social Formations, , autonomous self-governed units. Apart from their strategic, roJe the Latin and Roman colonies served to latinize the areas, in which they were located. They helped to spread Roman, culture and ideas in Italy. In the late republic colonies tended, to be much larger in size, with up to 5000 settlers. It was no, longer necessary to maintain colonies to control Italian, territories. Colonies were now one way of providing land to, impoverished peasants. The later colonies were not confined, to central Italy but were to be found in other parts of Italy, too. Gaius Gracchus created the first overseas colony in, Carthage. By the end of the republic it had become common, to set up colonies outside Italy, especially in western Europe, (Spain, Gaul etc.). After 100 BC retired professional soldiers, (veterans) were given land and settled in colonies. The colonies, outside Italy were in the provinces, i. e. in territories directly, administered by Rome. These colonies had their own local, governments and the citizens had full citizenship rights. Their, political rights were however a mere formality since they could, not regularly travel to Rome to participate in the assembly., Nevertheless they were the nucleus of Roman citizens in the, provinces and in later years inhabitants from these colonies, rose to high positions in the Roman state., It can be seen that Roman citizenship was extended on a, very selective basis and that the grant of citizenship rights, always had a political-military objective. As long as the Italian, allies were left free to manage their internal affairs and the, provisions of the treaties, particularly provisions regarding, military assistance, were respected by Rome the socii did not, mind being denied citizenship rights. The mounting military, burden combined with loss of autonomy made them demand, citizenship rights. When the senate rejected the demand the, allies joined hands to fight against Rome. This was the, background to the Social War., The war ended with a compromise. In 90 BC Rome granted, full citizenship to all allied territories in Italy south of the, river Po. It has been commented that in terms of political rights, the extension of citizenship to all free inhabitants of Italy (bar-
Page 265 :
Ancient Rome (I), , I, , 239, , ring the Cisalpine region) had very little meaning except for, the elites who got limited access to political power. The majority, of citizens could not be physically present in Rome to, participate in sessions of the assembly and were therefore, unable to exercise their political rights. This is an indication of, the decline of the comitia tributa and conciliw;n plebis. The, proceedings of these assemblies were totally dominated by, the urban proletarian mobs residing in the city of Rome who, were used by the oligarchy to disrupt the functioning of the, government on more than one occasion., By 90 BC the constitutional machinery of the Roman, republic was on the verge of collapse. The multiplicity of centres, of power added to the confusion. The army had emerged as a, new political factor. It had altered the balance of forces in, Rome and began to play a decisive role in determining the, outcome conflicts. The conflicts were increasingly marked by, bloodshed on a massive scale. The Social War had coincided, with a major military campaign in West Asia. In continuation, of its programme to make the territories of the Hellenistic, kingdoms a part of the empire, Rome had been trying to, increase its sphere of influence in West Asia. Macedonia had, been annexed, the Greek states had been forced to accept, Roman supremacy, the Seleucids of Syria had been defeated, in war, and Egypt was made a protectorate. Western Anatolia, had recently been organized as the province of Asia. But the, Romans faced a stiff challenge from the ruler of the state of, Pontus in Anatolia. Pontus was situated in northern Anatolia,, south of the Black Sea. Initially the relations between Rome, and Pontus had been quite cordial. Pontus had supported Rome, in the Macedonian wars and the Third Punic War. But, relations between the two states deteriorated when king, Mithridates VI of Pontus began expanding into western, Anatolia and Greece., Roman expansion in Anatolia was halted by Mithridates, VI. Mithridates VI of Pontus should not be mixed-up with, Parthian kings of the same name (this name was linked to the, worship of Mithra which was prevalent in West Asia, and the
Page 266 :
240, , I Early Social Formations, , title Mithridates was borne by several rulers in this region)., The Parthians ruled over Iran and parts of Mesopotamia., Mithridates I had created a large Parthian empire and his, successor Mithridates II was a contemporary of Mithridates, VI of Pontus. The latter phase of the clash with Mithridates VI, coincided with Roman wars against the Parthian king, Mithridates II and his successors, which can be somewhat, confusing., Rome had to wage three wars against Mithridates VI, (Mithridatic wars) before they could finally defeat him in 63, BC. After the Social War Roman armies were engaged in the, Mithridatic wars. Given the scale of operations in West Asia,, Rome ~ad to send a very large force to the east. The command, of this vast army became matter of dispute among the political, and military leaders of Rome. Marius, who had been consul, for several terms and was an able military leader, was given, charge of the campaign against Mithridates. Marius was, opposed by Sulla who at that time headed the most, conservative and anti-poor faction of the patrician aristocracy., This was the faction which had blocked the grant of citizenship, to the socii which had precipitated the Social War. Sulla was, stationed in the east at the end of the Social War. He was, asked to hand over command of the eastern armies to Marius,, but refused. Instead he marched to Rome with the army and, tried to forcibly seize power., A Civil War (88--82 BC) broke out between Sulla and Marius., Sulla soon got the upper hand in this Civil War. His task was, made easier by the death of Marius in 86 BC. Sulla then resumed, the war against Pontus and succeeded in expelling Mithtj.dates, VI from the Greek states which he (Mithridates) had occupied., His success added to his prestige and increased his hold over, the army. He used this po~er to become absolute rule~ of, Rome. Sulla returned to Rome in 82 BC and with the help . of, the army put an end to the Civil War. He brutally suppressed, his opponents. In 81 BC he was appointed dictator. Sulla defied, the rule according to which six months was the maximum, period for which a Roman dictator could assume office. He
Page 267 :
Ancient Rome (I), , I, , 241, , extended his dictatorship indefinitely. Sulla's personal, authority was supreme with all political and military power, concentrated in his hands., ·, Sulla's dictatorship lasted from 81 to 79 BC. In 79 BC he, retired for personal reasons and died· the next year. J1is dictatorship marked a turning point in the history of the republic., From now on the powerful military commanders, who have, been called 'warlords' by D. Dudley (Roman Society), decided, the fate of the Roman republic. The violent conflicts of these, warlords speeded up the collapse of the republic. Sulla's, dictatorship witnessed the strengthening of the patrician, aristocracy. Sulla dealt with the plebeian senatorial leaders in, a very cruel manner. He let loose a reign of terror against all, those who wanted to make the structure of the republic more, democratic and broadbased. The democratic gains of the, previous few decades were done away with. Powers of the, tribunes were reduced and the assemblies of citizens were, ignored. Sulla wanted to restore the prestige of the senate., The seats in the senate were doubled from 300 to 600. This, weakened the position of the plebeian senators and at the, same time gave the aristocracy (which now included the elite, among the Italian allies who had received citizenship rights), an overwhelming presence in the .state. The census, which had, been the only way of determining a citizen's place in the, republican institutions, was abandoned and the position of, the censor declined. Sulla also abolished free grain rations, causing great hardship to the destitute citizens., The measures of Sulla could not have been a long term, solution to the political crisis of the republic. Most of his regulations were reversed after his death'. The military situation, had become critical in the 80s and:70s. The Mithridatic wars, were still going on in east and now Rome had to defend its, empire in the west. Some of the supporters of Marius had, launched a movement against Sulla's dictatorship. The province, of Spain became the focal point of the rebellion. The movement, developed into a guerrilla war under the leadership of Quintius, Sertorius and between 80 and 72 BC Spain almost seceded from
Page 268 :
242, , i Early Social Formations, , Rome. Sertorius is regarded as the most brilliant guerrilla, leader of the ancient Greco-Roman world. Within Italy itself, a major slave uprising broke out in 73 BC and went on till 71, BC. This uprising, which was led by a Thracian slave named, Spartacus, was the biggest slave revolt in. Roman history. The, Spartacus revolt, as it is called, originated in Sicily and soon, spread to southern Italy. The revolt was crushed after heavy, fighting in 71 BC., The campaigns against Mithridates VI, Sertorius, and, Spartacus required military mobilization on an unprecedented, scale. Without the support of the plebeian elite such, mobilization was impossible. In the post-Sulla period the, plebeian senatorial oligarchy reasserted itself making it all, the more difficult to resolve the internal political conflicts of, the republic. Moreover, the military campaigns of this period, brought four warlords to the forefront of Roman politics., These four warlords were Lucullus, Crassus, Pompey and, Julius Caesar. Their struggle for power dominated the closing, years of the republic., Of the four, Crassus and Pompey had started their political, careers as supporters of Sulla, butthey were later instrumental, in revoking his measures. They were opposed to letting the, senate monopolize the Roman state. These warlords derived, their strength from the armies which they commanded and, the prestige which they gained due to their victories. Pompey, defeated Sertorius, Crassus suppressed the Spartacus revolt, and Lucullus was able to temporarily check Mithridates VI. In, 70 BC Crassus and Pompey consolidated their political position, by getting elected as consuls for that year. Julius Caesar was, sent to Spain to restore order in the province after the defeat, of Sertorius. Lucullus was still in Anatolia because even though, Mithridates had been expelled from Pontus, he recoveredmost, of his territory due to a mutiny in the Roman army., In 67 BC Lucullus was recalled from the east and thereafter, retired from public life. This left three warlords-Crassus,, Pompey, and Julius Caesar. Pompey was sent out to the east, to lead the Roman army against Mithridates. Pompey was
Page 269 :
Ancient Rome (I), , I, , 243, , given extensive powers under a law called Lex Manilia (66 BC)., Under Lex Manilia Pompey enjoyed powers which were more, wide~ranging than those of any other Roman military, commander before him. His own command was combined, with that which Lucullus had helq.. He was fully authorized, to settle the east in whatever manner he considered, appropriate. Pompey inflicted a decisive defeat on Mithridates, in 63 BC. Pontus was divided among chiefs who pledged their, loyalty to Rome. Having established Roman supremacy over, Anatolia, Pompey annexed the Seleucid territories in Syria., As we have noted the Seleucid kingdom was confined to Syria, after Antiochus ill. The Romans had defeated Antiochus III, but had allowed the Seleucid state to survive. Subsequently, Parthian expansion iri West Asia had deprived the Seleucids, of most of their territories. The Seleucids were left with only, Syria, where also their rule was quite weak.. Jn 63 BC Pompey, annexed Syria and made it a Roman province with, headquarters at Antioch. Rome was now a leading power in, West Asia., When Pompey had concluded his assignment in the east, he returned to Rome in 62 BC. The return of Pompey, inaugurated a new era in Roman politics. Pompey was certainly, in a position to assume absolute authority like Sulla had done., He however preferred to disband his army. The convention, which had traditionally been followed in Rome was that when, a general entered the city after a campaign he did so as a, private citizen and not as a military commander. Sulla had, violated this convention but Pompey did not want to create a, situation that might lead to more bloodshed. This gave the, senate a chance to curtail the power of Pompey. Since the, administrative arrangements made by Pompey in the east, were subject to the approval of the senate, the senate tried to, interfere in these arrangements which delayed their, confirmation., As the tension between Pompey and the senate grew,, Pompey joined hands with the two other warlords to counter, the senate. Julius Caesar had returned from Spain in 60 BC.
Page 270 :
244, , I, , Early Social Formations, , Crassus, Pompey and Julius Caesar formed a coalition in 60, BC. This coalition is referred to as the First Triumvirate, (triumvirate was a term for any official institution in which, authority was equally divided among three persons). The, historical significance of the Triumvirate can only be, understood when we realize that the constitutional machinery, of ,the republic had broken down by this ti.me and there was, no effective government at Rome. Pompey, Crassus and Julius, Caesar tried out a new experiment by concentrating all power, in their hands. The entire authority of the Roman state was, vested in the Triumvirate. The other institutions of the republic, were not abolished but they were made ineffective.., In 60 BC the three warlords had entered into a formal agreement to share power by forming a Triumvirate. In 56 BC they, renewed this agreement. After 56 BC, however, the, Triumvirate began facing problems. Crassus had been given, command of the eastern army where he endeavoured to, extend the Roman frontiers beyond Syria. This involved hini, in a full-fledged war with the Parthians who were now ruling, over Iran and Mesopotamia. The Romans suffered one of their, biggest military reverses when their army was totally routed, by the Parthians in 53 BC at the battle of Carrhae (Harran, in, northern Mesopotamia). Crassus was killed in this battle. The, death of Crassus upset the balance of power in the Triumvirate., For a few years after this event there was a tussle between, Julius Caesar and Pompey., Julius Caesar had received the command of Roman armies, in Gaul (modern France and Belgium) in 58 BC. For nearly a, decade Caesar was in Gaul. He conquered this large and fertile, region for .the Roman empire. Gaul was inhabited by Celtic, tribes who had evolved their own distinctive culture in areas, lying beyond the Alpine mountains. It may be recalled that, some Celtic Gauls were also settled in the northern parts of, Italy, between the Alps and the river Po, and this part of Italy, came to be known as Cisalpine Gaul. The main zone of Celtic, settlement lay beyond the Alps. The Celtic Gauls gave their, name to this region and the Romans generally referred to
Page 271 :
Ancient Rome (I) I 245, , present day France and Belgium as Gaul. The Gauls strongly, resisted Roman domination. They organized themselves, militarily to prevent Roman conquest of their territories. The, most well-known leader of the Gauls was Vercingetorix of, the Arverni tribe. It was only in 50 BC that Julius Caesar, succeeded in subjugating the Gauls., By the time Caesar had completed the conquest of Gaul, the relations between him and Pompey had worsened. In order, to prevent Pompey from becoming absolute ruler of Rome,, Caesar decided to march into Italy with his army. In 49 BC he, crossed the Rubicon river on his way to Rome. When the, territories of Cisalpine Gaul were organized, the river Rubicon, was made its southern boundary. Officially Julius Caesar's, command was confined to the area north of the Rubicon. He, was not authorized to cross the river into Italy proper with, his army. He ignored this provision and led his army to Rome., There was a brief civil war between the two warlords. Pompey, was defeated in 48 BC and fled to Egypt where he was, murdered. Julius Caesar was now the supreme warlord of, Rome. In 48 BC he became dictator with extensive powers. In, 47 BC he was made dictator for ten years. This might have, been a step in the direction of acquiring monarchical authority., Caesar's attempts to become absolute ruler was challenged, by some sections of the oligarchy. He was murdered in 44 BC., The leaders of the conspiracy to assassinate Caesar were Brutus, and Cassius. They belonged to the faction of the oligarchy, which wanted to prevent Julius Caesar from converting the, republic into a monarchy. There can be doubt that Julius Caesar, had been trying to alter the basic structure of the republic., The supporters of Julius Caesar were still sufficiently, strong to assert themselves after his assassination. They, quickly organized themselves under the leadership of Mark, Antony, Lepidus and Octavian Caesar. Mark Antony was a, prominent political ally of Caesar. Lepidus had been 'master, of the horse' under Caesar. 'Master of the horse' (magister, equitum) was an office attached to the post of a dictator and, normally it was held by a very loyal supporter. Lepidus had
Page 272 :
246, , I Early Social Formations, , also been consul in 46 BC. Octavian was a grand-nephew of, Caesar. His mother Atia was Julius Caesar's niece. He had, been recognized as the adopted son of Julius., Mark Antony, Lepidus, and Octavian Caesar formed a, new triumvirate, known as the Second Triumvirate, in 43 BC., Within a year the Triumvirate had suppressed all opposition., Brutus and Cassius were defeated in battle (42 BC). Lepidus,, who was the weakest among the three leaders, was then forced, to retire from the Triumvirate. Subsequently differences arose, between Mark Antony and Octavian over sharing political, power. The struggle for power between the two coincided, with further Roman campaigns in the east. Mark Antony sought, the support of Cleopatra, who was at that time the Ptolemid, ruler of Egypt. The combined forces of Mark Antony and, Cleopatra were defeated by Octavian at Actium on the western, coast of mainland Greece in 31 BC. Mark Antony and Cleopatra, were dead by 30 BC and Octavian became the supreme ruler, of the whole Roman empire. In 27 BC Octavian assumed, the, title Augustus (exalted) and declared himself princeps, i.e. the, first and foremost citizen. 27 BC formally marks the end of- the, republic and the beginning of the Roman principate.
Page 273 :
Chapter Nine, , ANCIENT ROME (II), , OCTAVIAN, who was called Augustus Caesar after 27 BC,, transformed the entire character of the Roman state. The, changes introduced by him were a continuation of the, measures initiated by Sulla, the First Triumvirate, Julius Caesar, and the Second Triumvirate. The dictatorship of Sulla, the, First and Second Triumvirates, and above all the dictatorship, of Julius Caesar, had undermined the institutions of the Roman, republic. Within half a century, i. e. between 81 and 31 BC,, these institutions had more or less ceased to function and, political power had got concentrated in the hands of the, warlords. Julius Caesar, after having defeated his main rival, Pompey, tried to become a permanent dictator. This, experiment was cut short by the assassination of Julius Caesar., Had Caesar lived for some time it is likely that his dictatorship, would have culminated in a monarchy. After he was killed,, political power still remained in the hands of his supporters., With the backing of the troops which were loyal to Julius, Caesar, three warlords-Mark Antony, Lepidus and, Octavian-took over the Roman state and formed the Second, Triumvirate. However Octavian was able to eliminate the other, two members of the new Triumvirate (Lepidus was not, physically eliminated but was forcibly retired), and by 31 BC, he had emerged as the unchallenged leader of the Roman, empire.
Page 274 :
248, , I, , Early Social Formations, , I, Augustus ruled over Rome as princeps for four decades till his, death in AD 14. He completed the process begun by Julius, Caesar and was successful in establishing a permanent dictatorship which developed into a monarchy. He was successful, where Sulla and Julius Caesar had failed. Augustus was careful, not to hurt the sentiments which the people had for Roman, republican traditions. These traditions had a history of several, centuries and could not be immediately abandoned. Augustus, cleverly retained the outward form of the republic while altering, the actual content of the Roman state. Most of the political, institutions of the republic were retained and the designations, of public officials remained the same as before. Augustus, himself was not referred to as king (rex) and he had no royal, title. Princeps merely meant first citizen. In fact,it might not, have been apparent to contemporaries that a monarchical form, of government was coming into existence. It is only when we, place the Augustan era in a historical context that we can, understand the implications of his actions and see how he, replaced the republic with a monarchy., Initially under Augustus the Roman state haa the, appearance of a republic. But by the time he died the state, had in effect become a monarchy. Except for the senate all, other features of the republic had become worthless. The final, transition from republic to monarchy was actually completed, in a period spread over several generations. For a long time, the successors of Augustus maintained the fiction that the, republic had not come to an end. Theoretically at least the, authority of the emperor was not derived from any divine, right to rule but was based on the consent of the citizens. The, ruler was the embodiment of the republic. In practice this meant, that a ruler had to have the sanction of the senate and the, army. Though there were no formal rules about this but, recognition by both the senate and the army gave the stamp, of legitimacy to an emperor and made his rule relatively stable., This arrangement had its origins in the kind of state which
Page 275 :
Ancient Rome (II) I 24'), , Augustus created after defeating Mark Antony., Given that the constitutional machinery of the r~public, had collapsed and in view of the multiplicity of centres of, political power in Rome it was necessary that a compromise, formula be worked out which would give an adequate share, of power to various components of the state. The emperor, i., e. Augustus, the senatorial oligarchy (which included the, plebeian elite), and the army were the three main components, of the new political structure. Augustus was successful in, ensuring a proper balance between these three centres of, power, thereby putting an end to the long period of instability, of the last few decades of the republic., It must be emphasized that as a class the senatorial oligarchy-Augustus belonged to this class-was too powerful, to be ignored, and although Augustus limited the authority, of the senate he allowed it to remain an important part of the, government. Since the army was the main source of Augustus's, power, the military leadership also had a key role to play in, the affairs of the state. Augustus made it clear that the military, leadership was fully subservient to him and that he was the, supreme commander of the Roman armies. The violent, conflicts which had marked the two triumvirates had shown, how dangerous it was to form coalition~ of military, commanders for neutralizing the senate. Augustus followed, the example of Julius Caesar in exercising absolute personal, power. Moreover, the defeat of Mark Antony had left no, military commander in the Roman empire who could compete, with Augustus., The main objective of Augustus was to concentrate as much, power as possible in his own hands. His government may be., described as a permanent military dictatorship. The, government of the republic had been based on a system of, granting imperium to magistrates and military commanders., The imperium was the authority .vested in an official for, performing executive, judicial or military functions. Imperium, was granted to high officials and it gave them unlimited, authority within their defined spheres to carry out their
Page 276 :
250, , I Early Social Formations, , ., , constitutional responsibilities. The imperium was given for, specific tasks and the duration and area for which the imperium, was valid was always clearly indicated. The imperium of a, consul was for one year. It was through the imperium that the, consuls got their powers. Governors of provinces, called, proconsuls, held the imperium for administering their respective, provinces. Similarly the imperium of a military commander was, for the period of a campaign. The imperium came to an end, when the objective of the campaign had been attained. The, imperium of military commanders defined their area of, operation. During the First Triumvirate Julius Caesar had the, imperium for Gaul. His imperium was valid only beyond the, northern frontier of Italy. The river Rubicon mar~ed the, boundary of Julius Caesar's imperium and when he crossed, the Rubicon in 49 BC he violated his imperium., In the republic several officials held the imperium simultaneously at any given moment of time. The imperium of each, official related to whatever duties he was expected to carry, out in his capacity as magistrate or military commander. What, Augustus did was to limit the imperium to just one person, i.e., himself. As holder of the imperium he was designated imperator, or commander. The term imperator (from which the word, emperor is derived) henceforth signified the one and only, person who possessed imperium. The imperium of Augustus, was for an indefinite period and was valid throughout the, empire. He was the only military commander with imperium., Consuls continued to be elected but they were divested of, their imperium. With the approval of the concilium plebis the, powers of the tribunes were transferred to Augustus., Augustus divided the provinces between himself and the, senate. He asked the senate to give him exclusive command, over the provinces of Gaul, Spain and Syria for ten years. The, remaining provinces were directly governed by the senate., Augustus already ruled over Egypt. The province of Egypt, eventually became a private estate of Augustus. Gaul, Syria, and Egypt were the most recent additions to the Roman empire., They still had to be properly organized. Spain had been a
Page 277 :
Ancient Rome (II) , 251, , disturbed territory since the rebellion of Sertorius and had to, be settled. Augustus got down to creating an administrative, infrastructure for all these provinces. Control over the, provinces of Egypt, Gaul, Spain and Syria provided Augustus, with the immense financial resources that he required to, consolidate his position. Besides, he constantly interfered in, the provinces which were administered by the senate., Appointments in these provinces had to be made with the, consent of the emperor and Augustus saw to it that leading, positions were occupied by his loyalists., Since the emperor did not have an administrative apparatus, of his own, Augustus developed an imperial bureaucracy. This, bureaucracy was answerable solely to the emperor and was, dependent upon him for its authority. The Augustan, bureaucracy was recruited mainly from among the equestrians., The equestrians were a distinct class in Roman society, which, may be broadly defined as the non-senatorial elite (both, plebeian and patrician). This class came into existence in the, late republic. The origins of the equestrians lie in the equites of, the early republic. The equites constituted one of the five classes, in the comitia centuriata. These were initially wealthy, patricians who served in the cavalry and maintained their, horses at their own expense. Subsequently the cavalry was, expanded and the Roman state began to. finance a section of, this cavalry. Some of these paid horsemen were rich plebeians, and they were also included among the equites. In the late, republic the equites were reorganized and the senators were, excluded from this class. By this time the cavalry was no longer, a crucial part of Roman military organization and the, equestrians (equestrian literally means horseman), i. e. those, who belonged to the class of equites, were now essentially a, privileged group in society of which any wealthy and influential person could be a part. With the decline of the comitia, curiata the equestrians became more of a social class consisting, of the non-senatorial elite. To a large extent Augustus relied, on this class to form his imperial bureaucracy., Augustus modified some of the official posts which had
Page 278 :
ZS2, , I Early Social Formations, , been created in the late republic to suit his purposes. One of, his top priorities was to establish order at Rome and to ensure, that the plebeian crowds did not engage in rioting. Moreover,, steps had to be taken to prevent the oligarchy from using, armed force to capture the city. After the battle of Actium the, Roman armies had been stationed in the provinces and on the, frontiers of the empire. Instead of using the army for, protecting the city of Rome Augustus depended on a special, armed contingent called the praetorian guard. The nucleus of, the praetorian guard were the imperial bodyguards. In the, late republic military commanders had frequently maintained, bodyguards at "their camp headquarters (praetorium). These, personal bodyguards were known as praetorian guards (cohors, praetoria). Augustus expanded his praetorian guards by, inducting highly trained loyal armed contingents to form nine, cohorts. Cohorts were infantry units which normally consisted, of six centuries (600 soldiers) each. Historians differ over the, composition of the cohorts of praetorian guards. The estimate, ranges from 500 to 1000 troops in each praetorian cohort., Of the nine praetorian cohorts of Augustus three were, encamped in the vicinity of Rome, and the remaining six were, stationed in neighbouring urban centres. Initially the emperor, was personally in charge of the praetorian guards but in 2 BC, they were placed under the command of a prefect. Later the, number of prefects was raised to three. Due to their strategic, location in the capital the praetorian guards became a factor, in Roman politics after Augustus. At times they were powerful, enough to make a person of their choice the emperor. Since, they were well-armed and highly trained it was difficult to, ignore them., The overall responsibility for keeping peace in the city, was given to a magistrate called praefectus urbi. This magistracy, had existed since the pre-republican period. Whenever a, Roman king went out of the city a praefectus urbi was named as, his deputy and he held temporary charge of the government., In the republic such an official had been appointed when both, consuls were absent. The post of praefectus urbi had fallen into
Page 279 :
Ancient Rome (II), , I, , 25 3, , disuse until Augustus revived it. In his time this became a, permanent magistracy and was entrusted with the task of, preventing disturbances in the capital. The praefectus urbi was, always a leading senator. He was assisted by a police force, which was set up for the first time by Augustus. But the, praefectus urbi had no jurisdiction over the praetorian guards., Under Augustus's successors the praefectus urbi also became, the official 'through whom other magistrates communicated, with the emperor. As an additional police force for the capital, Augustus formed seven cohorts of vigiles or night watchmen., They were placed under a separate prefect who was directly, answerable to the emperor. The vigiles were assigned the task, of fire-fighting in Rome apart from their other duties., The distribution of free grain rations to poor citizens was, vital for keeping discontent within manageable limits in the, city. The number of citizens entitled to free grain had been, reduced from 320, 000 (see chapter eight) to 250, 000 by Julius, Caesar. According to P. A. Brunt the figure had again risen to, 320, 000 by 5 BC. The regular distribution of grain rations on, such a large scale required an effective system for supply and, storage. The possession of a vast empire provided the Roman, state with the resources for obtaining large quantities of grain, to feed the capital. The entire system was streamlined by, Augustus and the province of Africa became the main supplier, of grain to Rome. A separate prefect, praefectus annonae, was, in charge of the branch of administration which looked after, public distribution of grain. Augustus revived the census of, citizens which had become irregular in the late republic and, had almost stopped after Sulla. As many as three censuses, were taken during the reign of Augustus. These censuses were, useful for compiling lists of citizens and provided information, about their wealth and property. The eligibility for free grain, rations was determined by the census., Augustus did not discard the assembly, but used it to gain, legitimacy for his actions. Initially, Augustus sought the approval of the assembly to show that he enjoyed popular support., Meetings of the comitia tributa were held from time to time
Page 280 :
254, , I Early Social Formations, , but they were strictly regulated by Augustus's officials. The, citizens were merely expected to express their approval by, calling out in favour of the proposals or lists of candidates, placed before them. Formal procedures for voting were no, longer followed and by the end of Augustus's reign meetings, of the comitia tributa were convened just occasionally. Most, of the legislative functions of the assembly were gradually, transferred to the senate. Augustus reformed the senate by, drastically reducing the number of members. It may be recalled, that Sulla had increased the strength of the senate from 300 to, 600 members. Under Julius Caesar the number of senators, had gone up to 900. Augustus first reduced the seats in the, senate to 800 and eventually to 600. Moreover the functioning, of the senate was controlled by the emperor through his, officials., Augustus concentrated on consolidating the empire rather, than on conquering new territories. After the acquisition of, Egypt there was no major expansion of the empire under, Augustus. As we have seen, the provinces of Egypt, Syria,, Gaul and Spain were directly placed under the emperor. Egypt, and Syria already had well-established administrative, structures. Augustus's main task in these provinces was to, reinforce Roman influence and to secure the smooth flow of, tribute to Rome. Egypt was treated almost as a personal, acquisition of the emperor who appointed an official called, praefectus Aegypti to govern it on his behalf. Augustus stabilized, the eastern borders of Syria by abandoning the policy of, military conflict with the Parthians. He focused his attention, on securing the existing border of Syria rather than attempting, to expand into Parthian territory., Spain was one of the oldest provinces of Rome, but it had, undergone a long period of turmoil since the revolt led by, Sertorius. Augustus reorganized the administration of the, province and subjugated the numerous tribes which inhabited, the region. Roman presence in Spain had so far been mainly, confined to the areas which bordered the Mediterranean., Augustus initiated a policy of settling Romans in the northern
Page 281 :
Ancient Rome (II), , I, , 255, , and western parts of Spain. New colonies were established in, Spain and large tracts of land were brought under cultivation., This policy was also extended to Gaul. Vast landed estates, called latifundia came up in Spain and Gaul. The Augustan, era witnessed the growth. of new urban centres in Gaul., Garrison towns, administrative urban centres and colonies of, Roman settlers became points from where Latin culture was, disseminated to the countryside of Spain and Gaul. Augustus, vigorously promoted the latinization of the western provinces, of the empire., The promotion of Roman/Latin culture in Spain and Gaul, had an impact on the African possessions of Rome lying in the, western Mediterranean. The province of Africa was a major, centre of Latin culture. Further west, Mauritania (modern, Morocco) was latinized due to the efforts of its ruler Juba II, who was subservient to Rome. Juba II had spent a long time, at Rome and had close personal ties with Augustus. In the, eastern Mediterranean Greek and Hellenistic traditions, remained paramount. The great Hellenistic cities of Alexandria, and Antioch continued to flourish under Augustus. In the, ancient Greek cities Augustus gave more autonomy to the, local elites thereby improving the municipal administration, and civic life of the poleis., With the annexation of Egypt and Syria the entire, Mediterranean had come under Roman rule. The unification, of the Mediterranean gave a boost to long-distance seaborne, trade. The establishment of peace in the empire facilitated, exchanges between different parts of the Mediterranean. The, strong Roman military presence in the Mediterranean Sea, helped to curb piracy which had often threatened maritime, trade., The immense intellectual output of the Augustan age laid, the foundations of classical Latin literature. This was the golden, age of Latin writing and produced the most outstanding poets, of the language. The three great classical poets, namely, Virgil,, Horace and Ovid composed their major works at the beginning, of the principate. Virgil (70-19 Be) is generally recognized as
Page 282 :
2..56, , I, , Early Social Formations, , the greatest of the three. He wrote an epic known as Aeneid. It, was begun in 30 BC after the decisive victory of Augustus. The, Aeneid recounts the adventures of Aeneas,· who was married, to Creusa, daughter of the king of Troy. Aeneas is supposed, to have escaped from Troy after the city had been defeated in, the Trojan war. He finally landed in Italy and became king of, the Latins. Aeneas was a mythical figure from whom the Roman, emperors were supposed to have descended. The Aeneid speaks, of the historical destiny of the Roman people to civilize the, world. The epic glorified the Roman past and was in a sense a, celebration of the coming of the Augustan age. Some scholars, have suggested that Virgil was commissioned to compose the, poem to hail the victory of Augustus. The work, unfortunately, was unfinished at the time of Virgil's death. Apart from, the rich poetry of this period, a significant historical account, of Rome was written at the beginning of the principate. Livy,, one of the leading historians of ancient Rome, produced a, massive history of the republic and the first phase of, Augustus's reign. Livy's History originally contained 142, books, though only summaries of 35 books have survived., Livy's work is indispensable for understanding the transition, from the republic to the principate., The later years of Augustus's rule were marked by growing, authoritarianism. The. kind of criticism of the government, which had been possible in the republican period was no longer, tolerated. All dissent was ruthlessly suppressed. Debates on, controversial political issues disappeared from public life. The, state increasingly began to interfere in private affairs of, individuals. Augustus introduced a series of moral reforms, from 18 BC onwards. One of his most well-known laws for, imposing. a moral code on citizens was Lex Julia which made, adultery a public offence. This law was defied by his own, daughter who was punished by being exiled. In another, incident, the poet Ovid was ordered to leave Rome when he, was involved in a scandal with which Augustus's, granddaughter was connected. Ovid became a bitter critic of, the regime and commented upon the personal despotism of
Page 283 :
Ancient Rome (II), , !, , 257, , Augustus by stating that under him 'The State is Caesar'., Augustus's success in restoring peace gave him an, opportunity to accumulate more and more power at the cost, of the senate. The senate was unwilling to resist Augustus, precisely because he had demonstrated his ability to put an, en.d to the violent upheavals which the Roman republic had, witnessed for over a century. The unending cycle of unrest,, civil war, and bloodshed had instilled a mood of despair and, helplessness in the Roman ruling class. This mood is reflected, in contemporary writings and speeches. In the closing years, of the republic the general feeling was that the Roman empire, would soon come to an end. In one of his early poems Horace, summed up the prevailing sentiment when he said, 'Which of, the gods now shall the people summon/ To prop Rome's, reeling sovereignty'. The episode of Mark Antony's' alliance, (and marriage) with Cleopatra, and the conflict between Mark, Antony and Cleopatra on the one hand and Augustus on the, other, had created such a panic at Rome that the people of, Rome actually believed the false rumour spread by Augustus's, supporters that. Mark Antony was trying to make Rome an, Egyptian province., Following the battle of Actium the mood completely, changed. Once it was realized that Augustus was in a position, to restore peace, the Roman oligarchy was prepared to, surrender some of its privileges. We need to understand that, the Roman people were fed up with the chaotic conditions of, the late republic. If Augustus could restore peace they were, not opposed to letting him become a permanent dictator. It, was by exploiting the intense desire for peace and stability, that Augustus transformed the republic into a monarchy. The, change in the situation after 27 ac was so dramatic that, Augustus was looked upon as the saviour of the Roman, empire. The writings of the Augustan era reflect a shift from, pessimism to a more confident outlook., The state now began to promote the cult of Augustus and, projected him as a semi-divine person. This process had already, started after the assassination of Julius Caesar. The Second
Page 284 :
: ' i;, , I, , Early Social Formations, , Triumvirate had claimed legitimacy for itself by glorifying, Julius Caesar. In 42 BC, soon after the Second Triumvirate was, formed, Julius Caesar had been recognized as a god. As the, adopted son and successor of Julius Caesar, Augustus was, declared the child of a divine person (divi filius). Augustus, made the fullest use of the sentiments which were attached to, the name of Caesar and added Julius Caesar's family name to, his title. The name of Caesar was crucial for justifying the, absolute authority of Augustus. Caesar eventually became a, title for all Roman emperors and the term survived in different, forms upto modem times. For instance, the terms used by the, Prussians and Russians for their rulers (Kaiser; Czar) were, derived from Caesar., The achievement of Augustus in restoring order and in, giving a new direction to the empire was so remarkable that, later generations accorded a special place to him in Roman, history. The reign of Augustus was portrayed as marking the, inauguration of a long and glorious era of peace and stability, which was defined by the term Pax Romana ('the Roman, peace'). Pax Romana was the basis of the prosperity of the, empire. It guaranteed the advancement of the people who, inhabited the territories ruled by Rome. It was stated that as, long as Pax Romana lasted, the people would be secure and, happy. However, it should be noted that the concept of Pax, Romana had ideological implications. The Augustan era completed the process of transforming the Roman city-state into, an empire. Pax Romana expressed the idea of a universal empire, ruled by Rome. Yet, for all those who were part of the empire,, it meant the acceptance of Roman hegemony. Pax Romana, signified Roman domination, in the same way as Pax Britannica, ('the British peace') signified colonial rule for those who were, subjects of the British empire in modern times. Since the time, of Agustus a widely held view in the Roman empire was that, through the establishment of Pax Romana Rome was fulfilling, a great historical mission. In many ways Augustus was the, principal architect of the Pax Romana which lasted for several, centuries.
Page 285 :
Ancient Rome (II), , I, , 259, , n, Augustus died in AD 14. Since he had no surviving direct, male descendent he was succeeded by his stepson Tiberius., In AD 4 Augustus had adopted Tiberius, the son of his wife, L:iyi.a from an earlier marriage, as his heir. The nomination of, a successor from within the family was another step in the, direction of establishing a hereditary monarchy. Tiberius ruled, from AD 14 to 37. It was during his reign that the monarchical, character of the Roman state became clearly visible. The, emperor was now all-powerful. The surviving traditions and, institutions of the republic were further ignored till they ceased, to have any relevance. It was probably in the time of Tiberius, that the comitia tributa stopped functioning. The senate was, the only republican institution which continued to be, important, but it was subordinated to the emperor., Membership of the senate tended to become hereditary,, though at the same time aristocratic families from outside Italy, (mainly from Spain, Gaul and Africa) were selectively admitted, to the oligarchical council. Consuls were still appointed, regularly. They were not elected by the assembly but were, nominated by the emperor and approved by the senate. The, rule that a consul held office for one year was no longer, adhered to. Their tenure could now be for just for a couple of, months. Consulships were occasionally held by the emperors., At times minors from the imperial family were also made, consuls. The consulship was thus reduced to a decorative post., The Roman armies had. held Augustus in very high esteem, primarily because he had been a very successful commander., The prestige of Augustus and the sentiments associated with, his name (and the name of Julius Caesar) guaranteed the, support of the soldiers for -Tiberius. Tiberius however was, personally not an outstanding military general. His only claim, to be emperor was that Augustus had chosen him as successor., Tiberius realized that in the long run this claim might not be, sufficient for retaining the throne (we use the term throne, only figuratively since there was no special sanctity attached
Page 286 :
260, , I Early Social Formations, , to the throne or seat of the emperor in the Roman state). As, we have noted, in the final analysis the emperor's authority, rested on brute force. Given that Tiberius had no worthwhile, military achievements to his credit he could not be sure that, the army would automatically assist him if a crisis arose., Therefore, in order to have adequate force at his disposal he, reorganized the praetorian guards., While Augustus had posted only three praetorian cohorts, in the city of Rome, and had stationed the remaining six cohorts, in adjoining Italian cities, Tiberius concentrated all the units, close to himself. Henceforth the praetorian guards resided, permanently in Rome. The guards were placed under one, prefect. This prefect had immense influence. Tiberius appointed, a person by the name of Sejanus as the praetorian prefect., Sejanus became so powerful that at one stage. he was almost, the deputy of the emperor. Sejanus and the prefects who, succeeded him tended to interfere in every branch of the, government. They were often a source of terror for the, inhabitants of the capital. The praetorian guards helped, Tiberius to consolidate his position. Later emperors had to, constantly ensure the support of the praetorian guards to keep, themselves in power., As the Roman monarchy evolved it developed some, peculiar features. Till the middle of the third century AD the, Roman state remained theoretically a republic. The people were, supposed to have delegated their authority to the emperor, who ruled on their behalf. In actual practice the emperor was, selected from among the oligarchy. The hereditary principle, remained very weak and there were very few dynastic, successions. The monarchy was essentially elective in nature., According to Edward Gibbon (Decline and Fall of the Roman, Empire), 'the emperor was elected by the authority of the, senate, and the consent of the soldiers'. Although the, institution of monarchy survived and was strengthened in, the centuries following the death of Augustus, it was marked, by considerable instability. The proportion of emperors who, were assassinated was very high. Several rulers had very short
Page 287 :
Ancient Rome (II) I 261, , reigns and there were frequent wars of succession., From AD 14 to 68 all emperors belonged to the family of, Augustus or Tiberius. When Tiberius died in AD 37 he was, succeeded by Caligula who was a descendent of Tiberius's, brother Drusus. The moral degeneration and cruelty of, Caligula made him intensely unpopular. In AD 41 Caligula, was killed by his personal attendants. The praetorian guards, then placed an uncle of Caligula, named Claudius, on the, throne. Incidentally, the mother of Claudius was the daughter, of Mark Antony from his marriage with Octavia, sister of, Augustus. Claudius made one significant territorial conquest., In AD 42-44 he added Britain to the Roman empire. Claudius, died in AD 54, probably as. a result of poisoning. He was, succeeded by Nero who was the deE:-cendant of another daughter of the marriage between Mark Antony and Octavia. In the, prevailing atmosphere of mistrust and intrigue Nero was suspicious of all those who might have a claim to the throne. He, physically eliminated possible rivals within the family and also, killed many of the prominent senators. He became increasingly, intolerant of any kind of criticism and went to the extent of, killing his mother and aunt. The praetorian guard then decided, to get rid of him. He was forced to flee from Rome and, committed suicide in AD 68. With the death of Nero the rule, of Augustus's family came to and end. It has been remarked, that the revolt against Nero was a general reaction against, the tyranny and immoral private lives of Augustus's successors, ., rather than against the monarchical system., For the next one year there was a virtual civil war among, army commanders for control of the empire. Nero was, succeeded by Galba who had the support of the Roman army, in Spain. Galba had been an important official under Claudius., Within a few months he was killed by the praetorian guards., Otho, one of the principal officers of the praetorian guards,, now became emperor. Meanwhile the Roman armies in the, northern European province of Germany had refused to, recognize Otho. The army in Germany was led by Vitellius., Vitellius marched towards Rome with his troops and defeated
Page 288 :
262, , I, , Early Social Formations, , Otho. Otho committed suicide and Vitellius was declared, emperor. Within the space of just one year after the death of, Nero (AD 68-69) three different emperors had occupied the, throne., At this point the eastern armies stationed in Syria and, Palestine rebelled. They nominated their commander, Vespasian as the emperor. Vespasian came from an ordinary, . family which was not part of the aristocracy. He had risen to, a high position in the army and had successfully suppressed, a major uprising of the Jews in Palestine (AD 66-70). With, his victorious army he marched to Rome and seized power, in AD 69. Vitellius was captured and killed. The reign of, Vespasian (AD 69-79), and his son Titus (AD 79-81), was a, period of relative peace and stability for the empire. The, authority of the emperor was restored under the family of, Vespasian (the family name of Vespasian was Flavius and, his dynasty is called the Flavian dynasty). After the death of, Titus in AD 81 his brother Domitian became emperor. He, ruled for fifteen years and managed to undo what Vespasian, and Titus had achieved. Contemporary accounts speak of, his excessive brutality. In AD 96 he was assassinated by the, praetorian guards., The collapse of the Flavian dynasty created a political, vacuum in the state. The senate tried to fill this vacuum by, reasserting itself. It ·took the initiative to appoint a new emperor. In AD 96 Nerva was made emperor by the senate. Nerva, started the p~actice of adopting successors during the lifetime, of the emperor with the support of the senate and the army., This ensured smooth successions for the next eighty years., The emperors were chosen with care, particularly with regard, to their administrative abilities. Many historians refer to Nerva, and his four successors as the 'good emperors' and regard, the period from AD 96 to 180 as the' golden age' of the empire., It must be pointed out that the selection of the 'good emperors', was based on a wide consensus. The historical reputation of, these emperors was not only the result of their capacity to, run the government efficiently, but was also an indication of
Page 289 :
Ancient Rome (II) I 263, , the fact that they were acceptable to a large section of the, oligarchy., Soon after his accession Nerva had adopted a popular, general named Trajan as his successor. Trajan became emperor, in AD 98. He belonged to an aristocratic family of Spain. By, the end of the first century AD the senate had ceased to be a, purely Italian body. The oligarchy had accommodated, aristocratic families settled in the western provinces of Spain,, Gaul, Africa. It has been estimated that under the first two, Flavians 75-80% of the senators were Italian. In the next few, decades Italians were reduced to about50% of the total. Since, the time of Augustus provincial ruling classes and municipal, elites had been a vital component of the central imperial, structure. Augustus had raised several members of aristocratic, Italian (non-Roman) and provincial families to senatorial and, equestrian ranks and had sought their support to counter the, influence of the traditional Roman oligarchy. This trend, continued under his successors and resulted in the, 'provincialization' of the central government. In other words,, the landed classes outside Italy were gradually incorporated, within the imperial system during the principate. By the midthird century AD the Roman empire had a truly composite, ruling class., Trajan vigorously pursued a policy of territorial expansion., Under him the Roman empire reached its greatest extent., Trajan's military accomplishments made him all the more, powerful and further strengthened the institution of, monarchy. So far the river Danube had formed the northern, border of the Roman empire in central and eastern Europe., All Roman provinces in this region were located south of the, river Danube (the river Danube flows across the middle of, central and eastern Europe and falls into the Black Sea). Trajan, annexed some of the lands situated across the Danube in, eastern Europe and formed these into the new province of, Dacia (roughly corresponding to modem Romania). Dacia was, rich in gold deposits and this might have been one of the, reasons for its annexation.
Page 290 :
264, , I Early Social Formations, , In West Asia Trajan reversed the policy of Augustus and, attempted to subjugate the Parthians. Ever since the Romans, had occupied Syria (63 BC) they had been engaged in a, prolonged conflict with the Parthians. The Parthians had risen, to power under the Arsacid dynasty and had gradually taken, over the Seleucid possessions in Iran and Mesopotamia. In, chapter eight we saw that Mithridates I of the Arsacid dynasty, was the founder of a vast Parthian empire. The Parthians had, pushed back the frontiers of the Seleucid empire and at the, time of Pompey's eastern campaigns the Seleucids only, controlled Syria. During the First Triumvirate the Romans had, suffered a serious setback when Crassus was defeated and, killed by the Parthians at the battle of Carrhae (53 BC)., Subsequently Augustus had abandoned the policy of military, conquest of the Parthian empire., Despite Roman presence in Syria, Palestine and Anatolia, the Parthians remained the most formidable political and, military force in West Asia. They were responsible for the, cultural and linguistic unification of the entire region. Their, influence extended far beyond their own frontiers. The, Parthians borrowed several aspects of Hellenistic culture but, blended these with specific Iranian elements. They promoted, the Aramaic language, which had been the official language, of the Persian empire prior to Alexander's invasion. Aramaic, was originally spoken by some of the tribes living in northern, Mesopotamia. Under the Parthians Aramaic, rather than, Greek, became the most widely spoken language of West Asia., An alphabetic script of twenty letters was developed for, writing Aramaic. This was the language of the common people, even in Roman ruled territories like Syria and Palestine., Aramaic was the language in which Jesus Christ preached., For over a century after Augustus the Romans preferred, to bring only the outlying areas of the Parthian empire under, their control. Their main objective throughout this period was, to maintain a dominant position in the large mountainous area, known as Armenia which lies in Central Asia to the north of, Iraq and Iran. At times the Romans briefly ruled over parts of
Page 291 :
Ancient Rome (II) I 265, , Armenia directly, but more often they placed pro-Roman, puppet rulers on the Armenian throne. The Parthians, constantly tried to dislodge the Romans from Armenia since, this was a strategically located territory on their northern, borders. It may be mentioned here that some of the important, trade routes linking West Asia and Central Asia passed, through Armenia., Trajan launched a campaign to destroy Parthian power in, Armenia and Mesopotamia. Armenia was formally made a, province of Rome. Northern Iraq was constituted into a new, province of Mesopotamia. The borders of the Roman empire, were extended upto the river Tigris and the Parthians were, ousted from southern Mesopotamia. This, however, was a, costly enterprise and the successor of Trajan realized that it, was not practical to militarily control the newly acquired, territories. Trajan died in AD 117 and was succeeded by his, adopted heir Hadrian. Hadrian withdrew Roman troops from, the Tigris and stationed them on the Euphrates. The Euphrates, now marked the farthest extent of Roman territories in West, Asia. Armenia was placed under a puppet king and ruled, indirectly. Nevertheless from Trajan onwards the Romans, adopted a more aggressive military policy with regard to the, Parthians .. This policy speeded up the decline of the Parthian, empire and facilitated the rise of a new force in Iran. From, the first quarter of the third century AD the territories, formerly ruled by the Parthians came under the Sassanid, dynasty of Iran. In AD 223 the Sassanid king Artaxerxes I, or, Ardashir (AD 211-241), overthrew the Parthian king, Artabanus V. The rise of the Sassanids was a much bigger, challenge to the Romans in West Asia than that of the Parthians., Westward expansion of the Sassanid empire during the third, century AD took place at the expense of Roman territoij.es in, West Asia and Rome had to divert enormous financial and, human resources to contain the Sassanid threat., Hadrian was more concerned about making the borders, of the empire safe. In the east the river Euphrates was made, the frontier. In Europe a series of permanent military outposts
Page 292 :
266, , I Early Social Formations, , was established along the Danube to prevent tribal incursions., In the British isles the northern parts of the province were, fortified by building a defensive wall (called Hadrian's Wall,, the remains of which are still extant) to thwart raids into Roman, territory. Hadrian toured the provinces extensively and, improved the administration of provincial capitals. The reign, of Hadrian saw several outstanding achievements in the fields, of art and architecture. Hadrian worked out a unique formula, to ensure a smooth succession after his death. He adopted, Antoninus Pius as his successor and asked Antoninus to, simultaneously adopt a young boy named Marcus Aurelius as, his (Antoninus's) successor. Antoninus Pius became emperor, after the death of Hadrian in AD 138. He was succeeded by, Marcus Aurelius (AD 161-180). Antoninus Pius and Marcus, Aurelius are together termed to as 'the Antonines'., Apart from being a competent administrator Marcus, Aurelius was a philosopher belonging to the Stoic school. A, compilation of his sayings entitled Meditations is still read, widely. Under him the empire began to adopt a more defensive, policy towards tribal groups settled in eastern Europe on the, banks of the Danube. Marcus Aurelius found that it was, becoming difficult to militarily resist the mounting pressure, of these tribes on the Roman frontiers. He attempted to arrive, at a settlement with some of these tribes (see chapter ten)., Many of these tribes belonged to the Germanic branch of the, Indo-European linguistic family. Aurelius had to undertake, several campaigns to push out the Germanic tribes in the, Danubian area. These campaigns were a great strain upon the, empire., Upon the death of Marcus Aurelius (AD 180) his son, Commodus became the emperor. Commodus had already been, associated with the government since AD 177. It soon became, apparent that he was unfit to rule. Commodus was killed in, AD 192. The army placed an experienced official named, Pertinax on the throne. Pertinax belonged to an ordinary family, but due to his merit he had been given important, responsibilities by Aurelius. He was one of the few associates
Page 293 :
Ancient Rome (II) I 2(i7, , of Aurelius who had survived the killing of prominent, functionaries by Commodus. Pertinax immediately attempted, to carry out a reform of the administration and put an end to, the disorder caused by Commodus. The praetorian guards, resented the stern discipline which he tried to impose and, conspired against him. Pertinax was killed within a few, months of becoming emperor. The praetorian guards replaced, him with a nominee of their choice. The powerful military, commanders in the provinces were unwilling to accept this., One of the military commander named Septimius Severus who, commanded the troops stationed in south-eastern Europe, marched to Rome with his contingents. Septimius entered, Rome and was declared emperor AD 193., Septimius Severus was the first Roman emperor of African, origin. He was born at Leptis Magna in Libya. Before him all, emperors had belonged to Italy, Spain and southern Gaul., These were the core areas of Latin influence in which Roman, aristocratic families were concentrated. The senate would have, been reluctant to appoint someone from outside this core area, as the emperor. Septimius became emperor with the support, of the army. By the second century AD the army was not any, longer exclusively Roman or Italian. Soldiers were recruited, from all over the empire. Hence the army with its mixed, composition was not very particular about the region to which, an emperor belonged. This trend intensified in later years, and emperors backed by the army had very diverse social, backgrounds. Septimius Severus himself contributed to making, the Roman ruling class more cosmopolitan by marrying a, Syrian woman., Septimius steadily reduced the role of the senate in the, government. The basis of Septimius's power was the armythe state under him may be defined as a military monarchy., He reconstituted the praetorian guards. Provincial urban, centres received greater attention under Septimius, but, imperial interference in the municipal administration of these, cities increased. Septimius died in AD 211 and was succeeded, by his son Caracalla. By this time the Roman empire was facing
Page 294 :
268, , I Early Social Formations, , a serious crisis which was reflected in its military, political, and economic problems. Septimius had managed to check these, problems temporarily but Caracalla was unable to cope with, the growing crisis.. The steadily increasing cost of defending, the empire placed a huge financial burden on the state. As we, shall see one of the solutions resorted to by the emperors was, debasement of coinage. Another solution was to increase taxes., One· of the significant measures of Caracalla must be, viewed in this context. In AD 212 Caracalla extended full, citizenship rights to all free inhabitants of the empire. This is, an indication of the fact that by the beginning of the third, century AD the political privileges associated with citizenship, rights had become meaningless. On the other hand it has been, suggested that the citizenship rights given by Caracalla made, more people liable for paying to various taxes which were, payable only by citizens. These included death-duties and the, tax levied on a citizen for granting freedom to slaves ., .Otherwise the extension of citizenship rights had hardly any, relevance in political terms., The reign of Caracalla became increasingly tyrannical and, in AD 217 he was murdered by the praetorian guards. One of, the prefects of the guards named Macrinus succeeded him., Macrinus was the first Roman emperor who was not a senator, or from a senatorial family. Others before him, even when, they came from ordinary families, had become senators during, the course of their political or military careers. Mactjnus was, unacceptable to both the senate and the frontier armies. There, was a strong feeling against him among troops stationed in, Syria. Caracalla had spent a long time in Egypt and Syria. His, mother, Julia Domna (wife of Septimius), was a Syrian and, she mobilized the soldiers in favour of her grandnephew, Elagabalus. Elagabalus was the head priest of a Syrian solar, deity called Baal. The worship of Baal was very popular among, Asian troops. In AD 218 Elagabalus became emperor with the, support of the Syrian army. Within four years he was killed, by the praetorian guards and was succeeded by his first cousin, Severus Alexander in AD 222.
Page 295 :
Ancient Rome (II), , I, , 269, , Although Severus Alexander had been elevated to the post, of emperor by the army he sought the sanction of the senate, to stabilize his rule. In return for the endorsement of the, senate he revived some of the powers of this institution. He, ruled partly with the support of the senate. Alexander restored, the authority of the state to a degree, but the crisis of the, empire had become too acute. Sharp differences between the, emperor and the army on the issue of fighting the Germanic, tribes culminated in the ouster of Severus (see next chapter)., In AD 235 the emperor was murdered. This date may be said, to mark the end of the principate. The principate is sometimes, referred to as the early Roman empire to distinguish it from, the later Roman empire of the period following the death of, Severus Alexander. The structure of the later Roman empire, differed in many respects from that of the later Roman empire., The murder of Severus Alexander was one more instance, of the failure to resolve the question of the balance of power, between the emperor, the senate, and the army. The army, included the praetorian guards but by the second century AD, the frontier troops in eastern Europe and West Asia were, becoming more and more assertive. These troops were posted, for long durations in frontier areas and developed a strong, sense of solidarity among themselves. Moreover a large, proportion of them were recruited from the local peasantry, and therefore had their roots in the adjoining countryside. It, is not surprising that the assertiveness of the frontier troops, was reflected in their readiness to back several candidates, from the eastern portions of the empire for emperorship. This, became one more factor in the triangular conflict between the, emperor, the senate, and the army. The Roman oligarchy, refused to recognize the claims of candidates who did not, hail from Italy, Spain, Gaul or Africa, especially if they had, humble origins., The decision of the army to place Maximinus I on the throne, after the assassination of Severus Alexander led to a complete, breakdown in the relationship between the senate and the, army. Maximinus came from the backward eastern area of
Page 296 :
270, , I Early Social Formations, , Thrace. What is more, he was an ordinary peasant who had, joined the army and had gradually risen to high positions, under Septimius Severus and Severus Alexander. He spoke, poor Latin. Yet he was popular among the troops who declared, him emperor. Maximinus did not even bother to seek the, approval of the senate. As for the senate, it did not accept, Maximinus as emperor. The triangular conflict between the, emperor, the senate, and the army intensified further. Anarchy 1, prevailed in the Roman empire for the next fifty years· (AD, 235 to 284). Nearly twenty emperors were placed on the throne, during ·this period, many of them non-senators supported by, the army. Eighteen of these had violent deaths., The situation began to improve after AD 284 when the ', emperor Diocletian came to power. Diocletian was a soldier, from eastern Europe whose ancestors were probably slaves., He entirely rebuilt the state through measures intended to ,, ensure long-term stability. Heavy taxes were imposed to, overcome the acute financial crisis of the government. In order, to streamline the administration the empire was divided into, four parts. Diocletian ruled over one part directly while, autonomous rulers were appointed for the remaining three, parts. Each ruler was supreme within his own jurisdiction,, though Diocletian laid down overall policies for the whole, empire. Diocletian held charge of Thrace, Egypt, ~natolia and, West Asia; Maximian looked after Italy and north Africa;, Galerius administered the Danubian provinces; and, Constantius had Gaul, Spain and Britain under him. Most, historians date the beginning of the later Roman empire from, the reign of Diocletian (i. e. AD 284)., Some of the predecessors of Diocletian had experimented ., with partitioning the empire among joint-rulers for, administrative purposes. The empire had become too unwieldy, for an effective unified administration. A unified, administration could be sustained by a vast central apparatus, which required enormous financial resources. It was more, convenient to divide the empire into separate semiautonomous administrative zones. Diocletian's innovation lay, 1
Page 297 :
Ancient Rome (II) I 271, , in his ability to put in place a workable arrangement of this, type. The tetrarchy (rule of the four) established by Diocletian, did not lead to a disruption of the empire by riva1ries of the, four rulers due to the forceful personality of Diocletian. This, does not mean that there were no tensions among them, but, the experiment was by and large successful., The scope of the state's activities was enlarged and the, regime of Diocletian was on the whole a very oppressive one., The system of tax collection was strengthened. Diocletian, ordered a census to be carried out to estimate the quantum of, agrarian tax payable to the state. Taxes had to be paid in kind., Since the tax was now assessed on individual cultivated plots, (irrespective of ownership), peasants and tenants were bound, to their holdings. They could not leave the place where they, were registered in the assessment record of the census. This, measure greatly benefitted the big landowners. We will, discuss this in some more detail later., Diocletian made administrative units more compact by, carving out smaller provinces. As a result of tlrj,s reorganization, the number of provinces was doubled. This made tax collection, more efficient. It also reduced the powers of the provincial, governors. Provincial governors were expected to concentrate, on their revenue functions and were divested of many of their, military duties. Diocletian expanded the imperial bureaucracy, by opening it to the middle class (local gentry, petty-traders,, urban professionals) which had hitherto been excluded., Military conscription was reintroduced by Diocletian to meet, the huge demand for soldiers in the frontier contingents., It is significant that Diocletian preferred to retain Thrace,, Egypt and the Asian provinces for himself when he divided, the empire. By the end of the third century AD the eastern, parts of the empire were relatively more stable. The triangular, conflict between the emperor, the senate, and the army had, led to a situation where differences between the western and, eastern sections of the empire had become more and more, apparent. These differences were linked to the pronounced, socio-economic divergence between the two sections. The west
Page 298 :
272, , I Early Social Formations, , (Italy, Gaul, Spain, Africa) was dominated by the Roman, landed aristocracy. This aristocracy had traditionally, controlled the senate. When, after AD 235, the oligarchy was, repeatedly denied the emperorship, the senate lost most of, its remaining importance. The emperor and the army joined, hands to marginalize the senate. The Roman landed aristocracy, was however too powerful to be ignored or controlled. The, emperors had to ultimately search for a new basis for their, power. The new monarchical state of Diocletian was firmly, rooted in the eastern provinces.· Here the emperor could, exercise unlimited authority without having to bother about, the western aristocracy. Diocletian briefly visited Rome on, just one occasion. He spent most of his time in the east and, eventually made the city of Nicomedia near the Black Sea in, northern Anatolia his capital. Interestingly, Diocletian's, colleague Maximian who was the ruler of Italy preferred to, reside at Milan rather than at Rome so as to avoid the, interference of the senate and the praetorian guards in his, administration., In the early Roman empire the main title of the emperor, (imperator) had been princeps. This, as we have observed, was, not a royal title. The Roman emperors did not wear any crown, nor did they have any elaborate dress to show their imperial, status. The only clifference between the dress of the senators, and that of the emperor was that whereas the outer garment, of a senator had a broad purple-coloured border (laticlavia), the entire dress of the emperor was of purple colour (the main, outer garment of the Romans was a long unstitched piece of, cloth called 'toga'). The simple dress of the emperors was, part of the fiction that the principate was a republic and not a, monarchy. Diocletian gave up the pretence ·that the Roman, state was still theoretically a republic. He projected himself as, a divine monarch. He started the practice of wearing richly, adorned regal dresses. On his head he placed a band or, diadem studded with precious stones. Roman emperors had, traditionally hesitated to wear a crown and Diocletian's diadem, may be considered a substitute for a crown. The title of the
Page 299 :
Ancient Rome (II), , !, , 273, , ruler also underwent a change. The emperor was no longer, called princeps but was addressed as dominus et deus (di\dne, lord and master). Dominus was the term which was most, commonly employed by slaves when addressing their masters., The use of this term for the emperors of the later Roman empire, has led historians to label this phase of Roman history as the, 'dominate'. While the early Roman empire is referred to as, the principate, the later Roman empire with its new monarchical, traditions is called the dominate. Diocletian introduced court, ceremonials which were meant to emphasize the dignity and, majesty of the emperor. People were expected to prostrate, themselves on the ground when they entered his presence., Scholars have pointed out that Diocletian's conception of, monarchy incorporated several features borrowed from the, Hellenistic kingdoms, Egypt, and the Sassanids of Iran. As, long as the emperor had resided in Rome he had found it, difficult, outwardly at least, to abandon.the ancient republican, traditions of the city. The shift to the east made it easier for, Diocletian to adopt those monarchical traditions which were, familiar to the people of the region., Diocletian retired from public life in AD 305. It is not very, clear as to why he abdicated the throne when he was at the, peak of his power. Gibbon has suggested that Diocletian's, failing health was one of the reasons which prompted his, retirement. The former emperor spent the remaining nine, years of his life at Salonae (modem Split, in Yugoslavia). He, had built a huge palace for himself at this place while he was, still on the throne. The magnificent palace of Diocletian at, Salonae, the remains of which have survived, is an indication, of the pomp and splendour which marked the reign of, Diocletian., Following the retirement of Diocletian there was a brief, war of succession. At the end of this war Constantine I (called, Constantine the Great) became the sole emperor of the empire, in AD 324. Constantine was the son of Constantius who had, been one of the co-rulers in Diocletian's tetrarchy. Before he, became sole emperor, Constantine had ruled over the empire
Page 300 :
2i4, , ! Early Social Formations, , for several years as co-emperor with other partners., Diocletian's scheme of partitioning the empire had continued, for about two decades after he abdicated. The arrangement, eventually broke down and by AD 324 Constantine brought, the whole empire under his unified control after a brief civil, war., Constantine completed the process of shifting the seat of, the emperor to the east. Between AD 324 and 330 he ·built a, new capital for himself at the south-eastern extremity of, Europe. The site of his capital was the ancient city of Byzantium, on the Sea of Marmara. The strategically located Sea of, Marmara separates the European and Asian parts of modern, Turkey. This sea is a narrow passage which connects the Black, Sea and the Mediterranean Sea. The city founded by, Constantine was named Constantinople (now Istanbul)., Constantinople became the main administrative centre of the, empire and later on it was the capital of the Byzantine empire, for many centuries. With this the political role of the city of, Rome came to an end. Henceforth the senate was not even, formally consulted on state matters. Constantine disbanded, the praetorian guards thereby eliminating another major, component of the principate. Constantine established a parallel, senate in Constantinople. The senate of Constantinople had, primarily municipal _functions. Its members were drawn from, the provincial elites of the east. The new senate was totally, subservient to Constantine. Legislative powers were now, concentrated in the hands of the emperor. By the time, Constantine passed away in AD 337 the character of the Roman, state had undergone yet another significant transformation., Diocletian and Constantine were the main architects of this, transformation., Not only was the character of the Roman state transformed, in the first half of the fourth century AD but its geographical, focus had moved from Italy to the eastern Mediterranean. In, the latter half of the fourth century AD the eastern and western, portions of the empire become distinct entitles. Barring a few, brief exceptions the immediate successors of Constantine found
Page 301 :
Ancient Rome (II) I 275, , it impossible to keep the two parts united. After AD 395 the, empire was permanently split into two separate halves-the, western Roman empire and the eastern Roman empire (also, called Byzantine empire). As a matter of fact it is inaccurate to, speak of a Roman empire after the fourth century AD. The, historical reality was that there was only an empire in the east, with Constantinople as its capital. In the west there was no, centralized state structure. As a result of the decline of the, city of Rome the western oligarchy gradually Withdrew to its, huge landed estates in the countryside ofltaly, Spain and Gaul., The western empire broke up into smaller units which were, controlled partly by the powerful nobility and partly by, Germanic tribal chiefs. An entirely new socio-economic, structure emerged in the west which created the preconditions, for the development of feudalism. These changes need to be, viewed in the context of the evolution of the Roman economy, which we will examine in the next section., , m, In the course of our discussion on the republican period we, have examined the nature of class differentiation in Rome. At, the beginning of the republic there was a small patrician, landowning aristocracy which had taken over power after, the expulsion of the Etruscan kings. The majority of citizens, were ordinary plebeian peasants, most of whom had their, own plots of land. There were some cultivators who provided, labour for the big landowners. These were mainly free tenant, farmers. We cannot rule out the possibility of some unfree, labour being employed by the aristocracy, but at the beginning, of the republic their numbers must have been negligible. In, any case the holdings of the aristocracy were as yet not, sufficiently large to require extensive labour., Roman expansion in central Italy c. 500-300 BC placed vast, tracts of agricultural land at the disposal of the landed aristocracy. Most of this land was in the form of ager publicus, which was leased out to the wealthy patricians who controlled
Page 302 :
276, , I Early Social Formations, , the state. A part of the ager publicus was leased to managers, called conductores and yielded a good profit to the state. There, was a continuous struggle between the aristocracy and the, poor peasants over the distribution of the ager publicus. As a, result of this struggle some of the ager publicus was allotted to, impoverished peasants while some of it was used to establish, Roman colonies. This distribution enabled individual peasants, to mobilize resources for serving in the army, which was crucial, for the next phase of expansion within and outside Italy., Moreover, due to this struggle restrictions were set on the, amount of land that a person could take on lease (see chapter, eight). The aristocracy however managed to ignore the, restrictions and continued to acquire large estates by taking, over more and more of the ager publicus. These estates were, occupied by them almost permanently and dues owed to the, state were rarely paid. After a few generations the public land, in Roman territories virtually became private property of the, aristocracy., The massive expansion which began with the Punic Wars, gave an opportunity to the aristocracy to obtain land on an, unprecedented scale. The benefits of the wars of expansion, accrued mostly to the senatorial oligarchy. On the other hand, the assidui farmers, who formed the backbone of the Roman, infantry, had to bear the full burden of fighting these wars., The wars impoverished them and physically eliminated a very, large proportion of the assidui. P.A. Brunt (Italian Manpower), has estimated that at the beginning of the Hannibalic War, there were approximately 100, 000 assidui. According to him, the majority of the plebeians had become propertyless by the, time the Second Punic War ended. There was also a very heavy, loss of men in this war., One significant outcome of the conflict of the orders in, the early republic was the abolition of nexum in 326 BC. The, impoverishment of the peasants had forced them to seek, regular loans from the rich. Failure to repay loans resulted in, enslavement of the debtor under the very rigid Rom.an law of, nexum. Debt bondage had allowed the landed aristocracy to
Page 303 :
Ancient Rome (II), , I, , 277, , acquire unfree labour for their estates. After 326 BC it became, difficult to convert free Roman peasants into unfree labour., The shortage of labour became all the more acute when the, wealthy landowners successfully cornered the land annexed, in Italy and overseas after c. 300 BC. As the size of aristocratic, holdings increased manifold, _there was a corresponding, increase in the demand for labour., The peasants were victorious in their struggle against debt, bondage but their fight for retaining possession over their, land remained unsuccessful. Frequent military campaigns after, 300 BC deprived the assidui of their means of livelihood., Procuringweapons·and ·armour was a costly affair. The peasant, soldier had to additionally support himseH and his family for, the duration of a campaign. The duration tended to get longer, after c. 270 BC. What is more, military campaigns removed, working hands from the fields. Many of the able-bodied male, adults were actually killed in the wars. As a consequence of, these problems the peasants lost their holdings to the, aristocracy. Land redistribution might have been a solution, but the failure of the Gracchan agrarian reforms and the, violence which was unleashed to obstruct the programme of, the Gracchus brothers put an end to that possibility once and, for all. The bulk of the peasants became proletarii. Landless, proletarii could have met the demand for labour to some extent., But the historical circumstances prevailing in the late republic;, which we have already outlined in the previous chapter,, enabled the proletarii 'to extract a major concession from the, aristocracy: free grain rations. Once the proletarii were assured, of their basic requirement of food they had no inclination to, leave the city of Rome and work on the landed estates of the, rich., ., The developments following the abolition of nexum caused, the internal supply of labour to shrink. This, according to, Finley, is one of the preconditions for the growth of largescale slavery. The aristocracy could now carry on production, on its large landed estates, called latifundia, by using slave, labour. Slavery was already widespread in Greece and the
Page 304 :
278, , I Early Social Formations, , eastern Mediterranean. There was an infrastructure for, capturing and supplying slaves. Slaves were an important, commodity in the trade of the Mediterranean world for several, centuries. Greek states had evolved elaborate legal provisions, pertaining to this form of property, thereby institutionalizing, it. Since the system of slave-based production was already, prevalent in the Mediterranean region much before 326 BC it, is possible that slave labour might have been present to a, limited extent on Roman landed estates in the early republic., The wars which ravaged the Greco-Roman world for three, hundred years, from Alexander's invasions to the battle of, Actium, provided an ideal opportunity for the expansion of, the slave trade. Nevertheless, the possibilities of the slave, trade in Greece were quite limited due to the small size of, landed estates. The landed estates of the Roman aristocracy, in Italy, Spain, Gaul and Africa opened up prospects which, would have been unimaginable before the Roman empire came, into existence. The latifundia in these regions absorbed everincreasing numbers of slaves. It was ·on the Roman latifundia, that ancient slavery reached its fullest development. War and, piracy sustained slave-based production on these estates., Slaves were first employed on a large scale in rural and urban, production in the Greek states. The potential of this form of, labour was fully realized in the Roman economy with the, emergence of the latifundia., Brunt has drawn attention to the fact that· on the eve of, the Second Punic War the total population of Italy (including, Cisalpine Gaul) was about 5 million. According to the estimates, worked out by him for the year 225 BC, 4.4 million of these, were free inhabitants (at this time there were 100, 000 assidui),, while 600, 000 were slaves. By the end of the republic the, total population had risen to 7 million. Brunt's figures are for, the year 43 BC. He has argued that the rise in population, between 225 and 43 BC is to be attributed to a phenomenal, increase in the number of slaves. Whereas the free population, had remained static or was declining, the number of slaves, had gone up from 600, 000 to 3 million. This figure pertains
Page 305 :
Ancient Rome <m I 279, , only to Italy. The reorganization of the empire by Augustus, led to the extension of agriculture and of slavery in Spain and, Gaul. The latifundia worked by slave-labour became the basis, of the agrarian economy of the western provinces., In Italy, the peasantry rapidly disappeared after 200 BC., This process gathered more momentum after the Third Punic, War. The Third Punic War coincided with wars in Greece,, Macedonia and Syria. Together all these wars· gave a boost to, the slave trade. War captives were brought to Mediterranean, ports in large numbers. The Romans declared the island of, Delos in the Aegean Sea a free port (167 BC). Delos became the, foremost Mediterranean port for the slave trade. The, disruption caused by incessant fighting in the eastern, Mediterranean and West Asia between c. 150 and 31 BC, encouraged piracy in this region. When Pompey was sent to, the east after the recall of Lucullus, one of the principal tasks, entrusted to him was the eradication of piracy in the area., When Augustus became princeps, one of his first priorities, was the suppression of pirates who had became active in the, disturbed conditions caused by the civil war between, Augustus and Mark Antony. Piracy was checked for a while,, but it never disappeared. Piratical raids remained vital for, augmenting the supply of slaves. This was particularly so after, the establishment of Pax Romana. Between the reigns of, Augustus and Trajan there were few large-scale military, campaigns. Pirates and military adventurers made regular, forays into the relatively backward areas on the periphery of, the empire to obtain slaves. The tribes inhabiting the area, around the Black Sea were their favourite targets., In the late republic the Roman empire was flooded with, cheap slave labour. These slaves were put to work on the, latifundia of Italy, Spain, Gaul and the province of Africa. The, huge surplus which the aristocracy derived from agrarian, production based on slave labour made it fabulously rich. The, era of peace and stability ushered in by the Augustan age, allowed the Roman ruling class to amass more wealth. The, estates of big landowners in classical Greece bear no
Page 306 :
280, , I Early Social Formations, , comparison with the size of the latifundia. In the Greek states,, large holdings ranged in size from 75 to 100 acres. Estates, above 100 acres were unusual. The latifundia of the Roman, aristocracy were normally several thousand acres in size. Even, ordinary latifundia could be of 3000 acres and above. The, really big latifundists possessed holdings amounting to several, hundreds of thousands of acres. For example we have reference, to one landowner having more than 200, 000 acres of land in, the first century BC. In the reign of Nero just six families, reportedly owned half of the province of Africa (by this time, the province of Africa was no longer confined to former, Carthaginian possessions in Tunisia but had been considerably, enlarged)., As in the case of the Greek states, Roman law recognized, slaves as a form of property. The commonly used term for a, slave was servus. Roman law evolved a much more, comprehensive understanding of the concept of private, property and this concept applied to slaves as well. The, authority of the master over the slave was absolute. Slaves, were commodities to be bought and sold in the market in the, same way as cattle. The complete legal deprivation which slaves, suffered denied them any sort of place in society. The slaves, were mere objects, with no rights whatsoever. The utter, degradation of the slaves through the apparatus of the state,, especially through law and legal institutions, was crucial to, cope with the presence of such an extraordinarily large slave, population within Roman society., Slaves might have been property but they were a peculiar, form of property. They were, after all, human beings as well., As human beings they could think, communicate, develop ties, with other human beings, and make efforts to improve their, status. The Roman state had adequate force at its disposal to, ensure that slaves did not attempt to free themselves. In the, long run, however, it was not very practical or cost-effective, to perpetuate slavery through the constant use of· force. The, values which Roman society as a whole imbibed, through law, and in various other ways, served to divest slaves of any kind
Page 307 :
Ancient Rome (11), , I, , 281, , of dignity. These values taught free persons not to have any, sympathy with slaves. As for the slaves, they were humiliated, to such an extent that it was not easy for them to be conscious, of the fact that they were human beings., Slaves captured from a particular area were not allowed, to live together. They were dispersed as widely as possible, and slaves from one area were mixed up with slaves from, other areas. This ensured that they did not form any ties of, solidarity. Slaves employed on a particular estate could be, speaking different languages. Slaves retained no kinship ties, and maintained· no families. The only relationship that they, had was with their master and this was a relationship of, complete subjugation. Slaves had no identity of their own., They did not even keep their own names but were called by, names given to them by their masters., This does not mean that there were no attempts by slaves, to free themselves. Slaves did try. to run away, especially in, areas where conditions might be unsettled. Unlike nineteenth, century America where slaves were invariably Black and, therefore easily distinguishable, or Greek slaves who were, mostly .non-Greeks and could be recognized because they did, not speak the Greek language, Roman slaves had diverse, geographical origins. In an empire which itself was so, cosmopolitan it was difficult to immediately spot a slave who, might have escaped. Apart from individual flight, there were, minor organized rebellions. Unfortunately contemporary, sources hardly mention such uprisings. We do know of three, major slave revolts, all which occurred in the late republic., The most serious of these was the Spartacus revolt of 73-71 BC, which we have mentioned in the previous chapter., The first big slave revolt, known as the First Slave War, (136-132 BC), took place in Sicily. The slaves on the latifundia, of this large isl~.nd worked under the worst·possible conditions, ever since it was annexed by the Romans. In the Roman, campaigns against the Seleucid ruler Antiochus III a huge, number of Syrian and Anatolian prisoners of war had been, made agricultural slaves in Sicily. In 136 BC a slave by the name
Page 308 :
282, , I Early Social Formations, , of Eunus killed his owner and organized the slaves on the, Sicilian estates to launch a struggle against the cruel oppression, of the Roman landlords. Eunus, who was from Apamaea in, Syria, was a religious leader and he used the religious, sentiments of Syrian slaves to mobilize them. He assumed the, name of Antiochus and declared himself king. Many Greek, settlements in Sicily acknowledged his kingship. The uprising, was crushed in 132 BC. Nevertheless, Eunus continued to be a, source of inspiration for the Sicilian slaves. In 104 BC another, slave rebellion, known as the Second Slave War (104-102 BC), broke out on the island. This was led by Salvius and Tryphon., Tryphon was a originally a flute-player by profession. A, number of slaves from Athens and other parts of mainland, Greece played an important role in mobilizing support for, this revolt. The revolt lasted for two years and the slave rebels, were defeated in 102 BC., We have referred to the Spartacus revolt in the previous, chapter. The revolt started in Capua (in Campania, near, modern Naples). It soon spread to most of southern Italy., Sicily was once again an important centre of the revolt., Spartacus was a brilliant military leader. He organized an army, of 90, 000 supporters. Oenomaus and Crb<us were two of the, prominent associates of Spartacus. This army contained a large, number of slaves belonging to Celtic and Germanic tribes., For over two years Spartacus's army controlled most of, southern Italy. The Romans had to launch a large-scale military, offensive under Crassus to suppress the revolt., Slave labour was to be found in every sector of the Roman, economy. Agriculture, mining, an<;I handicraft production were, the sectors in which they were most numerous. Slaves, accounted for as much as 90% of handicraft production. Slaves, were also employed as clerks in government offices. There, was a category of state-owned slaves which was employed at, the lowest levels of the administration to carry out various, tasks which involved a lot of toil and drudgery. Given that, there was a such a large number of slaves and that they were, engaged in such diverse activities it is not surprising that there
Page 309 :
Ancient Rome (II), , !, , 283, , was a hierarchy even among the slaves. At one end there were, skilled slaves, many of whom were used in a supervisory, capacity on the latifundia. Some of the outstanding artisans, and administrative personnel also came from this group. Then, there were the semi-skilled and unskilled slaves who were, occupied in agricultural production or as domestic workers., The majority of the slaves worked on latifundia. The unskilled, agricultural slaves were often bound by chains. The chained, slaves formed the lowest category. These slaves, as well as, those engaged in mining, worked under the most horrible, conditions. The slaves on latifundia were usually split up into, small teams. Each team had its own supervisor who might, also be a slave. The latifundia would be divided into units of, 150-200 acres and one team of slaves would be allotted to, each unit. The entire slave workforce of the latifundia was, placed under an overseer (villicus)., The Roman oligarchy had crea~ed vast latifundia in Italy,, Spain, Gaul and Africa by merging their private holdings in, these areas with huge estates leased from the government., Eventually it became impossible to distinguish between the, two and the big landowners permanently occupied public land., The emperors possessed their own latifundia in a personal, capacity. Since the time of Augustus most of Egypt was treated, as the private domain of the emperor. While production on, the royal estates was generally organized by imperial servants, directly, a portion of the land in Egypt was granted to, individuals. In Greece small peasant proprietors remained, important. West Asia and Egypt did not develop as slave, economies and in these regions the Roman ruling class was, superimposed over existing methods of production and, surplus extraction. Egypt was ruthlessly exploited throughout, the period of Roman rule and there is evidence for widespread, soil-exhaustion in this country during the later Roman empire., The declining productivity of agriculture in Egypt aggravated, the economic problems of the empire in the third century AD., The latifundists took care not to concentrate all their, holdings in one place. The holdings were widely distributed
Page 310 :
284, , I, , Early Social Formations, , so· as to escape the uncertainties of weather conditions. The, tendency was to occupy the most fertile areas of the· empire., In Italy, where latifundia had replaced small holdings by the, end of the republic, surviving peasants were pushed to the, least productive lands. Latifundia tended to absorb smaller, holdings. Trajan had introduced a rule which required all, senators to invest one-third of their wealth in Italy (the, proportion was reduced to one-fourth by Marcus Aurelius), and this must have led to more acquisitions being made by, the oligarchy at the expense of the smallholders. The rich plain, of Campania in the western part of c·entral Italy was one of, the most productive regions of the peninsula and almost all, the cultivable land here was converted into latifundia. As, compared to western Italy, the soil of the Apennine region, was rocky and of poor quality. The aristocracy ousted the, peasants from the fertile plains of the west, especially, Campania, and confined them to the mountainous and, marginal tracts in the east., The latifundia of Italy concentrated on cultivation of cereals, and rearing of sheep and cattle. In fact, in some' parts of Italy,, pasturage became more important than agriculture. In, southern Italy many of the latifundia were converted to horseranches. Olive and vine cultivation was gradually shifted to, the estates of Spain and Gaul, while Africa and Egypt became, the main suppliers of wheat to the Italian cities. The Cisalpine, region of north Italy specialized in production of millet and, pork. The staple crops of the latifundia in Spain, Gaul and the, province of Africa were olive, vine and wheat. Southern Gaul, began to specialize in production of good quality wines. Only, the big landowners had the necessary resources to promote, new olive and vine. plantations. The grapevine begins to, provide its full yield several years after it has been planted., In the case of olives, it takes an entire generation for a tree to, reach maturity. The produce of_ the olive tree is collected in, alternate years. The kind of investment that this implied was, easier for the wealthy landowners., In no society throughout human history did the use of
Page 311 :
Ancient Rome (II) I 285, , slaves attain the same magnitude as in ancient Rome. Rome,, like Greece, was not just a society with slaves, but a slave society., According to Finley Greco-Roman society may be regarded, as a slave society because slave labour was employed on a, large scale in production. This is also the view of most Marxist, scholars. Marxist historians have defined the Greco-Roman, social formation -a slave social formation. This does not mean, that all production was based on slave labour in Greco-Roman, antiquity. What this means is that the slave mode of production, was the dominant mode of production in the Greco-Roman, world. A mode of production is the sum total of the means of, production and relations of production. Means of production, are the objects, tools, and technology involved in production., Relations of production refers to the manner in which the, means of production (land, cattle, tools, etc.) are controlled,, and the relationship of all those who are part of a production, process to one another (e.g., slave-master; serf-lord; workercapitalist)., The relations of production determine how the surplus is, extracted and redistributed. In a class society each mode of, production has its own specific mechanism for extracting or, ta.king away the surplus from the actual producer. This, mechanism may be called the surplus extraction relationship, and is the basic feature of the relations of production of a, mode of production. The surplus extraction relationship gives, its name to the mode of production. Thus a system where, surplus extraction takes the form of slavery, i. e. the actual, producers are slaves and those who take away the bulk of the, surplus are slave-owners, will be called a slave mode of, production. A given society may have various modes of, production coexisting side by side. Greco-Roman society had, free peasant production alongwith slavery. However there, will be one dominant mode of production and it is this, dominant mode of production which will determine the nature, of the social formation. For instance in nineteenth century USA, there was widespread slavery on the plantations of the, southern states while there was also the capitalist mode of
Page 312 :
286, , i Early Social Formations, , production in the country. The slave economy served the, interests of the capitalist economy and was therefore, subservient to it. It is for this reason that we regard the capitalist, mode of production as the dominant mode of production in, nineteenth century America and characterize it as a capitalist, social formation and not as a slave social formation. Similarly,, the ancient Greco-Roman social formation was a slave social, formation since the slave mode of production was the, dominant mode of production., Historians are of the unanimous view that slaves were, present in large numbers in ancient Greece and Rome (more, in Rome than in Greece) and that at least in Rome a substantial, proportion of them were engaged in production. Nevertheless, there is considerable difference of opinion over the precise, role of slavery in the production process. On the one hand, there are scholars, mainly non-Marxists, who hold that the, role of slavery has been exaggerated and that slaves did not, occupy a central place in the economy. The non-Marxist, argument is that slaves were too few in relation to peasants, and free labour. Slaves were just one category of labour and, not the most important category. Yet there are different, shades of opinion among non-Marxists on this question. As, we have noted, Finley who is a leading authority on the subject, and is a non-Marxis.t, strongly feels that Greco-Roman society, was a slave society., On the other hand, Marxists generally attach great significance to slave labour in the context of the Greco-Roman, economy. Marx himself noted that slavery was the decisive, invention of the Greco-Roman social formation. Though Marx, and Engels wrote on various aspects of Greco-Roman antiquity,, they did not attempt a full-length study of the slave social, formation. Engels in his Origin of the Family, Private Property, and the State made a relatively detailed statement on the, Marxist understanding of ancient Greece and Rome, but this, was more by way of a useful framework which later historians, could use. It is only recently-a full. century after Origin of, Family, Private Property and State was written-that a
Page 313 :
Ancient Rome (II), , I, , 287, , comprehensive Marxist account of the slave social formation, has been published. The British historian Geoffrey de Ste. Croix, has written a monumental work entitled The Class Struggle in, the Ancient Greek World (1981) which covers 1400 years of Greek, history down to the Arab conquests. Ste. Croix's book tries to, explore the dynamics of the slave mode of production from a, Marxist viewpoint in much greater detail than has been, attempted so far. Class Struggle in the Ancient Greek World is not, confined to Greece; as the title might suggest, but contains an, exhaustive discussion on Roman slavery as well. Ste. Croix, has surveyed tl:te diverse forms which surplus extraction, relationships took in the Greco-Roman world., There were first of all various indirect ways in which, surplus was extracted by the ruling class. These included the, taxes imposed by the state. The Athenians and Romans, collected a large tribute from the territories over which they, had established their hegemony. Roman taxes increased, manifold in the principate· and dominate. In classical Athens, and during the late republic and early principate in Rome the, burden of taxes on citizens was relatively light. The Athenian, state levied no regular taxes on the citizens, and in Rome, citizens residing in Italy were exempted from paying tributum,, the main tax on land and individuals, after 167 BC (see previous, chapter). But citizens were taxed in another way: they had to, perform unpaid military service for the state and had to, procure their own fighting equipment. In the words of Marx,, it was through wars that 'the Roman Patricians destroyed the, Plebeians, by compelling them to serve as soldiers, . . . and, made paupers of them'. Ste. Croix draws attention to other, compulsory services which had to be performed for the state., He cites the example of angaria, a type of compulsory service, for the state which was prevalent in West Asia. This labour, could be requisitioned for all kinds of official purposes like, carrying loads, repairing buildings, assisting the provincial, functionaries in tasks ranging from maintaining roads to doing, disagreeable jobs connected with execution or punishment of, convicts.
Page 314 :
288, , I Early Social Formations, , Besides the various indirect forms of surplus extraction,, there were numerous direct ways in which surplus was, extracted. Ste. Croix agrees that peasants, free smallholders,, wage-labourers, tenants and sharecroppers were present in, large numbers in the agricultural sector. These categories, produced a large share of the agrarian surplus. However, after, analyzing the available evidence he has stressed that slavery, was the major surplus extraction relationship, especially in Italy, and the western provinces of the Roman empire. This does, not necessarily imply that the majority of the actual producers, were slaves. Ste. Croix's contention is that it was through, slavery that the aristocracy acquired most of its surplus. As, slavery was the dominant surplus extraction relationship, i. e., modes of production were organized under its domination,, the Roman social formation may be called a slave social, formation., A few recent studies by Marxist scholars have questioned, the assumption that the Greek and Roman social formations, were identical. Ellen M. Wood in her work Peasant-Citizen and, Slave: The Foundations of Athenian Democracy makes a clear, distinction between Greek and Roman slavery. She has argued, that the Roman empire was the only social formation in history, which may be correctly characterized as a slave social, formation. According to her ancient Greece, unlike Rome, was, essentially a peasant economy. Though there was widespread, slavery in Greece, slaves were• marginal to the production, process. In the Greek states slaves were mainly used for mining, and for domestic work in urban areas. The countryside was, dominated by peasants who had some control over their land, and produce. This ·was particularly true of Athens where, political participation by ordinary citizens helped to stabilize, the position of the peasantry and made it difficult for the, aristocracy to exploit the smallholders beyond a certain point., Greek landed estates never reached the size that they did in, Rome after 200 BC and the small peasantry of the Greek states, did not disappear like it did in Italy. The Greek peasant soldiers, i. e. hoplites, did not have to bear the kind of burden
Page 315 :
Ancient Rome (II), , I, , 289, , which Roman peasants had to bear due to the enormous scale, of Roman expansion. She concludes that the conditions in, Greece differed fundamentally from those of Rome. Rome, should be treated as an exception due to the sheer scale of its, expansion which allowed it to use slave labour so extensively., Wood's study leaves unanswered the question as to how we, should explain the large proportion slaves in Athens as, compared to citizens. The ratio of slaves to citizens in the, classical period was 3:1. It would not have been economically, practical to have such a large proportion of slaves doing, domestic work in wealthy urban households. In any case, even, Wood agrees that slave labour was vital for the Roman, economy. In the following chapter we will see how problems, of the slave mode of production produced a crisis in the, Roman economy and led to the decline of the Roman empire.
Page 316 :
Chapter Ten, , ANCIENT ROME: CRISIS AND DECLINE, , I, THE expansion of the Roman empire had created conditions, for the development of the slave mode of production in Italy,, Spain, Gaul and north Africa. The establishment of Pax Romana, had sustained the growth of slave-based production. However, the Roman peace itself became an obstacle for this mode of, production. There was very little expansion of the empire, between the reigns of Augustus and Trajan. Following the, death of Trajan in AD 117, no new territories were added to, the empire. Wars of expansion had placed a vast slave labourforce at the disposal of the Roman landed aristocracy. From, the Augustan era onwards there were very few territorial, conquests. Consequently there were fewer opportunities for, capturing slaves in large numbers, The annexation of Britain,, Roman consolidation in northern Gaul, the acquisition of Dacia,, and the extension of the eastern frontiers beyond the, Euphrates did help in maintaining the supply of slaves down, to AD 117. Moreover, frequent skirmishes with tribal groups, settled on the periphery of the empire in northern Africa and, in central and eastern Europe, as well as the continuous conflict, with the Parthians, allowed slave traders and pirates to launch, regular raiding expeditions to procure slaves., Nevertheless, the overall trend during the first hundred, years of the principate was a fall in the supply of slaves. In the
Page 317 :
Ancient Rome: Crisis and Decline, , i, , 291, , post-Trajan period the problem became even more serious., Large-scale capture of slaves was dependent upon large-scale, wars. Raiding expeditions into neighbouring territories, especially in bi.bal settlements, could supplement supplies. But this, was possible only as long as the empire remained militarily, strong. By the end of the second century AD Rome was finding, it difficult to contain the threat of tribal incursions and under, these circumstances raiding expeditions for slave-capture could, not be supported by the army., The shortage of slaves was reflected in the rising prices of, slaves. According to the estimates of A. H. M. Jones slave prices, in the second century AD were eight to ten times higher than, in the second and first centuries BC. There was a genei:al shortage, of manpower due to two major outbreaks of plague in this, period. The empire was ravaged by plague in AD 165 and again, in AD 250. This led to a sharp decline in population. As labour, became scarce the landed aristocracy resorted to new methods, of surplus extraction. Ste. Croix has argued that by the second, century AD it was no longer profitable to invest in slaves., Initially the high cost of purchasing slaves was balanced, by increasing the level of exploitation of slaves. But this was, not possible beyond a certain point since most of the, agricultural slaves already lived much below the basic, s~bsistence level with hardly any food or clothing. The chained, gangs of slaves working on latifundia toiled for long hours, and there were absolute physical limits to the amount of labour, they could be forced to do. Mortality rates, it must be noted,, among these slaves were very high. The miserable conditions, in which they lived was an important cause of death. As slaves, became more and more expensive it was no longer easy to, replace the slaves who had died. The first response of the, latifundists to this situation was to exploit the slaves even, more, i. e., they tried to increase the rate of exploitation. This, would have resulted in even faster deaths. Besides, as we, have observed, this was not a practical solution beyond a, certain extent. A point of crisis was reached by the second, century AD.
Page 318 :
292, , I, , Early Social Formations, , The· crisis in the slave mode of production necessitated, some modifications in the system. This was all the more so, due to the fact that Roman agriculture was technologically, stagnant and there were hardly any significant improvements, in methods of cultivation in the empire. The availability of, cheap slave labour itself was an impediment to technological, progress because there was little inclination to introduce, labour-saving techniques. The slaveowners tried to cope with, the crisis in ~ther ways. Slave-breeding became a significant, economic activity which helped to overcome the shortage of, labour for some time. However, human reproduction is a, complicated matter. Successful human _reproduction depends, on various cultural and biological factors. The ratio of female, slaves to male slaves has also to be taken into account and this, ratio might not always have been favourable, especially on., the big latifundia. Ste. Croix suggests that slaveowners sought, to improve the chances of reproduction by encouraging male, and female slaves to develop loose family bonds. Such slaves, began to form matrimonial and kinship ties among themselves, and ceased to be mere commodities. Some of them were settled, on individual plots within the large estates and these plots, were cultivated by the slaves with their family labour. Many, of the big landowners did not any longer directly organize, production on their laµfundia but entrusted this task to slave, families which were attached to small plots and had to give a, part of their produce to their owners. Under this new system, there was a slight improvement in the status of the slave., The requirements of slave-breeding had led to the, betterment of the slave's status in many cases (due to family, ties; having their own holdings; no longer being regarded, exclusively as commodities etc.). In urban areas too there were, some changes. Roman law had a provision which entitled slaves, to own some property. This form of property was called, peculium. With the permission of their owners, slaves could, set aside some of their produce or their earnings as peculium., Of course it was the owners who determined the quantum of, the peculium. This type of property had legal recognition and
Page 319 :
Ancient Rome: Crisis and Decline, , I, , 293, , could be used by· the slaves to engage in economic activities, on their own account. There are references to slaves who, invested their peculium in trade, moneylending, and production., They could themselves own slaves. Part of the profits eam~d, in this manner were handed over to the owner while the, remainder was added to the slave's peculium. The peculium, acted as an incentive for the slaves to earn profits by taking, the initiative to organize their own business. These profits, were shared by their masters. This was a more efficient way, of. utilizing the skills of the better trained slaves. The peculium, was. not confined to urban areas but extended, . to rural areas, as well., As compared to Greece, where instances of slaves being, set free were rare, the incidence of manumission (releasing a, person from slavery) was much higher in Rome. Manumission, was a form.al act and required a legal declaration. The Roman, state levied a tax on manumission. The manumitted slave, acquired the same civic rights as those of his or her master., Slaves who had been set free owed certain obligations to their, former owners which they had to render whenever called, upon to do so. Manumitted slaves were often employed in a, supervisory capacity in the establishments of their former, masters. Manumission was more of an urban phenomenon, and it is unlikely. that the lowest category of slaves, i. e., the, agricultural slaves working in chained gangs, ever had any, hope of manumission., Ste. Croix points out that in the long run slave-.breeding, was less profitable than slave capture. The modifications in, the slave system had the cumulative effect of reducing the rate, of exploitation. If the rate of exploitation decreased the aristocracy could keep up its lavish lifestyle only by adopting other, methods of surplus extraction. If other means of exploitation, could be used then the overall volume of surplus extraction could, be maintained. This· the aristocracy succeeded in doing by, placing a greater burden on free peasants, tenant farmers and, hired agricultural workers. These groups were unable to resist, the growing exactions of the aristocracy in the west (Italy,
Page 320 :
294, , l Early Social Formations, , Spain and Gaul) due to the enormous power wielded the big, landlords in this part of the empire. In the words of Ste. Croix,, 'The inevitable consequence is that the propertied .class cannot, maintain the same rate of profit from slave labour, and, to, prevent its standard of living from falling, is likely to be driven, to increase the rate of exploitation of the humbler free, population-as I believe the Roman ruling class now actually, did, by degrees'., From the second century AD onwards the landed, aristocracy began to depress the status of the free cultivators, known as coloni. The coloni had originally been tenant farmers., This class of cultivators should not be mixed-up with the, settlers in a colony. The members of Roman and Italian colonies, (colonia) were also known as colonus (plural colom). The term, coloni had another meaning: it referred to free tenant farmers, who did not own their land. It is in this latter sense that we, are using it here. These tenant farmers were cultivators of, very limited means. They did not normally have their own, implements and could not afford to purchase seeds for sowing., The landlords provided them with implements and seeds and, the coloni had to hand over a share of their produce, usually, in kind, to the owners. The coloni were essentially, sharecroppers. The share. taken away from them by the, landlords. represented rent on land and repayment for, implements and seeds ·given to them. The poverty of the coloni, explains their dependent status., Though the coloni had been free tenants-they could move, to other plots at their will-in reality they were gradually, tied to the landowners. By the second century AD the, landowners were taking advantage of the dependent status, of the coloni to extort a larger share from them. The coloni lost, their freedom to move from one place to another and were, bound to their plots. The taxation measures of Diocletian, formalized this arrangement by prohibiting cultivators to leave, the place where they were registered in the tax assessment, records. In the reign of Constantine more legal provisions, were introduced to permanently attach the coloni to the soil.
Page 321 :
Ancient Rome: Crisis and Decline, , I, , 295, , These provisions laid down that coloni be transferred with, the land if there was a change of ownership. The status of the, coloni now approximated to that of the medieval serfs. Strictly, speaking, coloni cannot be equated with serfs since classical, serfdom had several other implications in terms of the, authority of the feudal lord which evolved during the course, of the next few centuries. But the essence of the serf's status is, already to be found among the coloni. With the growing crisis, in the slave mode of production there was a tendency to, reduce smallholders, free agricultural labourers and other sections of the rural workers to the status of coloni by dominant, landed groups., At times entire peasant villages sought the prptection of, powerful nobles againstthe oppression of corrupt officials or, to escape the heavy taxation imposed by the dominate. The, peasants would surrender their land and liberty to a noble, who would then grant back the land to the peasants in the, form of a tenancy. This was the phenomenon of patrocinium, which became widespread by the fourth century AD. The, peasants received the protection of the big landowners or, strong local comm~nders to whom they had voluntarily, submitted, but they lost their freedom and ownership of their, land. They were now tenants bound to-the estates of the nobles, and their status was virtually the same as the coloni. It might, be added here that the extension of -patrocinium to large parts, of Italy, Spain and Gaul, where the aristocracy was in control, of the countryside~ deprived the Roman state of the revenues, of these areas and further weakened its authority in the west., Patrocinium promoted the growth of localized ·centres of power, governed by the aristocracy., We thus see that by various processes a uniform. class of, dependent peasant tenants tied to the soil -came existence in the, western half of the Roman empire by the third century AD., All such peasants were referred to as coloni (whatever might, have been their earlier status) and included those _slaves whose, status had improved. when they were settled on individual, plots with their families. There was little to differentiate slaves
Page 322 :
296, , I Early Social Formations, , of this type from the other coloni. The original coloni who had, lost their freedom, the slaves whose status had been marginally, improved when they became tenant cultivators, and depressed, peasants (including those who had accepted patrocinium),, became part of the broad status of coloni ·by the later Roman, empire., It was by extracting a large surplus from hitherto free, cultivators that the landed aristocracy attempted to increase, the volume of surplus extraction which had earlier declined, due to the problems faced by slave-based production. The, colonate, or the new type of production based on the coloni,, became prevalent in the west by the fourth century AD. Thecrisis in the slave mode of production had led to the emergence, of the colonate and the simultaneous decline of latifundia., The colonate represents a transitional phase between classical, Greco-Roman slavery.and classical medieval European, feudalism. It should not however be thought that slavery, completely disappeared in the later Roman empire. Slavery, was very much there and latifundia still thrived in some areas., In the fifth century AD we have evidence of one ·latifundist, owning 25, 000 agricultural slaves who worked on estates, located on the outskirts of Rome. Moreover, slaves continued, to be employed for domestic work, in mining, and at the lowest, levels of the government., The crisis in the slave ·mode of production was accompanied, by a more general crisis within the Roman economy. There, were firstly the mounting military and bure·aucratic costs of, maintaining the empire. Such a vast empire could be protected, at an enormous expense. The expansion of the empire over, several centuries had yielded the resources required for, maintaining a huge army. By the second century AD the, possibilities of further expansion were exhausted. On the other, hand after Marcus Aurelius the empire had to pursue a, defensive policy with regard to the Germanic tribes. As the, pressure of the Germanic tribes mounted, the protection of, the empire became costlier. At the death of Augustus the, Roman army had 250, 000 regular troops. Under Trajan the
Page 323 :
Ancient Rome: Crisis and Decline, , I, , 297, , strength of the army had gone up to 300, 000 and in the reign, of Septimius Severus the army had 330, 000 troops. As a result, of the military reforms carried out by Diocletian at the end of, the third century AD the number of regular troops rose to, 450,· 000. Diocletian achieved this increase by reintroducing, conscription. By the fourth century the strength of the Roman, army stood at 650, 000., Military organization on such a gigantic scale necessitated, heavy taxation by the state. Whereas Roman conquests during, the late republic had allowed the state to exempt Roman, citizens resident in Italy to do away with the tributum, the, main agricultural tax, new taxes had been imposed in Italy, and the provinces during the principate. Taxation steadily, intensified and in the later empire the rate of taxation was, three times higher than that prevailing at the end of the, republic. Jones has called this high rate of taxation as 'overtaxation'. It is generally recognized that the heavy burden of, state taxation was one of the factors which speeded up the, decline of the Roman empire., Diocletian's reign witnessed a steep rise in taxation. The, collection of these taxes required a large administrative apparatus. To fl,.is we must add the need to have a huge centralized, bureaucracy to govern the empire. Free grain distribution was, also a big drain on the resources of the government. In the, early prindpate cheap oil and wine rations had been added to, free or subsidized wheat distributed by the state. Augustus,, as we have noted, had increased the number of free grain, recipients to 320, 000. Thereafter the number was gradually, stabilized at about 200, 000. When the seat of government, shifted to Constantinople free grain distribudon was, introduced here as well. In the later Roman empire 80, 000, inhabitants of Constantinople benefitted from this free food, distributed by the state., Diocletian and Constantine· had pursued a policy of more, taxation and greater centralization in their attempt to overhaul, the functioning of the Roman state. This policy succeeded in, the east, but it accentuated the crisis in the west. The western
Page 324 :
298, , I Early Social Formations, , oligarchy passed on the increasing weight of state taxes to, peasants, coloni, artisans, and petty-traders. This had an adverse effect on agricultural production, manufacture, and, trade. The agrarian economy was the worst affected because, it was the main source of revenue. The state tried to ensure, that it received the full revenue demand by holding the tax, collectors, called decuriones or curiales, responsible for its, realization. The origins of this system went back to the early, principate. In the principate the civic administration of urban, centres was entrusted to municipal councils called curia (not, to be confused with the curia of the comitia curiata). These, were composed of the local elites and included wealthy, landlords who had holdings in the neighbouring countryside, but normally resided in the respective cities. The members of, these municipal councils were designated as decuriones or, curiales. Their functions included revenue collection., With the passage of time the municipal councillors became, a hereditary group and by the end of the principate hereditary, municipal councillors were usually referred to as curiales. The, curiales were simultaneously hereditary tax collectors. They, were men with considerable local influence and possessed, wealth derived mainly from land. Most of them were absentee, landlords. The curiales collected imperial taxes from, landowners, peasants, artisans and traders. They frequently, attempted to escape their own tax liabilities by forcing the, less privileged sections to pay illegal cesses. The curiales also, tended to collude with other big landowners in helping them, to avoid their share of tax payment. The curiales had to pledge, their property to the Roman state against the taxes to be, collected by them. This practice became prevalent in the third, century AD. Diocletian strengthened the hold of the state over, the curiales by tying them to their respective municipalities, and introducing legal provisions which made it impossible, for these hereditary tax collectors to get· away from their, responsibilities., Jones has drawn attention to the fact that in the west the, administrative machinery had. traditionally been in the hands
Page 325 :
Ancient Rome: Crisis and Decline, , i 299, , of the aristocracy. Tax collection in this part of the empire, was inefficient and the aristocracy had been lenient in taxing, members of its own class. In the east the state relied mainly, on the local gentry and 'men of middle class origin'. The state, found it easier to exercise control over its officials in the east., Diocletian and his successors were more successful in tightening, the system of taxation in the east as compared to the west. As, the western oligarchy became more and more uncooperative,, particularly due to its failure to determine the choice of, emperors and the subsequent decline of the city of Rome in, the administration of the empire, the collection of taxes in the, west through curiales became an uphill task for the state. The, oligarchy refused to pay taxes and even gave protection to, the peasants against imperial tax collectors through the system, of patrocinium. This accelerated the process of disintegration, in the west. The landed aristocracy withdrew from urban, centres and permanently settled down in their country houses, making it even more difficult for the state to collect regular, taxes from them., Secondly, the government resorted to short-term solutions, like debasement of coinage (reducing the weight of coins or, adulterating them by diminishing. the content of precious, metal in them) to meet its growing financial commitments. In, the long run such solutions undermined the entire economy., The silver denarius had been devalued by 15% under Trajan., This meant that the silver content of the denarius was now, 85% of its face value. Marcus Aurelius further devalued the, denarius by 6%. By the mid-third century AD the denarius had, been reduced to 5% of the value it had at the beginning, principate. Diocletian and Constantine did attempt to reform, the currency but they were not very successful. It should be, kept in mind that coinage of a high standard depended largely, on a steady supply of precious metal. The supply of gold and, silver had become more or less static by the end of the second, century AD. Major conquests had come to an end and there, Were no discoveries of new mines or breakthroughs in mining, technology within the empire.
Page 326 :
300, , I Early Social Formations, , Large-scale debasement of coinage resulted in an all-round, increase in the prices of goods. During the last quarter of the, third century AD there was a 1000% rise in overall price levels., All those who were in some way or the other involved in, monetary exchanges felt the impact of this phenomenal price, rise. Even the sections of society which were not engaged in, monetary transactions suffered due to the ever-increasing, exactions of the state which demanded more revenue to offset, losses caused by inflation. The situation was particularly, serious for those who received regular cash salaries. For the, state it was a matter of worry that soldiers and government, servants could no longer live on the salaries they received. It, was not feasible to go on increasing the rate of taxation beyond, a certain point. Diocletian experimented with state regulation, of prices. In AD 302 the emperor issued an edict which fixed, prices for nearly 900 commodities. This attempt was, unsuccessful for the simple reason that the state had virtually, no control over production and distribution. Eventually by, the fourth century AD the government began paying salaries, in kind in the form of rations of food and clothing. This, development discouraged monetary exchange and reinforced, the tendency towards local and regional self-sufficiency which, was already visible by the end of the third century AD., The monetary crisis was just one of the factors which contributed to the decline of trade in the later Roman empire., The decline of trade had been an·ongoing process which was, linked to the very nature of the Roman economy. When we, speak of trade in the context of the Roman empire we should, not forget that long distance trade was mainly in luxury goods., Agricultural produce and handicrafts were routinely sold in, local markets (unless they happened to be high value goods, like fine wines, delicate pottery, superior varieties of textiles, etc.). Unfortunately our knowledge about the precise manner, in which the surplus produce was converted into money or, precious metal which could then be exchanged by the, aristocracy for luxury goods is inadequate. Not much is known, about the mechanism by which the surplus produce was
Page 327 :
Ancient Rome: Crisis and Decline j 301, , gathered and centralized in the hands of the big exploiters., The Roman social formation was highly exploitative and it, has been estimated that the wealth of the senatorial oligarchy, in the third century AD was nearly five times what it had, been in the first century AD. Even as late as the fifth century, AD one latifundist who owned estates located in Italy, Sicily,, Spain, Britain and Africa had an annual income which when, converted into precious metal amounted to about 750 kg of, gold! Such fortunes allowed the oligarchy to enjoy an, ostentatious lifestyle. The conspicuous consumption that they, indulged in sustained long distance trade in luxury goods., In the early principate the oligarchy was concentrated in, the city of Rome or in the principal Italian towns. They were, expected to regularly attend meetings of the senate and there, were restrictions on their going beyond Italy and southern, Gaul without the permission of the government. The big, landowners were absentee landlords who resided in Rome, or in prominent urban centres. Their wealth flowed into these, cities. What is more, the Mediterranean was the geographical, centre of the Roman economy and all major towns were, located on or very close to the coastline. Th,e unification of, the Mediterranean under Roman rule and the establishment, of Pax Romana had given a boost to long distance seaborne, trade. A ship could cover the entire distance from one end of, the Mediterranean to the other in twenty days. The cost of, conveying goods by sea was significantly lower than, transporting them over land. Transport charges for carrying, goods from Alexandria to Rome by sea were twenty-five times, less than covering the same distance by land (this can only be, a rough estimate since there were several variables in, calculating freight charges). The further away one moved from, the Mediterranean the more expensive inland transport, became., The Romans did possess excellent and well-maintained, highways which facilitated the administrative unification of, their empire. The construction of these highways had, commenced in the late republic. The Via Appia which
Page 328 :
<) 2,, , I Early Social Formations, , connected Rome to southern Italy was begun in 312 BC and, the last stretch of this major highway was completed only in, the time of the Gracchus brothers. Then there was the Via, Aemilia which was the main highway to Cisalpine Gaul. Other, important highways were the Via Domitia linking Italy to Spain, and the Via Egnatia which ran from Rome to Damascus. In, addition to these there were provincial roads which joined, provincial capitals to outlying territories. Roman highways, were primarily used for military and administrative purposes. Their role in promoting trade and commerce was negligible., The relative backwardness of road transport technology made, overland transport commercially unviable. The Mediterranean, was the great commercial highway of the empire., Goods flowed in the direction of Rome as long as it, remained the preeminent urban centre of the Roman world., In the republican period the port of Ostia situated at a distance, of sixteen miles from Rome at the mouth of the Tiber was the, port-town which served the capital. Ostia developed into a, major port (Ostia was also a naval base), with traffic from all, over the Mediterranean converging upon it. Towards the end, of the republic the silting of the port necessitated a shift to a, new harbour located two miles north of Ostia. The new harbour, was named Portus. The prosperity of Ostia/Portus was, directly linked to the stat1:1s of Rome as the foremost centre of, consumption in the Mediterranean., What needs to be emphasized is the parasitic nature of, the city of Rome. Apart from the imperial court, the oligarchy,, government officials, and praetorian guards there was a large, section of unproductive poor inhabitants who lived on free, grain distribution. Rome was more of a centre of consumption, than of production and the trade of Ostia was essentially a, one-way traffic. The declining political and administrative, importance of the city was immediately reflected in the, displacement of all economic activity centred on the city. By, the third century AD the aristocracy was no longer interested, in residing at Rome or in its vicinity and moved to estates in, the countryside of Italy, Gaul and Spain. This speeded up the
Page 329 :
Ancient Rome: Crisis and Decline I 303, , decentralization of economic activity and made the country, seats of the oligarchy self-sufficient economic units. Once Rome, and Ostia lost their key position, Mediterranean long distance, trade which for centuries had been geared to fulfil the, requirements of the capital gradually slowed down. This, resulted in the decay of long distance trade, especially in the, west., A related development was the economic advance of the, northern regions of western Europe (northern Spain and Gaul)., Considering that these areas were located at a great distance, from the southern coastline of Europe they had never been, integrated with the economic activity of the Mediterranean, sea. These northern areas had tended to be self-sufficient right, from the beginning. Some of the garrison towns in the northern, frontier settlements of the Rhine and Danube had become the, nucleus of production and exchange to ensure a stable local, supply of provisions. It was too expensive to send regular, overland supplies to these areas from the south. Paris, Trier, and Mainz were a few notable frontier towns which had grown, out of military garrisons., We can therefore see that trade and monetary exchange, was not essential to the new type of economy which was, developing in several parts of the empire. In any case, we, must be careful not to overrate the importance of trade in the, Roman economy even when the empire was at its peak., Exchange would have been localized in nature and except for, the luxury sector we are really dealing with petty-commodity, production (small value articles of everyday use). This was, also true of most of the provincial urban centres which, procured whatever they required from their neighbourhood,, from a surrounding area lying on an average within a radius, of thirty miles. It would be worthwhile to note that the big, latifundia themselves had stimulated economic self-sufficiency, especially when they were situated at some distance from, major centres of habitation. Almost everything that was needed, by residents of the latifundia was produced on the estate itself., When landowners permanently settled in the countryside, and
Page 330 :
304, , I Early Social Formations, , in a situation where trade had declined, estates tended to, become even more self-sufficient., The self-sufficient village or estate inhabited by coloni who, were subservient to a wealthy landowner with semiindependent authority in the countryside gradually became, the typical pattern of Italy, Spain and Gaul. With the shift of, the landed aristocracy to the countryside the centralized state, became weaker in the west and ultimately collapsed. On the, other hand small and medium peasants and the local middle, class gentry maintained a strong presence in the east. Slave, agriculture in the east never attained the dimensions that :l.t, did in the west. Consequently the crisis of the slave mode of, production was not as acute in the east as it was in the west., The economy of the east remained relatively stable which, enabled the restructured Roman state of the dominate to, mobilize financial resources for its drive towards centralization, in the eastern provinces. In the east the landed aristocracy, was not powerful enough to obstruct the process of, centralization., Unlike in the west, the old urban centres of the east did, not wither away. Since there were fewer cities in the west as, compared to the east the process of ruralization of the economy, in Italy, Spain and Gaul was very swift after the latifundists, withdrew to the countryside. This did not happen in the east, where towns and sorrie amount of trade survived. The three, biggest cities of the Roman empire were Rome, Alexandria, and Antioch. Of these, two were situated in the eastAlexandria in Egypt and Antioch in Syria. Alexandria was, perhaps the greatest port of the Greco-Roman world,, surpassing even Ostia in terms of its economic importance., Both Alexandria and Antioch continued to prosper for long, after the decline of Rome. To these two great cities of the east, we may add Constantinople which rose to prominence in the, fourth century AD. The economic crisis of the later Roman, empire was much more pronounced in the west. This was the, area where the development of the slave mode of production, had found its fullest expression. It is not surprising that the
Page 331 :
Ancient Rome: Crisis and Decline, , I, , 305, , crisis in the slave mode of production was the most serious in, Italy, Gaul and Spain. The final blow to the Roman empire, came from the Germanic invasions. The collapse of the state, in the west left the region militarily weak so that it quickly, succumbed to the Germanic tribes. The east was able to resist, these invasions and the eastern empire lasted several centuries, after the end of the empire in the west., , II, The internal crisis of the Roman empire coincided with, escalating pressure by barbarian tribes on the frontiers. Some, of these tribes penetrated and took over several parts of the, empire thereby completing the process of its downfall. For, centuries northern and central Europe had been the home of, diverse tribal groups. A significant proportion of these, belonged to the large Indo-European linguistic family. The, Roman conquest of Gaul and the Danubian region of central, Europe had brought the empire face-to-face with these tribes., The Celtic tribes· of northern Gaul and Britain were, incorporated in the empire, although the subjugation of the, Celts of northern Gaul and Belgium was a long drawn-out, process. The eastern frontier of Rome in northern Europe was, established at the river Rhine. The Rhine which rises in, Switzerland, just north of the Alps, runs from south to north, across the western extremity of modern Germany and flows, into the North Sea. The Danube originates in southern, Germany, within a short distance of the Rhine, and flows, eastwards right though central Europe and discharges its, waters into the Black Sea. The Rhine and Danube formed an, L-shaped boundary of the Roman territories in northern and, central Europe. Beyond the Rhine-Danube border, east of the, Rhine and north of the Danube, lay the principal Germanic, zone., The Germanic peoples initially lived in southern, Scandinavia and along the Baltic coast. From c. 1000 BC, onwards they began moving southwards and westwards.
Page 332 :
306, , I Early Social Formations, , Many Germanic tribes like the Cimbri and the Teutones were, settled near the Rhine when the Romans conquered northern, Gaul. The vast undefined area to the east of the Rhine was, referred to as Germania by the Romans. Roman writers, sometimes used Teuton and German synonymously for all, the tribes which dwelt in this area, although the Teutones, were just one of the innumerable Germanic tribes. The, Germanic tribes with whom the Romans first came into contact, practised primitive agriculture and pastoralism. They were, frequently on the move and were not attached to a particular, territory. Land and cattle were owned collectively by the tribe., There was very little social differentiation within the tribes., The primitive economy of these tribes hardly produced any, surplus and the produce was shared on a more or less, equitable basis by all households which constituted the tribe., State formation had not yet taken place. The tribes had their, chieftains who were chosen to lead the tribe in times of war., Hereditary chiefship was almost unknown., The tribes inhabiting the margins of the empire were constant victims of raids carried out by the Romans to capture, slaves. Some historians believe that Roman raids forced some, of the Germanic tribes to organize themselves for warfare on, a permanent basis and that this factor acted as a catalyst for, state formation among the Germanic tribes. Moreover, the, proximity of the Roman empire to the Germanic tribes had a, profound impact upon the Germanic social formation. The, tribes living close to the frontier traded with the Romans, exchanging cattle, dairy products, and forest produce for, Roman goods. Roman slave traders might have found a couple, of collaborators among the tribes who helped them capture, slaves and received payments in return. Lastly, the tribes,, whenever they got an opportunity, raided outlying Roman, settlements and the booty captured on these occasions, increased the surplus available to the respective tribes., Gradually wealthy warrior chieftains and a class of, professional warriors came into existence and rudimentary, states were formed. The more powerful chieftains subjugated
Page 333 :
. Ancient Rome; Crisis and Decline i, , 307, , neighbouring Germanic tribes or formed alliances with them, thereby augmenting their strength. They could now support, a large retinue of warriors for carrying out regular raids and, to exploit members of their own tribes. These changes broke, down the earlier social structure of the tribes and led to class, differentiation and state formation., Right since the time of Augustus the Romans had to, contend with the problem of the Germanic tribes who, occupied the land beyond the Rhine-Danube frontier. In the, early principate the tribes were undergoing a transition to, class society and were too weak and scattered to seriously, confront the might of the Roman army. Things began to change, around the middle of the second century AD. The pressure of, the Germanic tribes in the Danube area increased mainly due, to the onslaught of the Marcomanni. The Marcomanni had, founded their own state along the middle Danube. Marcus, Aurelius had a difficult time dealing with them. From his time, onwards the empire embarked upon a defensive policy to deal, with the Germanic problem. One of the strategies of Aurelius, was to grant permission to Germanic cultivators to settle down, within Roman territories. The Germanic tribes were no longer, interested in raiding expeditions but wanted to acquire fertile, agricultural land. The central European provinces were, sparsely populated and Aurelius thought that if Germanic, peasants were settled in this area it would solve the problem, of labour and at the same time reduce the pressure on the, frontier. The Germanic cultivators were legally free but they, were assigned to specific landowners and tied to the soil. Each, group was placed under the supervision of a Roman official., The successors of Marcus Aurelius pursued similar policies,, but at times they also launched major military expeditions to, keep the Germanic tribes in check. By the end of second, century AD the Danubian army was the largest in the empire., In the half-century of anarchy which followed the assassination, of Severus Alexander in AD 235 the Danubian contingents, had a decisive say in the choice of the emperor. Incidentally,, Severus Alexander had been killed by his soldiers due to a
Page 334 :
308, , I, , Early Social Formations, , dispute with the Danubian troops over the question of fighting, the Germanic tribes. The troops had been demanding a more, aggressive policy which the emperor was reluctant to adopt., The attempt of the emperor to bargain for peace rather than, fight the Germanic tribes provoked his murder. Germanic, penetration of the Danubian frontier and occupation of, agricultural lands created a tense situation in the frontier areas., The problem was of immediate concern to the Danubian troops, which were often recruited from local peasant families., Diocletian and Constantine too came from this area., In the first half of the third century AD two confederations, of northern Germanic tribes, the Alamanni and the Franks,, were the most formidable adversaries of the empire on the, Rhine frontier. These two tribal groups made constant forays, into Gaul. The Danubian frontier was threatened by another, group known as the Goths. The Goths were among the latest, arrivals in central and eastern Europe. They migrated from, southern Scandinavia in the mid-second century AD. In the, first quarter of the third <;entury AD they began raiding the, Danubian frontier and it was their invasion which had incited, the troops to mutiny against Severus Alexander., With time it became clear that the Roman empire did not, have the military resources to protect its long European, frontier against the Germanic tribes. A policy of compromise, became inevitable. There were broadly three aspects of this, policy: i) the Romans selectively allowed isolated Germanic, groups to settle down inside the empire as cultivators; ii) the, Roman army increasingly recruited Germanic soldiers; and, iii) puppet Germanic chieftains who were loyal to Rome were, established along the· frontier to act as a buffer against the, relatively more hostile tribes. It was, of course, necessary to, fight back several tribes and the military option was not, completely abandoned. Nevertheless, the Roman policy of, compromise paved the way for peaceful Germanic penetration, of the empire. By the end of the third century AD there was a, substantial Germanic populatj.on in the Danubian and Balkan, provinces. In the Roman army too there was a strong Germanic
Page 335 :
Ancient Rome: Crisis and Decline I, , 309, , presence. Constantine had gone in for large-scale recruitment, of Germanic soldiers. His personal bodyguard mainly, contained Germanic troops and several Germans were given, leading positions in the army by him., While the Roman empire did manage to gradually absorb, a section of the Germanic tribes, it could not resist the steadily, increasing pressure of some of the most aggressive tribes, which had advanced to a stage where they required land for, permanent settlement to develop a stable agrarian economy., These tribes were already militarily well-organized. Within a, few decades after the death of Constantine (AD 337) there, was a fresh wave of tribal movements in eastern Europe. For, the Romans the immediate threat came from the Goths. In the, first half of the third century AD the Roman army had repulsed, the earliest Gothic invasions. During the course of their, subsequent wanderings in Europe the Goths had split into, two groups: the Visigoths (western Goths) who lived close to, the Danubian frontier; and the Ostrogoths (eastern Goths), who lived further east in southern Russia., Around the middle of the fourth century AD there was a, series of tribal movements which had their origin in, developments in Central Asia. These set in motion a chain, reaction which had disastrous consequences for the Roman, empire. The Central Asian grasslands which extend from, southern Russia in the west to the Gobi desert in the east had, for long been the homeland of numerous tribes which engaged, in specialized nomadic pastoralism. This was a specific strategy, to exploit the resources of this region. The nomadic tribes, reared livestock on a large scale and had evolved a complex, pattern of movement to support their animals. Perry Anderson, has characterized nomadic pastoralism as a distinct mode of, production 'with its own dynamic, limits and contradictions,, that should not be confused with those of either tribal or feudal, agriculture'. This mode of production suited the semi-arid, environment of Central Asia. It represented a higher level of, development than primitive subsistence agriculture. The highly, specialized strategy of nomadic pastoralism was a successful
Page 336 :
310, , t, , Early Social Formations, , adaptation to the Central Asian terrain and was capable of, producing a surplus. Livestock, rather than land, was the main, form of wealth. Surplus production promoted class differentiation. Tribal chieftains presided over a relatively simple state, apparatus which included warriors and heads of powerful, clans., The search for good pastures was an important, consideration for these nomadic tribes. Given the, comparatively poor soil of the region inhabited by them, they, were always in need of extensive stretches of land to provide, for their animals. The larger the tribe and the more successful, it was at rearing its livestock the greater would be its pressure, for pastures. This implied conflicts with neighbouring tribes, who subsisted on nomadic pastoralism. The conflict might lead, to subjugation of one tribe by another (and payment of tribute, to the dominant tribe) or an alliance which would culminate, in a powerful confederacy. However, nomadic societies had, some serious drawbacks, as for instance complete lack of, urbanization and low levels of technology, which made it, difficult for them to progress to higher stages of historical, development entirely on their own., Nomadic pastoralists did not live in isolation but had, intimate exchange relationships with the advanced agrarian, societies on whose margins they dwelt. Meat, dairy produce,, hides, wool, fur, cattle and horses were exchanged for diverse, commodities which advanced agrarian economies could offer., Trade was combined with raiding expeditions into territories, of settled societies. Both increased the disparities of wealth in, the nomadic societies. It became possible for some of the tribal, chiefs to maintain full-fledged professional armed contingents., The inbuilt mobility of the nomadic troops, their familiarity, with difficult terrain, their simple needs and their special skills, as horsemen and archers often gave them a great advantage, while conducting swift military campaigns. These, developments produced a number of short-lived episodes in, history in which some nomadic tribes succeeded in conquering, large territories.
Page 337 :
Ancient Rome: Crisis and Decline [ 311, , One such episode occurred in the fourth century AD when, a confederacy of nomadic pastoralists called Huns expanded, westwards from the Gobi desert and north China. The Huns, moved across Central Asia and by c. AD 350 they had reached, eastern Europe. Here they attacked and displaced the tribes, inhabiting southern Russia. Of these tribes the Ostrogoths were, among the most prominent. The Ostrogoths were forced to, abandon their lands and had to move further west where, they encountered the Visigoths. The combined pressure of, the Huns and the Ostrogoths drove the Visigoths to the Roman, border in eastern Europe. The Visigoths crossed the lower, Danube and fought a fierce battle with the Roman· army in, AD 378 at Hadrianopolis (also called Adrianople, this city was, named after the emperor Hadrian; it is now called Edirne, and is situated in the European part of modern Turkey). The, Visigoths were led by their chief Fritigern in this battle. The, Roman army was routed in the battle and the reigning, emperor, Valens, was killed while fighting. This was the first, major military defeat inflicted by the Germanic tribes on the, Romans. Gibbon regarded the battle of Hadrianopolis as a, tvrning point in the history of the later Roman empire. The, empire never recovered from this shock., The battle of Hadrianopolis opened the way for further, barbarian invasions. In AD 406 several Germanic tribes, which, included the Vandals, the Suebi and the Alani, crossed the, Rhine and began to occupy the western provinces of Rome., This date marks the beginning of the gradual takeover of the, western empire by the Germanic tribes. Besides the Vandals,, the Suebi and the Alani there were some other prominent, tribes, namely, the Visigoths, the Ostrogoths and the, Burgundians. After their victory at Hadrianopolis the Visigoths, had plundered Greece and had then moved into Italy. In AD, 410 the Visigothic chief Alaric attacked Rome and looted the, city for three days. This incident had a deep psychological, impact on contemporaries. The prestige of the city of Rome,, even after it had lost its political relevance, was such that it, was not considered likely that it might actually be captured
Page 338 :
312, , I Early Social Formations, , and plundered. From the fourth century AD onwards Rome, was just a symbol of the Roman empire, but it was still a powerful symbol. Alaric's assault on the city had a demoralizing, effect on the empire as a whole., A permanent division of the empire had taken place, following the battle of Hadrianopolis. Rival claimants to the, throne now enlisted the support of Germanic chiefs to establish, their authority in different parts of the empire. After AD 395, Arcadius was the emperor in the east with Constantinople as, his capital. He was supported by Alaric. Honorius was the, emperor in Rome and had the backing of the Vandal chief, Stilicho. The Germanic chiefs strengthened their position in, the empire by promoting the interests of opposing imperial, candidates. In the fifth century AD it became normal to have, two emperors, one in the east and the other in the west., Eventually the western Roman empire split up into a number, of Germanic kingdoms., Having sacked Rome, the Visigoths attempted to invade, the province of Africa, but were unsuccessful. They then, moved on to Gaul and Spain where an independent kingdom, was founded in AD 475 by the Visigothic ruler Euric. In AD, 507 the Visigoths were expelled from Gaul by another, Germanic tribe, the Franks, but the Visigothic kingdom, survived in Spain right till the Arab conquests of the eighth, century AD. Meanwhile the Vandals had reached Africa and, had captured Carthage in AD 439. The Vandal.chief Genseric, established a new Germanic kingdom in the Roman province, of Africa. This was a catastrophe for Rome because Africa, had been the principal supplier of grain to the city. The Vandal, kingdom later extended to other parts of the western, Mediterranean coastline of north Africa., In the mid-fifth century AD there was a renewed and more, vigorous invasion of eastern Europe by the Huns. By this time, the Huns had created a powerful monarchical state. The Hun, ruler Attila created a vast empire in the first half of the fifth, century AD. This empire extended from Asia to central and, eastern Europe. For some time Attila extracted a tribute from
Page 339 :
Ancient Rome: Crisis and Decline, , !, , 313, , the western Roman emperor. Attila invaded Italy and Gaul., The Visigoths and other Germanic tribes allied with Rome to, push out the Huns. In AD 451 Attila was defeated by the, combined Roman and Germanic armies. With the death of, Attila in AD 453 the Hun empire collapsed. However Attila's, invasions provided the Germanic tribes with yet another, opportunity to tighten their hold over the Roman empire., In AD 455 the Vandals invaded and plundered the city of, Rome. Then in AD 476 the last Roman emperor, Romulus, Augustulus, was deposed. After this there was no emperor in, the west. Only a remnant of the Roman empire survived in, the east with its capital at Constantinople. This truncated, empire is usually referred to as the Byzantine empire (or, eastern Roman empire). The Byzantine empire claimed itself, to be the legitimate successor of the original Roman empire., In a sense this is true because after the fifth century AD there, was no such thing as a Roman empire in the west. But the, nature of the Byzantine empire was very different from the, Roman empire. A detailed discussion on the Byzantine empire, falls outside the purview of this study. It will suffice to note, that the Byzantine empire, which consisted of the eastern, provinces of the Roman empire was politically and, economically more stable. This enabled the Byzantine empire, to endure for several centuries., _ The Byzantine empire soon recovered from the upheaval, caused by the Germanic invasions. It reannexed some of the, Roman territories in north Africa. The Byzantine emperor, Justinian I (AD 527-65) briefly unified the eastern and western, provinces by conquering Italy. The Byzantines consolidated, their position in West Asia but their eastward advance was, checked by the Sassanids. The Byzantine empire inlrerited and, preserved some of the attainments of Roman civilization., Particularly noteworthy is that it carried forward the great, tradition of Roman law. In fact it was the eastern emperors, who took the lead in systematizing and codifying Roman law., The emperor Theodosius II compiled all the laws which had, been framed since the time of Diocletian. Later, a
Page 340 :
.'.H 4, , I Early Social Formations, , comprehensive Code of Roman Law was prepared under, Justinian. This was an elaborate exercise which reqtt4"ed the, sorting and classification of an enormous collection ofRoman, laws. It should be remembered that the edifice of Roman law, had been built over several centuries, since the publication of, the Twelve Tables in the early republic. Justinian entrusted, this task to a sixteen-member board which summarized the, laws, judgements, commentaries of jurists and imperial rulings, which together are known as Justinian's Code. A simplified, version of the Code was issued in a two-volume work which, has come to be known as the Digest. This Digest helped to, popularize Roman law in the Germanic states of the west. It, was through Justinian's Code, as outlined in the Digest, that, Roman legal concepts entered modem European jurisprudence., The impact of Justinian's Code on present-day legal systems, can hardly be ignored., In the western provinces of the empire various Germanic, tribes had carved out their own kingdoms: the Visigoths in, Spain; the Vandals in Africa; the Burgundians in southern Gaul;, and the Ostrogoths in Italy. When the Visigoths had moved, on to Spain the Ostrogoths occupied parts of eastern and, central Europe. They posed a danger to the Roman empire in, the east. The Byzantine empire encouraged them to conquer, Italy and thereby relieve the Germanic pressure in the east. In, AD 493 an Ostrogothic kingdom was founded in northern, Italy. The Ostrogoths proclaimed their chief, Theodoric, as, ·, the ruler of this kingdom., Several historians have pointed out that we should be careful not to exaggerate the damage caused by the Germanic, states to Roman society. The first phase of Germanic occupation, of the west which began inc. AD 406 did not eliminate Roman, institutions or the Roman socio-economic structure. During, the 1920s Alfons Dopsch put forth the thesis (Economic and, Social Foundations of European Civilization) that Germanic, invasions did not represent a complete break with the past, and that the Germanic states continued with the traditions of, the Roman empire. He argued that the Germanic states
Page 341 :
Ancient Rome: Crisis and Decline, , 1, , 313, , assimilated and preserved Roman institutions at a time when, the ·state had broken down in the west. The Germanic tribes, therefore performed the historical task of nurturing the great, achievements of Roman civilization. The Germanic societies, adopted several features of Roman society which modified, their own social structures., It is difficult to accept Dopsch' s contention in its entirety., Roman institutions did not remain undisturbed by Germanic, invasions and were seriously undermined by them. The real, value of Dopsch' s work likes in its focus on the continuities, between structures of the later Roman empire and the first, Germanic states. Dopsch highlights the fact that the Germanic, invasions transformed Germanic societies themselves more, than Roman society. The Germanic tribes were at a much lower, level of development than societies in the Roman territories, which they conquered. They lacked the infrastructure to, govern the highly sophisticated Roman empire. Consequently, they took over the preexisting political and economic, framework. This wholesale borrowing by the Germanic states, perpetuated the social formation of the later empire., The economic trends of the third and fourth centuries AD, persisted in the fifth century AD. The only major change was, that a Germanic landPd aristocracy appeared in the, countryside. The Ostrogoths, the Visigoths and the, Burgundians introduced the system of hospitalitas through, which Germanic landowners found a place in the rural, economy. Hospitalitas was a system by which Roman, landowners were forced to extend 'hospitality' to Germanic, warrior chiefs and clan leaders. This implied that the Roman, landowners had to share their estates with the Germanic, tribes. The estates were divided according to the proportion, laid down by the Germanic rulers. In Visigothic Spain the, landowners had to give two-thirds of the cultivated land to, the Germanic leaders. In the Ostrogothic kingdom of Italy, the Roman landed aristocracy had to hand over one-third of, the respective estates to the Germans. This division pertained, to individual estates and did not entail a division of the entire
Page 342 :
316, , I Early Social Formations, , cultivable land. On the whole the overall agricultural land, affected by hospitalitas was never very large. Only the biggest, estates were broken up in this way., A given Germanic tribe usually did not exceed 100, 000, members on an average. The scale on which the Germanic, tribes took over land under the· hospitalitas system was, therefore not big enough to cause a serious dislocation of the, economy. Nor did it significantly change the pattern of, landownership. Social differentiation among the tribes ensured, that only the more influential members were able to acquire, land in this manner. The less privileged members of the tribes, were settled as cultivators on the holdings of the tribal leaders., With time the Germanic cultivators were reduced to the status, of coloni. The Germanic landowners imitated the lifestyles of, the Roman provincial aristocracy and became socially, indistinguishable from it., The process of depressing the status of the independent, Germanic peasants was facilitated by the presence of Roman, coloni and serfs on the portions of the estates taken away by, the Germans. When transfer of land took place it included the, coloni who were attached to it. It may be recalled that since, the fourth century AD Roman coloni were legally tied to the, soil. Further, the hospitalitas system also involved the sharing, of slaves between the Roman and Germanic landowners (e. g., half the total number of agricultural slaves had to be given to, the Germanic leaders in the Burgundian state). The basic, system of production was unaltered. The colonate and slavebased agriculture remained the dominant features of the rural, economy in Italy, Spain and Gaul. In the Vandal state of Africa, the situatiotl. was somewhat different. Here the Vandals, completely eliminated the Roman landed aristocracy and took, over all their holdings. Of all the Germanic ruling classes the, Vandal ruling class is considered to be the most ruthlessly, exploitative., The administrative and judicial apparatus evolved by the, states formed during the first phase of Germanic invasions, was marked by dualism, i. e. a sort of dual system of
Page 343 :
Ancient Rome: Crisis and Decline, , I, , 317, , government emerged. The existing Roman structure was not, dismantled. In towns and generally at the local level Roman, administrative bodies looked after day-to-day governance., The groups which had controlled these bodies prior to the, Germanic conquests retained much of their authority. Roman, laws remained in force, especially for the Roman populace., The Germanic settlers were governed by their own laws and, customs. Roman law influenced and modified Germanic laws,, and laws relating to matters like private property were· copied, without too many changes. There was nevertheless a sharp, division between the civil and military administration. The, army was fully under Germanic control. The dualism of the, Germanic states allowed Roman institutions to flourish for, some time even after the Roman empire had come to an end, in the west. A second phase of Germanic invasions destroyed, end to this dualism and had a more devastating -effect on the, Roman social structure. It was in this second phase that the, foundations of classical European feudalism were laid. We, will examine the second phase of Germanic invasions in the, context of the rise of feudalism in Europe (chapter twelve).
Page 344 :
Chapter Eleven, , THE ARABS, ISLAM, AND THE EARLY, ABBASID CALIPHATE, , AT the beginning of the seventh century (hereafter all dates, are AD, unless otherwise specified) an event of great historical, significance took place in the Arabian peninsula (roughly, corresponding to modern Saudi Arabia). We have scarcely, referred to this region so far because the people who inhabited, it lived an isolated existence, away from the settled societies, of West Asia. Except for the fertile mountain valleys of Yemen, in the south-west and Oman in the south-east, the entire, peninsula is a sparsely populated arid zone. Nomadic tribal, communities, who are generally called 'beduin', lived in this, inhospitable land. In the seventh century Arabia became the, centre of a new religious movement-Islam., , I, Arabia is a peninsula of large dimensions. It is surrounded by, the Red Sea in the west, the Arabian Sea in the south and the, Persian Gulf in the east. Most of the peninsula is either desert, or dry grassland (steppe). Very little regular rainfall takes, place in the area. Periods of drought extending up to three, years are quite common. Some parts of the peninsula may go, without rainfall for as many as ten years at a stretch. Rains, are more frequent in the coastal areas than in the interior., Brief spells of rainfall occur mainly in winter and spring. There, are no permanent rivers in Arabia. However, the land is dotted
Page 345 :
The Arabs, Islam, and the Early Abbasid Caliphate, , I, , 319, , with a number of oases formed by springs or wells., At the heart of the peninsula lies a vast unbroken arid, zone called Najd. In the north Najd merges with the Syrian, desert or Nafu.d. In the north-east Najd extends almost to the, banks of the Euphrates in southern Iraq. In the west, the strip, of land which runs parallel to the Red Sea consists of several, low hills. The central part of western Arabia is called Hijaz., Mecca and Madina, where early Islam was born, are situated, in Hijaz. The hills and rocks of Hijaz are barren and the entire, area is arid. Yemen (South Arabia), which· lies in the southwestern comer of the peninsula, contains mountains and fertile, valleys. The environment of Yemen differs sharply from that, of the rest of Arabia because it receives monsoon rains. Southeastern Arabia, known as Oman, is also relatively less arid, than Najd and Hijaz. Lying at the entrance to the Persian Gulf,, Oman was a somewhat remote area at the periphery of Arabia, and was socially and economically integrated with the rest of, the peninsula comparatively late., For centuries the inhabitants of central, northern and, western Arabia had led a nomadic existence. The, domestication and introduction of the camel (sometime after, c. 2000 Be) had facilitated the evolution of specialized pastoral, nomadism based on camel-rearing. Camels can travel, continuously for three weeks with almost no food or water in, temperatures as high as 50° C. They could be used to explore, and exploit the scarce resources of the Arabian desert. The, oases offered pastures for the animals and served as watering, places. Dates, fruits and some grain could be grown in the, oases utilizing natural springs or by digging wells. Date and, camel's milk was the staple diet of the region. The camel, pastoralists, known as beduin (from bdu or nomad), moved, from oasis to oasis with their animals and over a period of, time acquired an intimate knowledge of the harsh environment., This familiarity with the difficult terrain of Najd and Hijaz, was crucial to their strategy of survival. The beduin knew, exactly where they could find some subsistence for themselves, and their animals (mainly camels, but occasionally a few
Page 346 :
320, , I, , Early Social Formations, , horses), and for how long they could stay in a particular place., The beduin were constantly on the move. Their social, organization was based on the independent tribe (qabila), each, tribe recognizing a common ancestor (real or imaginary)., Beduin tribes were usually"units of small size and were divided, into clans or extended families. As clans grew larger they, moved away to form independent units of their own. This, prevented the tribes from becoming too unwieldy. The arid, environment just could not support large concentrations of, population. The beduin lifestyle became typical of Arabia., There were very few communities which led a settled, existence. In some places where the rainfall was more regular, or where the springs and wells provided sufficient water for, irrigation, especially in Hijaz, there were limited possibilities, for cultivating grain together with date-palms, fruits and, vegetables. Such settlements were often targets of beduin, raids. The beduin combined pastoralism with raids against, neighbouring beduin tribes and settled communities to, augment their resources. A form of tribute, called khuwwa,, might also be realized by the beduin from the agriculturists in, return for protection and an assurance to desist from plunder., In this way the camel pastoralists exercised a degree of, control over the settled people. They were certainly-the most, prominent inhabitants of the region. Camel nomadic, pastoralism was the dominant feature of the pre-Islamic social, formation of Arabia. There were at the same time inferior, pastoralists who reared sheep and goats. On the other hand, there were some communities which subsisted on cultivation, of dates, fruit and grain. Finally, all groups were involved in, some amount of exchange and trade. As we shall see, a class, of specialist merchants had come into existence by the sixth, century. It should be borne in mind that at this time there, were no urban centres in Arabia proper and no state formation, had taken place., The beduin tribes and the people of the peninsula as a, whole referred to themselves generally as arab. The ancient, Greeks had used the term Sarakenoi (Latin Saraceni, English
Page 347 :
The Arabs, Islam, and the Early Abbasid Caliphate, , I, , 321, , Saracens) to designate them. Till very recently Saracen and Arab, were used synonymously in western literature. The language, spoken by them was a form of Semitic which was a variation, of Aramaic. Although there were different dialects, a, distinctive Arabic linguistic identity had been formed by the, end of the fifth century. The most outstanding expression of, this was the growth of a tradition of oral poetry. From c. 500, onwards poems were being composed in Arabic (there is no, record for the earlier period) in a specific form known as rajaz., There were several poets who composed in this form, usually, extempore. Each tribe had its own poets who entertained their, audience by narrating tales of the glory of the tribe. The rajaz, form was followed by a highly evolved type of poetry called, qasida or ode. These poems were of some length and could be, sung. A particular variety of the qasida acquired great fame, throughout Arabia. These were odes called-for some obscure, reason-'suspended poems' or muallaqat. The earliest and the, most well-known of the 'suspended poems' are those, composed by lmrul Qays who is regarded as the foremost, pre-Islamic poet of Arabia. Tarafa, Zuhayr and Labid were, among the other poets who wrote muallaqat. These poems were, recited far and wide therel;,y giving the language a certain, uniformity. The possession of a common language contributed, towards giving the dispersed Arab tribes some cultural unity, even though they lacked state structures or political cohesion., Patricia Crone has commented on the remarkable 'cultural, homogeneity' of the Arab tribes during the sixth century., It would be wrong to assume that the Arabs lived in, complete isolation from the outside world. There were several, points of contact in the north (with Syria and Palestine); in the, north-east (with Iraq); in the south (with Yemen); and across, the Red Sea (with Ethiopia). Syria, Palestine, Iraq, and to a, lesser extent Yemen, were settled societies. In the sixth century, Syria and Palestine were part of the Byzantine empire, (successor to the Roman empire in the east). Iraq was ruled, by the Sassanids whose capital Cstesiphon was situated on, the T~gris in southern Iraq, not very far from the edge of the
Page 348 :
312, , I Early Social Formations, , Arabian desert. Yemen was a settled tract with an agrarian, ecoriomy which yielded a sufficient surplus to activate state, formation. Agriculture in Yemen was supplemented by trade., By the beginning of the fifth century a few urban centres, had come up in Yem.en. The area was ruled by independent, chiefs who had carved out small states. In the middle of the, fifth century Yemen was unified by Abkarib Asad who also, managed to extract tribute from some beduin tribes. A number, of southern beduin tribes had at this time come together in a, confederacy led by the Kinda tribe. The chiefs of Kinda were, allied to the ruler of Yemen to whom they paid tribute. Yemen, was inhabited by people whose language was closely related, to, but quite distinct from, Arabic. In the fifth century a sizeable, section of the Yemeni population practiced Judaism. There, had been a Jewish presence in Hijaz and Yemen since the first, century. Asad himself had converted to Judaism. Yemen also, had a small Christian community., Throughout the latter half of the sixth century (from c., 540) the Byzantine and Sassanid empires were engaged in a, bitter conflict for the control of Syria and Palestine. Syria, it, may be recalled, had been a part of the Roman empire for a, long time. The Sassanids had consolidated their position in, northern Mesopotamia and were trying to dislodge the, Byzantines from Syri~. In the course of their struggle for, supremacy in West Asia the Byzantines and Sassanids had, extended their control to parts of the Arabian peninsula. This, they did indirectly by entering into unequal alliances with, some tribal groups which were willing to accept Byzantine or Sassanid overlordship. It might be mentioned here that several, Arabs had gradually penetrated Syria and Iraq and had, enlisted in Byzantine or Sassanid armies. In the fifth century, one beduin clan, the Banu Lakhm, had established a state on, the borders of the Sassanid empire in north-east Arabia. The, Lakhmid state was subject to the· Sassanids. The capital of this, state was Hira on the lower Euphrates. At the turn of the, sixth century a nomadic Arab clan from Jordan, the Ghassan,, had created a state on the outskirts of Syria. The Ghassanids
Page 349 :
The Arabs, Islam, and the Early Abbasid Caliphate, , I, , 323, , owed their allegiance to the Byzantine empire. The Sassanids, and the Byzantines used the Lakhmids and the Ghassanids,, respectively, as a buffer against beduin incursions and for, recruiting Arab troops., On the shore of the Red Sea opposite the Arabian peninsula, is the East African country of Ethiopia. Ethiopia was a, monarchical state with its capital at Axum. The Ethiopian kings, had converted to Christianity in the fourth century. In the, sixth century the dominant religion of Ethiopia was, Christianity. The Ethiopians had adopted a version of, Christianity known as Coptic, the Coptic Church having, descended directly from early Egyptian Christianity. Ethiopia, was a close ally of the Byzantine empire and was used by the, Byzantines to maintain their sphere of influence in Arabia,, especially in Yemen. When inc. 510 a Jewish ruler named Dhu, Nuwas came to power in South Arabia and began persecuting, Christians, the Ethiopians used this as a pretext to invade, Yemen. They were initially unsuccessful but eventually, defeated Dhu Nuwas in 525. The supporters of Dhu Nuwas, sought the help of the Persians to end Ethiopian and Byzantine, predomina,nce over South Arabia. By c. 570 Sassanid influence, had become paramount in Yemen. The Arabs had thus been, drawn into big power politics of the region in various ways., During the sixth century a slow and gradual change was, taking place within Arabia. Some of the tribes took to trade, as their main occupation and gave up nomadic pastoralism., The shift to trade was mo·st pronounced in Hijaz. Arabian, trade received an impetus with the dislocation of the, international route passing through the Persian Gulf and Iraq,, caused by the Sassanid-Byzantine conflict. Some of the trade, was now diverted through the Red Sea or went overland from, Yemen to Syria. There were already exchange relatio:uships, between Yemen and Syria-Palestine. Caravans went via Hijaz, where a number of oases could be found on the way. Yemen, now became an important transit point in the international, trade. As a result.the Hijaz route acquired greater significance., For the tribes or clans which had adopted trade as their
Page 350 :
324, , I, , Early Social Formations, , primary occupation this was an excellent opportunity. They, provided camels for carrying goods or organized caravans, on their own account. It was necessary to arrange for protection, against beduin raids, for which purpose alliances had to be, made with neighbouring tribes. Despite the growth of trade, in Hijaz, at least five-sixths of the population of this area was, still nomadic in the sixth century., It is in this historical situation that Mecca, a settlement of, traders in Hijaz, rose to prominence in the sixth century. The, settlement was located at an oasis and had a well, known as, the Zamzam, the water of which came to be regarded as holy, by the Muslims. Mecca was strategically placed at the junction, of two trade routes: the route running from north to south, linking Palestine with Yemen; and the somewhat less, important route connecting Ethiopia and the Red Sea in the, west with the Persian Gulf in the east. Mecca derived some of, its importance from being a place of pilgrimage, a feature which, the trading community of the settlement might have tried to, promote to strengthen its position. The main shrine at Mecca, was a rectangular structure called Kaba (cube). The Kaba, contained idols and other objects venerated by various tribes, and clans. These sacred objects included a black stone which, was built into the wall of the shrine. Every year there was a, specific sacred period when pilgrims visited the shrine. During, this sacred period, which took on the shape of a fair, no violent, acts of revenge were permissible and hostilities among, conflicting tribes were suspended. Business transactions could, take place peacefully at the fair. Similar fairs were held in, some other neighbouring settlements, as for instance at Ukaz, where there was an annual fair lasting twenty days., Sometime towards the end of the fifth century Mecca came, under the control of a person named Qusayy who belonged, to the Quraysh tribe. This tribe consisted of numerous clans, which were engaged in trade. The Quraysh soon became the, leading tribe of the settlement. They entered into alliances, with some neighbouring tribes .like the Thaqif. The Thaqif, were the dominant tribe in the settlement of Taif situated
Page 351 :
The Arabs, Islam, and the Early Abbasid Caliphate, , I, , 32S, , close to Mecca. Tai£ was a fertile oasis where fruits and grain, were cultivated. Speaking of the ascendancy of the Quraysh,, Maxime Rodinson, in his biography of Muhammad, has, remarked that 'the history of the ensuing five hundred years, may be seen in the light of the expansion of this one tribe to, the dimensions of a world power'., Mercantile activity was the mainstay of the Meccan, economy since there were hardly any possibilities for, agriculture. The proceeds from trade seem to have been large, enough to support the inhabitants of the settlement. Camels,, sheep and goats were also reared, although this was a, secondary activity. Dates were cultivated to supplement the, diet. The surplus accruing from trade had begun to undermine, tribal solidarity by the sixth century. Initially the Quraysh, were split into two broad divisions, those who lived on the, outskirts (Quraysh az-Zawahir) and the more privileged who, dwelt in the heart of the settlement close to the Zamzam well, (Quraysh ~z-Bataih). A few families and clans became, prosperous through trade and this led to a process of social, differentiation. Class distinctions began to appear among the, Quraysh. The adoption of a sedentary lifestyle had necessitated, some elementary structures of authority to contain conflicts., Clan councils formed by heads of families were the basis of, political organization. Tensions and conflicts generated by the, breakdown of tribal society gave rise to a group with limited, political authority. At the end of the sixth century and the, beginning of the seventh century there were intense factional, conflicts within this group. The factions were divided along, clan lines and their disputes were partly for gaining a larger, share of the trade of Mecca. It was in this historical situation, that Muhammad began preaching his religious message in the, opening decades of the seventh century., , II, Our information about the early life of Muhammad is quite, , sketchy. The first accounts of his life which have come down
Page 352 :
326, , I Early Social Formations, , to us were written more than a century after his death. The, generally agreed date for his birth is c. 570. He belonged to, the Hashim clan of the Quraysh tribe. Muhammad's father,, Abudllah, was a person of limited means. Muhammad lost, both his parents when he was still very small. He was brought, up under the care of his paternal uncle, Abu Talib. Abu Talib, was a fairly well-to-do merchant. When Muhammad grew up, he found employment with a rich widow named Khadija., Khadija was a successful businesswoman who traded with, Syria and Palestine. Muhammad assisted her with her, enterprise. Subsequently Muhammad married Khadija. He was, about twenty-five years old at the time of his marriage while, Khadija was much older., Inc. 610 Muhammad had an intense spiritual experience, which is supposed to mark the beginning of his Prophethood., A series of revelations, believed to be divinely inspired, were, made to him. These became the basis of Muhammad's religious, mission. He said that he was the messenger, or Prophet, of, the Supreme Being-Allah. Allah's message was being, communicated to human beings through Muhammad. These, revelations form the Quran, the religious book of the Muslims., Khadija was among-the first to believe in Muhammad's, Prophethood. Within a few years Muhammad had a small, group of Meccan followers who had accepted his religious, ideas. They came to be known as muslim (plural muslimun),, i.e. those who had submitted (to Allah). The religion itself, was denoted by the term Islam, implying submission, derived, from the same root as the word muslim., The overriding principle of Muhammad's religion was, uncompromising monotheism. He taught that there was only, one God, namely Allah. All other deities were rejected. One, had to blieve exclusively in Allah and not accept any other, gods and goddesses whatsoever. The worship of idols was, firmly prohibited. Muhammad sought to replace the diverse, religious practices of Arab tribes by a single belief, making it, the ideological basis of tribal unity. There was a strong, emphasis on the unity and equality of all those who had
Page 353 :
The Arabs, Islam, and the Early Abbasid Caliphate, , I, , 327, , accepted Allah and the Prophet., Muhammad's faith differed sharply from the religious, practices of the Meccans. He met with stiff opposition since, he had denounced their traditional beliefs. For a few years he, was able to preach his ideas at Mecca due to the protection he, got from his influential uncle, Abu Talib. However, the death, of Abu Talib, as well as of Khadija (who was an important, source of strength to the Prophet), in the same year---619made things difficult for him in Mecca. The situation became, more and more unfavourable and eventually Muhammad, decided to shift from Mecca to another Hijaz settlement,, Yathrib, which was about 200 miles north of Mecca. Yathrib, later acquired the name Madina (Madina literally means 'the, city'). Muhammad and his followers emigrated to Madina in, 622. This emigration from Mecca to Madina is referred to in, Arabic as hijrat. Subsequently the beginning of the Islamic era, was reckoned from this year., Madina was a cluster of small villages inhabited by different tribes. These villages had come up around an oasis, containing springs and wells with an abundant supply of water., This was more of a peasant settlement since it was possible to, cultivate fruits and cereals here. A transition from nomadism, to settled agriculture was taking place in Madina. Unlike, Mecca, where the Quraysh were the dominant tribe, there, were various tribes in Madina many of which were contending, for control over the settlement. Some of the tribes were Jewish., Muhammad had been assured of support by the Madinese., He soon acquired some authority at Madina when he emerged, as an arbitrator in tribal disputes. This helped him to spread, his message and he now had a number of Madinese followers., The earliest Meccan converts who had accompanied the, Prophet to Madina were known as the muhajirun (' emigrants'),, while the Madinese supporters were called ansar ('helpers')., These divisions played a role in later political disputes., Muhammad laid the foundations of a new political structure, in Madina. He was no longer just a religious leader, but the, head of a nascent state centred on Madina. He was looked
Page 354 :
328, , I Early Social Formations, , upon as lawgiver and began to lay down rules for governance., His followers (the male adults among them) constituted his, armed force. Alliances were made with some of the tribes of, adjacent areas. Several tribes embraced the new religion,, thereby becoming part of the Muslim religious community, (umma) as well as of Muhammad's unified polity. Raids were, still an indispensable source of income for this state. A formula, for equitable distribution of the booty was worked out. Onefifth of the booty went directly to the Prophet so that the, state was provided with independent finances. In addition,, regular voluntary contributions were levied on tribes which, accepted Muhammad's leadership. This developed into a tax, called zakat which all Muslims had to pay to the state. Zakat, was intended to be redistributed, mainly to the less privileged, sections of the Muslims., Once the framework of an administrative system and an, army had been created, and ties had been forged with beduin, tribes, Muhammad was in a position to carry on an armed, struggle against the Quraysh of Mecca. As a matter of fact the, two processes went hand in _hand. Caravans going north from, Mecca towards Syria and Palestine had to pass close to Madina., Quraysh trading caravans traversing this route were, frequently attacked. The successful raids against Quraysh, caravans eventually disrupted Meccan trade. The Quraysh had, to sue for peace and in 630 Muhammad was able to occupy, Mecca. The Meccans accepted Islam en masse. With the support, of the powerful Quraysh tribe (and their allies such as the, Thaqif of Taif who had also joined the fold), Muhammad rapidly consolidated his authority in Arabia. The Kaba in Mecca, became the most sacred sanctuary of Islam. All tribal idols, and other objects of worship were removed from Kaba. The, Islamic symbol which was located in Kaba was a black stone, traditionally associated with Abraham. Abraham was regarded, as the common ancestor of all the Arabs. Muslims were, enjoined lo always pray in the direction of Kaba and the, pilgrimage to Kaba (haj) was established as the preeminent, religious ritual of the faith.
Page 355 :
The Arabs, Islam, and the Early Abbasid Caliphate, , I, , 329, , Muhammad passed away in 632. He had managed to, replace tribal organization with a state which encompassed a, large number of Arab tribes. At the time of Muhammad's death, the overwhelming majority of beduin tribes (especially in Hijaz, and Najd) had acknowledged his leadership. Initially the state, was not territorially well-defined. This is hardly surprising, since this was a state which essentially comprised nomadic, tribes. Madina, and to a lesser extent Mecca, were the focal, points of the government. However the extensive military, potential of this state may be gauged from the fact that when, Muhammad led an expedition in the direction of Syria shortly, before his death his army consisted of 30, 000 troops. It was, in the half-century after 632 that the Arab state was given a, concrete shape., The work of W. M. Watt helps us to understand why Islam, gained such wide acceptance among Arab tribes in such a short, space of time. Watt has examined the nature of Arab society, on the eve of the this new religious movement (Muhammad at, Mecca; Islam and the Integration of Society). He sees the rise of, Islam as a response to the transformation which was taking, place due to trade and the adoption of a sedentary lifestyle, by some tribes. It was at Mecca that the most striking changes, occurred. The expansion of Meccan commerce eroded, traditional ties and introduced tensions in society. The wealth, which profits from trade, or earnings from pilgrims, brought, into Mecca did not benefit everyone uniformly. This led to, conflicts at various levels. The relatively simple tribal, organization of the Quraysh did not have any mechanism to, cope with the new situation. Similar processes were at work, elsewhere too, especially among tribes which had been drawn, into the network of commercial exchanges. Many of these tribes, had become a part of the Meccan system. Moreover, there, were tribes which were taking up agriculture on a limited, scale while others were coming within the orbit of settled, societies on the periphery of Arabia (Byzantine and Persian, empires; Ethiopia; Yemen). Muhammad's message of unity, was an answer to this social ferment and Islam provided the
Page 356 :
330, , I, , Early Social Formations, , tribes with a scheme for state formation., Watt's explanation has profoundly influenced writings on, the subject from the late 1950s onwards. Scholars like Rodinson, (Mohammed) and Marshall Hodgson (The Venture of Islam) have, accepted, and further elaborated, Watt's hypothesis. On the, other hand some historians, as for instance Patricia Crone,, are of the opinion that Watt's 'Meccan trade hypothesis' is, unsatisfactory. Crone has put forward an alternative view in, her Meccan Trade and the Rise of Islam. Crone has tried to, demonstrate that Meccan trade was not on a scale large enough, to undermine traditional society. The trade was essentially in, commodities of small value and was incapable of generating, much wealth. The surplus yielded by the mercantile economy, was not so big as to result in wide disparities in society. In, other words, the traditional way of life was still intact., According to Crone the evidence indicates that the traditional, way of life 'functioned too well'. The Meccans were initially, opposed to Islam 'because they preferred their traditional way, of life'. Further, for the beduin tribes raids and plunder were, a useful way of augmenting their scanty resources. The new, faith appealed to them as it helped to 'legitimize conquest'., What was offered to the tribes was a programme of state, formation through unification and conquest. In more general, terms Crone characterizes early Islam as a 'nativist movement',, i.e. a movement born out a deep attachment to the Arabian, way of life in opposition to the penetration of foreign, influences. The foreign influences are identified by her as those, values which were introduced by Byzantine and Persian, attempts to dominate Arabia. Nevertheless, Crone does agree, with Watt's view that the sedentarization which was taking, place in some parts of Arabia had necessitated the growth of, state structures at the expense of tribal ties., , III, Muhammad's death created a political vacuum. He had taught, that he was the last of a long line of prophets sent by God to
Page 357 :
The Arabs, Islam, and the Early Abbasid Caliphate, , I, , 331, , show the right path to humanity. This line included the, prophets of Judaism and Christianity (Moses, Jesus, etc.). It, was held that there would be no further prophets after, Muhammad. He was, however, not only Prophet but also the, religious leader of the Muslims and head of the newly founded, Arab state. His teachings, which were supposed to be the, word of Allah, comprised the Quran and were to guide his, followers in all aspects of life. There was no question of anyone, assuming his posifion as Prophet, but someone had to take, physical charge of the state and guide the religious community., As no specific rules had been laid down for this purpose, there, was considerable scope for a dispute on this point. The question, of who should have religious and political authority after, Muhammad was to become increasingly contentious with the, passage of time, leading to fierce conflicts which were to divide, the·believers and often involved serious doctrinal differences, between different groups., Broadly speaking there were three groups which daimed, the right to succeed. There were, firstly, the Meccan muhajirun, or 'emigrants', who were the earliest followers of Muhammad,, and the ansar or Madinese 'helpers' who had given critical, support to the cause after the. hijrat of 622. They felt that the, prerogative of succession belonged to them as they had been, the first to accept Islam and had stood by Muhammad during, the most difficult phase of his career. The second group, which, is labelled as that of the 'legitimists' (or Alids), argued that, succession should take place within the family of Muhammad., Since the Prophet had no surviving direct male heir, this, implied that Muhammad's paternal cousin, Ali, should, succeed. Ali was the son of Muhammad's uncle Abu Talib and, was married to Fatima, one of the daughters of Muhammad, and Khadija. An additional qualification of Ali was that he, was one of the muhajirun. Finally, there were the aristocracy, or the Quraysh, particularly the Umayyads. We have already, noted that Muhammad belonged to the Hashim clan of the, Quraysh. In the early seventh century this was not the leading, clan of the tribe. The most powerful clan was that of the
Page 358 :
332, , ! Early Social Formations, , Umayya (Abdul Muttalib, the grandfather of Muhammad was, a first cousin of Umayya). They had converted very late but, wielded enormous political influence., At times there were overlapping loyalties, as well as internal divisions within these groups. For instance, the muhajirun,, who were all Meccans, had clan and family ties with the, Quraysh. On occasions when the muhajirun aligned with, members of their own tribe the Madinese ansar complained, that they giving priority to tribal over religious ties. By and, large political authority passed into the hands of the 1eading, Quraysh families after 632. The immediate successors of, Muhammad were his close companions. Ali also become one, of the successors, though at a later date. Subsequently it was, the Umayyads and Hashimites who monopolized power., Upon the death of Muhammad one of his seniormost, companions, Abu Bakr, was chosen successor or khalifa. Khalifa, literally means successor, which here implied 'successor of, Muhammad'. For the next few centuries khalifa became the, main title for the religious leader of the Muslims and the head, of the state founded by Muhammad. 'Caliph' is the anglicized, form of the word khalifa (and it is this form which we will use, more frequently in our discussion). Early Islamic literature, used the titles khalifa and imam synonymously, though the term, imam was used more in the sense of religious leadership. In a, more restricted sense the word imam denoted anyone who, led the community in prayer. The title imam was also applied, to leaders of sects which grew up within Islam., The succession of Abu Bakr as the first caliph (632-34), was fairly smooth. Abu Bakr was widely respected as being, one of the closest aides of the Prophet. He was also the fatherin-law of Muhammad (Muhammad had married Abu Bakr' s, daughter Aisha after the death of Khadija). When Abu Bakr, took over, the newly formed state was in danger of, disintegration as many of the beduin tribes broke away from, Madina. For the nomadic people of Arabia the idea of being a, permanent part of a state was quite new. They were not, accustomed to such formal institutions. Rather they felt that
Page 359 :
The Arabs, Islam, and the Early Abbasid Caliphate, , I, , 333, , they owed personal allegiance to Muhammad whom they recognized as their religious leader. The alliances with the tribes, were still quite fragile and this gave an opportunity to some, of the powerful tribal leaders to assert their independence., The situation became even more serious from the point of, view of the young Islamic state as a few tribal religious leaders, declared themselves to be prophets. One of these was, Maslamah (Musaylimah) of the Hanifa tribe of central Arabia., Maslamah managed to gather a large following, The Muslims, of Mecca and Madina denounced these leaders as 'false, prophets'. Abu Bakr had to wage a series. of campaigns to, reestablish control over these tribes. These campaigns are called, 'wars of the ridda' (ridda means apostasy or defection from, one's religious allegiance)., Abu Bakr died within two years of his becoming caliph, (634). He was succeeded by Umar, whom he had nominated, as his successor. Umar was caliph from 634 to 644. He had, also been one of the earliest Meccan followers of Muhammad., Umar was the real builder of the Arab empire. The unification, of Arabia was completed under him and large-scale territorial, expansion outside Arabia commenced. The Arabs conquered, Iraq, Syria, Palestine and Egypt. Arab conquests in West Asia, were at the expense of the Sassanid and Byzantine empires., For over eighty years, prior to the rise oflslam, the Sassanid, and Byzantine empires had been involved in a fierce combat, for supremacy over West Asia. Syria and northern Mesopotamia were the main theatres of the wars between the two, empires. At the beginning of the seventh century the Persians, gained an upper hand in this ongoing· conflict. Their armies, marched across Syria into Palestine and occupied Jerusalem, in 615. The Persian army then moved into Egypt (619) and, even threatened Constantinople (626). Internal problems of, the Sassanids prevented them from consolidating their victories., Further, the Byzantine emperor Heraclius reorganized his, army and launched a counter-offensive against the Persians., The Persians were pushed back and the Byzantine empire, regained control over its territories in West Asia.
Page 360 :
334, , I, , Early Social Formations, , In the long run this conflict weakened the two empires., When the Arabs embarked upon their two-pronged invasion, of Byzantine and Sassanid territories in 633---4, these two West, Asian powers were so exhausted militarily that they were, unable to put up any meaningful resistance. It took the Arabs, just a couple of years to take Iraq from the Sassanids and to, oust the Byzantines from Syria, Palestine and Egypt. In 633, the Arabs began making preliminary forays into Sassanid, territories along the lower Euphrates on the north-eastern, frontier of Arabia. The Lakhmid capital of Hira was besieged, and taken. In 636 the Persian army was routed at the battle of, Qadisiya. In the following year Arab forces led by one of, their leading commanders, Saad, captured the Sassanid capital, Cstesiphon (called Madain by the Arabs). With this, Sassanid, rule came to an end in Iraq. Saad was appointed the military, and civil head of Iraq. In Syria the town of Damascus was, first attacked in 634 and taken in 635. The fall of Damascus, paved the way for the annexation of Syria and Palestine. Apart, from Saad, Khalid bin Walid was another prominent military, commander of the Arabs. Khalid played a major role in the, campaigns in Iraq and Syria. In 639 Egypt was invaded and, within a year almost the entire country was occupied., Alexandria was captured in 642, thereby completing the, conquest of Egypt. In the east, Arab troops began penetrating, Iran proper from 642. The Sassanids had retreated beyond, the Zagros mountains after the loss of Iraq. In 642 itself the, main Sassanid army was destroyed at the battle of Nehawand, in Iran. By c. 650 the Arabs had taken over most of Iran,, including the north-eastern region of Khurasan. The last, Sassanid ruler, Yazdagird, was killed in I<hurasan (651). At, this stage the Arab empire comprised the Arabian peninsula,, Egypt, Palestine, Syria, Iraq and Iran., The rapid expansion of the Arabs has been attributed by, G. E. von Grunebaum partly to the mobility of the camelriding Arabs and partly to the decline of Byzantine and, Sassanid military power. Using their camels the Arabs could, move with great speed through the difficult desert terrain.
Page 361 :
The Arabs, Islam, and tire Early Ab"basid Caliphate, , I, , 335, , Nomadic armies are usually capable of very swift manouvres, because they are not encumbered by too much baggage. The, lance and the sword were the traditional weapons of Arab, warfare. Saa~ is credited with introducing archers into the, army. The beduin also relied on horses, which some of the, tribes had bred for a long time as part of their traditional, pattern of subsistence. As already mentioned, the Byzantines, and Sassanids were unprepared for meeting such a determined, challenge. The setbacks which these empires faced in their, first encounters with the Arabs further demoralized their, armies. The religious motivation of the Arabs was an, additional factor which contributed to their success. The, consequences of Arab expansion were more disastrous for, the Sassanids than for the Byzantines. Sassanid ·rule was, completely extinguished, whereas the Byzantine empire, survived for several centuries though its territories were, confined to Anatolia, Greece and a few other parts of southeastern Europe., Umar was killed in 644 by a person who had a personal, grievance against him. Umar had appointed a board of six, selectors to nominate a successor after him. The selectors were, not to name anyone from among themselves as the caliph., Usman, another early Meccan convert to Islam, was named, successor to Umar. Usman became the third caliph (644-56)., Usman was one of the muhajirun but he belonged to the, Umayyad clan. This caused considerable indignation among, the Hashimites. The most vehement opposition came from, the legitimists-the supporters of _Ali. It may be mentioned, that the claim of Ali had been put forward ever since the death, of Muhammad but he had been overlooked every time a, successor was chosen. Usman made himself unpopular by, allowing members of the Umayyad clan to occupy all major, official positions. Although the conquest of Iran was completed, under Usman, the initial pace of expansion slowed down after, c. 650. This added to the growing dissatisfaction with Usman's, rule. Some of the Arab settlements in southern Iraq and Egypt, became centres of opposition to the caliph. There was a revolt
Page 362 :
336, , I Early Social Formations, , by the Egyptian troops and amidst the ensuing chaos Usman, was assassinated in 656., The murder of Usman marks the end of one phase of the, formation of the Arab empire. All this while, Madina had, remained the capital. Till the time of Abu Bakr the Islamic, state had been confined to Arabia. Umar and Usman had built, a vast empire extending from the Nile to the margins of Central, Asia. They had to therefore evolve an infrastructure for, governing such a large political entity. Umar had emphasized, the military authority of the caliph by taking on the title of, amir al muminin (commander of the faithful). As amir al muminin, the caliph was the supreme commander of the troops. This, reinforced his religious and political authority. In other words, political, military and religious power was initially combined, in one person-the caliph. The Arab tribes which constituted, the Muslim community or umma were at the the armed force, of the state. All able-bodied male adults of the umma had to, render military service. The soldiers were grouped according, the respective tribes to which they belonged and fought under, the leadership of their tribal chiefs (though the overall, command of the army might be with the amir al muminin or, someone appointed by him)., Unlike in Arabia, the Arabs were outsiders in Iraq, Iran,, Syria, Palestine and Egypt. For several years they were, primarily an army of occupation and it was only gradually, that they got integrated with the conquered areas. The troops, were stationed in fortified camps or garrisons, called amsar, (singular misr; amsar should not be confused with ansar), located, at strategic points. In Iraq the Arabs preferred to set up their, own garrison towns whereas in Syria they usually lived in, existing towns which had been abandoned by the retreating, Byzantines. Significantly, the Arabs did not occupy the, Sassanid capital Cstesiphon despite having captured it. They, founded two new cities in southern Iraq where the troops, and administrative personnel were lodged. These cities were, Kufa and Basra, which were founded between c. 635 and 638., Kufa was situated on the banks of the Euphrates, very close
Page 363 :
The Arabs, Islam, and the Early Abbasid Caliphate, , I, , 337, , to Hira, and Basra was at the mouth of the Persian Gulf. Basra, grew into a major commercial centre. In Syria the Arabs, selected an old market town, Damascus, as their main militarycum-administrative centre. In Egypt the settlement of Fustat, was founded at the edge of the Nile delta inc. 641. Fustat, later developed into Cairo., As military conquest was looked upon as a collective enterprise, the spoils of war were to be shared by the community, as a whole. According the principles laid down by the Prophet,, one-fifth of the booty went to the state and the rest was, distributed among the umma. Given the unprecedented scale, of conquest, Umar had to ensure that the distribution of the, booty did not take place in a haphazard manner. The booty, was distributed by the state in the form of lump-sum military, stipends. The amount of stipend which a person received was, determined by the nature of his service and stage at which his, family or clan had accepted Islam. Thus, the muhajirun and, their descendants would be ranked first and so on. The, allocations were made centrally while the actual disbursement, might be made in the area where a person was serving. All, Muslims were liable to pay the zakat tax, which was assessed, on their possessions., For the time being the complex question of land was, resolved by keeping it under the control of the state instead, of dividing it among individual Arab families. Land was held, by the central government on behalf of the umma. Th~ land, which caine under the control of the Arab state was i) Byzantine, or Sassanid crown land; ii) land abandoned by the former, owners; and iii) land on which the subject population had, forfeited its property rights because they had resisted the, Arabs. In all these cases a share of the produce was taken, from the cultivators or the intermediaries and redistributed, among the Arabs in the form of pensions along the lines of, the formula for distributing booty. It must be remembered, Arabs had gained access to, that this was the first time that, such an enormous agrarian surplus derived from land. Hence, it took some time to evolve a regular system of land admin-, , the
Page 364 :
338, , I, , Early Social Formations, , istration. For over half a century there was considerable confusion with regard to patterns of landownership and categories, of land revenue. We should not assume that the stipends or, pensions paid by the state amounted to an equitable, distribution of wealth. Earlier disparities were reinforced and, soon a privileged Muslim elite emerged in the conquered, territories. Nevertheless the measures of Umar and Usman, helped to maintain the cohesion of the umma in the first phase, of expansion. Usman had placed severe restrictions on the, private pt!trchase of land in southern Iraq by·wealthy Meccans, when he ~ound that provisions laid down by Umar were being, violated.·, Umar was responsible for systematization of Islamic ritual., The mosque,.where the males of the community gathered for, prayer, became the centre of the religious life of Muslims. In, the amsar the practice of praying collectively was one of the, ways in which the umma could be brought together by giving, to Arab troops drawn from different tribes a strong sense of, identity. Umar sent out Quran reciters to the garrison towns, to familiarize the residents with its text. Although some parts, of the Quran were written down, most of it was transmitted, orally. Umar and Usman initiated the writing down and, standardization of the entire text. This task was completed, under Usman and the standardized text dates from his time., Umar instituted a new Islamic ~ra commencing from the year, of the hijrat (622). This is a lunar calendar of tw~lve equal, months and is 11 days less than the actual year of 365.25 days., , IV, There was a violent struggle over the question of succession, after Usman. No unanimity could be arrived at and the political, crisis deteriorated to a point where a virtual civil war broke, out in the Arab empire. Some of the differences which arose, in that period have persisted down to the present day in the, shape of numerous religious sects within Islam. At Madina, the supporters of Ali had joined hands with the rebels from
Page 365 :
The Arabs, Islam, and the Early Abbasid Caliphate, , I, , 339, , Egypt and they proclaimed Ali as the caliph. This was not, acceptable to the Umayyads. Another faction led by Zubayr,, an associate of Muhammad, and Muhammad's widow Aisha, also opposed Ali. The most serious challenge came from, Muawiya, the governor of Syria, who was a descendent of, Umayya and a cousin of Usman. Muawiya had a strong base, among the Arabs of Syria. He openly revolted against Ali. Ali, had shifted his capital from Madina to Kufa in Iraq. He had a, large following at this place. Except for Syria, all other regions had recognized Ali as the caliph. In order to seek Muawiya's submission Ali marched towards Syria with his troops., An armed encounter b.etween the armies of Ali and Muawiya, took place at Siffin in northern Mesopotamia (657). The battle, was inconclusive and both sides agreed to arbitration. Nothing, concrete emerged from the negotiations and Muawiya became, the de facto ruler of Syria. Ali ruled over the rest of the empire, from his capital at Kufa (Madina was too inconveniently located, to be the seat of government)., The events leading to Ali's withdrawal from Siffin, provoked the first major sectarian division in Islam. There, was one group which held that Ali was divinely endowed, with special qualities of leadership by virtue of his belonging, to the family of the Prophet and being the 'true' successor. He, was incapable of making any error. This group, called shiah, (shiah is a collective noun which literally means 'party', and, here implies 'the party of Ali'; the adherents of this party are, the shii or Shiites), had unquestioning faith in Ali and fully, endorsed his actions at Siffin. On the other hand there was a, breakaway group which was opposed to any arbitration, between Muawiya and Ali. In their opinion Ali's conduct, amounted to a compromise with the Umayyads. For this group, Ali was no longer the leader of the Muslim community. Those, who took this extreme position acquired the label of Kharijis, or secessionists: the Kharijis had seceded from Ali, and of, course from Muawiya and the Umayyads. The Kharijis, continued to be a source of trouble for the Arab state for at, least half a century. Small bands of Khariji rebels harassed the
Page 366 :
340, , I Early Social Formations, , government in different parts of the empire. The Kharijis, evolved their own religious interpretations and their doctrines, influenced the development of Islamic theology everi after, the movement itseli died out by the beginning of the eighth, century. Arab history in the post-Siffin period was marked, by an unequal contest between the Umayyads, Kharijis and, Shiites, a contest in which the Umayyads emerged as the, winners. Of course there were a large number of Muslims, who took no sides in this contest., Ali was murdered by a Khariji assassin in 661. Muawiycl,, now formally declared himself as the caliph. There was a brief, attempt to promote the candidature of Ali's eldest son Hasan,, but the Shiites failed to muster enough support. Damascus, became the new capital of the Arab empire. Muawiya began, the process of transforming the caliphate into a monarchy., Between 661 and 750 all caliphs were from the Umayyad clan., This is known as the period of the Umayyad caliphate. In, Muslim historiography a clear distinction is made between, the first four caliphs and the Umayyad and later caliphates., Abu Bakr, Umar, Usman and Ali are generally referred to as, the 'pious caliphs' or rashidun (i.e. 'rightly guided' caliphs)., With Muawiya monarchical rule based on the dynastic, principle was established. The Umayyad caliphs projected, themselves as religious leaders but ultimately their power, rested on force., ·, Muawiya, who ruled from 661 to 680, reinforced the, concept of hereditary succession by naming his son Yazid as, the heir. Yazid (680-3) became caliph after his father's death., Once again the Shiites put forth the claim of Ali's family. They, -announced their support for Ali's younger son, Husayn (Hasan, had died in 669). Husayn' s supporters, who were concentrated, in southern Iraq (mainly in Kufa), mobilized a contingent of, soldiers for ~med resistance against the Umayyads. In 680, Husayn led a small band of followers to fight the Umayyad, army. The battle took place at Karbala, not far from Kufa., Husayn' s force was massacred and Husayn himself was killed., The slaying of Husayn on the battlefield made him a martyr
Page 367 :
The Arabs, Islam, and the Early Abbasid Caliphate, , I, , 341, , not only for the Shiites but for many of those who were, opposed to the shape which the caliphate had taken. Husayn's, martyrdom became a powerful religious symbol for the Shiites, and was henceforth to be the rallying point for their cause., This event is commemorated every year as a period of, mourning during the Islamic month of Muharram, i.e. the, month in which the battle of Karbala took place., Yazid's brief reign witnessed numerous uprisings. Besides, the Shiites and the Kharijis, several sections of the people of, Madina were also opposed to his succession. Yazid hardly, had any time to settle down and passed away in 683. He was, survived by a minor son, Muawiya II, who was installed as, the new caliph. Muawiya II died shortly afterwards. To the, opponents of the Umayyads the succession of both Yazid and, Muawiya II was a complete negation of the concept of the, caliphate. From 684 onwards a prolonged civil war engulfed, the Arab empire. The major adversaries of the Umayyads were, the old Muslim families of Mecca and Madina who were, aligned with a tribal confederacy headed by the Qays tribe of, southern Arabia., With the centre of political power having shifted towards, Syria (and to a lesser extent Iraq) Arabia had been increasingly, marginalized. The growing alienation of Mecca and Madina, was now converted into a revolt led by Ibn Zubayr. Ibn Zubayr, was proclaimed the new caliph in 684 and Madina was restored, as the capital. For the next few years Arabia became virtually, independent. Some areas were controlled by Ibn Zubayr while, others were under the Kharijis. Most. of Iraq owed allegiance, to Ibn Zubayr. The Kharijis briefly upheld Ibn Zubayr' s claim,, but on the whole the two were hostile to each other., Throughout the empire Arab communities were split along, the lines of the three warring factions: lbn Zubayr, the, Ununayads and the Kharijis.·, Meanwhile the leadership of the Umayyads was assumed, by another branch of the clan. This was the family of Marwan., Muawiya, Yazid and Muawiya II belonged to the of family, Abu Sufiyan, a grandson of Umayya. They are therefore often
Page 368 :
342, , I EarlySacial Formations, , referred to as Sufi.yanid Ummayads. Marwan was descended, from a cousin of Abu Sufi.yan. He and his Umayyad successors, are called Marwanid Umayyads. Marwan had earlier served, as the chief adviser of caliph Usman (to whom he was closely, related). In 684 Marwan defeated lbn Zubayr at the battle of, Marj Rahat which enabled the Umayyads to recover Syria., Marwan died in 685 and was succeeded by Abd al-Malik., Abd al-Malik (685-705) rebuilt the Umayyad state,, strengthened the caliphate and extended the borders of the, empire. A series of campaigns had to be directed against Ibn, Zubayr and the Khariji rebels before they could be defeated., All of Iraq had submitted to Abd al-Malik by 691 and in 692, Mecca and Madina were occupied. Ibn Zubayr was killed. It, was only aft.er 692 that Umayyad rule was stabilized. The, person who played the most prominent role in the campaigns, against lbn Zubayr was a military commander named al-Hajjaj., He was from the Thaqif tribe of Tai£ and was in-charge of the, action at Mecca. Al-Hajjaj was subsequently appointed, governor of Iraq and the eastern territories of the empire which, he ruled with an iron hand till his death in 714., Under Abd al-Malik the caliphate became an absolute monarchy. Political and military power was concentrated in the, hands of a small ruling elite presided over by the caliph. The, caliph wielded supreme authority. Abd al-Malik developed a, bureaucratic apparatus for governing the empire. The army, was reorganized to make it a professional standing army rather, than a league of tribal contingents. Several features which had, survived from former Byzantine and Sassanid regimes were, abandoned. The Byzantines had used Greek and the Sassanids, had used Pahlavi (a type of Persian which linguists call 'Middle, Persian') as their official languages. When the Arabs occupied, the territories of these empires most of the routine, governmental work was still done in Greek and Pahlavi in, the respective areas. This was partly dictated by necessity, because the bulk of the lower and middle level administrative, personnel had been serving the former rulers. Abd al-Malik, vigorously pursued a policy of arabization. He replaced Greek
Page 369 :
The Arabs, Islam, and the Early Abbasid Caliphate, , I, , 343, , and Pahlavi with Arabic as the language of the administration. An innovative and distinctive coinage was introduced, which was very different in its design from the coins issued, by the Byzantines and Sassanids. The coins of Abd al-Malik, carried no portraits but only had some written text engraved, on them. The text was inscribed in Arabic and included words, from the Quran. This was to remain the basic format for coins, issued by Muslim rulers throughout the world. Abd al-Malik' s, reign was also a period of hectic building activity. Monumental, public buildings, mainly mosques and palaces, were, constructed in the principal cities of the empire. A number of, grand buildings came up in the capital Damascus. The most, famous monument built at the initiative of Abd al-Malik was, the structure known as 'Dome of the Rock'-Al-Aqsa mosque-in Jerusalem (692). The Dome of the Rock was constructed at, a site which was held sacred by the Jews as well the Muslims, due to its association with Abraham. The imposing dome on, this mosque defined a new architectural expression which, became one of the most enduring elements of Islamic architecture., Abd al-Malik and his successor al-Walid I (705-15), embarked upon a new phase of territorial expansion. The most, significant conquests took place in northern Africa and the, western Mediterranean.. Egypt was used as the launching pad, for campaigns in the western parts of northern Africa. The, entire stretch of northern Africa, from the western borders of, Egypt to the Atlantic coast, was referred to by the Arabs as, 'the Maghrib'. The Maghrib is bound by the Mediterranean in, the north and the Sahara in the south. It comprises presentday Libya, Tunisia, Algeria and Morocco. The Arabs began, making inroads into the Maghrib in the latter half ·of the seventh, century and by the end of the century they had occupied the, Roman province of Africa (called Ifriqiya by the Arabs; now, known as Tunisia). In Ifriqiya the leading garrison town of, the Arabs was Qayrawan (Kairoun, in south-eastern Tunisia),, which was founded inc. 670. Qayrawan became the first Arab, urban centre in the Maghrib. By the beginning of the eighth
Page 370 :
• '.! J, , I, , Early Social Formations, , century the entire Maghrib was under Umayyad rule. Arab, consolidation in the Maghrib was facilitated by the ties which, they forged with local nomadic people known as the Berbers., Many of the Berber tribes adopted Islam and got arabized., Subsequent campaigns in the western Mediterranean were, jointly undertaken by the Arabs and Berbers. By 711 Umayyad, armies had invaded western Europe. The Visigoths were, dislodged from Spain, which was incorporated into the Arab, empire. Further advance into Europe was checked by the, Franks., Umayyad power was based primarily on Syrian support., The surplus produced by the Syrian economy provided the, initial resources for the Umayyads to extend their authority., The agricultural produce of the rich and fertile tract lying, between the Tigris and the Euphrates in southern Iraq was, another vital component of the Umayyad economy in the, Marwanid era. The provincial government of Al-Hajjaj laid, great stress on the improvement of irrigation works in, southern Iraq. There is evidence to suggest that there was, some agricultural expansion in this region during the early, decades of the eighth century. It should be borne in mind that, southern Iraq had been the main politica,l and economic centre, of the Sassanid empire., A few general observations about Umayyad society may, be made at this stage. Firstly, both Syria and Iraq had a fairly, large Arab population at the time of the Islamic conquests., Secondly, the Arab component of the population was somewhat, larger in Syria than in Iraq. Third, when the Arabs invaded, Syria the Greek-speaking Byzantine landed aristocracy fled, from the country, whereas in Iraq the Persian landowners, remained in place and were initially accommodated as, intermediaries in th~ !and revenue sys·~~m. Fourth, the Arabs, began to penetrate the countryside of Syria at a relatively, early date as compared to Iraq. Fifth, by the beginning of the, eighth century the Arab settlers of Iraq were also not confined, just to the cities but had begun acquiring land in southern, Iraq as private holdings. Sixth, whereas there was extensive
Page 371 :
The Arabs, Islam, and the F.arly Abbasid Caliphate, , I, , 345, , Arab colonization in Syria and Iraq, Iran (i.e. the area lying, east of the Zagros mountains) itself was not colonized by the, Arabs. Khurasan may be cited as the one exception to this., There was a sizeable Arab concentration in this north-eastern, frontier region of Iran. Finally, the key to Umayyad domination, over Syria, and through it over the Arab empire, was their, alliance with the Quzaa (or Kalb) tribal confederacy. The tribes, which comprised the Quzaa confederacy were numerically the, single largest Arab group in Syria. Patricia Crone has stated, that (Slaves on Horses), 'Syria was an exceptional province, firstly, in that the Arab population was spread evenly over the, countryside, and secondly in that one confederacy, the Quzaa,, by far outnumbered any other tribe. It was thus possible for, the Syrian as for no other governor to rely on a local group'., When the Arabs first settled in the amsar in Byzantine and, Sassanid territories they were grouped according to their tribal, affiliations which were combined to form semi-artificial tribal, units. Each garrison town was divided into sectors (or, quarters) which were allotted to separate tribal units. Arab, tribes were the basis of military and administrative, organization. The respective sectors in which the tribes resided, were the centres of their social and religious life. These sectors, were virtually autonomous segments of the wban settlement., The city was thus more of a collection of tribal localities. Ira, Lapidus states that, 'Quarters [i.e. sectors] were village-like, communities within the urban whole. Indeed some quarters, were suburban districts composed of people of recent village, or beduin origin. These sharply divided city populations, enjoyed relatively few institutions which cut across quarter, ·, boundaries to bind them together'., Initially each sector was· placed under the chief of the, dominant tribe living in it. This chief, or rais al qabila, was the, main link between the central or provincial governments and, the sectors. He was answerable for the tribes under him. It, was through the rais al qabila that stipends or pensions were, paid and taxes were realized. Mobilizing troops from the tribal, units for military campaigns was the duty of the rais al qabila.
Page 372 :
346, , I Early Social Formations, , The rais al qabila were the ruling elite (ashraf) of the early, Umayyad state. In Syria at least the ashraf were invariably, drawn from tribes which were loyal to the Umayyad house., Abd al-Malik reformed· this system in order to create a, standing army with regular troops maintained by the state., Tribal units were reconstituted into regiments called junds., funds were not kinship groups. The junds were commanded, by qaids, who were ·military commanders and might not, necessarily be tribal chiefs. This was an attempt to dissolve, tribal loyalties within the army and impart a professional, character to it., In the first phase of Arab expansion in West Asia the pace, of conversion to Islam in the former Byzantine and Sassanid, territories was very slow. The earliest Muslims identified Islam, with the Arabs. Islam was regarded as the religion of the, Arab tribes. Usually the conversion to Islam was a tribal and, not an individual affair. A tribe as a whole would adopt the, new creed (there were, of course, a few exceptions). The, military, administrative and social organization of the Arab, Muslims, as we have seen, was along tribal lines. Initially ties, of tribe or clan remained intact in the conquered territories., In Syria, ·Iraq and Egypt the Muslims lived in garrison towns, from where they controlled the neighbouring countryside., They were not encouraged to have much interaction with the, local populace. The garrison towns were islands of Arab, presence mthese countries. Yet complete isolation was out of, ·the question. The practical compulsions .of administering such, vast territories with their highly developed economies, necessitated some intercourse with the subject non-Arab, population. The systematic extraction of surplus by the Arab, ruling class required the collaboration of local elites. In Syria, the problem was more acute since the Byzantine upper class, had taken refuge in the areas which were still ruled by, Constantinople. Nevertheless, there were a few officials who, stayed on and offered their services to the Arabs., In the case of Iraq and Iran there was a class of wellentrenched landowners and village chiefs called dihqans who
Page 373 :
The Arabs, Islam, and the Early Abbasid Caliphate, , I, , 347, , had assisted the Sassanid government in the collection of land, revenue. The dihqans retained their position under the Arabs,, even though they lost many of their privileges. They continued, to be the dominant class in the rural areas. The dihqans collected, the land tax from villages and paid it to the government. They, also carried out numerous other administrative functions., Over a period of time many of them began to reside, permanently in Arab cities and embraced Islam., Simultaneously Arab settlers were penetrating the countryside,, a phenomenon which was particularly apparent in Syria. As, more and more Arabs developed economic and social, relationships with areas outside the garrison towns, many local, inhabitants became Muslims. Bythe end of the seventh century, non-Arab Muslims were to be found both in urban centres, and the countryside., Given that Muslims were only visualized as belonging to, specific Arab tribes and that these tribes were the very basis, of military and administrative organization, a way had to be, found for accommodating non-Arab Muslims-'-who often, converted in small batches-within this structure. The problem, was resolved by allocating the non-Arabs to some Arab tribe., What is significant is that non-Arabs who entered the fold, had an inferior status. This inferior status was institutionalized, by making the non-Arabs accept the overlordship of the, respective tribes to which they were attached. The non-Arab, convert was classified as maula (plural mawali) or dependent, of the tribe. The mawali had a subordinate position within the, tribe. Later, when tribes ceased to play a role in the military, and administrative organization of the state non-Arc1-b Muslims, became mawali of individuals or families., There had been an appreciable increase in the proportion, of non-Arab Muslims by the beginning of the eighth century., Crone has suggested that under the e_arly Umayyads the, greater part of the converts were war captives who had been, made slaves. These slaves were subsequently manumitted, when they converted (theoretically Muslims could not be, slaves). She has pointed out that there was extensive
Page 374 :
348, , I Early Social Formations, , enslavement during the early Arab conquests. The manumitted, slaves were accorded a low status in Muslim society when, they converted. This partly accounts for the subordination of, the mawali., There was a marginal improvement in the status of the, mawali when the landowning classes (dihqans, etc.) and former, Sassanid officials of Iraq and Iran began to adopt Isla,m. This, process gathered momentum with the incorporation of these, groups into the administrative structure. Al-Hajjaj had, curtailed the autonomy of the dihqans by centralizing the, collection of land revenue and placing the mawali in charge of, it. The dihqans now had an additional incentive to convert., The adoption of Islam by the dihqans was usually accompanied, by the conversion of the villages controlled by them. Some of, the Marwanid Abbasids, as for instance Umar II (717-20),, actively promoted conversions. Moreover the interaction, between Arab settlers and the local population, which took, place at various levels, undermined Arab exclusivism. The nonArab Muslims were no longer content with the status of maula, and aspired for equality within the community. These, developments led to widespread resentment against Umayyad, rule, particularly in Iraq and Iran., The Umayyads were unpopular among several sections, of the Arabs as well. Their government was looked upon as, being authoritarian and corrupt. The st~te had become, militarily weak which made it difficult for the Umayyads to, control the far-flung areas of the empire. Some of the, commanders took advantage of this situation to make, themselves powerful in the areas in which they were posted., A new class of Arab traders, government officials, absentee, landlords and rural intermediaries had arisen within the, former Sassanid ':erritories. This class wanted some share in, powe.r. In view of the narrow social base of the Umayyads,, which was primarily confined to Syria, these groups could, not be accommodated without disturbing the delicate balance, of tribal alignments which sustained the state. There had also, been occasional uprisings against the Umayyads by the clans
Page 375 :
The Arabs, Islam, and the Early Abl,asid Caliphate, , I, , 349, , and tribes opposed to them. The most consistent foes of the, Umayyads were the Hashimites and the Alids. Thus the, dissatisfaction of the mawali combined with the opposition of, diverse Arab groups led to a strong artti-Umayyad sentiment, in the empire by the mid-eighth ·century., In the 740s an organized movement aimed at the, overthrow of the Umayyads came into existence. Till almost, the last moment the leadership of this movement remained, underground. It worked in complete secrecy to mobilize all, the forces which were opposed to the Umayyads for one reason, or another. Though the origins of the movement are somewhat, obscure, there is no doubt that its real leaders were the, Hashimites. The Hashimites had never reconciled themselves, to Umayyad supremacy. The movement was guided by the, Abbasids, a branch of the Hashimites who were descendants, of Muhammad's paternal uncle al-Abbas. The headquarters, of the Abbasids were at an isolated village named al-Hurnayma, which was situated in the desert to the south of Syria. From, al-Humayma a number of agents were sent out to gather, support for the Abbasid cause. The main strength of the, movement was in Khurasan which, as we have noted, had a, large Arab population. Here a leading role was played by, Abu Muslim:, a military commander and outstanding organizer:., Abu Muslim managed to collect a large army from among the, Arab settlers of Khurasan. He also enlisted the assistance of, the local mawali. Abbasid propagandists made an appeal to, the anti-Umayyad feelings of the Alids and even vaguely indicated that someone from the family of Ali would be made the, caliph. But it became clear later that the Abbasids had no intention of handing over power to the Alids. The Abbasids, preferred to remain• concealed until the movement had, attained its objective and only then did they reveal as to who, would succeed the Umayyads., Umayyad rule came to an end in 749-50. The Khurasani, army mobilized by Abu Muslim was instrumental in ousting, them from power. The last Umayyad caliph, Marwan II, fled, to Egypt and was killed there. It was only when Abu Muslim
Page 376 :
350, , I Early Social Formations, , had accomplished his task that the Abbasid leader Abul Abbas, al-Saffah (al-saffah literally means 'the avenger') was declared, the new caliph. This inaugurated t!,.e 500 year long reign of, the Abbasids. The Abbasid caliphate lasted till 1258, though, they enjoyed supreme power only for about a century after, which they were more of figureheads and were reduced to, being figureheads by the tenth century., , V, With the rise of the Abbasids the centre of political power, shifted from Syria to southern Iraq. Corresponding to this, was the marginalization of Syria. Whereas the Khurasanis were, the staunchest allies of the Abbasids, Khurasan itself was ~, frontier area and was therefore not suitable for governing, such a large empire. The economy of southern Iraq could, provide the resources necessary for maintaining the Abbasid, imperial government. The Persian empire of the Sassanids too, had its nucleus in this region. It was here that the Sassanid, administrative structure was concentrated. The dihqans and, erstwhile Sassanid officials who had become mawali had a, strong presence in this fertile tract. They had backed the, Abbasids in their 'struggle against the Umayyads and they, were to be henceforth one of the pillars of the Abbasid regime., Persian mawali were recruited in the· civil administration and, the army on a large scale from the middle of the eighth century., The mawali rose to high positions and the local and regional, elites among them got a share in political power. Most of the, Iranians adopted Islam in the following two centuries. This, implied that the Iranian component of the Muslim population, of West Asia outnumbered the Arabs. Once a section of the, Persian mawali had become part of the ruling class the distinction between Arab and non-Arab Muslims no longer had, much meaning. Social differentiation among the Muslims was, now primarily along class lines. Even the use of the term maula, was gradually dispensed.with., Arab expansion into the Iranian world (which in the
Page 377 :
The Arabs, Islam, and the Early Abbasid Caliphate, , I, , 3.51, , context of the Abbasid caliphate included parts of presentday Afghanistan and extended beyond the Oxus river) was a, turning point in the development of Islam. Islamic, consolidation in Iran under the Abbasids produced a rich, synthesis through the fusion of Arab and Iranian traditions., The civilization which flourished under the early Abbasids, was rooted in this synthesis. As a result of this synthesis many, of the features of the Sassanid monarchical state were carried, over to Islam. Thus, what has been referred to as the 'Abbasid, revolution' had far-reaching implications for Arab-IranianIslamic history., Al-Saffah died in 754. He was succeeded by his brother, al-Mansur (754-75). Marshall Hodgson regards the eighty years, from the accession of al-Mansur to the death of the Abbasid, caliph al-Mamun in 833 as marking the climax of the 'High, Caliphate'. In his periodization of Islamic history Hodgson,, has termed the era of the Marwanid Umayyads and the early, Abbasids (from 684 to c.' 900) as the 'High Caliphate', as distinct, from the 'Primitive Caliphate' which preceded it (632-683)., The most outstanding of the early Abbasids were al-Mansur,, Harun al-Rashid {786-809) and al-Mamun (813-33)., In al-Mansur's reign the caliphate became even more of, an absolutist monarchy than it had been under the Marwanids., The Sassanid conception of kingship, combining temporal and, spiritual authority, was adopted to uphold the caliph's, supreme authority. An elaborate court ceremonial, much of it, borrowed from the Sassanids (though there were also, Byzantine inputs) was introduced. The person of the caliph, became unapproachable, signifying distance between ruler and, ruled. If at all someone was allowed into the caliph's presence, it was necessary to prostrate oneself and kiss the ground. The, splendour of the court emphasized the majesty of the caliph., Southern Iraq at this time had three prominent Arab cities., We have already referred to Kufa and Basra. Besides, there, was Wasit located on the Tigris, north of Basra. Wasit had, been the headquarters of Al-Hajjaj and had been founded by, him in c. 702. Al-Mansur discovered that none of these cities
Page 378 :
352, , I Early Social Formations, , could cater to his needs. Cstesiphon (Madain), the imperial, capital of the Sassanids was decaying. The caliph decided to, build an imposing capital for himself in southern Iraq. In 762, he founded Baghdad on the banks of the Tigris. The site of, the city was not far from ancient Cstesiphon. Initially this was, a cantonment for the Khurasan army of the Abbasids. Many, scholars regard the founding of Baghdad as having a deeper, symbolic significance whereby al-Mansur tried to present, himself as a ruler in the tradition of the Sassanids and their, Hellenistic predecessors., Right since the time of Alexander the Great the formal, founding of cities was a symbolic act which denoted imperial, power. This was a concept that was alien to Arabia where, urban centres were non-existent. The first Arab cities in the, Byzantine and Sassanid territories had grown out of the amsar., Damascus, the capital of the Umayyads, was an old Roman, town which was converted into a military-cum-administrative, centre. Baghdad, on the other hand, was planned on a grand, scale from the outset. It was conceived as a circular city which, came up around the palace of the caliph and a large mosque., The boundaries of the city were marked by a number of gates., Baghdad remained the residence of the Abbasid caliphs till, the end (except for a very short period when it was shifted to, Samarra). It grew into one of the great metropolises of the, world and was perhaps the largest city of the Middle Ages., The eighth and ninth centuries were a period of urban, expansion in the Islamic world. Baghdad, Kufa, Wasit and, Basra were the main cities of Iraq. Al-Mansur was responsible, for building walls around Kufa and Basra (c. 770). The, population of Basra at the beginning of the eighth century is, estimated to have been 200, 000 while Kufa had a population, of 1.00, 000. Basta became the main port for Baghdad and was, an important transit point in the Indian Ocean trade route, which passed through the Persian Gulf. In Iran the leading, urban centres were Nishapur, Marv and Tus in Khurasan. The, prosperity of the cities of Khmasan was directly linked to the, importance of this region in the early phase of Abbasid rule.
Page 379 :
The Arabs, Islam, and the Early Abl,asid Caliphate, , I, , 353, , Nishapur was the principal town of Khurasan. It lay on the, Central Asian trade route and benefited from the commerce, which went along this artery. Nishapur was also an eminent, centre of learning. Beyond Khurasan in Central Asia new urban, centres like Balkh and Bukhara were rising to prominence., In the west, Syria had lost its former prestige. Damascus,, which had been the capital of a vast empire for almost a, century, was now just a provincial town. However, it still, remained the chief metropolis of Syria. Aleppo and Antioch, (the capital of the province under the Rom.ans) were the other, leading cities of Syria. The ancient ports of Byblos, Sidon and, Tyre on the Lebanese coast continued to flourish due the hectic, commercial activity of the eastern Mediterranean. In Palestine,, the development of Jerusalem received a fresh stimulus when, it became a religious centre for the Muslims in the 690s., Jerusalem was already a major place of pilgrimage for the, Jews and the Christians., In Egypt, where urban decay had set in with the decline, of the Roman empire, the ruralization of the economy was, almost complete at the time of the Arab conquest. As we have, noted above, the main Arab garrison in Egypt was located on, the Nile, at the edge of the delta. This was called Fw;tat and, became the largest city in Egypt. When Cairo was founded, adjacent to Fustat in the tenth century, Fustat merged with it, (Fustat is now part of Old Cairo). The great Mediterranean, port of Alexandria had already lost its former glory and was, now fully eclipsed with the rise of Fustat. In the Maghrib the, founding of Qayrawan was followed by the creation of a new, city near the Mediterranean coast. The site of this city was a, Roman settlement called Tynes on the outskirts of ancient, Carthage. It is from Tynes, or Tunis, that the name of· the, present-day country of Tunisia (corresponding to Ifriqiya) is, derived. In the rest of the Maghrib the emergence of new, cities was somewhat slower. Most of the old Roman towns, had disappeared. The city of Fez (now in Morocco) at the, western extremity of the Maghrib, which grew into a major, urban settlement, was founded only in 808. Finally, in Spain,
Page 380 :
:54, , I, , Early Social Formations, , which the Arabs called Andalus, the capital of the territories, ruled by the Muslims was at Cordoba (Qurtuba). Cordoba,, situated on the Guadalquivir river which flows through, southern Spain, was founded inc. 719. As it expanded it became, the preeminent Arab city in western Europe, although the, really intesive growth of Cordoba occurred in the tenth, century., The urban expansion of this period was not merely, sustained by the military and administrative requirements of, the Arabs but also a reflection of the expansion of trade. Political, unification of such a large area, extending from the western, Mediterranean to Central Asia, promoted commercial, exchanges. Long-distance trade between the Mediterranean, world and the Indian Ocean and Central Asia was facilitated, by the relative stability of the eighth and ninth centuries., Goods moved along the sea route from China, via India, to, the Persian Gulf. In the Gulf there were two major Abbasid, ports: Siraf in Iran and Basra in Iraq. The seaborne trade from, Siraf and Basra to various places in south-east Asia was, organized by Arab and Iranian merchants, who included a, number of Jews. Ships were regularly sent out as far as China,, altnough the Arab and Iranian merchants tended to, concentrate on the Arabian Sea segment of the route. From, Siraf or Basra goods were taken overland to Syria and Palestine, and then entered the Mediterranean network. Some of the, goods were sent for sale to Baghdad while a small proportion, might go onwards to Nishapur to enter the Central Asian, network. The traditional Central Asian overland route linking, China with West Asia and the Mediterranean was another, busy highway of international commerce., There was a change in the orientation of the Mediterranean, commercial network in this period. With the decline of trade, in early medieval Europe the focus of long-distance trade in, the Mediterranean sea moved southwards to north Africa, (Egypt and the Maghrib). Ships laden with cargo plied between, Egypt, or the Lebanese ports, and Spain. Tunis, lying midway, along this route, was a major point of transit. Sicily was also
Page 381 :
The Arabs, Islam, and_the Early Abbasid Caliphate, , I, , 35.5, , part of this network as it was ruled by the Arabs. Later, Venice, too began to participate in this trade. The Jews occupied a, key position in the trading world of the Mediterranean. Egypt, had a large concentration of Jewish merchants who handled a, sizeable proportion of ·the Mediterranean and Red Sea trade,, including the trade between the Indian Ocean and the, Mediterranean. The discovery, a few decades back, of a huge, collection of documents belonging to the Jewish merchant, community of Fustat from a storehouse (the Cairo Geniza}, where these were deposited, has shed considerable light on, the commercial activities of the Jews in the Arab empire., Spices, fine quality silk and cotton textiles, precious stones,, furs, and a few other luxury goods such as chinaware were, carried from south-east Asia and India to West Asia and, Europe. These commodities were in demand in the new urban, centres of the Arab empire. This international trade catered, to the large market for luxury goods in the cities where the, rulers and their courts resided. The ostentatious lifestyle of, the caliph was imitated by the provincial aristocracy which, also lived lavishly thereby generating the demand for a wide, range of high value commodities. The biggest consumers were, to be found in Baghdad, Damascus, Nishapur, Fustat and, Cordoba. The cities of the Muslim world were themselves, centres of handicraft production, and some of these products, were exchanged for the commodities which were imported., Weapons, paper, ivory, sugar, olive oil, slaves, gold and horses, were the commodities which the Arab-ruled territories sent, out. The growth of trade rapidly gave rise to a Muslim urban, middle class consisting of traders, shopkeepers, commission, agents and shipowners. However, unlike the bourgeoisie of, medieval Europe which exercised control over the towns, the, Muslim middle class had little control over the political, institutions of cities in which they resided. The reason for this, was, as S. D. Goitein observes, that the urban centres of the, Arabs were primarily developed by the state for, administrative or military purposes and were therefore closely, supervised by the government. In this situation the middle
Page 382 :
35(,, , I Early Social Formations, , class could hardly hope to occupy a position of authority in, the city. This might perhaps partially explain why these cities, could not have become the starting point for transition to, capitalism., In any case the importance of trade in the Abbasid, economy should not be exaggerated. Land was the principal, source of wealth. The early Abbasids were keen to promote, the agrarian economy of southern Iraq since this was the core, area of their state. It was on this region that they depended, first and foremost for their resources. They endeavoured to, maximize production by extending cultivation and improving, irrigation. Al-Hajjaj had launched a programme for repairing, the irrigation works of the Sassanids. The Abbasids took over, from where he had left off and restored and expanded the, complex network of canals in southern Iraq. Existing irrigation, techniques were modified and more efficient devices for lifting, water to irrigate fields were adopted. The most outstanding, achievement in this sphere was the dissemination of the waterwheel or noria (naura). This device was already in use in Syria., It was a great iµiprovement over the simple method of lifting, water with the help of a rope and bucket. Noria is a machine, which is powered by oxen or some other draught animal. The, animals turn a horizontal wheel to which a vertical wheel is, attached. The vertical wheel has a number of buckets or jars, which lift the water and discharge it into a channel from where, it is distributed in the fields. Noria and its variants came to be, widely used in Iraq and Egypt and spread as far as Spain., In Iran the system of constructing underground canals,, called qanats, for carrying water from springs to irrigate fields,, had survived from the Sassanid era. The earlier qanats were, artificial streams which were covered in order to prevent, evaporation of water. Qanat irrigation was mainly prevalent, in places which were situated at the foothills of mountains., Mountain springs were tapped by this process. In Iran the, ancient qanats which had ceased to function (due to silting or, the collapse of their covers) were rebuilt. The network was, extended within and outside Iran. It was adapted to desert
Page 383 :
The Arabs, Islam, and th.e Early Abbasid Caliphate, , I, , 357, , springs and the technique was employed wherever water was, scarce., The collection of land revenue was made uniform in the, eighth and ninth centuries; We have drawn attention to the, fact that it was the conquest of the Byzantine and Sassanid, territories that placed a large agrarian surplus at the disposal, of the Arabs. This was an entirely new situation which had, the potential ofcausing a social upheaval among the nomadic, tribes. The early caliphs had tried to discourage the Muslims, from converting the land in conquered territories as their, private holdings. Later, as Arab settlers began to acquire land, a distinction was made between Muslim and non-Muslim, landowners. The main tax paid by the Muslims was :zakat which, was theoretically meant for charitable purposes. This was, normally assessed at the rate of 2¼ % of the payee's, possessions (exclusive of land). Landowning Muslims had to, pay a tax on land called ushr. Ushr was assessed at the rate of, one-tenth of the produce (hence ushr is often translated as, tithe)., All non-Muslims were liable to pay a general tax called, jizya. Jizya was levied on those who were classified as nonbelievers (zimmis), i.e. those who were outside the Muslim, community or umma. This was not a tax on property or income, and was collected on a per head basis. However the zimmis, were classified according to their wealth for the assessment, of jizya. The tax on land payable by non-Muslims was a, separate category. This tax was called kharaj. The rate of, assessment for kharaj depended on various factors (nature of, soil, type of irrigation, status of ownership etc.) but it was, seldom less than one-third of the produce., We therefore see that there were two types of land tax: i), ushr, which had to be paid by Muslim landholders at the rate, of one-tenth of the produce and ii) kharaj, which had to be, paid by non-Muslim landholders at the rate of one-third or, more of the produce. As long as there were very few Muslim, landholders the distinction between ushr and kharaj did not, create much of a problem. Most of the landowners were non-
Page 384 :
358, , I Early Social Formations, , Muslims, especially in the Sassanid territories where the dihqans, retained possession of their land, and therefore had to part, with a large share of the surplus. Two simultaneous processes, changed the situation. Firstly, a large landowning class had, emerged among the Muslims by the beginning of the eighth, century. Secondly, the pre-Islamic landed gentry adopted Islam, in a big way and were added to the class of Muslim, landholders., To have continued with the existing dual structure of taxation would have reduced the income of the state because a lot, of land which was earlier paying kharaj (the higher rate) would, now be paying ushr (the lower rate). Whatever the terminology,, ultimately it was a question of the rate at which the assessment, was made. The Umayyads had experimented with different, solutions to cope with this problem. Al-Hajjaj had decreed, that any land that had once been assessed as kharaj land could, not become ushr land even if the owner became a Muslim., Umar II had gone to the extent of prohibiting Muslims from, acquiring kharaj land. In the long run the difference between, these two kinds of taxes disappeared. By the beginning of the, ninth century all land was paying kharaj, irrespective of, whether or not it was owned by Muslims. This ensured that, the state was not deprived of a high level of revenue. Under, the Abbasids kharaj was the main source of agrarian revenue., Besides, the state derived its income from zakat levied on, Muslims and jizya levied on non-Muslims. Finally, there were, duties on trade and a variety of cesses none of which- were, theoretically valid according to Islamic law., The Abbasid centralized state was managed by a huge, bureaucracy. The infrastructure of this bureaucracy was a, legacy of the Sassanids. The Sassanid imperial system, it must, be remembered, had evolved over a period of four centuries., Persian monarchical traditions, going back to the Hellenistic, age, had provided a readymade model for Abbasid, absolutism. But it was the Sassanid administrative apparatus, which helped to give shape to their absolutist state. What is, more, many of the personnel were recruited from families
Page 385 :
The Arabs, Islam, and the Early Abbasid Caliphate, , I, , 359, , with a history of civil service under the Sassanids. ., From the time of al-Mansur onwards the civil, administration was unified and placed under a powerful official, who was designated 'vazir'. The vizarat developed into one, of the most characteristic institutions of the Islamic state. The, vazir was a powerful official, usually well-educated and having, a knowledge of various branches of administration including, military affairs. He presided over the bureaucracy (though, not the ariny). The vazir was expected to supervise the civil, administration, a job which required some specialized skills., It was through him that the officials communicated with the, caliph. The term has at times been inaccurately rendered as, 'prime minister'. It has been suggested by some scholars that, the vizarat is an institution of Persian Sassanid origin., However there are others who have questioned this view and, have pointed out that we. must not assume a Persian origin, for the office of 'vazir' merely because the Abbasids borrowed, so heavily from the Sassanids. Goitein has argued that the, vizarat was a specific product of the early Abbasid state. The, word itself, he notes, is of Arabic and not Persian origin (vazir, literally means helper in Arabic). It was first used to designate, the agents who were 'helpers' or vazirs of the Abbasid cause., By the time of al-Mansur it became the title of the most, prominent official who assisted the caliph., The most famous of the early vazirs of the Abbasids were, those belonging to the family of the Barmekids. The first, person of the Barmekid family to be appointed vazir was, Khalid bin Barmek. Khalid came from a family of Buddhist, priests. His ancestors were grandpriests of a Buddhist, monastery in Balkh. Khalid began his career under al-Saffah, and rose to the office of vazir. Subsequently he became the, vazir of al-Mansur. Khalid may be said to have given proper, shape to the vizarat as an institution. Al-Mansur entrusted, most of the routine work of governance to Khalid. Oosely, connected with the evolution of the vizarat was the practice, of placing a senior bureaucrat in charge of the education and, training of the heir-apparent and other princes. These tutors
Page 386 :
360, , I Early Social Formations, , were often appointed as vazirs upon the succession of the, princes. Khalid's son Yusuf was the tutor, and later vazir, of, Harun al-Rashid. Yusuf s sons were tutors of Harun al-Rashid' s, sons. Jafar, one of the sons of Yusuf, succeeded his father as, al-Rashid's vazir. The relationship between Harun al-Rashid, and Jafar became legendary and is referred to in the stories, of the One Thousand and One Arabian Nights. This relationship, did not prevent the downfall of Jafar due to court intrigues,, after which the Barmekid family lost its preeminent position., The fall of the Barmekids underlined the fact that the vazir, was ultimately a civil servant and derived all his authority, from the ruler. This was, after all, a pre-modern bureaucracy., The institution, nevertheless, continued to grow in importance, and reached the peak of its development in the eleventh, century., The prosperity of the early Abbasid period was reflected, in the scientific and cultural achievements of the age. The intermingling of diverse cultural traditions gave rise to new ideas, and enriched thought. The Abbasid rulers, especially alMam un, encouraged this process by commissioning, translations of ancient Greek philosophical and scientific, treatises. Major Greek texts were translated to Arabic which, gave the Muslim intelligentsia access to the rich store of GrecoRoman knowledge. The works of Plato and Aristotle were, translated and became widely known among Muslim thinkers., Hunyan bin Ishaq, who lived during the ninth century, was, one of the most outstanding of the scholars who translated, important Greek works into Arabic. The translation of Greek, writings on medicine, including the great treatise of, Hippocrates, led to significant advances in the field. A new, tradition of Arab medicine (the Unani system of medicine), flourished on the basis of the Greek legacy (Unani was the, Arabic term for Greek). This in turn led to the development, of other disciplines such as chemistry. Arab scientists showed, a lot of interest in alchemy, which may be regarded as the, initial stage of chemistry, and thereby acquired a more, thorough understanding of chemical processes.
Page 387 :
The Arabs, Islam, and the Early Abbasid Caliphate I 361, , Greek works on astronomy and mathematics were also, read avidly by the Arabs. Al-Khwarazmi, who lived in the, early ninth century, is one of the most famous mathematicians, of the Abbasid period. Al-Khwarazmi. was familiar with Indian, achievements in mathematics and he used the Indian system, of numerals ir). his calculations. The Arabs, it may be pointed, out, hdd Indian science and mathematics in high esteem. Arab, admiration for Indian learning is summed up in the well-known, work of al-Biruni (973-1050). In the words of Albert Hourani,, al-Biruni 'is perhaps the greatest sustained attempt by a Muslim, writer [of the Middle Ages] to go beyond the world of Islam, and appropriate what was of value in another cultural, tradition'. The Abbasid empire acquired knowledge from the, Greco-Roman world on the one hand and.India (and China), on the other, and thus became a transmitter of ideas from., east to west and vice versa., The writing of history was deeply influenced by GrecoRoman traditions. The first serious historical narratives by, the Arabs began to appear in the ninth century. Al-Tabari, (839-:-923), who is sometimes referred to as the 'Livy of the, Ar<;1,bs', was among the first Islamic historians. His Tarikh is a, history of the early Abbasid caliphate. Other prominent, historians were al-Masudi, and of course al-Biruni., The social transformation within the Abbasid empire due, to the assimilation of Arab settlers with indigenous Iranian, Muslims had changed the linguistic character of early Islam., Arab was no longer the only language spoken by the ruling, elite. The language of a section of the elite, and indeed of the, majority of the people, was Persian. Persian had evolved from, Pahlavi and was written in a modified Arabic script. While, Arabic was the official language and the language in which all, religious and legal texts were written, Persian soon became, the language for everyday administrative purposes and nonreligious literature. Persian and Arabic borrowed freely from, each other, which helped both languages to develop a rich, vocabulary. Most of the educated people were bi-lingual. By, the eleventh century a brilliant Persian literary tradition, which
Page 388 :
362, , I Early Social Formations, , produced great poets such as Nizami and Saeli, had come into, existence., The conception of the caliphate, it should not be forgotten,, was primarily a religious one. The Abbasid caliphs were, absolute monarchs ruling over a territory, but they also, regarded themselves as the leaders of the Muslim community., Whereas their power actually rested on force, they legitimized, it in religious terms. This was not just a theoretical question., It had its roots in the actual struggle over the succession issue., Every stage in the history of the caliphate had been marked, by disputes over succession ever since the death of, Muhammad. The conflict had given rise to religious sects, within Islam and each sect revolved around a particular, claimant to the caliphate. Thus religious debates were closely, intertwined with the question of succession. This helps us to, understand why the Abbasids were so assertive about their, religious role., The Shiites were the most determined opponents of the, Abbasids. Nevertheless they did not pose much of a challenge, to the caliphate as they were an amorphous group with little, political or military support (the ascendancy of Shiism in Iran, is a much later development). The Abbasids had made use of, Alid support to dislodge the Umayyads, but marginalized, them as soon as they came to power. The Alids were aware of, the fact that they were hardly in a position to take over the, empire. After the debacle at Karbala in 680 the Shiites did not, launch any concerted movement against the caliphate for the, next two centuries or so. They quietly accepted the political, rule of the caliphs, but refused to acknowledge their religious, leadership. For them, political leadership vested in the family, of Ali and Husayn. The descendants of Husayn were regarded, as the religious leaders, or imams, of the Shiite community., The imams themselves did not participate in political activities., After Husayn was killed in battle his son Zayn al-Abidin, was declared imam. When Zayn al-Abidin died in 714 there, was a dispute among his sons, Muhammad al-Baqir and Zayd., One group of Shiites accepted al-Baqir as the imam, while a
Page 389 :
The Arabs, Islam, and the Early Abbasid Caliphate, , I, , 363, , small minority declared their support for Zayd. The followers, of Zayd became a distinct sub-sect of the Shiites-the Zaydis., Another dispute arose (among al-Baqir's loyalists) after the, death of Jafar al-Sadiq who had succeeded al-Baqir as the, imam. Some of the Shiites recognized Musa al-Kazim., one of, al-Sadiq' s sons, as the imam. There were, however, some Shiites, who claimed that al-Kazim's brother Ismail (who had, predeceased Jafar al-Sadiq) was the legitimate imam. They, believed that Ismail would reappear at the end of the world., The adherents of Ismail were designated· Ismaili Shiites. The, Ismailis developed into a very powerful· sub-sect and in the, tenth and eleventh centuries a dynasty with Ismaili leanings,, the Fatimids, ruled over Egypt and Tunisia. The Fatimids, assumed the title of caliph, challenging the political and religious authority of the Abbasid caliphate., Another section of the Shiites was loyal to Musa al-Kazim, and his descendants. The line of succession continued in alKazims' s family till the end of the ninth century. Muhammad, al-Muntazar was the last (twelfth) imam in this line. This section, recognized twelve imams in all, from Ali to al-Muntazar, and, therefore were (and still are) called 'Twelver Shiites'. The, Twelver Shiites held that the imams after al-Muntazar were, 'hidden imams', i.e. not visible to the world, and that they, would be revealed at the end of the world., The Shiites and their sub-sects (Twelvers, Ismailis and, Zaydis} were a very small minority in the early Abbasid, period. The majority of the Muslims accepted the Abbasids as, caliphs and imams. Here it is necessary to point out that in, political terms the Abbasid empire was primarily a. West Asian, entity by the ninth century. The empire had become so, unwieldy that it became difficult to directly rule over territories, which were situated at a great distance from Iraq and Iran., The western Mediterranean gradually slipped out of Abbasid, control. Independent Arab dynasties were established first in, Spain, then in the Maghrib, and finally in Egypt. A member of, the Umayyad family succeeded in setting up an independent, Arab state in Spain soon after the Abbasids came to power.
Page 390 :
364, , I Earty Social Formations, , The Umayyad dynasty ruled over Spain from 756 till the, eleventh century. Soon after this an Arab dynasty {the Iclrisids), established its rule over Morocco in 789. Tunisia was lost in, Harun al-Rashid's reign and was ruled for a century by the, Aghlabid dynasty. The Aghlabids were overthrown by the, Fatimids in 909. The Fatimids first brought Tunisia under their, control and then conquered Egypt which they ruled till the, twelfth century. Of these dynasties only the Fatimids and the, Umayyads claimed to be caliphs (the Umayyads of Spain, declared themselves as caliphs as late as the tenth century)., Otherwise, the Abbasids were nominally accepted as religious, leaders of the umma., ., Given the religious significance which was attached to the, caliphate the Abbasids were eager to demonstrate that their, state was based on Islamic ideals. They were guided by, injunctions laid down in the Quran-in theory at least. The, Quran outlined the fundamental principles of the Islamic state, but many provisions had to be properly interpreted and, elaborated upon. Whenever there was a doubt it was resolved, by finding out how the Prophet acted in a similar situation., The first caliphs, who were also companions of Muhammad,, were personally familiar with the manner in which the Prophet, had dealt with a particular problem. They constantly referred, back to what was called the sunna or sayings and habitual, behaviour of Muhammad. The sunna became a supplementary source of tenets for the guidance of the community. After, the early caliphs these began to be formally recorded. The, record of the Prophet's sunna was called hadis (usually, transliterated as hadith). The hadis was based on oral traditions, which were handed down by people who had actually heard, the respective sayings or actions of the Prophet. A systematic, attempt was made to classify and record the sunna as well as, to authenticate it. The chain of oral transmission was subjected, to rigorous examination and the reliability of the witnesses/, transmitters was carefully evaluated. The study and, compilation of the hadis developed into a separate theological, discipline with its own methodology.
Page 391 :
The Arabs, Islam, and the Early Abbasid Caliphate, , I, , 365, , The actions of the community had to be in accordance, with the sunna (and above all with the Quran) and the Abbasids, projected themselves as the upholders of correct behaviour, based on sunna. All those who conformed to the sunna, acceptable to the majority (there was considerable scope for, disagreement on whether or not a particular hadis or recording, of the sunna was correct, hence the need for a consensus) were, generally called Sunnis. Initially the term seems to have, referred to all those who accepted the sunna or traditions, endorsed by the majority and confirmed by the Abbasids. In, view of the refusal of the Shiites to accept the authority of the, Abbasids in religious matters they were considered outside, the fold of the Sunnis. Sunnism eventually became a term for, distinguishing the majority of the Muslims from the Shiites., In a very limited sense it denoted 'those who were not Shiites'., Hodgson remarks that when the term sunni is used to, differentiate between Shiites and Sunnis there is an element, of inaccuracy because it is wrong to think that the Shiites do, not follow the sunna. It is only that they have their own set of, traditions, some of which are different from the sunna accepted, by the majority of the Muslims., Two major hadis compilations were prepared during the, ninth century. These are the hadis collections of two great, Islamic theologians,' Al-Bukhari and Muslim. Bukhari and, Muslim closely scrutinized all the hadis that were then available, and prepared their massive compendiums. Almost, simultaneously separate schools of jurisprudence which, interpreted Islamic laws (shariat) in different ways (the basis, of the law being the Quran and the hadis) were coming into, existence. Four major schools of Islamic law developed in the, early Abbasid period. These schools remain the four major, Sunni shariat traditions down to the present day. The four, schools of interpretation were those of Abu Hanifa (Hanafis),, Malik (Malikis), al-Shafi (Shafiis), and lbn Hanbal (Hanbalis)., The Shiites had their own schools of jurisprudence. These, developments laid the foundations of a complex legal system, for the Islamic state., ·
Page 392 :
366, , I Early Social Formations, , Abbasid power began to decline by the end of the ninth, century. Spain and the Maghrib had already bro:f<en away from, the empire. Control over Egypt had also weakened. In the, east, provincial governors were becoming semi-independent, and eventually set up their own dynasties. Khurasan and the, Central Asian territories of the Abbasids came under the rule, of the Samanid dynasty with its capital at Bukhara (819-1005)., The Samanids had been governors of the Abbasids in, Khurasan. In Baghdad the Abbasids were divested of real, power by the family of one of their military commanders, the, Buyid family. The Buyids (who were Shiites) became de facto, rulers of the Abbasid state from the middle of the tenth century, onwards. By the eleventh century the Abbasid empire was, taken over by a nomadic people from Central Asia, the Turks., The Turks in turn were displaced by the Mongols. Abbasid, rule formally came to an end with the capture of Baghdad by, the Mongols in 1258.
Page 393 :
Chapter Twelve, , EARLY MEDIEVAL WEST ASIA, , I, BY the beginning of the tenth century the unified ,Arab empire, had been replaced by several independent Islamic states, some, of which owed nominal allegiance to the Abbasid caliphs, whereas others-especially the states in Egypt, the Maghrib, and Spain-did not even formally acknowledge the Abbasids., In Asia, Abbasid power was increasingly confined to southern, Iraq and some parts of western Iran while independent or, semi-independent principalities came up in Iran, Central Asia,, Syria, Yemen and northern Iraq. Many of these principalities, were ruled by dynasties w}:tich were founded by provincial, governors (e.g. the Samanids in north-eastern Iran) or military, commanders. Most of the successor states in Asia were, theoretically a part of the Abbasid caliphate but were actually, independent political entities., The decline of Abbasid power had started in the latter, half of the ninth century. For the next hundred years or so,, i.e. from the end of the ninth century to the end of the tenth,, the core area of the Abbasid state (Iraq and Iran) was controlled, by dynasties of Iranian origi~. T~e two most prominent of, these dynasties were the Samanids and the Buyids. The, Samanids, whom we have already mentioned, ruled over, Khurasan, Transoxiana (the Central Asian zone which lies, between the Oxus and Syr rivers and which was called Mawara
Page 394 :
:-l68, , I Early Social Formations, , al-Nahr by the Arabs), and portions of what is now, Afghanistan. The Buyids (or Buwayhids) originated in the, region of Dailam in northern Iran. Dallam is the name given, to a small mountainous stretch along the south.,.western coast, of the Caspian Sea. The Buyids established their supremacy, over most of Iran and eventually brought Iraq under their, control. They ruled from Baghdad where the caliph was, deprived of all his power., Buyeh, after whom the dynasty is named, was an ordinary, soldier in the Abbasid army. His sons became military, commanders and seized power in the Fars area of central Iran., The Buyids were firmly entrenched in the cities of Isfahan,, Kirman and Shiraz during the early decades of the ninth, century. In 945 the Buyids captured Baghdad and became the, de facto rulers of the Abbasid state. A grandson of Buyeh,, who was given the title Azud-ud-daula by the caliph, unified, the Buyid possessions in various parts of Iraq and Iran, c. 977, (members of the Buyid family had been governing different, provinces as autonomous rulers). Azud-1;1d-daula is generally, regarded as the most outstanding of the Buyids. Even though, the Buyids were sympathetic to Shiism they did not oust the, Abbasids. Nor did they themselves take on the title of caliph., They maintained a firm hold over the Abbasid caliphs and, used them to legitimize their own power. Shiism and Sunnism, coexisted under the Buyids., The caliphs now ruled only in name. They were allowed, to carry out a few symbolic religious functions (within, Baghdad) but had no say in the civil administration or in, military affairs. The Buyids ruled with the backing of the army., Initially they derived their main support from t.roops recruited, from their homeland Dallam. Later they relied more and more, on Turkish c_ontingents. The Buyids assumed monarchical titles, of the Sassanid kings such as shahenshah ('king of kings') and, even claimed to be descended from the Sassanids., One of the salient features of the Buyid state was the, growth of the iqta system. Iqtas were assignments of land, revenue by the state. The origins of this system go back to the
Page 395 :
Early Medieval West Asia, , I, , 3t.9, , first Arab conquests· when a proportion of the land which had, been in the possession of the Byzantine or Sassanid states, (crown land) was confiscated and some of it distributed to, powerful military commanders. It appears that the assignments, made at this stage carried some sort of ownership rights, (though these rights might not be properly defined). Another, type of assignment was the grant of the right to appropriate, the revenues of a particular area. It was this type of assignment, which developed into the iqta during the eighth and ninth, centuries. Albert Hourani remarks that, 'It could scarcely have, been the intention of any ruler to alienate the tax permanently,, or to give those to whom assignments were made a permanent, control over the land'., Iqta basically implied a right to the state's share of the produce., Theoretically speaking it did not give the assignee, termed muqta, (or iqtadar), any ownership rights. The muqta was only entitled, to appropriate the revenues which were due to the state from, the area which was assigned. There could be considerable, variation in the precise nature of the grant. Four distinct kinds, of iqta had evolved by Buyid times: i) a large tract of territory, might be assigned as iqta to members of the royal family or, powerful officials who would govern the territory more or less, autonomously; ii) the iqta might be an administrative unit of, some size where the muqta would have the responsibility of, looking after the administration and collection of revenue and, at times even some military functions; iii) iqtas which were given, in lieu of salary; iv) iqta grants which carried with them, obligation to maintain a certain number of troops out of the, revenues realized from the assignment. In the case of the last, two kinds of iqta the muqta did not necessarily have a personal, connection with his holding. The state would often appoint a, separate set of officials to collect the revenue and give it to the, assignee. A feature which was common to all kinds of iqta was, that the muqtas frequently attempted to establish hereditary, ownership over their grants _whenever they got an opportunity., This involved them in conflicts with the state on the one hand, and the local landowning classes on the other.
Page 396 :
370, , I, , Early Social Formations, , The grant of iqtas for payment of salaries had become widespread by the beginning of the tenth century. The Buyids, inherited and expanded this system. Salaries of officials were, paid increasingly in the form of iqtas. The_ Buyid muqtas were, normally not expected to furnish troops out of the revenues, of their iqtas since the salaries of soldiers were disbursed, centrally. Howover, all officials did not receive their pay in, the form of iqta assignments. The Buyid state retained a portion, of the land owned by it and did not alienate all its holdings., Yet the proportion of the surplus taken away by the state was, somewhat more than under the caliphs. This large surplus, sustained a ruling class in which military leaders had come to, occupy an important place. The Buyid military aristocracy soon, began to dominate the countryside as well. It should be, emphasized that this aristocracy remained fully subservient, to the Buyid rulers., The territories of the Buyids were mainly confined to Iraq, and Iran. In the east the Sam.anids maintained their presence, in Transoxiana and parts of Afghanistan. In the west the, Buyids had to contend with the Fatimids of Egypt. As we, have seen the Fatimids first came to power in Ifriqiya (Tunisia), at the beginning of the tenth century. In 909 a person by the, name of Ubaydullah al-Mahdi, who claimed to be a descendant, of Muhammad's daughter and Ali's wife Fatima (al-Mahdi's, genealogy remains uncertain), came to power in Ifriqiya after, overthrowing the Aghlabid dynasty which had ruled the, province since the latter half of the eighth century. Al-Mahdi, declared himself to be the imam or the leader of the Ismaili, Shiites. He and his successors assumed the title of caliph thereby, directly challenging the authority of the Abbasids. The dynasty, founded by al-Mahdi is referred to as the Fatimid caliphate., From their base in Ifriqiya the Fatimids began expanding into, other parts of north Africa. They were initially unsuccessful, in the western Mediterranean where the Idrisids of Morocco, (who were also Alids) and the Umayyad dynasty of Spain, kept them in check. The Fatimids were however able to take, advantage of the weakening of Abbasid/Buyi.d authority in
Page 397 :
Early Medieval West Asia I 3i1, , Egypt. The Fatimid caliph al-Muizz (953-75) annexed Egypt, in c. 969. In the west, the conquests of al-Muizz extended to, Morocco. The Idrisids were expelled, and for the next few, decades the whole of north Africa (Egypt and the Maghrib), was unified under Fatimid rule. The Fatimids managed to, annex parts of Arabia and Syria-Palestine and thus were a, serious danger for the Buyids in West Asia. In 970-1 Mecca, and Madina were occupied. The two holiest places of Islam, remained under the Fatimids till the end of the eleventh, century. The Fatimids created a centralized state with a political, structure which was similar to that of the Abbasid caliphate., In 973 al-Muizz shifted the seat of his government to Egypt., Here he founded a new capital on the outskirts of Fustat. The, new capital was named Cairo (al-Qahira, i.e., 'the town, founded when the planet Mars was rising'). Within a few, decades Cairo had grown into a major urban centre. In the, first half of the eleventh century it had a population of about, 500, 000. It rivalled Baghdad as a great metropolis. The city, contained several magnificent buildings including a grand, mosque, the al-Azhar mosque built in the reign of al-Muizz., Cairo also became an important centre of learning. Further, it, had a thriving international trade., By c. 1000 the bulk of the seaborne .trade between the, Indian Ocean and the Mediterranean was passing through the, Red Sea. There had been a shift from the Persian Gulf to the, Red Sea, partly due to the destruction of Siraf which had been, the foremost international seaport of the Persian Gulf. The, disturbed political conditions under the later Abbasids too, had contributed to the decline of the Persian Gulf route. The, Fatimids took advantage of this situation and actively, promoted the Red Sea route. It may be mentioned here that, since ancient times there had been a canal which linked the, Red Sea with the Nile at a point where the delta began. The, Fatimids repaired and improved this canal so that goods could, be carried easily between the Red Sea and Cairo. Cairo itself, was both a centre of consumption and handicraft production, (it was well-known for its silk textiles). Some of the
Page 398 :
372, , I Early Social Formations, , commodities would be marketed in the capital-or goods, produced in Cairo would be sent to the Red Sea via the canal., Otherwise commodities would be carried to, or from, the, Mediterranean., The unification of the entire Mediterranean coastline of, Africa under the Fatimids gave a boost to long-distance, seaborne trade. Egypt had an active trade with the Maghrib, and italian cities (Venice and Genoa) as well as with different, parts of Europe. The Fatimids were on fairly cordial terms, with the Byzantine and Frankish empires. Incidentally, a, number of high officials in the Fatimid bureaucracy were, Christians, some of whom rose to the position of vazir. The, Geniza documents of the Jewish community of Fustat (Old, Cairo), which we have already referred to in the previous, chapter, provide ample evidence of the pivotal role played by, the Jews of Cairo in the international trade between the Indian, Ocean and West Asia. Commodities exported to India and, south-east Asia included silk textiles, shawls, paper, sugar,, crockery, glasses, soap and raisins. Areca nuts, Indian locks,, brass bowls, almonds, perfumes, Chinese silk and porcelain, were imported from the Indian Ocean., The Fatimids were a not only a threat to the political and, military power of the Buyids in West Asia but they also undermined the religious authority of the Abbasid caliphate. It, hardly mattered that the Buyids were Shiites like the Fatimids, (it has been pointed out that the Buyids were not very firmly, committed to Shiism). What was more significant was that, the Fatimids claimed to be religious leaders of the entire, Muslim umma and that they were actually able to enforce their, authority over a very large part of the Islamic-ruled territories., On the one hand the ascendancy of Fatimids during the latter, half of the tenth and the first half of the eleventh centuries, completed the process of Abbasid decline, and on the other, made it difficult for the Buyids to consolidate their position., Buyid power was considerably weakened due to various, internal and external factors by the middle of the eleventh, century. The economy was facing problems mainly arising
Page 399 :
Early Medieval West Asia, , I, , 373, , from (a) the crisis of the Persian Gulf trade and (b) decline of, agrarian production. Historians generally agree that the, irrigation system of southern Iraq, which was so vital for the, economic prosperity of the High Caliphate, was no longer in, a good condition by the end of the tenth century. The Buyids, failed to maintain the network of canals in this region. The, neglect of the irrigation system caused silting of the canals,, which in turn resulted in waterlogging. Overexploitation of, the land, without any corresponding investment in better, techniques, might have led to environmental degradation., Large tracts of land were covered with marshes and swamps., The area under cultivation had definitely 'shrunk by the, beginning of the eleventh century. The Buyids responded with, an increase in levels of taxation, but this only intensified the, crisis. At this juncture the silver coinage was debased (i.e., its, silver content was reduced), which further disrupted trade., Although the Buyid state was considered to be a single, entity, in actual practice various parts of the empire were ruled, by different members of the royal family as separate semiautonomous units. The Buyid territories which had been, unified by Azud-ud-daula were gradually split up, under his, successors, among different branches of the Buyid family. This, naturally weakened the central authority and speeded up the, collapse of the Buyids. In fact Buyid power had become so, weak by the, first half of the eleventh century that the Abbasid, caliph al-Q,~im (1031-75) was able to briefly reassert his, authority in Baghdad. Nevertheless, the single most important, factor which was responsible for bringing Buyid rule to an, end was the rise of the Turks., Since the latter half of the ninth century two closely related, developments had been taking place in the territories ruled, by the Muslims. One was the formation of armed contingents, comprising slave soldiers. The second was the penetration of, Turks from Central Asia into West Asia and north Africa. To, a large extent these two developments were interlinked, because a significant proportion of the slave soldiers were of, Turkish origin. The Abbasid caliphs, their provincial
Page 400 :
37,1, , I Early Social Formations, , governors, and rulers of local dynasties had initially employed, slave soldiers as personal bodyguards. The slave bodyguarii.s, were highly trained and had a strong sense of personal loya1ty, for their masters. By the tenth century slave troops (called, mamluks) had become an indispensable part of the armies of, West Asia, Egypt and the Maghrib. Some, though not all,, mamluks were granted freedom following their conversion, to Islam. Mamluk contingents were usually under the, command of slaves who had been manumitted., The nucleus of elite (i.e. the most well-trained) regiments,, including personal bodyguards, was composed of slave, soldiers. Several thousand Turkish military slaves were serving, in the Buyid and Samanid armies in the second half of the, tenth century. Moreover, provincial governors and high, officials _relied on slave soldiers to man their private armies., The mamluks emerged as a new factor in the politics of the, region. Commanders of slave troops tried to assert themselves, by constantly interfering in political and military matters. The, mamluk contingents were often a destabilizing factor as they, could be utilized in factional conflicts and for capturing power., Patricia Crone in her study of the phenomenon of slave ~oldiers, (Slaves on Horses) has attributed the decline of the power of, the Abbasids to their growing dependence on mamluks., The distinctive feature of slavery in early medieval West, Asia was the large-scale recruitment of slaves into the army., Many of the mamluks possessed administrative skills as well, and were employed in civilian positions. Unlike ancient Greece, and Rome, slaves were not extensively engaged in production., There might have been some slaves in mining or handicraft, production. In any case, we can be certain that agrarian, production was not dependent upon slave-labour. This does, not mean that there were no agricultural slaves. We have, evidence of slaves being made to work on sugar plantations, in Iraq. In 868 a major slave revolt broke out at Zanj in southern, Iraq. Zanj had a number of sugar plantations which depended, upon slave labour. The slaves were mostly blacks. The Zanj, revolt was spearheaded by black slaves and lasted till 883.
Page 401 :
Early Medi~al West Asia, , I, , 375, , Generally, however, slave labour does not appear to have, been widespread in agriculture. Besides being forced to serve, as soldiers, slaves were also used for domestic work. The, slaves should not be thought of as an undifferentiated class., While at one end there were well-trained warriors who fought, on horseback, at the other end there were many more who, performed only menial dutie~., The expansion of the Abbasid empire beyond the Oxus, river had brought it to the edge of the pastures of Central, Asian nomads. These were lands which were inhabited by, Turkish-speaking tribes. The Turkish tribes were essentially, nomadic pastoralists. From the ninth century onwards we find, references to several Turkish tribal confederacies-such as the, Oghuz, Qipchaq, Qarluq and Qirghiz confederacies. Over a, period of time small bands belonging to these confederacies, had been moving into Transoxiana and north-eastern Iran., Some of these bands (usually comprising a few fa;milies) came, in search of pastures and lived a nomadic existence. However,, there were others who began to settle down and mingled, with the local population. Turks were to be found in both, rural and urban areas. It would be wrong to assume that all, Turkish soldiers were slaves. Several free Turks enlisted as, mercenary soldiers. Nevertheless, it is true that the overwhelming majority of slaves were captured from the relatively, backward Central Asian region lying across the Oxus. The, conquests of the Abbasids and-their successor states caused, extensive dislocation, making the Turkish nomads easy targets, for slave traders. Frequent wars too resulted in wholesale, enslavement of many tribes., The interaction between Turkish nomadic tribes of Central, Asia and settled societies of W_est Asia accelerated the pace of, change within the existing Turkish social formation. Some of, the changes in the nomadic social formation were related to, conflicts between tribal confederacies for control over, pastures. The coming. together of tribes in the form of tribal, confederacies had given rise to new political structures., Simultaneously a Turkish warrior aristocracy had come into
Page 402 :
376, , I, , Early Social Formatwns, , existence. This in tum led to social differentiation within the, tribes. Raiding expeditions were carried out regula~ly into, settled areas and the booty added to the surplus that was, available to the aristocracy., The expanding slave trade too acted as a catalyst for change., Many Turks were themselves engaged in this trade and earned, large profits from it. Then there were Turks who enlisted as, mercenary soldiers in the armies of the Muslim-ruled states., These soldiers helped to recruit others from their tribes,, thereby forming compact contingents of Turkish soldiers in, the armies of West Asian states. Finally there were the Turkish, families or clans which had migrated to the settled areas. The, migrants either became peasants in the countryside or took, up various occupations in the urban areas. All these, developments transformed Turkish nomadic society., This background helps us to understand how the Turks, were drawn into the process of state formation. The acceptance, of Islam by most of the Turkish hi.bes (and the conversion of, mamluks) provided the ideological framework for Turkish, state formation. The Turkish tribes penetrated and eventually, cortquered large parts of West Asia. Together with their, acceptance of the Muslim faith the Turks borrowed heavily, from Iranian culture, or, to be more precise, the culture which, was a synthesis of Arab and Iranian elements. The Turks in, tum fused this Iranian culture with their own hibal customs., The social and linguistic character of Transoxiana, Afghanistan,, Iran and large parts of Iraq was getting modified in the tenth, and eleventh centuries due to the growing presence of the, Turks., C. E. Bosworth has noted that the prosperity of the early, Abbasid caliphate provided resources for buying and traming, Turkish slaves for a professional standing army which owed, its loyalty to the ruler. The Buyids resorted to the grant of, iqtas for raising contingents -of Turkish mamluks. The, recruitment of military slaves was further systematized by, the Samanids. The employment of mamluks in the army first, attained its full expression under them. The Samanid state
Page 403 :
Early Medieval West Asia, , I, , 377, , became the nerve centre of the slave trade of Central Asia, and Iran. This was facilitated by the proximity of the San,.anid, territories to the homeland of the Turkish nomadic pastoralists., After c. 950 a few mamluk military commanders emerged, as warlords in the Samanid state. One of these warlords was, Alp-Tegin. Alp-Tegin was a Turk who had several mamluk, contingents under him. With the help of his army he virtually, became independent in the Samanid territories in Afghanistan., Ghazna was the main stronghold of Alp-Tegin. When AlpTegin died in 977 he was succeeded by his leading slave, commander Sebuk-Tegin. Sebuk-Tegin founded the, Ghaznavid dynasty which briefly created a huge empire, in, the first half of the eleventh century, extending from eastern, Iran to north-west India., Sebuk-Tegin belonged to the Qarluq tribe of the Turks., He originally came from the area around the Syr Darya in, Central Asia. He had been captured in a tribal conflict and, sold as a slave. He became ·a slave soldier and rose to be a, military commander in the Samanid army, serving under AlpTegin. Sebuk-Tegin became the successor of his master in 977., Ghazna was the capital of this state. Within the next two, decades Sebuk-Tegin brought the southern part of the Samanid, territories (the territories lying south of the river Oxus) under, his control. Khurasan was also annexed by him., Following the death of Sebuk-Tegin, his son Mahmud, became the ruler of the Ghaznavid state (998-1030). It was in, the reign of Mahmud that the Ghaznavid state reached its, greatest territorial extent. Mahmud embarked upon a policy, of aggressive expansion and extinguished the local dynasties, which ruled over different parts of Transoxiana, Afgh~nistan, and Iran. The Samanids were finally overthrown in 999. The, state of Khwarazm, lying between the Aral Sea and the middle, Oxus, was conquered. The Buyids were confined mainly to, Iraq. In the east, Mahmud invaded northern India and annexed, parts of the Panjab., In his struggle against the Buyids, Mahmud championed, the cause of orthodox Sunnism. He attempted to legitimize
Page 404 :
378 j Early Social Formations, , his authority by portraying himself as a religious w~rior who, was fighting against the Shiite tendencies of the Buyids. He, declared himself to be a supporter of the religious leadership, of the Abbasids. He thus sought the sanction of the Abbasid, caliph to uphold his own power. From the time of Mahmud, we find a. sharp distinction being made on the one hand, between the ruler who wielded supreme political power and,, on the other hand, the caliph who was seen as the religious, head of the Muslim umma. It became customary to designate, the ruler as 'sultan', which literally means 'holder of power'., Sultan was the title which was henceforth commonly used for, kings as distinct from caliphs and imams., Mahmud's rule marks the beginning of a new kind of, monarchical state. In Mahmud's conception of kingship the, sultan's authority was supposed to derive from the recognition, granted to the sultan by the Abbasid caliph. In reality however, the power of the sultan rested on force. Mahmud ruled as an, absolute and despotic monarch. He pursued a policy of, vigorous centralization of the state apparatus. The success of, this policy was dependent upon having a large and welldisciplined army. Turkish mamluks were the core of Mahmud's, army. For maintaining such an army Mahmud required access, to sufficient resources. A very large proportion of the surplus, was concentrated in the hands of a small ruling elite which, owed its loyalty to Mahmud. This ruling elite was mainly of, Turkish extraction but also included Iranian, Arab and some, local elements., Mahmud endeavoured to maximize revenue collection by, increasing the level of taxation, especially in Khurasan. Most, histo~ans agree that Ghaznavid rule was a period of great, hardship and suffering for the Iranian peasantry in general, and the Khurasani peasantry in particular. This made them, quite unpopular in this region. Mahmud augmented his, resources by frequent raids into India. The iqta system was, expanded to provide for the support of troops. In fact under, Mahmud iqtas came to be· used more and more for military, purposes. Iqta holders were supposed to maintain a specified
Page 405 :
Early Medieval West Asia I 379, , number troops out of the revenues of the holdings that were, assigned to them . This type of iqta became even more prevalent under the successors of Mahmud. Bosworth states that, 'the Ghaznavids became the channel whereby the iqta system, passed [from the Buyids] to the Ghurids and was firmly, implanted in northern India under the Delhi Sultans and their, successors'. The Ghaznavid state and the Turkish military, aristocracy which owed allegiance to it undermined the, economic and political power of the Iranian landowning class., This allowed the absolutist monarchical state to consolidate, its position-a process which culminated under the Saljuqs, who became. the leading power. of the region after Mahmud., Nevertheless, the Iranian bureaucracy continued to occupy a, key position in the civil administration both under the, Ghaznavids and the Saljuqs., The Ghaznavid state did not survive intact for very long, after the death of Mahmud in 1030. Mahmud was succeeded, by his son Masud. Within a decade of his accession Masud, had lost the empire created by Mahmud. Masud was himself, deposed by his military commanders in 1040 and was replaced, by his brother Muhammad. Thereafter the Ghaznavids were, reduced to a minor local dynasty ruling over Ghazna and the, surrounding area. The disintegration of the Ghaznavid empire, was speeded up by the growing pressure of Turkish, penetration into Transoxiana and West Asia. Bosworth is of, the view that it was in the eleventh century that Turkish tribal, movements into the settled regions of West Asia intensified., According to him the large-scale tribal movements of the, eleventh century combined with the slower penetration of, the preceding two. centuries 'gradually chqnged the ethnic, complexion of much of the northern tier of the Middle East'., Within a short space of time the newly arrived Turkish, groups displaced the Ghaznavids as well as the Buyids. In the, 1030s the Saljuqs emerged as one of the leading Turkish bands, which invaded the Ghaznavid and Buyid territories. The, Saljuqs were a small clan of the Qiniq tribe which formed part, of the Oghuz confederacy. We have already noted that the
Page 406 :
380, , I Early Social Formations, , Oghuz were one of the prominent Turkish tribal confederacies., The Saljuqs had been carrying out raids in eastern Iran in the, opening decades of the eleventh century. Their raids had, become a regular feature by the time Mahmud died. By this, time the Saljuqs had mobilized a fairly large army. It did not, take long for the Saljuqs to overrun most of Khurasan., According to contemporary accounts, Ghaznavid rule in this, area had become so oppressive that the residents of the leading, cities of Khurasan themselves invited the Saljuqs., The unpopularity of the Ghaznavids certainly made the, Saljuq conquest of eastern Iran much easier. The inhabitants, of Marv surrendered to them in 1037 and those of Nishapur, in the following year. Then in 1040 the Saljuqs routed Masud' s, army at a battle which took place at Dandanqan lying to the, west of Marv. The Ghaznavids were expelled from eastern, Iran following their defeat at Dandanqan. This area now, passed into the hands of the Saljuqs. Once the Saljuqs were, firmly established in Khurasan they used it as their base for, expanding westwards., At this stage the Saljuqs were led by Toghril and his brother Chaghri Beg. After a series of military campaigns during, the next fifteen years, the Saljuqs succeeded in bringing Iraq, and western Iran under their control. In 1055 Toghril occupied, Baghdad. The last Buyid king, al-Malik al-Rahim, was made a, captive. Toghril became the ruler of Iraq and western Iran, while Chaghri Beg ruled over Khurasan and the eastern part, of the Saljuq kingdom. Chaghri' s capital was at Marv. Chaghri, Beg died in 1060 and was succeeded by his son Alp Arslan., Three years later Toghril died without leaving any male heir, (1063). This was followed by a brief struggle for succession at, the end of which,Alp Arslan established himself as the master, of all the Saljuq territories (i.e. both the western and eastern, parts of the state). Alp Arslan laid the foundation of a great, Saljuq empire., The second half of the eleventh century was the most glorious period of the Saljuq empire. The empire reached its zenith, under Alp Arslan (1063-73) and his son Malik Shah (1073-
Page 407 :
Early Medieval West Asia, , I, , 381, , 1092). The territories which were ruled by the Saljuq dynasty, included Transoxiana, Khwarazm, western Afghanistan, Iran,, Iraq, Syria and parts of Anatolia. They also controlled Mecca, and Madina and extracted tribute from some areas of Arabia., Whereas the centre of the Ghaznavid state was located in, Afghanistan (Ghazna), the base of Saljuq power lay essentially, in Iran. Marv in Khurasan was the main capital of Alp Arslan., Isfahan, lying at the heart of Iran, was the capital of Malik, Shah. In other words the Saljuqs were much more firmly, rooted in Iran than was the case with the Abbasids, the Buyids, or the Ghaznavids. This imparted a specifically Iranian, character to the Saljuq state., _ The Saljuqs carried forward the monarchical traditions of, the Ghaznavid state. The evolution of the saltanat which had, begun under Mahmud of Ghazna reached its culmination under, the Saljuqs. The saltanat, as we have noted, must be seen as a, type of monarchical state in which supreme political and, military authority vested in the sultan. The authority of the, sultan was legitimized through the nominal acceptance of the, religious authority of the Abbasid caliphate. Like the, Ghaznavid state the Saljuq state was also highly centralized., The ruler was surrounded by an extravagant court. The, splendour of the court and its elaborate ceremonial were, intended to underline the majesty of the sultan. Court etiquette, bore the imprint of Persian and Abbasid traditions., The Saljuqs had a large standing army which was partly, composed of mamluks. The army contained Turk, Mongol,, Arab, Iranian, Greek, Armenian, and African soldiers. Saljuq, military organization was closely linked to the iqta system., Iqtas were now specifically assigned for the upkeep of troops., The system of assigning iqtas was expanded considerably for, this purpose. The practice of collecting revenue from the iqtas, by a separate set of officials appointed directly by the central, government was more or less given up. Iqta holders, or iqtadars,, collected the revenue themselves and used a part of it for, supporting troops and retained the rest of the revenue as their, salary. The main taxes which accrued to the state were kharaj,
Page 408 :
382, , I, , Early Social Formations, , ushr, zakat and jizya. There was a tendency for the iqta grants, to be held on a semi-permanent basis since the assignments, were made for relatively long periods. This resulted in many, of the iqtas being converted into hereditary private holdings, (milk or mulk) by the twelfth century. The Saljuq iqta system, sustained a powerful military aristocracy which was mainly, of Turkish origin. This military aristocracy derived its, authority from the sultan and was an important component, of the ruling elite., The Saljuqs maintained the fiction that they ruled· with, the sanction of the Abbasid caliph. Although the caliph had, no real power, the sultans formally acknowledged his, i:,upremacy. The caliph had his own court at Baghdad. In their, dealings with the caliphs the Saljuqs showed respect for the, customary protocol. A military official called shahna was, permanently stationed at Baghdad for representing the Saljuq, ruler at the caliph's court. Of course, the diplomatic functions, of the shahna were only secondary. The shahna's main, responsibility was to keep a watch over the activities of the, caliph. It should be kept in mind that Baghdad, being the, residence of the caliph, only had a symbolic value. The city, had lost its political significance. In fact Alp Arslan did not, visit Baghdad even once., The Saljuq rulers continued with the practice of entrusting, the civil administration to Iranian officials. This was all the, more so because Iran was the focal point of the Saljuq state., The role of tl}.e Iranian bureaucracy assumed a new significance, under the Saljuqs and this period may be said to mark the, climax of the evolution of the early medieval Iranian, administrative structure. The most outstanding of the, bureaucrats of this era was Abu Ali Hasan Tusi, who is better, known by his title Nizam al-Mulk. Nizam al-Mulk was the, vazir of Alp Arslan and Malik Shah. The Saljuq state was as, much the creation of the Saljuq sultans as it was the product, of Nizam al-Mulk's towering personality. In the words of, Bosworth the thirty years from 1063 to 1092 may also be characterized as 'the age of the great Vazir Nizam al-Mulk who
Page 409 :
Early Medieval West Asia, , I, , 383, , typified the class of Iranian secretaries and officials upon whom, the sultans relied'. Nizam al-Mulk was not only an, administrator but was also an eminent scholar. He was the, author of a famous work on.statecraft entitled Siyasat" Nama, ('Book of Government'). This lays down general principles of, governance and gives advice to kings and princes on a wide, range of topics related to the manner in which they should, rule., Nizam al-Mulk was born in 1017 and had his ea'rly, education in the Khurasani city of Nishapur. He began his, career as an official in the Ghaznavid government. Later he, took up service under the Saljuqs and became Alp Arslan' s, vazir. Nizam al-Mul.k had been appointed vazir even before, Alp Arslan became the ruler of the entire Saljuq empire. When, Toghril died in 1063 Nizam al-Mul.k assisted Alp Arslan in the, struggle for succession. The success of Alp Arslan made Nizam, al-Mulk even more po.werful. He conti4ued as vazir under, Alp Arslan's successor Malik Shah. Nizam al-Mulk was, murdered in 1092. It was a matter of coincidence that Malik, Shah died a few days after his vazir was killed. Thus the, assassination of Nizam al-Mulk and the, death of the last of, the Great Saljuqs (Toghril, Alp Arslan and Malik Shah are, referred to as the Great Saljuqs as distinct from the later Saljuqs), occurred at the same time. The close of the eleventh century, brought to an end a significant era in the history of the Islamic, state., Nizam al-Mul.k headed the civil administration or the divani-vazir. The divan-i-vazir had its own elaborate bureaucracy, which included a chief secretary (munshi) and chief accountant, (mustaufi). Nizam al-Mulk streamlined the training of officials, by setting up a network of educational institutions called madarsas which were intended to produce a class of civil servants, who had acquired higher learning. These madarsas were, financed by the state. The madarsas founded by Nizam al-Mulk, were referred to as Nizamiyyas. The origin of madarsas can be, traced to the tenth century. The earliest Abbasid madarsas were, institutions for imparting instruction in Sunni religious tenets.
Page 410 :
384, , I Early Social Formations, , Madarsa education was free. It has been suggested that initially, the Abbasid madarsas were a response to Shiite propaganda, carried out by the Fatimids. The Fatimids, it should be borne, in mind, actively encouraged and financed institutions which, were engaged in propagating Ismaili beliefs. By the Saljuq, period madarsas were teaching a wide range of subjects which, included Sunni theology, 1aw, jurisprudence, history and, political theory. The Nizamiyyas maintained very high, standards and renowned scholars were brought to teach at, these madarsas. The students were given liberal stipends in, order to attract the best talent. The most famous Nizamiyyas, were those of Baghdad (founded in 1067), Nishapur, Marv,, Isfahan and Basra. The Nizamiyyas served the ideological, purpose of evolving a uniform religious outlook for the Saljuq, state. The officials who graduated from these institutions, became the instruments for disseminating such an outlook., The office of vazir owes its decisive development to Nizam, al-Mulk. Under him the vizarat became a key element within, the administrative structure of the medieval Islamic state. The, vazir' s secretariat looked after all aspects of the civil administration. This was a complex task which required considerable, attention to intricate details. It was necessary to have a large, official machinery to carry out the work of day-to-day governance. The Saljuq sultans, assisted by Nizam al:.Mulk and his, team, expanded the infrastructure which they had inherited, from the Abbasids, the Buyids, the Samanids and the, Ghaznavids. A word of caution is essential here. We should, not exaggerate the level of centralization in a pre-modem state., Much of the routine administrative work of the· state would, have been taken care of at the local or provincial level. The, arrangements at these levels· were frequently of an informal, nature and the local officials were not always a part of the, central bureaucratic apparatus. They might be village, headmen, relatives of iqtadars, tribal chiefs, or persons with, some local influence. Nevertheless Nizam al-Mulk did, endeavour to make the functioning of the vazir' s secretariat, as comprehensive as was possible in the given historical
Page 411 :
Early Medieval West Asia I 385, , situation. One might also add that Nizam al-Mulk.'s status was, somewhat exceptional. There were very few vazirs who, after, him, attained the preeminence which he enjoyed., Nizam al-Mulk' s tenure saw the evolution of yet another, institution. This was the institution of atabegs. Atabegs were, senior and highly trusted officials who were entrusted with, the responsibility of training princes of the royal family,, especially the heir apparent. We have seen that the practice of, appointing such tutors goes back to early Abbasid times. But, atabegs were a peculiarly Turkish phenomenon. More, specifically, the atabegate as an institution was a product of, the Saljuq period. The appointment of an atabeg was a much, more formal affair than was the case with ordinary tutors., The designation of atabeg had social connotations as well. The, atabeg's authority was similar to that of one's father. He could, not be easily disobeyed. Under the Saljuqs the appointment, of atabegs was not confined to princes alone. Young sons of, iqtadars (i.e. royal heirs of large hereditary iqtas) too had atabegs., A. K S. Lambton is of the view that the appointment of atabegs, had an additional political objective. They were supposed to, keep a watch over the princes and prevent the possibility of, any rebellion. Nizam al-Mulk gave concrete shape to this, institution when he was appointed atabeg of Alp Arslan' s son, and heir apparent, Malik Shah. When Malik Shah became sultan, he made Nizam al-Mulk his vazir. Under the later Saljuqs the, position of the atabeg was often misused. Many atabegs became, regents with independent power and even founded their own, dynasties., , II (a), After the death of Malik Shah in 1092 there was a prolonged, struggle over the question of succession. Sanjar, who was one, of the sons of Malik Shah, was able to bring most of the Saljuq, territories under his rule by 1118. By this time the authority, of the Saljuq state had become quite weak in Iraq and western, Iran. The conflict between rival claimants disrupted the unity
Page 412 :
386, , I Early Social Formations, , of the empire and it was witp great difficulty that Sanjar gained, recognition as sultan of the entire realm. Sultan Sanjar's main, base was in Khurasan where he had firmly established himself, following the death of his father. Khurasan remained the, nucleus of the Saljuq empire during the twelfth century. Sanjar, ruled till 1157 but his last years were marked by violent, upheavals caused by the irruption of Turkish tribes., The hundred years from the death of Sanjar in 1157 and, the capture of Baghdad by the Mongols in 1258 is a period, with a complicated political history. Several dynasties, the, Saljuqs being only one of them, ruled over different parts of, West Asta, Transoxiana and Afghanistan. Not all the dynasties, were Turkish. There was even a revival of Abbasid authority, in southern Iraq. The Abbasids took advantage of the struggle, within the Saljuq family to recover some of their prestige. The, caliph al-Nasi.r (1180-1225) came to be regarded as a senior, statesman i.J.1 the politics of West Asia. He was often called, -q.pon to mediate in the conflict5 between various groups. This, does not imply that the Abbasids had regained their former, authority. Their effective area of control was Baghdad and its, environs., The Abbasid caliphate and the numerous kingdoms of West, Asia were destroyed by the Mongol invasions led by Chingiz, Khan and Hu.legu. Hu.legu entered Baghdad in 1258 and killed, the· last caliph (al-Mustasim). Thereafter the Mongols became, the dominant ethnic group in Central Asia and parts of West, Asia. In due course they accepted the Islamic faith. The Turks, continued to be a significant factor in the politics of the region., In Egypt the Fatimids ruled till 1171. They were ousted by a, dynasty which had originally been founded by an atabeg in, northern Iraq and which in the process of expansion had ·, established itself in Egypt. One of the members of this family,, named Salah al-Din (Saladin), became the ruler of Egypt. He, overthrew the Fatimids and founded a new dynasty-the, Ayyubids-which ruled over Egypt-till 1252. The Ayyubids, were in turn overthrown by a military aristocracy consisting, of mamluk soldiers.
Page 413 :
Early Medieval West Asia, , I, , 387, , Although the twelfth century witnessed the decline and, fall of the Saljuqs, this was a period of cultural efflorescence., The post-Sanjar period is the great age of classical Persian, literature. A rich literary tradition had come into existence by, the early eleventh century with the composition of a great, epic entitled Shah Nama. Shah Nama was composed by Firdausi, (c. 940-1020). This tradition was further enriched by the poetry, composed by Nizami. Nizami is regarded as one of the most, outstanding poets in the Persian language. Nizami (c. 11401209) belonged to the city of Ganja in Azarbaijan (northern, Iran). He is most famous for his romantic epics which remain, popular down to the present day. One of his most beautiful, epics is Laili u Majnu.,This is a poem consisting of over four, thousand lines. Khusru u Shirin is another well-known poem, of Nizami. The other epics of Nizami include Haft Paikar and, Iskandar Nama. Many of Nizami' s epics were inspired by ancient, Iranian legends., The classical Persian literary tradition continued to flourish during the thirteenth century despite the dislocation caused, by the collapse of the Saljuq empire and the Mongol invasions., Provincial courts became centres of hectic cultural activity., Out of the immense output of this period the works of two, towering literary figures-Sadi and Jalaluddin Rumi-deserve, special mention. Sadi (c. 1213-1292) belonged to the town of, Shiraz in Iran. His two major compositions are Bustan ('The, Orchard'), which is an epic poem, and Gulistan ('The Rose, Garden'), which is written partly in verse and partly in prose, and contains numerous anecdotes which are meant to highlight, certain morals. The writings of Sadi are deeply imbued· with, Sufi mysticism. Jalaluddin Rumi (1207-73) composed an, encyclopedia of Sufism. This encyclopedia, known as Masnavii Manavi, is in verse and contains about 27, 000 lines., The foundations of natural science in the Arab and Iranian, world had been firmly laid during the early Abbasid period, (see chapter eleven). The translation of ancient Greek texts, into Arabic had stimulated the development of medicine,, chemistry, mathematics and astronomy. We have noted that
Page 414 :
388, , I Early Social Formations, , the Greek legacy in the field of medicine formed the basis of, a new tradition of Arab medicine-the Unani system of, medicine. Ibn Sina (called Avicenna by the Europeans), who, was the most distinguished exponent of this system, lived at, the close of the tenth and the beginning of the eleventh, centuries (980-1037). Ibn Sina hailed from Bukhara. He had, made a thorough study of ancient Greek scientists and, philosophers. Aristotle left a lasting impression on him. Ibn, Sina' s enduring contribution to science was in the discipline, of medicine. He wrote a work which is generally known as, Qanun, or Principles of Medicine. Through this work Ibn Sina, popularized the writings of Hippocrates and Galen. Qanun, incorporated the ideas of some of the most important Greek, scientists. This became the standard textbook on medicine not, only in the Arab and Iranian world but also in Europe. Qanun, was translated into Latin and other European languages. It, was the basic reference work on medical science in Europe, down to the sixteenth century. Umar Khayyam, who was a, contemporary of Nizam al-Mulk, was another outstanding, scholar of the Saljuq era. Umar Khayyam, it may be noted,, was politically opposed to the Saljuq state. He was a scholar, with a wide range of interests. Though he is popularly known, as a poet, i.e. as the composer of a form of Persian poetry, known as rubai, he was primarily a mathematician w.ho, contributed to the development of algebra, geometry, physics, and astronomy. Umar Khayyam was also a profound, philosopher. There can be little doubt that Umar Khayyam, was the most brilliant product of early medieval West l,\.sian, scholarship., , II (1?), The decline of the caliphate and the shift in political focus, from the caliph to the sultan created an urgent need for, evolving a constitutional theory of the saltanat. The saltanat, as a form of government was a relatively new phenomenon., Its beginnings may be dated to the latter half of the tenth
Page 415 :
Early Medieval West Asia I 389, , century. The central dilemma of Islamic polity was that it had, no provision for a monarchy. Yet, right from the time of the, Umayyads the Islamic state had been monarchical in nature., As long as political and religious authority were merged in, the person of the caliph the monarchical nature of, the state, did not pose a serious theoretical problem. The caliph was, seen as exercising his political authority by virtue of his being, the religious leader or imam of the Muslim community (umma)., This situation no longer held true under the later Abbasids., The rise of provincial dynasties like the Aghlabids in, Ifriqiya or the Samanids in north-eastern Iran and Central, Asia altered the position of the Abbasid caliphs. The rulers of, these dynasties nominally acknowledged the overlordship of, the Abbasids (the Samanids held that they were ruling on, behalf of the caliph) and broadly accepted their religious, authority, but were independent for• all practical purposes., By the beginning of the tenth century northern Africa and, Spain had ceased to be of much concern to the Abbasids, because they had no role to play in the religious or political, life of the Islamic societies of these regions. With the, establishment of the Fatimid empire in north Africa and the, firm grip of the Umayyads over Spain-both the Fatirnids and, the Umayyads claimed the title of caliph for themselvesAbbasid sovereignty was limited to West Asia., In West Asia, the ascendancy of the Buyids decisively, transformed the status of the caliphs. The Abbasids were now, reduced to being virtual prisoners of the Buyid rulers., Nevertheless the Buyids did not remove the caliphs because, they found it useful to continue with the tradition of, recognizing the religious authority of the caliphs. This helped, them to legitimize their usurpation of political power. From, the middle of the tenth century there was a clear distinction, between the constitutional position of the caliph as the head, of the Islamic state and leader the of umma on the one hand,, and the actual ruler on the other hand., It may be recalled that the Buyids used monarchical titles, such as shahenshah. It is pertinent to note over here that the
Page 416 :
390, , I Early Social Formations, , Fatimids and the Umayyads of Spain sought legitimacy for, their power by taking on the title of caliph. Some scholars, have wondered as to why the Buyids did not do the same., This might have been due to the fact that the Buyids with, their Shiite sympathies felt themselves somewhat insecure in, a region in which orthodox Sunnism was so deeply entrenched., Moreover the Abbasids were closely identified with the Sunni, traditions of West Asia. Their presence had a symbolic value., The Buyids probably felt that it was not easy disregard the, sentiments which were attached to the Abbasids. As for the, Ghaznavids and the Saljuqs, both of them projected themselves, as champions and liberators of the Abbasids in the formative, stages of their respective empires. This was one of the ways, in which they tried to gain wider acceptance. Incidentally,, once Saljuq rule had stabilized, sultan Malik Shah declared his, intention of ousting the Abbasids. In the last year of his life, (1092) Malik Shah had been planning to dislodge the Abbasid, caliph al-Muqtadi, with the aim of ending the Abbasid caliphate, and possibly making someone else the caliph. The plan was, cut short by the death of Malik Shah. What is significant is, that Nizam al-Mulk was not in favour of such a move. This, indicates that even at this point of time the Abbasids retained, their symbolic prestige., Whatever might have been the symbolic or nominal status, of the caliphs, the fact remains that by the latter half of the, tenth century they had almost no say in the affairs of the state., Real power was concentrated in the hands of the Buyids and, the Samanids (there were a host of minor local dynasties as, well), and subsequently in the hands of the Ghaznavids and, the Saljuqs. A new type of Islamic monarchical state-the, saltanat-had come into existence. The sultan exercised, absolute power but tried to legitimize his rule by seeking the, sanction of the caliph. The reign of Mahmud of Ghazna marks, the beginning of the mature phase of the saltanat as a form of, government. Although Mahmud ruled like a despot over a, vast centralized empire, he maintained that he derived his, authority from the caliph. To contemporary observers and
Page 417 :
Early Medieval West Asia I 391, , Muslim political theorists Mahmud represented a new type of, ruler and the saltanat was seen as an innovative form of, government. This form of government evolved further under, the Saljuqs., One thing that was immediately obvious was that despite, the sultan's outward show of respect for the caliph, his power, was absolute and that it ultimately rested on force. The sultan, was a monarch in every sense of the term, except that he, regarded himself (at least formally) as the deputy of the caliph., This was a contradiction which was not provided for in' the, existing writings on jurisprudence or political theory. Even, before Nizam al-Mulk some Islamic scholars had tried to, grapple with this problem. The first prominent thesis on the, political theory of the saltanat appeared around the middle of, the eleventh century. This was a work entitled Ahkam alSultaniyya ('The Principles of Government') written by alMawar_di (died 1058). Al-Mawardi made an attempt to, reconcile the historical reality of the saltanat with the Islamic, concept of the state. He clearly stated that the authority of, the caliph was supreme. The apparent aim of Ahkam alSultaniyya is to present grounds in favour of the authority of, the caliphs. H. A. R. Gibb has pointed out that al-Mawardi, was writing at a time when Buyid power was declining and, the Abbasids were reasserting themselves, especially under, al-Qaim (see above). It is likely that al-Mawardi was, commissioned to write Ahkam al-Sultaniyya by al-Qaim. What, is more relevant is that even though al-Mawardi strongly, defended the supremacy of the Abbasid caliphate, he, enunciated a theory for rationalizing the saltanat. The, Ghaznavids were his main reference point for this (the Saljuqs, had not yet come to power). Al-Mawardi's principal argument, was that while the caliphate was ordained by Allah, and, therefore supreme, the caliph could delegate his power. The, power that was delegated could either be limited or unlimited., The person to whom the power was delegated should exercise, it in accordance with the shariat. Al-Mawardi justified the, usurpation of power by force by stipulating that this type of
Page 418 :
392, , !, , Early Social Formations, , power was valid if the usurper recognized the authority of, the caliph. It is clear that he had someone like sultan Mahmud, in mind while discussing this type of government., In this context one should mention the contribution of, Nizam al-Mulk. The basic framework of Nizam al-Mulk's, Siyasat Nam.a is the saltanat. Whereas this was not a theoretical, work it did contain a detailed exposition of the Saljuq saltanat., Given the influence of Nizam al-Mulk on Muslim contemporary, scholars and his popularity with the Iranian bureaucracy it is, hardly surprising that the Siyasat Nama helped to regularize,, in theoretical terms, the saltanat as a form of government., Nizam al-Mulk emphasized the absolute nature of the sultan's, power. In the final analysis this power was based on force., Nizam al-Mulk. went so far as to state that the sultan did not, need any constitutional sanction for his authority. The absolute, power which was vested in the sultan was crucial for, maintaining order in society and as such it had divine approval., In the latter half of the eleventh century al-Ghazali (10581111 ), who was a leading authority on Islamic jurisprudence,, published a series df treatises in which he formulated a detailed, political theory of the saltanat. Al-Ghazali began with the, proposition that from the point of view of the Islamic, conception of the state all power was vested in the caliph by, virtue of his being the head of the Muslim umma.:The <.aliph, was after all the successor of the Prophet. The caliphate as an, institution combined three elements: i) the caliph represented, legitimate succession to the Prophet; ii) the caliph exercised, political authority; and iii) the caliph was the religious leader, of the Islamic community. In an ideal situation all these three, elements should be concentrated in one and the same person., If the historical circumstances did not permit this then it was, perfectly valid to divide these three elements among different, persons. The caliph would then only embody legitimate, succession from the Prophet and be the constitutional, though, nominal, head of the state. Political and military power would, be exercised by the sultan. The ulama or religious scholars, would guide the community in religious matters.
Page 419 :
Early Medieval West Asia, , I, , 393, , We can see here that in al-Ghazali's scheme the role of the, caliph has been marginalized. Al-Ghazali was more concerned, with providing a legal justification for the sultan's authority., He dealt exhaustively with the saltanat as a form of, government in his work Nasihat al-Muluk. According to him, the sultan should recognize the supremacy of the caliph and, should rule according to the shariat. But in aqtual practicP. the, power of the sultan had no limits. Al-Ghazali\argued that the, sultan's power had a divine origin. The sultan was' the Shadow, of God upon Earth'. This made it obligatory for all his subjects, to obey him completely. Any kind of rebellion, even if it was, directed against a tyrant, was unlawful. Al-Ghazali' s writings, contain the most explicit statement on the absolute power of, the sultan. These writings, together with the works of alMawardi and Nizam al-Mulk, were to function as the, ideological basis of the saltanat as a form of government for a, long time. With the abolition of the Abbasid caliphate by the, Mongols· in 1258 these writings acquired even more, significance. Since it was no longer possible to maintain the, fiction that the sultan was exercising political power on behalf, of the caliph, theories which emphasized the independent and, divine origin of the sultan's power were useful for legitimizing, the Islamic monarchical state from the thirteenth century, onwards.
Page 420 :
Ch.apter Thirteen, , GERMANIC INVASIONS AND AFTER:, · ORIGINS OF MEDIEVAL EUROPE, , WE saw in chapter ten that by the beginning of the fifth, century the Roman empire had ceased to be a unified political, entity. There was, first of all, a general separation of the, eastern and western portions of the empire. The eastern, provinces-which were henceforth ruled from, Constantinople-remained relatively stable. They survived, as a single state which came to be known as the Byzantine, empire. On the other hand, different parts of the western, empire came under the rule of various Germanic tribes (some, Germanic chiefs exercised considerable control over the, political and military structure of the eastern empire as well,, though not for long), it was in the west that the Germanic, invaders succeeded in completely taking over the Roman, territories., , I, During the course of the fourth century the seat of the, Roman government had shifted to the east and from the, time of Constantine onwards the city of Constantinople had, been the real capital of the empire. Initially it was the east, which bore the brunt of the most violent Germanic attacks., It may be recalled that the battle of. Hadrianopolis in 378, had been a major catastrophe for the Roman empire. This, battle took place in the east when the Roman army tried to
Page 421 :
Germanic Invasions and After: Origins of Medieval Europe I 395, , prevent the Visigoths from over-running Roman territories, along the lower Danube. The Visigoths had routed the, Roman army and the emperor Valens had been killed in, battle. For several decades after this the Visigoths remained, a major source of trouble for the Roman territories in southeastern Europe, especially in Greece and the Balkans., However, the new emperor, Theodosius I (c. 376-395), was, able to restore some order in the east during the last quarter, of the fourth century. ., Following the death of Theodosius in 395 the influence, of the prominent Germanic military leaders became, paramount at Constantinople and to some extent at Rome., To some extent this was facilitated by the fact that there, was already a large Germanic population in the territories, of the Roman empire lying between the lower Danube and, the Mediterranean. There was also a strong Germanic, presence in the army and the government, particularly in, the east. Of course the Germanic groups which were settled, wit_hin the Roman empire were often quite hostile to the, new arrivals. Germanic troops in the Roman army fought, against Germanic invaders with as much ferocity as the, soldiers of non-Germanic origin. In fact the empire in the, east could hardly have survived had this not been so since, Germanic troops formed a major component of the Roman, army stationed in the eastern provinces. Nevertheless the, changes in the ethnic composition of the Danubian region, in the east did provide the Gothic and other Germanic chiefs, to gather support for themselves. Ultimately it was the, breakdown of the central apparatus of the empire that, allowed them to strengthen their position., Theodosius was succeeded by his sons Arcadius (who, was ruler of the eastern provinces of the empire till his death, in 408) and Honorius (who was emperor the west till his, death in 423). Both were very young and inexperienced when, they were made rulers over their respective ten:i-tories. Both, ruled only in name, real power being in the hands of different, factions of the army. For several years after the death of
Page 422 :
3%, , I Early Social Formations, , Theodosius a Vandal military leader named Stilicho (referred, to in chapter ten) was the most powerful figure in the empire., Eventually Stilicho' s control was confined to the west where, Honorius was a puppet in his hands. It may be mentioned, here that Stilicho had found it necessary to withdraw the, Roman army from the Rhine frontier so that more troops, would be available to defend Italy. It was this measure that, left Roman territories in Gaul exposed and made it easier, for the Vandals, the Suebi and the Alani (the Alani were not, actually a Germanic people bt•t a tribe of Caucasian origin, which got associated with the Germanic tribes living in the, Rhine area) to carry out their large-scale migration across, the Rhine in 406, which marked the beginning of the first, phase of the Germanic occupation of the western empire (see, chapter ten)., Meanwhile in the east the Visigoths continued to be a, formidable force. Led by their chief Alaric, they frequently, plundered Greece and the Balkans. The eastern emperor,, Arcadius, was forced to accept the supremacy of Alaric at, Constantinople. The growing power of Alaric was one of, the reasons that compelled Stilicho to concentrate on the west., This situation continued for some time under Arca dius' s son, and successor Theodosius II (408-50) .. Even though, Theodosius II himself was not a very effective ruler, the ruling, class of the eastern empire-in which the military leadership, played an important role-was soon able to stabilize its hold, over the territories which were administered from, Constantinople. This ruling class was largely drawn from, Greece, the Balkans and Anatolia and could rely on the, enormous resources of Egypt and Syria (the eastern empire, broadly comprised Greece, the Balkans, Anatolia, Syria,, Palestine and Egypt; the Germanic incursions mainly occurred, in the European parts of the empire). We have already seen, that the economic and political crisis of the later Roman, empire, including the crisis in the slave mode of production,, was much more pronounced-in the west than in the east. The, various components of the state remained more or less intact.
Page 423 :
Germanic Invasions and After: Origins of Medieval Europe, , I, , 397, , The government continued to function quite effectively,, primarily due to the existence of a centralized bureaucracy., The military and political leadership centred on, Constantinople exercised considerable control over this, bureaucracy. Moreover, unlike the west, the east did not, have to contend with a powerful senatorial class. It was the, presence of this class that made it practically impossible for, the government to recover its authority in the west once the, crisis had set in during the third century. Finallyr the city of, Constantinople was well-defended militarily., By the first decade of the fifth century the Byzantines (we, use this term as a convenient synonym for the eastern provinces, of the Roman empire ruled from Constantinople) had, successfully resisted the attempt of the Visigoths to take over, their territories. The Visigoths moved westwards into Italy,, which they found easier to invade. In 410 Alaric invaded and, plundered the city of Rome, the disastrous consequences of, which event we have already discussed. From Italy the, Visigoths went on to invade Gaul and Spain and set up their, own kingdom their. We will return to the Visigoths a little, later., Once the pressure of the Visigoths was reduced, the Byzantines could devote some of their energies to rebuilding their, institutions. Without going into a detailed account of the early, Byzantine empire one would like to cite one significant example, which is illustrative of the process of recovery whj.ch had already begun during the reign of Theodosius II. This was the, codification of Roman law. Under Theodosius II all Roman, laws since the time of Diocletian, i.e. a period of nearly one, centuryr were systematically compiled. 'T'his provided the basis, for the comprehensive codification which was undertaken, under Justinian, culminating in the publication of the Digest, (see chapter ten)., The east had to face another major threat during the fifth, century before it could recover from the disruption caused by, Germanic tribes. In the mid-fifth century a large part of Europe, (both east and west) became a part of the shortlived Hun
Page 424 :
398, , I Early Social Formations, , empire of Attila. The expansion of Attila's empire into Europe, temporarily halted the Germanic advance into the Roman, territories. Some of the Germanic groups united with sections, of the Roman army to repulse the Huns. The decisive defeat, of Attila in- 451 and his subsequent death in 453 led to the, dissolution of the Hun empire in Europe. Following this the, Germanic tribes renewed their onslaughts. In the case of the, east the Visigoths were now replaced by another branch of, the Goths-the Ostrogoths. The Hun invasion was one of the, factors responsible for pushing the Ostrogoths in the direction, of the lower Danube, just as the first wave of Hun invasions, in the latter half of the fourth century had caused a chain of, tribal movements which forced the Visigoths to enter t_he, empire, and which· in turn had culminated in the battle of, .Hadrianopolis., In the latter half of the fifth century, i.e. in the postAttila period, there was a dramatic increase in Ostrogothic, settlements in the lower Danube area. The concentration of, the Ostrogoths in this area could have upset the stability of, the eastern empire. Yet the Byzantines were able to withstand, the pressure of the Ostrogoths. Not only that. They, encouraged the Ostrogoths to turn towards Italy., There was a political vacuum in Italy at this time. The, emperor in the west had become a mere figurehead since, the time of Honorius. This situation continue'd till 476 when, the western troops, the majority of whom were of Germanic, origin by now, selected Odoacer (or Odovacer) as their, ruler. Odoacer was a Germanic commander.' Romulus, Augustulus, whom traditional historical accounts regard as, the last Roman· emperor in the west, was deposed by, Odoacer. The collapse of the Roman state apparatus within, Italy was complete. It should be borne in mind that in the, west the province of Africa had been lost to the· Vandals,, Spain to the Visigoths ahd Gaul to numerous Germanic, tribes such as the Suebi, the Alani, the Franks and the, Burgu!}dians., The Ostrogoths took advantage of the chaos prevailing in
Page 425 :
Germanic Invasions and After: Origins of Medieval Europe, , I, , 39'¾, , Italy and invaded it. They were led by Theodoric, their chief., The Byzantine emperor Zeno (474-497) actually requested, Theodoric to assume the title of king of Italy. By 490 the, Ostrogoths occupied Italy and Theodoric assumed the title of, king in 493. Theodoric owed. nominal. allegiance to, Constantinople. The Byzantine strategy· of diverting the, Germanic tribes westwards had proved successful a second, time: first in the case of the Visigoths and then in the case of, the Ostrogoths. But what was crucial was that the Goths found, it difficult to militarily subdue the Constantinople. On the other, hand the west was a much easier target., At the beginning of the sixth century conditions were favourable for the revival and expansion of the eastern empire., This was accomplished during the reign of Justinian. We have, noted the role of Justinian in helping to preserve and develop, some of the important achievements of Roman civilization., Justinian's most enduring contribution was· the codification, of Roman law. Here a brief reference needs to be made to, Justinian's conquests which brought some of the western, provinces under the control of Constantinople. Byzantine, expansion in the western Mediterranean under Justinian had, a profound impact on the history of some of the Germanic, states in the west and it is only in that context that we will, outline his policy., ·, Justinian I (or Justinianus I) came from the Balkan region., His family was of peasant origin, but had risen to prominence, through military service. Justinian's uncle, Justin I, became, emperor of the By~antine empire in 518 and :ruled till 527., Justin adopted his nephew Justinian to succeed him. Justinian, was involved in governing the empire right since the 518., He became emperor following the death of Justin in 527. At, the beginning of "his reign Justinian had to first devote his, attention to securing the eastern frontier of the Byzantine, empire. The Byzantines shared a long border with the Persian, empire of the Sassanids in the east. The Euphrates marked, the traditional boundary between the two empires., Nevertheless both empires constantly sought to extend their
Page 426 :
400, , I Early Social Formations, , territories leading to frequent conflicts. Northern, Mesopotamia and Armenia were the two major theatres of, war. It may be recalled that it was this struggle during the, sixth century that exhausted the two empires and paved the, way for Arab supremacy in West Asia. Justinian concluded a, shortlived peace· treaty with the Sassanids in 532. This gave, him a chance to deploy the Byzantine troops elsewhere, but, wars with Persia continued off and on after 540 and lasted, till the Arab invasions in the seventh century (see chapter, eleven)., _, Having temporarily arrived at a settlement with Persia,, Justinian moved his troops into the western Mediterranean., Here he tried to recover some of the Roman provinces which, had been lost to the Germanic tribes. In 534 Justinian gained, victory over the Vandals who ruled over the province of, Africa. Some of the large islands in the western Mediterranean,, such as Sardinia and Corsica, were also annexed. A Byzantine, general named Belisarius was instrumental in carrying out, these conquests., Next, Justinian invaded Italy which had been under the, Ostrogoths since the time of Theodoric. Theodoric had, accepted the nominal overlordship of Constantinople. After, his death in 526 there was a prolonged struggle over, succession. Justinian took advantage of this state of affairs, and from 540 onwards carried out a series of campaigns to, annexHaly. It was only in 552 that the Ostrogoths were, finally crushed. Although Justinian extinguished the, Ostrogothic kingdom of Italy, the Byzantines were unable, to fully consolidate their position in Italy. Shortly after the, death of Justinian in 565 another .Germanic tribe, the, Lombards, penetrated Italy and established their rule over, a large part of the peninsula. Thus the eastern empire was, not only able to survive the Germanic invasions but it, succeeded in deflecting many of the Germanic tribes, westwards and during the Justinian era the Byzantines even, managed to destroy two major Germanic states in the west, (Vandal Africa and Ostrogothic Italy). It is against this
Page 427 :
Germanic Invasions and After: Origins of Medieval Europe, , I, , 401., , background that we must view the transition that was taking, place in the west., , II, Italy, Gaul and Spain were the core areas of the Roman, empire in western Europe. In the first phase of the Germanic, occupation of the west, a number of Germanic tribes which, originally lived in territories lying to the east of the river, Rhine (the region which was generally referred to as, 'Germania' by the Romans) crossed the Rhine d:uring the, course of a large-scale migration in 406. These tribes, included the Sue bi, the· Alani, the Vandals and the, Burgundians. The migration of the Germanic tribes is often, termed as volkerwanderung in German. The Goths and the, Lombards were also a part of this great migratory movement, called volkerwanderung. The tribes which undertook the, volkerwandrung across the Rhine at the beginning of the fifth, century settled down in various parts of Gaul. The Alani, were dispersed in Gaul and Spain, the Suebi moved to the, west towards Spain, and the Burgundians set up their, kingdom in south-western and central Gaul. The Vandals, pushed south towards Italy and Spain before conquering, Africa. As for the Goths, the Visigoths and the Ostrogoths, penetrated western Europe via the lower Danube and, southern Europe. The consequences of the first phase of, Germanic invasions in the west have been discussed in, chapter ten., The second phase of Germanic invasions commenced in, the latter half of the fifth century and continued for almost a, hundred years. Actually Europe witnessed several waves of, Germanic invasions/ migrations rather than a single concerted, tribal movement. The major tribes which participated in the, second phase were the Franks, the Angles, the Saxons, the, Alamanni (or Alemans), and the Lombards. The Franks, occupied northern Gaul, the Angles and Saxons (later called, Anglo-Saxons) settled in Britain, the Alamanni inhabited the
Page 428 :
402, , ! Early Social Formations, , Rhine area, and the Lombards set up their kingdom in Italy., Of these major tribes the Lombards were the last to arrive, (in the second hal{ of the sixth century), but as they become, the predominant Germanic people of Italy-the heart of the, Roman empire-let us first examine their migration or, volkerwanderung., The Lombards (called Longobardi in Latin texts) were a, Germanic people who originally lived in Scandinavia. They, were a branch of the Suebi. In the course of several centuries, the Lombards had moved southwards and by the fifth century, their settlements were to be found in central Europe, north of, the Danube (in the area roughly corresponding to modern, Austria). The upheavals of the fifth century dislocated the, Lombards. They migrated further south and were settled, north of the Alps in the early sixth century. By this time the, Lombards were no longer a primitive tribal people. Social, differentiation had taken place and a warrior aristocracy, as, well as the institution of kingship, had come into existence. In, 546 Audoin became king of the Lombards. His dynasty ruled, over the Lombards and their territories for the next few, decades., ·, The Lombards crossed the Alps and invaded northern, Italy in c. 568. They were led by Alboin (568--73), the successor, of Audain. This event occurred shortly after the death of, Justinian. Justinian's invasion of Italy had resulted in the fall, of the Ostrogothic kingdom. However. the Byzantines were, not able to establish a firm hold over Italy. Aftel' Justinian, there was yet again a political vacuum in Italy which was filled, by the Lombards. By 570 the territory between the Alps and, the river Po had come under Lombard rule. The Lombards, also extended their control over parts of central and southern, Italy., However northern Italy remained the nucleus of their, state. Even today this part of Italy is known as Lombardy, (Milan is the most prominent city of Lombardy). Pavia was, the capital of the Lombard kingdom. This kingdom lasted for, two centuries., The Lombards put an end to the dualism which had marked
Page 429 :
Germanic Invasions and After: Origins of Medieval Europe, , I, , 403, , the Ostrogothic state. This was true of many of the other, Germanic states set up in the second phase. The parallel RomanItalian sphere of civil and judicial administration, which had, been under the local population, was done away with and the, entire administrative apparatus was placed under direct, Germanic control. Instead of the hospitalitas scheme by which, landed estates, together with dependent labour, were shared, between Germanic chiefs and Roman landowners, the holdings, of the Roman landed aristocracy were ruthlessly appropriated, by the Lombards. The Ostrogothic arrangement of dividing, tax revenues between themselves and the Roman component, of the state (the Ostrogoths had demanded one-third of the, revenues) was abolished. All taxes now flowed to the Lombard, state, though collecting these taxes centrally remained a major, problem. The system of having separate sets of laws for the, Roman and Germanic people was replaced by a uniform, but, more primitive and crude, Germanic legal system. In other, words, the proces~ of dismantling the institutions of the Roman, state was completed in the Lombard era. A new kind of state, began to evolve. This was based on decentralization of, authority, payment of salaries in the form of land-grants, and, the obligation placed on Germanic chiefs to furnish troops in, ti.mes of war (rather than maintaining a centralized standing, army). These developments led to the emergence of classical, feudalism in Italy. Yet, being the original home of Roman, civilization, Italy was somewhat from other parts of western, Europe. Here the destruction of Roman institutions was never, as extensive as elsewhere. This was particularly so in the case, of law and literacy., The Lombard kingdom reached its climax in the early, eighth century under king Liudprand (712-44), who is, generally regarded as the most outstanding of the Lombard, rulers. This was also a period of further territorial expansion, in Italy. The Lombard attempt to acquire more territory, continued after Liudprand. This involved them in a series, of conflicts and made them increasingly unpopular. As we, shall see, Charlemagne, the Frankish ruler of Gaul
Page 430 :
404, , I Early Social Formations, , intervened in this conflict and defeated the Lombards (773)., Charlemagne's victory marked the end of the Lombard, kingdom., The vast province of Spain (including modem Portugal), was one of the earliest overseas conquests of the Romans., The designation of 'province' for Spain is used here in a very, loose sense, since to refer to it as a 'country' at this stage, would be confusing and inaccurate. Spain, as was the case, with many other provinces like Gaul, was not a single, administrative unit but was divided into a number of, provinces (we will use the term province for Spain, Gaul, etc., only for the sake of convenience; Italy, it should be, remembered was not, strictly speaking, in the category of, provinces). With its extensive latifundia, Spain was a major, centre of the slave mode of production and its economy had, been seriously affected by the c~is of slave production. This, area was more latinized as compared to other western, provinces outside Italy., By the end of the fourth century Roman administration, had collapsed in Spain. Political power got concentrated in, the hands of landed aristocracy which began to ruthlessly, exploit the free peasantry due to the decline of slave labour., At the beginning of the fifth century the Vandals, the Suebi, and the Alani penetrated Spain after they had occupied parts, of Gaul. Some Vandal groups took over southern Spain, which was henceforth called Vandalusia (Andalusia, the, name by which this region is still known, is probably derived, from this name). Similarly the Suebi and the Alani founded, their own settlements. in different parts of Spain. Almost, simultaneously the Visigoths invaded Spain after Alaric had, ravaged Italy. The prevailing confusion in this province, made provided them with an opportunity to establish, themselves., Initially the Visigoths made the area near the Pyrenees, mountains their home. The Pyrenees lie in south-western, France and divide France (Gaul) from Spain. The Visigoths, controlled a large tract of territory on both sides of the
Page 431 :
Germanic Invasions and After: Origins of Medieval Europe I 405, , Pyrenees-in south-western Gaul and north-eastern Spain. In, 418 a new Visigothic kingdom was created in this tract, with, its capital at Toulouse in south-western Gaul(close to the, Pyrenees). For some time the Visigoths owed nominal, allegiance to the western Roman emperor. In fact, Rome had, appealed to the Visigoths to deal with the Vandals, the Suebi, and the Alani. For the remaining part of the fifth century the, Visigoths were engaged in subduing these tribes. In 475 the, Visigothic king Euric formally declared himself to be, independent of Rome. This was an assertion of the stability, and strength of the new kingdom., However, at the beginning of the sixth century the, Visigoths had a major setback. The Franks, in the course of, their expansion iri Gaul, defeated them in battle (507). The, Visigoths were pushed out of Gaul and had to retreat beyond, the Pyrenees. Following this they concentrated on expanding, their territory in Spain. In the sixth century most of Spain was, annexed by the Visigoths. Toledo, in the centre of Spain, (Toledo is located just south of modern Madrid), became the, capital of the Visigothic kingdom of Spain for almost two, centuries. This kingdom lasted till the Arab conquest of Spain, in 711., The Visigoths adopted several features of Roman culture,, and had become sufficiently romanized by the fifth century., They legitimized their rule by claiming to be successors of the, Roman empire. The Visigoths did not completely discard, Roman institutions, many of which they found useful for, developing a new administrative structure. Nevertheless,, given the disintegration of the state apparatus they had to, find new solutions to the problem of governance. One of their, solutions was to officially make Germanic chiefs, powerful, landowners, and military leaders answerable for the, inhabitants of the respective areas in which they had a dominant, influence. This evolved into a hierarchal system in which those, who were responsible for looking after larger territories would, in turn hold local elites in their regions answerable for the, inhabitants of respective localities. This chain continued to
Page 432 :
406, , I Early Social Formations, , the level of villages or individual clans. In return, the more, powerful person would offer protection to the less powerful, person or dependent., Here we can see an administrative structure based on, feudal ties in its embryonic form. In the words of Marc Bloch, (Feudal Society), 'The principal difficulty which faced the central, government [in early medieval western Europe] was to reach, individual subjects, in order to exact services and impose the, necessary sanctions'. According to him this led to 'the idea of, utilizing for the purposes of government the firmly established, network of protective relationships'. Bloch observes that this, kind of structure first came into existence in Visigothic Spain, and spread to other parts of western Europe. It was borrowed, by the Frankish state in Gaul and became an important element, of the feudal system. ., It has been estimated that the Visigoths numbered about, 200, 000 while the local population of Spain was around three, to four million. Yet the Visigothic population took away a, very large proportion of the surplus. The big landowners had, to share two-thirds of their estates with the Visigothic chiefs., The state reserved two-thirds of the revenues of the kingdom, for its use. Urban centres and trade continued to decline., Many of the laws enforced by the Visigoths discriminated, between the Visigoths and the local inhabitants. From an early, date the Visigothic rulers initiated the codification of laws for, governing the kingdom. These were a mixture of Roman and, Germanic laws. The code of Euric (Codex Euricianus) and the, code of his son Alaric II, who ruled from 484-507 and was, defeated by the Franksr contained the main laws of the, Visigothic territory. The state established by the Visigoths, was extremely exploitative and ruthless and this might partially, account for the relative ease with which the Arabs were able, to conquer Spain., We may regard Spain as an exceptional case because the, second phase of Germanic invasions did not have the same, far reaching consequences in this province as in other parts, of western Europe. In Spain the political, social and economic
Page 433 :
Germanic Invasions and After: Origins of Medieval Europe I 407, , conditions prevailing in the Visigothic kingdom were an, extension of the first phase of Germanic invasions. The, dualism of this phase was modified but not abandoned. From, the eighth century onwards Spain came under Arab rule and, therefore traversed along a somewhat different path for the, next few centuries. It was in Gaul that t.he second phase of, Germanic invasions had its most profound impact. Here, in the, territories occupied by the Franks, classical feudalism was, born. We will discuss the rise of the Franks in the next section., , III, The Franks were one of the, Germanic people living east of, the Rhine, in Germania, for several centuries. Like other, Germanic tribes the Franks too must have slowly infiltrated, Roman Gaul in small groups till the end of the fourth century., Then at the beginning of the fifth century, following the, withdrawal of Roman troops from the Rhine frontier, the, ;pranks migrated to Gaul in large numbers. By the middle of, the fifth century they were a major ·component of the, population of northern Gaul., Fifth century Gaul was inhabited by a variety of ethnic, and linguistic groups. Firstly, there were the indigenous Celts, who had been living in the province since pre-Roman times., Then there were Roman settlers, a large number of whom, spoke Latin (there were also non-Latin slaves, coloni and free, peasants from different parts of the Roman .empire). Finally,, there were people of Germanic origin: Burgundians, Suebi,, Alani, Franks, Alemanni and Visigoths. As we have seen, the, Burgundians ruled over south-western and central Gaul. The, Visigoths dominated the south-east. Rome controlled only a, small stretch of land in the south-western corner, on the, Mediterranean coast, on the border of Italy. The Franks were, concentrated mainly in northern Gaul. One might mention, here that northern Gaul was less romanized than southern, Gaul. Therefore it was much easier to impose Germanic, customs and traditions in the north.
Page 434 :
408, , I Early Social Formations, , It was in the latter half of the fifth century that the Franks, rose to prominence in Gaul They began by bringing most of, northern Gaul under their authority. The Franks were divided, into two major groups: the Salian Franks and the Ripuarian, Franks. It was the Salian Franks who became the dominant, group. Frankish society in this period was already divided into, classes. Tribal organization had disintegrated leading to the, emergence of dependent Germanic peasants on the one hand, and a small landowning elite on the other. This landowning, elite consisted of clan chiefs and professional warriors. A, monarchical state came into existence, although initially the, kings exercised limited authority. They had to share power, with other tribal chiefs or members of their own family., Earlier all free adult males of the tribe served as soldiers, whenever there was need for military mobilization. In times, of peace they cultivated the soil and tended their cattle. With, growing social differentiation there arose a class of professional warriors. This class controlled land as well. The conquest, of Gaul had placed extensive holdings at the disposal of the, Franks. Roman landowners were dispossessed when the, Franks established their supremacy. This accelerated the pace, of social differentiation among the Franks. The overwhelming, majority just became peasants· and ceased to be soldiers., Henceforth the Germanic peasantry had only a marginal role, in the army. In course of time, the Germanic peasants who, were settled on estates taken over from the Roman (or GalloRoman) landed aristocracy, became indistinguishable from the, Roman coloni, former slaves, or other dependent peasants, who were to be found in this area., In the last quarter of the fifth century a Germanic chief, named Clovis (Chlodwig in German) assumed the title of king, of the Franks. Clovis was a Salian Frank who belonged to the, family of Merovech. Merovech, who had apparently been one, of the Frankish tribal chiefs, was the grandfather of Clovis., Clovis became the founder of a dynasty of Frankish kings, who ruled over Gaul till 751. This dynasty is known to history, as the Merovingi.an dynasty (it is named after Merovech). The
Page 435 :
Gennanic Invasions and After: Origins of Medieval Europe I 409, , main historical source for the early Merovingians is an account, written during the latter half of the sixth century. The author, of this work was Gregory of Tours (539-94), a prominent, Christian priest. Gregory wrote a ten-volume History of the, Franks which is indispensable for reconstructing the history of, the Merovingian dynasty at the height of its power., Clovis took over the leadership of the Salian Franks after, the death of his father (Childerich I, son of Merovech) in 481., 481 is the generally accepted date for the founding of the Frankish kingdom. In traditional historical accounts this date marks, the beginning of a new political-geographical entity-France, (derived from Frank)-as distinct from Roman Gaul. From, this po~t onwards we will use the term France :rather than·, Gaul for this area since this is a more easily recognizable name., Of course this does not imply that the name 'France' suddenly, substituted 'Gaul' after 481. It was not till the end of the tenth, century that the name 'France' began to be used widely. The, name or names by which a people refer to a country or region, involves a long historical process which varies from place to, place, period to period~ and language to language (a given, geographical region might be designated by different names, in different languages)., Clovis unified the territories of northern France which, were occupied by various Germanic tribes. By the end of the, fifth century he had annexed the areas controlled by the, Ripuarian Franks and the Alemanni. Then in 507 he defeated, the Visigoths and drove them out of France. The Merovingians, now controlled most of France. The only other major Germanic, state in France was that of the Burgundians in the south-west., This state was extinguished by the Merovingians in the second, half of the sixth century., One of the important factors which contributed to the, growth of Merorvingian power was the conversion of Clovis, to Christianity. Clovis (and the Franks as a whole) adopted, orthodox Christianity. This allowed the Merovingian state to, forge an alliance with the bishops of France. The church was, the only organized institution which had survived from the
Page 436 :
410, , I Early Social Formations, , Roman period. It owned a lot of property, had almost a, monopoly over education, and generally exercised considerable, political and social influence. It may be pointed out over here, that unlike the Franks most of the other leading Germanic, states in western Europe had accepted Arianism when they, converted to Christianity. This had brought them into conflict, with the established church of the Roman empire. The Council, of Nicaea (325), it may be recalled, had rejected Arianism., This implied that at the Roman state identified itself with, Christianity in its Catholic form. Since the Vandals, the Goths, and the Lombards had adopted Arianism they had to face the, hostility of the existing institutions of the church. On the other, hand the Franks could rely on the assistance of the church for, consolidating their position., When Clovis died in 511 the Merovingian empire was, partitioned among his four sons. This was to remain a, recurring feature of the Frankish state. Germanic state, formation had some specific characteristics. Germanic tribes, such as the Franks were making a transition from a tribal, polity to a monarchical empire. It is therefore not surprising, that the new states founded by them retained some aspects, of their tribal past. In the process of creating a monarchical, state the Germanic tribes had borrowed and modified Roman, institutions. But this had been easier for the Germanic states, of the first phase. By the time the second phase of invasions, took place very few elements of the Roman state apparatus, had survived (the invasions of the first phase had themselves, contributed to the destruction of the Roman state). In the, case of regions like northern Gaul, which wer~ comparatively, less romanized, the breakdown was much more apparent., Consequently the·· F~nks had to evolve their own, monarchical traditions. Some of these traditions were the, product of their tribal organization., The Frankish (Merovingian) empire was regarded as the, personal domain of the king. Hence it was subject to the same, laws of inheritance as other types of private property. Private, property, especially landed private property, itself was a
Page 437 :
Gennanic Invasions and After: Origins of Medieval Europe I 411, , relatively new concept. According to Frankish custom, when, a person died his property was inherited by all the sons and, was divided equally among them. Although this was already, a patriarchal society as well as a society which was, differentiated along class lines, certain tribal customs-such, as the sharing of property by all male descendants-had, survived. Similarly, the kingdom too was divided., The Merovingian empire was divided into four, independent kingdoms which were ruled by the sons of, Clovis. There were, of course, frequent conflicts between these, kingdoms. However, this was also a period of overall, Merovingian territorial expansion. One significant event was, the conquest of the Burgundian kingdom in 534. This brought, to an end the last surviving Germanic state founded in France, during the first phase of the invasions. The Merovingian family, now ruled over almost the whole of France. Around the middle, of the sixth century the empire was politically reunified under, one of Clovis's sons, Chlotar I. Chlotar I was the sole ruler of, the vast Merovingian empire from 558 till his death in 561., The empire attained its greatest extent in the second half of, the sixth century. After the death of Chlotar I the empire was, once again partitioned, leading to fresh conflicts among the, different Merovin~an states. Nevertheless the Merovingian, dynasty survived till the middle of the eighth century. The, rulers retained sq.fficient authority till c. 630 and the empire, was unified from time to time. From c. 630 onwards real power, passed into the hands of Merovingian officials known as, 'mayors of the palace'., Mayors of the palace were prominent officials who began, playing an increasingly important role in the Merovingian, empire from the beginning of the seventh century. By the midseventh century they had become king-makers, and by the, end of the century the Merovingian rulers were reduced to, being mere puppets in their hands. Mayor of the palace (major, palatii) was originally the title borne by officials who, supervised various aspects of the imperial household. Their, functions included looking after the personal estates of the
Page 438 :
412, , I, , Early Social Formations, , king. Some of them were appointed as tutors to princes. These, officials took advantage of the conflicts among the, Merovingian kingdoms and hastened the decline of, Merovingian power. Around the middle of the seventh century, one family of mayors of the palace became prominent. This, was the family of Pippin I (or Pepin I). Pippin I and his, successor Pippin II were influential in north-eastern France,, in the area lying between Paris and the Rhine. Pippin I and, Pippin II gradually assumed control over the Merovingian, state. This process was completed under Charles Martel, the, son of Pippin II., Charles Martel had to wage a long struggle to establish, his authority. He had to fight against other mayors of the, palace as well as against various Germanic chiefs. It was only, in c. 715 that he was able to stabilize his rule. The Merovingian, king was by now merely a figurehead whereas all political, power was concentrated in the hands of Charles Martel., Charles Martel was the real founder of a new dynasty of, Frankish kiri.gs, the Carolingian dynasty, which succeeded the, Merovingian dynasty. However, the Carolingians formally, assumed power several years after the death of Charles Martel., One of the most formidable challenges which Charles, Martel had to face was the Arab invasion of France. The Arabs, had started expanding into western Europe in 711. Sp"lin had, been their first major target. Within a few years the Arabs, had defeated the Visigoths and established their rule over, large parts of Spain. From Spain the Arab armies, led by the, governor of Spain (Abd al-Rahman), penetrated southern, France in the second quarter of the eighth century. Charles, Martel mobilized the Frankish army to resist the Arab advance, and in 733 he managed to defeat Abd al-Rahman's forces at, the battle of Poitiers (732 is the traditionally accepted date,, but this has been revised). Poitiers is situated in north-western, France, just south of the city of Tours. Following their defeat, at Poitiers, the Arabs evacuated France and retreated to Spain., From the point of view of the history of early medieval France,, the battle of Poitiers in 733 was an important turning point
Page 439 :
Germanic Invasions andAfter: Origins of Medieval Europe, , I, , 413, , because this event put an end to the danger of Arab expansion, into Frankish territories (though this might not have been, immediately apparent)., Charles Martel is credited with having first given concrete, shape to some of the institutions which became an integral, part of European feudalism. He initiated a programme to, make the military structure of the empire more efficient. From, the time of Charles Martel we find a crucial shift in the military, organization of the Franks. Foot-soldiers were gradually, substituted by troops fighting on horseback. To some extent, this was a culmination of the process of social differentiation, within the Germanic tribes. Whereas earlier all able-bodied, male adults had participated in military campaigns, the, emergence of a class of professional warriors had divested, the majority-Le. all those who had become ordinary, peasants-of their military responsibilities. Simultaneously,, with changes in military techniques (which we will discuss, later) these professional warriors increasingly tended to fight, on horseback rather than on foot., Since it was expensive to provide for horses, Charles, Martel resorted to large-scale confiscation of church property, for this purpose. The landed estates of the church were redistributed among Charles Martel's leading military supporters, on the condition that their revenues would be used to maintain, horses and soldiers for the army. The confiscation and redistribution of large estates by Charles Martel gathered momentum, on the eve of the Arab invasion, and was perhaps prompted, by the need to provide the Frankish army with the capability, to resist the Arabs. The Arabs, it should be kept in mind,, relied heavily on the cavalry for their military success., Upon the death of Charles Martel in 741 the territories, ruled by him were partitioned between his two sons,, Carloman and Pippin III. However, Carloman soon retired, from political life and Pippin III .became the. ruler of all the, Frankish possessions (747). Pippin III deposed the last, Merovingian king (Childeric III) and formally declared himself, the king. Pippin's action was legitimized by the pope who
Page 440 :
414, , I, , Early Social Formations, , crowned him 'king of the Franks' in 751. In return Pippin, supported the pope in his struggle against the Lombards in, Italy. Pippin III thus became the first king of the Carolingian, dynasty. His predecessors had maintained the fiction that they, were ruling on behalf of the Merovingians, but Pippin III, himself assumed the title of king and removed the, Merovingians from the throne., Pippin III reigned from 751 to 768. As had been the case, with the Merovingians, the kingdom was divided among the, surviving sons of Pippin after his death. Pippin had two sons:, Carloman II and Charlemagne. For a few years after the death, of Pippin III the two brothers ruled over their respective, portions of the Frankish empire. The death of Carloman II in, 771 made Charlemagne the sole ruler of the empire. The, accession of Charlemagne inaugurated a new era in the history, of France, and in the history of western Europe as a whole., Charlemagne created a vast empire which encompassed a large, part of western Europe. Classical feudalism was in many ways, the product of the social, economic, military and political, structure which evolved under him., , IV, Charlemagne (in Latin texts referred to as Carolus Magnus,, i.e. Charles the Great, after whom the Carolingian dynasty is, named) was born in 742. He became the king of one portion, of the Frankish empire after the death of his father, Pippin ill,, in 768. Pippin had divided the empire between his two sons,, Carloman II and Charlemagne. Carloman II died three years, later and in 771 Charlemagne became the king of all the, Frankish territories. Charlemagne lived till 814 and was, therefore on the throne for almost half a century. During this, long period he vigorously extended the boundaries of the, empire and created a new administrative structure to govern, it. Charlemagne had to undertake more than fifty major, military campaigns to expand the empire or defend it., One of Charlemagne's earliest campaigns was directed
Page 441 :
Germanic Invasions and After: Origins of Medieval Europe I 415, , against the Lombard kingdom of Italy. The Lombards had, occupied some of the territories ruled by the pope. These, territories are usually referred to as the Papal States. The Papal, States were situated in central Italy and were directly, administered by the pope (they survived, with some changes,, till the nineteenth century when Italy was politically unified)., The pope, who was finding it difficult to resist the Lombard, offensive, appealed to Charlemagne for military support. This, appeal should be seen in the context of the close ties which, existed between the Frankish state and the Catholic church., In 773 Charlemagne responded to the pope's request by leading, his army into Italy. The Lombards were defeated and the, Frankish army occupied Pavia, the capital of the Lombard, kingdom. The Papal States were restored to the pope while, the Lombard territories were annexed by Charlemagne. North, Italy now became part of the Carolingian empire. This event, increased the prestige-·of Charlemagne and reinforced the, alliance between the pope and the Frankish state., Charlemagne's realm eventually included France, central, Europe (including west Germany), north Italy and a small, part of Spain. Many of the Germanic tribes living east of the, Rhine were subjugated and brought under Frankish rule. By, the beginning of the ninth century the Carolingian empire was, the largest and most powerful political entity in western, Europe. The principal seat of government was at Aachen (also, known as Aix-la-Chapelle, located in Germany in the Rhine, area). Charlemagne was able to further consolidate his position, when· he was crowned Roman emperor by the pope, Leo III, (795-822), in 800. Leo ill, who was elected pope in 795, had, been unsuccessful in establishing his authority due to internal, conflicts within the church. He was forced to flee Italy and, sought refuge with Charlemagne. Charlemagne reinstated Leo, III and himself marched to Rome in 800. The pope used this, occasion to· formally declare Charlemagne as Roman emperor., The crowning of Charlemagne as Roma!\ emperor has been, portrayed as an event of far-reaching historical significance., To some extent this is true because it helped Charlemagne
Page 442 :
416, , I Early Social Formations, , and his suc~essors to project themselves as rightful heirs of, the monarchical traditions of the later Roman empire. This, was useful for legitmizing the authority of the Carolingian, monarchy and served to highlight the political unification of, the west which had been achieved by Charlemagne., Charlemagne was accepted as the undisputed master of the, western provinces of the erstwhile Roman empire (minus Spain, and Britain, but including Germany which had not been a, part of Rome). Nevertheless, the pope's action primarily had, a symbolic value. There had been no emperor in the west, since 476 and as far as western Europe was concerned the, title had very little relevance in political terms. Moreover, the, Byzantine rulers styled themselves as Roman emperors thereby, implying that the authority of the Roman state was vested in, them. The revival of the title in the west was not an attempt·, to restore the Roman empire but merely a way of expressing, the enormous power which the Carolingian monarchy had, acquired under Charlemagne. By using this title Charlemagne, claimed a· monopoly of political power in western Europe., By bestowing the title of Roman emperor on Charlemagne,, Leo III cemented the ties between the church and the, Carolingian state. This bond, as we have seen, was already, very strong. The Carolingians were firm allies of the pope, and in return they had got the support of the church, its, institutions and officials. In receiving the title of Roman, emperor from Leo III, Charlemagne acknowledged the, preeminent position of the pope-i.e. the bishop of Rome-in, religious matters. The pope's own authority was greatly, enhanced. Henceforth it became crucial for emperors to secure, the recognition of the pope to legitimize their status. This gave, to the church some say in the affairs of the state, which led to, serious conflicts between the church and the state later on., The new ritual whereby the pope crowned the Roman, emperor had some implications for the concept of monarchy, in medieval Europe. Kingship was now seen as being divinely, ordained. Receiving the crown from the pope signified that, the emperor's authority had divine sanction. In other words,
Page 443 :
Germanic Invasions and After: Origins of Medieval Eurqpe I 417, , monarchical power was based on the 'divine right' to rule, and was therefore absolute. This 'divine right',.as well as the, intimate link between the religious authority of the pope and the, political authority of the emperor, was proclaimed through the, use of the title 'holy Roman emperor' by the successors of, Charlemagne. The emperor came to be called. 'holy Roman, emperor' instead of just Roman emperor, and the territories over, which he ruled wer~ designated as the 'holy Roman empire'., In an age when the central apparatus of the state was very, weak and-barring a few exceptions-the emperors were not, in a position to exercise centralized control over the empire,, this terminology and ritual helped the institution of monarchy, to retain its relevance within the political structure that was, evolving in western Europe. Monarchy provided the, framework for unifying the various elements (the feudal, aristocracy, military leaders, big landowners, warriors) which, constituted the decentralized feudal state, i.e. these elements, theoretically derived their authority from the 'divinely, ordained' holy Roman emperor. This was necessary for, legitimizing the power exercised by the members of the feudal, ruling class., This brings us to the most formidable problem with which, Charlemagne was faced, a problem which could not be solved, merely by adopting new titles or rituals. There was virtually, no centralized apparatus to govern such a vast empire., Charlemagne had to mould such an apparatus out of the, institutions which he had inherited. At the same time he had, to accomodate the interests of regional and local elites, i.e., feudal lords. Feudal lords (consisting of military leaders,, former Germanic chiefs and whatever remained of the Roman, oligarchy) weil4ed enormous political and economic power, at the regional and local levels. Charlemagne integrated them, with the machinery of the state. He divided the empire into a, number of administrative units which were placed under, regional governors called 'counts'. The counts enjoyed a lot, of autonomy. They had revenue, judicial and military responsibilities. Subsequently we find another category of powerful
Page 444 :
418, , I Early Social Formations, , fedual lords called 'dukes' who too looked after provincial, administration. Under-Charlemagne roughly three hundred, prominent lords administered the country. The emperor, monitored their functioning through a set of imperial officials, known as missi dominici. The missi dominici or 'emissaries of, the master' were sent out (missi literally means 'sent ouf) to, review the state of affairs in the provinces. They also, communicated instructions or directives of the central, government to the counts., This was the first systematic attempt to evolve a unified, and effective goverment for a large political entity in western, Europe since the collapse of the Roman empire. A series of, Carolingian royal documents, referred to as capitularies, which, have come down to us shed some light on the character of the, Frankish state in the ninth century. Charlemagne's capitularies, are particularly relevant in this context and are a vital historical, source for his reign. The capitularies are essentially letters which, contain royal commands or instructions. Many of them are of, ~ legislative nature, i.e. they lay down or interpret laws pertaining to a variety of subjects. Some of them are guidelines, for better governance while others indicate the emperor's, disapproval of the actions of certain officials. The capitularies, show that Charlemagne seriously tried to create a uniform, administrative and legal system for the diverse communities, which inhabited his farflung empire. There can be no doubt, that under him most of western Europe had a regular, government for the first time after several centuries. Yet,, despite all the efforts of Charlemagne, in the long run the, historical situation was not favourable for centralization, (incidentally, as many scholars have pointed out, a centralized, government is not necessarily a superior form of government)., The state did not have the resources to maintain a large, bureaucracy. There was no standing army. The big feudal lords, (counts etc.) who governed the provinces received grants of, land as remuneration for their services. Revenue collection,, recruitment of soldiers, payment of salaries to government, servants, and appointment of officials was not centralized. It
Page 445 :
Germanic Invasions and After: Origins of Medieval Europe I 419, , is hardly surprising that under Charlemagne's successors the, process of centralization was reversed as feudal lords, accumulated more and more power., Here we need to make a reference to another component, of the social and political structure of Charlemagne's empire,, namely the church. The close alliance between the Frankish, state and the Catholic church has already been noted. The, various reforms undertaken by Charlemagne to reorganize, the state included measures to formally associate the church, with the government. When the newly-created regional, administrative units were placed under counts superior, officials of the church were simultaneously entrusted with the, responsibility of supervising the religious affairs of these, regions. These officials of the church were archbishops or, bishops. The count was the supreme political authority while, the archbishop or bishop was the supreme religious authority, in the provinces. In several instances the bishops had, considerable political authority as well. Since the church, possessed large landed estates it could dominate the economy, in certain areas. Moreover, with its organized priesthood the, church had been one of the few institutions which had been, capable of assisting with routine administrative tasks at the, local level in the period following the downfall of the Roman, empire, so that bishops and the local clergy performed a, political role in addition to their religious duties., Perry Anderson has drawn attention to the contribution, made by the church in the development of culture, ideas and, some of the institutions of early medieval Europe. The church, preserved the attainments of Greco-Roman antiquity and, transmitted them to the Carolingian era. According to, Anderson it was 'an indispensible bridge between the two, epochs'. He observes that 'one single institution ... spanned, the whole transition from Antiquity to the Middle Ages in, essential continuity: the Christian church. It was indeed the, main, frail aqueduct [a channel that carries water] across which, the cultural reservoirs of the Classical World now passed to, the new universe of feudal Europe'.
Page 446 :
420, , I Early Social Formations, , Perhaps the most outstanding contribution of the church, was towards the revival of literacy in the early medieval, period. There had been an overall decline in the level of literacy, from the time of the Germanic invasions. In the Roman empire, Latin had been the main language of literate persons. It was, the language in which most of the official work was done., Education invariably meant acquiring mastery over written, Latin. Better educated people were usually familiar with Greek, as well. The elite conversed in Latin and this was the language, of high culture. Outside Italy the bulk of the ordinary people, spoke their own local languages, but under centuries of Roman, rule latinization had made some progress in the western, provinces. The growth of the church was a key factor in, promoting the latinization of the west in the later Roman, empire.·, The fall of the Roman empire and the upheavals of the, fifth, sixth and seventh centuries had an adverse impact on, Latin learning. The spread of the Latin language was halted., The use of the language itself declined, both for official, purposes and at the popular level. This was inevitable given, the disintegration of the government and the displacement of, the Roman aristocracy. A parallel development was the sharp, drop in the level of literacy. The tradition of teaching Latin, decayed. Thus fewer.and fewer people had the ability to read, and write., Germanic invasions altered the linguistic character of, western Europe. Germanic tribes brought with them their own, languages which belonged to the Germanic linguistic family., The ascendancy of Germanic tribes meant that a large section, of the ruling class in the west now spoke Germanic languages., The interaction between Germanic languages and Latin, promoted linguistic diversity. In Italy, the home of the Latin, language, Gaul and Spain (Latin had struck deep roots in Gaul, and Spain though it was not the language of the majority of, the people) modified forms of Latin began to emerge as the, language of everyday speech changed over a period of time., These changes were reinforced by the neglect of reading and
Page 447 :
Germanic Invasions and After: Origins of Medieval Europe I 421, , writing (a language is more stable and uniform in a literate, society). Eventually, distinct languages descended from Latin, evolved in Italy, France, Spain, and what is- now Portugal, (Italian, French, Spanish and Portuguese, respectively; these, are collectively called Romance languages). Germanic, languages, namely German and Anglo-Saxon (from which, English is descended) dominated Germany, central Europe, and England. All these languages used the Roman script, with, minor alterations. Germanic and Romance languages borrowed, freely from each another. Even in the Romance linguistic zone, there was extensive germanization of the language, especially, in northern France. The rise of the Franks profoundly, influenced the growth of the French· language. Germanic, dialects transformed and were transformed by Latin and Celtic, languages of the Gallo-Roman population., The linguistic pattern of the east need not detain us. Suffice, it to say that Greek was the main language of the Byzantine, ruling class. In other parts of eastern Europe Germanic, languages competed with the Slavic linguistic group. The Slavs, were an Indo-European tribal people who began migrating, into eastern Europe in large numbers in the latter half of the, fifth century. By the beginning of the sixth century the, movements of Slav tribes had assumed massive proportions., The Slavs began penetrating the lower Danube and settled, down in the Balkan region. Later, they spread to other parts, of eastern Europe right upto the Baltic Sea, i.e., into presentday Poland, Ukraine, Russia, etc. Gradually, people who spoke, various Slavic languages, for example, Polish, Russian, Czech,, Slovak, and Serbo-Croatian (spoken in Yugoslavia),, constituted the predominant linguistic group of eastern, Europe. Slavic linguistic influence over eastern Europe was so, strong that the Bulgars, a powerful tribal people of non-IndoEuropean origin who established their rule over a part of, Macedonia and Greece in the ninth century, soon adopted, Slavic speech and customs. Bulgarian, which is a Slavic, language, became the language of the territory ruled by the, Bulgars (roughly corresponding to Bulgaria). A few Slavic Ian-
Page 448 :
422, , I Early Social Formations, , guages used the Roman script whereas others evolved their, own scripts (Glagolitic, Cyrillic) which were derived from, Greek. It is worth noting that the development of Slavic scripts, owed a lot to the church in the east., Broadly speaking there were four main linguistic zones in, Europe by the early medieval period: Romance and Germanic, in western and central Europe; Slavic and Greek in eastern, Europe. The pattern in the east was somewhat more, complicated than what this classification might indicate. The, arrival of new groups introduced several changes. One such, group was that of the Magyars who were a tribal· people of, non-Inda-European origin. From the ninth century onwards, they began to occupy what is now Hungary in eastern Europe., The Hungarian language is quite unique in its sbucture and, bears no resemblance to any of the Indo-European languages., There were also some surviving areas of Latin speech in the, east, as for instance the tract of eastern Europe which forms, part of the country known as Romania. Romanian, the main, language of Romania, is a Romance language. This was a Latin, enclave in eastern Europe. However the situation in the west, was much more homogenous. Here Latin and languages, descended from Latin maintained their primacy. Further, the, development of Germanic languages too was shaped by, Romance languages and Latin. The enormous hold which Latin, and its successors had over the west must, to a large extent,, be attributed to the leading ro~e of the church in the revival of, learning in early medieval Europe. Since Latin fotmed the, basis of much of this learning there was greater cultural and, linguistic unformity in the west, which in turn helped to unify, western Europe in religious terms. In the words of Anderson,, 'universalist orthodoxy and linguistic Latinism' were distintive, features of Christianity in the west., Richard Hooker has commented that Charlemagne's, 'formal patronage' of Christianity and learning 'was the most, significant first step in developing a distinct European, monoculture'. Charlemagne consciously involved the church, in his project for improving standards of literacy and
Page 449 :
Germanic Invasions and After: Origins of Medieval Europe j 4~3, , education in his empire. The church was the only organized, institution that was equipped for this task. The church had, been the main repository of knowledge in the era of Germanic, invasions. For a long time education was synonymous with, learning Latin. Marc Bloch (Feudal Society) states: 'Latin was, not only the language in which teaching was done, it was, the only language taught. To be able to read was simply to, be able to read Latin'. The literary traditions of the Romance, languages matured much later. Considering that Latin, learning had been largely confined to the church ever since, the Roman empire ceased to exist, it is easy to see why the, church had a monopoly over education., It is true that legal work too was done in Latin, and therefore all those who were connected with the field of law had, at least a working knowledge of the language. This was one, other field in which persons who were fairly well-versed in, Latin could be found. By their continuing use of Latin, legal, institutions became an additional factor responsible for the, revival of the language. Nevertheless, by the early medieval, period many of those who were in the legal profession,, particularly at its lower levels e.g. clerks, might not have, known Latin in its classical form. But at least they were literate., Italy, where Latin learning was relatively more widespread,, retained a strong tradition of Roman law even under Germanic, rule. Conversely, writ_ten laws becamie1defunct in regions, where there lacked educated person . Written laws were, ignored and older legal terms were istorted. The original, meaning of many words was lost. WJ. can hardly ignore the, part played by those who comprised the legal system in incorporating, in a written form, some of the changes which were, taking place in the spoken language. Contemporay legal, documents (wills, contracts, sale deeds, marriage records), contained many new words and usages. In this way the, vocabulary was enriched and several existing terms or, expressions took on new meanings. Marc Bloch has stressed, that we must not regard the L.;ltin of medieval Europe as a, 'dead language' despite the rise of the Romance languages.
Page 450 :
424, , I .Early Social Formations, , The changes in the language first become visible in legal, documents., The advantage of the church lay in that it possessed an, infrastructure for imparting education. Charlemagne enlarged, this infrastructure by taking the initiative to set up state-run, educational institutions in France and west Germariy., Prominent scholars were invited from all over Europe to teach, at these institutions. The scholars were mostly priests and, monks, of whom an English monk from York named Alcuin, (d. 804) was the mqst famous. Alcuin taught at the school, which Charlemagne had established at Aachen, the principal, centre of his government. Apart from his activities as a teacher,, Alcuin is credited with modifying the way in which the Roman, script was written. He developed a style of writing which, came to be known as the Carolingian script. The Roman script, was so far written only with capital letters. Alcuin invented, lower case letters, which were easier to write. This was his, lasting contribution to the Roman script., Charlemagne's concern for the spread of education has to, be seen in the context of the measures undertaken by him to, reorganize the state. It was necessary to have institutions for, educating a section of the population so as to be able to recruit, literate administrative personnel. Officials with some amount, of education were required for carrying on the routine, functioning of the government. Records had to be maintained,, accounts had to be written, letters had to be drafted and laws, had to be promulgated. All this called for a minimum level of, literacy. What is more, an official link language was, indispensible for governing a vast empire which had a so many, different linguistic groups. Due to the efforts of the church, and of the Frankish state there were signs of recovery in the, ninth century. Society became relatively more literate, though, we should not overestimate the extent of this literacy. Latin, was the language of the church, of law, of higher learning and, of official documents. It was certainly not spoken by the, common people, and was not even the language of the political, elite. The masses remained illiterate and, as Bloch notes, the
Page 451 :
Gennanic Invasions and After: Origins of Medieval Europe I 425, , early medieval aristocracy (including the monarchy) too was, quite backward from the point of view of education., During his lifetime Charlemagne had nominated three of, his sons as heirs to different parts of the empire. After his, death the empire was to be partitioned among them. Two of, the heirs-apparent predeceased Charlemagne. Upon, Charlemagne's death in 814 the surviving heir, Louis I (81440), succeeded as emperor of all the Carolingian territories., The rule of Louis I and his son Charles II (840-77), was, constantly threatened by opponents from within the family., The centralization carried out by Cl,larlemagne proved to be a, temporary phenomenon. The c~ntralized structure began to, dissolve by the middle of the ninth century. The Carolingian, empire broke up into a number of semi-independent territories ruled by dukes or cou,nts. The ~arolingian monarchy, itself survived for another century,' but it had no real power., It was in this period that feudal institutions developed firm, roots in western Europe. Feudal lords became increasingly, powerful in their respective areas. The Carolingian dynasty, was finally removed in 987 by Hugh Capet, the count of the, region of Paris. Hugh Capet founded a new dynasty, the, Capetian dynasty, which ruled over France till 1328. Yet the, Capetians were not able to form a centralized state and the, substitution of one dynasty by another did not imply the, overthrow of the prevailing political structure. The feudal, system had come to stay by the tenth century and continued, to flourish throughout the Capetian era.
Page 452 :
Chapter Fourteen, , FEUDALISM IN MEDIEVAL EUROPE, , BY the beginning of the tenth century.a social formation which, was fundamentally different from the social formation of, Greco-Roman antiquity had come into existence in western, Europe. At the end of a long period of transition the slave, social formation was replaced by the feudal social formation., During this transition two societies-Roman and Germaniccame into close contact and merged,. The coming together of, the two societies, both of which were undergoing momentous, historical changes, produced a synthesis which may be, compared to a chemical reaction. A qualitatively new society, was born. The feudal social formation contained Roman as, w.ell as Germanic elements. Since the synthesis occurred at a, time when the two societies were disintegrating, many of the, Roman or Germanic elements which we find in feudalism were, actually· of very recent origin. The changes taking place in, both societies reinforced each other and accc,lerated the process, of synthesis., , I, With the collapse of the Roman empire in the west regional, and local elites, primarily the Roman landed aristocracy and, the Germanic chiefs/ military leaders, had usurped the powers, of the state. They became the actual rulers of their respective, areas. The process of incorporating these semi-independent, elites with the administrative structures. of the states which
Page 453 :
Feudalism in Medieval Europe, , I, , 427, , were formed after the Germanic invasions probably started, in Visigothic Spain. We have referred to the 'fact that under, the Visigoths warrior chieftains were held reJponsible for the, particular areas in which they, i.e. the chieftains, were, dominant (chapter thirteen). The Merovingi~s adopted this, practice and the Carolingians extended it. During the course, of the ninth century the. regional and local elites, whom we, may now refer to as feudal lords, were formally granted political, and judicial authority. Whereas the lord's position in the, political system was earlier an informal one, now his authority, was regularized., A related development was the growth of a hierarchical, structure whereby the big lords (counts, du:fes, i.e. the, nobility) derived their ·authority directly from the king, and they in turn sanctioned the authority of lesser lords, below them who had their own subordinates and so on., At each level a lord was virtually supreme in his own, area-he was the government. He had political and judicial, authority in addition to his military influence and control, over land. In this hierarchical structure, which may be, visualized as a pyramid for the sake of convenience, the, lord at each level derived· his authority from and owed, his allegiance to a superior lord above him and this chain, went on right upto the king. To put it differently, the, authority of the king, who symbolized the state, was, hierarchically distributed among a large number of feudal, lords. This~ is what Perry Anderson ha~ called, 'parcellization of sovereignty' in medieval Europe. Political, power was not concentrated in one person but was widely, dispersed., The distribution or decentralization of the authority of, the state was not a matter of choice. This was a recognition of, ground reality. The state was in no position to ~sert itseif, vis-a-vis the aristocracy. The feudal lords fully controlled their, respective localities and could not be easily dislodged. In the, final analysis their power was backed by force, i.e. by their, ability to mobilize armed supporters who were personally loyal
Page 454 :
428, , I Early Social Formations, , to them alone. It was with their armed supporters that they, coerced the peasants, defended their localities and challenged, the state. However, they could not always resist bigger lords, in their own regions who had the capacity to mobilize armed, supporters on a larger scale. Less powerful lords thus, submitted to the more powerful ones by formally accepting, their overlordship. The distribution of power corresponded, to the ability of the lords to individually mobilize armed, supporters., Given that the state lacked the resources to recruit a, standing army (there was no machinery for centralized, collection of revenues), it could not curb the military strength, of the lords. In the absence of any supreme military force, · there would have been a free-for-all among the lords. In fact, this is what had been happening since the fifth century. Some, system had to be evolved to cope with this problem. The, early Merovingians had tried to enforce the authority of the, central government, but failed. Though Charlemagne was, temporarily successful, the centralized apparatus created by, him was so fragile that it was undone within fifty years of, his death., By the beginning of the tenth century a decentralized, structure with hierarchical distribution of power had acquired, concrete shape. This political system-which was the political, dimension of feudalism-took care of the interests of the, lords as a whole, and minimized their conflicts. In this system, each hierarchical chain consisted of lords who were linked, to one another in a personal manner. The underlying principle, of the relationship between the superior and inferior lord, was the formation of a personal bond. This relationship was, essentially not based on kinship ties. The inferior or, subordinate lord, referred to as vassal pledged lifelong, personal loyalty to his superior who in turn promised to, protect the vassal (we are talking of men only-women were, totally excluded)., There was an elaborate ritual which established the bond, -between a lord and his vassal' The ritual was intended to
Page 455 :
Feudalism in Medieval Europe I 429, , sanctify their ties. A ceremony would be organized at which, the vassal would take a vow to serve the lord all his life. This, ceremony was called 'homage'. It was through homage that a, vassal was accepted as one of the lord's 'men'. Marc Bloch, states that in the feudal period it was common 'to be the" man", of another man'. The identity of a lord/vassal was defined in, terms of his being the 'man' of someone with a superior status., Every lord was at the same time someone else's vassal or, 'man'. A lord would have an overlord above him and vassals, below him. The· overlords would have their own lords-the, nobles. At the top of this hierarchy was the king. The king, enjoyed only limited power but he was essential for, legitimizing the authority of the lords. The king was the, immediate· overlord of nobles., When a vassal pledged his loyalty to his lord he, simultaneously accepted the protection of the lord. Maimbour, was a term frequently used in medieval France to describe, the protection granted to a vassal by his lord. In return for, this protection or maimbour the vassal had to perform various, services for his lord. The services were chiefly of a military, nature. The vassal was bound by oath to render military service, for the lord. He had to furnish a certain numbet of troops, whenever called upon to do so. The vassal might also be given, administrative responsibilities., The roots of this relationship may be traced back to the, custom among Germanic tribes whereby their chiefs used to, have a retinue of highly trained and fiercely loyal warriors, attached to them. These warriors shared a very close personal, bond with their chief. They ·constituted the nucleus of the, skilled fighters who accompanied the chiefs on military, expeditions. The rest of the army consisted of able-bodied, males of the tribe, not all of whom were skilled fighters. The, warriors who formed the personal retinue of the Germanic, chiefs were called gisind, which literally means 'companion, for an expedition'. Ancient Latin works on the Germanic tribes, translated gisind as comes (plural comitis) or companion. The, practice of having such an escort of warrior~companions was
Page 456 :
430, , I, , Early Social Formations, , denoted b~e Latin term comitatus. Comitatus signified the, warrior-b 8. as a whole., It was rom comitatus that the institution of vassalage, gradually evolved. The word comitatus became the Latin, equivalent of vassalage once the system was established in its, medieval shape. In the later Roman empire it was common, for the western aristocracy also to have such personal retinues, of warriors. As the practice spread during the early medieval, period, various terms were employed for these special, warriors who pledged personal loyalty to their lords: comes,, gasindus, bucellarii, vassus etc. Vassus, a· word of Celtic origin,, seems to have come into general use in Gaul and became, increasingly popular. Hence we see the extensive use of the, term vassal in the middle ages., An integral part of the lord-vassal relationship was that, the lord was expected to provide for the maintenance of his, vassals. For this purpose a grant would be made to the vassal, for his own sustenance and for the support of his troops., The grant was made when someone was formally recognized, as a vassal through the ceremony of homage. In a period, when money was in short supply and monetary exchange, was uncommon, the tendency was to grant land. This was a, conditional grant: it carried with it the. obligation to serve, the lord (militarily or otherwise). For the lord this was a, convenient way· of mobilizing· troops and governing· his, territory. Already under Charlemagne government officials, were receiving their remuneration in the form of grants of, land. So ··even though Charlemagne tried to create a, centralized state, he ended up by strengthening feudal, tendencies. The conditional· grant m:ade by the lord to his, vassal was knowp. as a 'fief. Some of the other contemporary, terms for fief were benefice, lehn and feudum. It is from feudum,, which refers to a grant made on condition of (military) service, and was a synonym for fief, that the term feudalism is, derived., Theoretically, a fief could be in any form (payment of, salary, assignment of revenue, gift of land, or providing for
Page 457 :
Feudalism, , in Medieval Europe, , I, , 431, , the vassal directly from the lord's household), but by the, tenth century it was overwhelmingly in the form of land. A, vassal's submission was inseparably.linked to the grant of a, fief by the lord to the vassal. As we shall see, in the eighth, century the early Carolingians frequently resorted to land, grants for the suppoJt of troops. However, at this, stage a, large number of grants were not linked to military service., It was in the latter half of the ninth century that vassalage,, fief and military service were organically fused. This fusion, was absolutely central to the feudal system. With the passage, of time vassalage became hereditary so that fiefs too became, hereditary., The consensus among historians is that the linking of, vassalage and fief with military service was related to, Carolingian efforts to recruit troops on a regular basis. The, fall of the Roman empire and the Germanic invasions had, resulted in the dissolution of the Roman army in the west., There was no longer a standing army. The states which, succeeded the Roman empire lacked the means to recruit troops, on a centralized basis. The tribal military organization of the, Germanic tribes, wherein all free male adults constituted the, army, gradually disintegrated as the greater part of the tribal, people became dependent peasants., There was an urgent need for some other pattern of, military mobilization. Any social structure which is based on, class differentiation requires a state with sufficient armed force, at its disposal. It is the presence of this state, backed by force,, which makes possible the appropriation of a disproportionately, large share of the surplus by the ruling class. The ruling class, which was coming into existence iri the eighth and ninth, centuries had so far relied on ad hoc solutions to fight wars,, carry out raids, and keep the peasantry under subjection. The, Carolingians devised a viable system for recruiting soldiers, through fiefs. So crucial is this aspect th~t some scholars regard, feudalism as essentially a military system. In the late nineteenth, century Heinrich Brunner had defined European feudalism, as a way of organizing society for· 'instant warfare'. He
Page 458 :
432, , I Early Social Formations, , underlined the insecurity which was caused by the Germanic,, Hun, Slav, Magyar and Arab invasions. Violent upheavals had, become a way of life. In' the absence of a regular army the, king had to rely on his vassals, who relied on ·their vassals, and so on, to gather troops for the frequent wars that had to, be fought., We noted in the previous chapter that at the beginning of, the eighth century the Frankish army became critically, dependent upon professional warriors fighting on horseback., A shift was tal<ing place from infantry to cavalry and footsoldiers became redundant. It has been suggested that the, growing importance of the cavalry was partly a response to, the Arab advance. Since horsemen accounted for the effective, strength of the Arab armies, the Franks had to likewise develop, their own cavalry. Brunner considered the battle of Poiti.ers, as a major turning point in the transformation of the Frankish, army. We do know that Charles Martel's reforms coincided, with this event., ·, Nevertheiess, it would be more accurate to see the growth, of the Frankish cavalry as part of a long-term process. The, difficulty of enlisting trained foot-soldiers, which in many ways, was the outcome of the marginalization of the Germanic, peasantry and the nominal role that they had been accorded, in fighting, speeded up this shift. It should not be assumed, that in the feudal era ordinary peasants had no military, responsibilities whatsoever. They were used, but always as, minor adjuncts to the main fighting force. Mounted soldiers, were the backbone of medieval armies in Europe., Equally significant were some of the technological, innovations of a military nature which became available at, that time. The most important of these was the introduction, of the stirrup (the attachments suspended from either side of, a horse-saddle which act as foot-rests for the rider; the rider's, feet are placed in the stirrup). There is no evidence for the use, of the stirrup in pre-Carolingian Europe. It is around the eighth, century that stirrups began to form part of a horse-,rider' s, equipment in western Europe. Rudimentary stirrups were used
Page 459 :
Feudalism in Medieval Europe, , I, , 43J, , in ancient India and China, from where the idea spread, westwards and was adopted in a modified form by the Franks, in the first quarter of the eighth century. Stirrups, revolutionized methods of warfare by giving the cavalry a, decisive edge., Bloch, a French historian whose works were written in, the second quarter of the twentieth century and who is, universally regarded as the foremost authority on European, feud&lism, had highlighted the role of the stirrup in the, development of the Carolingian cavalry. In his Feudal Society, he examined the impact of the stirrup on medieval warfare,, also taking into account other innovations, as for instance the, horse-shoe, which combined to make fighting on horseback, more effective. Though Bloch gave due recognition to the, stirrup, he held that the prominence given to mounted troops, by the Franks was 'an evolution which had been going on for, several centuries'. Yet he was aware that the question deserved, a more thorough investigation. He admitted that this, phenomenon has 'not always been very well understood,, partly because insufficient consideration has been given to, certain technical factors'. Later, Lynn White, an American, scholar, dealt exhaustively with the history of the stirrup,, offering several fresh insights., Lynn White in his pathbreaking work on the subject,, Medieval Technology and Social Clumge (1962), has advanced the, novel hypothesis that the introduction of the stirrup was one, of the factors which led to the rise of feudalism. He has argued, that the stirrup had far-reaching military, political and social, implications. It qualitatively altered both the way in which, the horse-rider fought and the manner in which society was, organized. According to White, the stirrup was the most, important invention in the entire history of wadare before, the coming of gunpowder. The stirrup gave the cavalry a, tremendous strategic advantage. Till the introduction of the, stirrup horse-riders had to press their knees against the body, of the horse to maintain their balance while riding. If they did, not put enough pressure with their knees they would be in
Page 460 :
43-1, , I Early Social Formations, , danger of falling off the horse. This made the job of fighting·, on horseback, particularly when the horse was in motion, very, difficult. A lot of one's energy simply went into keeping steady, so that the weapon in the hands of the fighter could not be, wielded with full force This was a very inefficient way of, fighting when compared to what could be achieved if a stirrup, was provided., The stirrup allowed the rider to hold on to the horse with, great ease. The rider's body was now firmly positioned on, the back of the horse. Rider and horse were 'welded' together, to form a single unit. The combined force of the two multiplied, the thrust of the weapon in the hand of the rider manifold., The weapon thus became much more lethal. In medieval, Europe warriors on horseback usually used the long lance (a, kind of spear) as their main weapon. When they charged with, their lance, the entire force of the speeding horse was, transferred to the weapon. This kind of fighting came to be, known as 'mounted shock combat'. Mounted shock combat, rapidly transformed medieval European warfare. Without the, stirrup mounted shock combat was not possible., In Europe, the Carolingian military leadership was able, to appreciate the superiority of mounted shock combat as a, military technique at an early date. This technique was probably, adopted by the Franks in the days of Charles Martel. Charles, Martel was instrumental in inducting a large cavalry into the, Frankish army for undertaking campaigns based on mounted, shock combat. It is about this time (c. 730) that the Franks had, got acquainted with the stirrup. It needs to be understood, that raising a cavalry was not an easy matter. Good horses, were very costly and maintaining the horses, training mounted, soldiers, equipping the cavalry (with weapons, armour,, saddles etc.) all called for a large outlay. Resources had to be, found to meet these expenses. As centralized collection and, disbursement of revenues for financing such a venture was, out of the question, powerful lords were granted land for, this purpose. These were conditional grants, or fiefs, which, carried specific military responsibilities. The assignee had to
Page 461 :
Feudalism in Medieval Europe, , I, , 435, , furnish a certain number of mounted troops in return for the, grc;1nt., Another problem for the government was that it needed, sufficient land for distribution. Charles Martel solved this, problem by confiscating landed property of the church on a, large scale. The church was compensated by being allowed, to collect certain taxes, e.g. 'tithe', more rigorously (see, below). Charles Martel gave this land to his vassals who, were bound to maintain horses and troops out of the produce., Confiscation of church land under Charles Martel commenced, just when the Arabs invaded France. This circumstance has, led many.historians to think in terms of a direct connection, between the reform of the Frankish army and the Arab, invasions., White has demonstrated that confiscations had already, started before the crucial encounter between the Arabs and the, Franks at Poitiers (733). In 732 the lands lying within the, jurisdiction of the bishop of Orleans were confiscated hy, Charles Martel In White's opinion herein lies the significance, of the revised date for the battle of Poitiers. It was earlier, supposed that the battle took place in 732 ahd this is the date, generally mentioned even in more recent works. The research, of M. Baudot established that the battle actually occurred in, 733. Baudot' s conclusions were published in 1955. The modified, date implies that the reorganization (while prefers the term, 'reorientation') of the Frankish army preceded the, confrontation with the Arabs. Moreover, the Arab threat soon, receded, primarily due to the internal problems of the, Umayyads in Spain, and Wltjte feels that the Arab factor has, been somewhat exaggerated. He finds the dissemination of, the stirrup a logical explanation for the switch from infantry, to cavalry., What we have presented is an oversimplified version of, White's complex argument, but it is true that for him the stirrup, was the starting point of those profound changes which led, to the emergence of feudalism as a political and military, system. It is for this reason that White has been criticized· for
Page 462 :
436, , I Early Social formations, , his 'technical determinism', i.e. making technique the, determining or critical factor in social change. This does not, mean that technology can be ignored, but that we must place, it in its proper context. The transition to a cavalry-based army, consisting of professional mounted .warriors, called 'knights', in the medieval period, was not completed till the tenth, century. It was intimately tied up not just with technological, changes but also with the political structure which we have, discussed and with the pattern of production and surplus, extraction which we will look at in the following section., , II, Whatever the political and military structure of medieval, Europe, its success depended upon the stability of the system, of production and surplus extraction. It was feudalism as a, system of production that sustained the political, military, and social structure which we have described above. All these, aspects put together (economic, political, military, social), constitute feudalism in the fullest sense of the term. They, are all an integral part of the feudal mode of production,, which _succeeded the slave mode of production at. the, dominant mode of production of western Europe. This new, mode of production created possibilities for overcoming the, prolonged crisis triggered by the crisis of the slave mode of, production., The crisis in the slave mode of production had given rise, to new surplus extraction relationships. These surplus, extraction relationships were the foundations of the feudal, social formation. Similarly, social differentiation among the, Germanic tribes had undermined earlier tribal ties. Once the, tribes settled down and most of their members became, peasants, the relationship of the dominant class with the, producers beq1me increasingly exploitative. The recent, methods of exploitation which Roman society had evolved, in order to cope with the crisis in the slave social formation, were rapidly adopted by Germanic societies. Ultimately
Page 463 :
Feudalism in Medieval Europe, , I, , 437, , surplus extraction relationships in the two societies became, identical., We saw 'in chapter ten that with the dissolution of the, slave mode of production the colonate became prevalent in, the western countryside. In the later Roman empire the coloni,, who at one point of time had been free peasants, had become, dependent peasants tied to the soil. When the Germanic tribes, were absorbed into the agrarian economy of the west,, Germanic peasants were reduced to the status of coloni by, their own warrior aristocracy. Besides, various other, categories of free peasants became coloni when they sought, the protection of a powerful Roman landowner or Germanic, chief. On the other hand many former slaves were settled on, 'small holdings carved out of latifundia, alongwith their, families, as a new way of managing large landed estates. This, improved their status marginally. These former slaves were, indistinguishable from the coloni. In other words, a significant, proportion of the actual cultivators were fused into one broad, category, i.e. the coloni. It should be borne in mind that slaves, as well as free peasants coexisted with the colonate, and that, the coloni were placed between these two classes., The loss of liberty suffered by the free peasantry went, hand in hand with the growing political and economic power, of big landowners, military leaders and Germanic chiefs at, the local level. The failure of the centralized state to enforce, its authority gave these groups an opportunity to accumulate, more and more power. The peasants were completely at the, mercy of landed magnates and their condition deteriorated, due to the inability of the government to protect the people, from the onslaught of the Germanic tribes. Ordinary peasants, were forced to exchange their liberty for the promise of, security from anyone who was militarily strong enough in, their locality. Obviously it was the landed aristocracy which, was in a position to offer protection because it had the, resources to mobilize armed support. The small private armies, of the aristocracy might or might not have guaranteed safety, in actual practice, but they did help the big landlords to tighten
Page 464 :
438, , I, , Eariy Social Formations, , their grip over the peasantry. At the local and regional levels, landed magnates and warrior chieftains were the real, government., The coloni had become the mainstay of agricultural, production in the west by the eighth century. As a form of, production/ surplus extraction the colonate _was a transitional, stage between slavery and serfdom. The colonate itself, contained many of the principal ingredients of serfdom. In, the Merovingian era the status of the coloni was quite similar, to that of the later serf. But we need to conceptually distinguish, between the two. Though it is true that serfdom did emerge, out of the colonate, yet serfs were very different from the, coloni precisely because serfdom was intimately linkedtothe, social, political and economic structure of early medieval, Europe. What was new was the manner in which serf-based, production was organized. The basis of the feudal lord's power, was also different. He now had wide-ranging , political and, judicial authority which allowed him to exercise extra-economic, coercion over the peasantry., The development of a mode of production cannot be, easily fixed in time like a particular event. A broad period, might be indicated, but it would not be appropriate to, suggest a particular year as marking the moment of, emergence of a given mode of production. The process is, one of transition, not instant replacement. We should, distinguish between some elements of a mode of production, having appeared and that mode of production having, become dominant. It is possible to say :with some certainty, that full-fl.edged feudalism was established in northern France by, the beginning of the tenth century., Given that the Franks, and above all the policies of, Charlemagne, had contributed so significantly to the, development of feudal institutions it is hardly surprising that, the Carolingian empire e_m~rged as the main centre of, feudalism in early medieval Europe. And since northern France, was the core area of this empire, the region may justifiably be, called the' central homeland' of European feudalism. Of course
Page 465 :
Feudalism in Medieval Europe I 439, , the Carolingian rulers essentially acted as catalysts in pushing, forward at a faster pace those economic trends which had, appeared after the second phase of Germanic invasions. There, was a perceptible northward shift in the focus of the economy, of western Europe from the sixth century oawards. This, northward shift was related to the shift away from the, Mediterranean with the fall of the Roman empire. The, Mediterranean-centred economy of Greco-Roman antiquity, had started disintegrating with the decline of the Roman, empire., Some historians are of the view that the economic activity, of Europe was still substantially oriented towards the, Mediterranean even after the first Germanic invasions. It was, only in the eighth century, i.e. after the Arab conquests, that, the Mediterranean ceased to be the nerve centre of the, European economy and northern France rose to prominence., This argument was put forward forcefully by Henri Pirenne, in his influential work Mohammad and Charlemagne. Pirenne, contended that the unity of the Mediterranean, which was so, vital for the Roi;nan economy, remained more or less intact, despite the Germanic invasions. The commercial network of, the Mediterranean survived and long-distance trade in several, commodities continued. Subsequeritly, Arab expansion into, northern Africa seriously undermined the unity of the, Mediterranean. Arab control over the entire southern coastline, of the Mediterranean Sea, as well as some parts of the eastern, and western Mediterranean, fundamentally altered the balance, of power iri. the region. The entire pattern of trade was, disturbed and the Mediterranean lost its relevance in so far, as the European economy was concerned. The resulting, vacuum was eventually filled by the Carolingian empire. In, the words of Pirenne, 'Without Muhammad, Charlemagne, would be inconceivable'. Medieval society really came into, existence with the Carolingians., Pirenne sought to explain the rise of feudalism in terms of, the decline of Mediterranean trade following the expansion, of the Arab empire. This argument has been questioned by
Page 466 :
4.40, , I, , Early Social Formations ., , several historians. R.S. Lopez, for inst~c~, has pointed out, that if we were to look a little more closely-at the structure of, Mediterranean commerce in the eighth and ninth centuries, we would find that long-distance trade did not come to an, abrupt halt after the Arab conquests. Rather, many of the, goods which Pirenne assumed were no longer imported into, or exported from Europe, were still being bought and sold., Lopez cites the example of papyrus, an important commodity, in the trade between Egypt and Europe. Egypt, it may be, recalled, had come under Arab rule by 642. The evidence, suggests that unlike what was thought earlier, the use of, papyrus for writing was not entirely abandoned in early, medieval Europe. According to Lopez long-term factors (which, we have discussed in chapter ten) were responsible for the, decline of long-distance trade in general and Mediterranean, trade in particular., What is undeniable is that the shift away from the, Mediterranean and the slackening of trade opened up new, possibilities for those areas which were economically selfsufficient. The regions which had not been fully drawn into, the commercial network of the Mediterranean were able to, escape the adverse consequences of the decline of longdistance, trade. Northern France was one such area. It had vibrant local, economic units which benefited from the relative stability, ushered in by the Carolingian rulers. By the end of the ninth, century the feudal mode of production was well-entrenched, in the Prankish territories. Just as Italy had been the nucleus, of ancient Roman civilization, France became the nucleus of, early medieval European civilization., Before we outline the salient features of the feudal, economy it would be worthwhile to make some general, observations: Feudalism was marked by low level of, urbanization and virtual absence of monetary exchange., Money was in short supply. Though trade was not nonexistent,, its scope was limited. Towns, markets and commodity, production were poorly developed (commodity productio_n, is production of goods for exchange, i.e. commodities are
Page 467 :
Feudalism in Medieval Europe I 441, , products which are not meant for simple consumption but are, exchanged for money or for other commodities). Handicraft, production for the market was a marginal activity. The' feudal, economy was overwhelmingly agrarian, even more so than, the slave social formation. The feudal aristocracy derived its, wealth primarily from land and its produce. The hierarchical, political structure of feudalism was a reflection of hierarchical, rights in land. All those who were part of this structure shared, the agrarian surplus in accordance with their position within, the hierarchy., The agrarian economy was dominated by landed estates, of the feudal lords. The typical landed estate of medieval, Europe was the manor or seigneurie. A manor was the sum, total of all the land in a locality over which the lord had superior, rights. Some of this land, or all of it, would have been received, by him as a fief from his overlord. Here we are talking of, how the lord exploited the land under his control, irrespective, of what proportion of it was a fief. The manor was an estate, which had two separate, but closely linked, components. One, portion of the estate would be : under the direct management, of the lord. The rest of the estate would comprise peasant, holdings. The portion of the estate which was managed directly, by the lord was known as demesne. Production on the, demesne was carried out partly by household serfs of the, lord, who were often just slaves, and partly by the peasants, who had been given small plots on the remaining portion of, the manor. The peasants were regarded as tenants of the lord's, manor, and being tenants they had to give something to the ·, lord in return for the right to occupy their respective plots., The peasants were required to pay rent in the form of labour, services (labour services constituted feudal rent). Apart from, cultivating their own holdings, they had to perform labour, for the lord. Labour services were a peculiar form of rent., The labour services which the peasants had to render for the, lord mainly involved working on the demesne for a certain, number of days in a week. These were dependent peasants, (descended from coloni, former slaves, and depressed
Page 468 :
442, , I, , Early Social Formations, , Germanic peasants), who had no choice but to do whatever, the lord demanded of them. The dependent peasants of, medieval Europe, called serfs' were tied to the soil and were, completely subject to the authority of the lord. Incidentally,, the term 'serf is derived from the Latin servus, the word, commonly used for slaves in the 'Roman empire, which, indicates that initially the status of the serf was not very, different from that of the slave., This pattern of production had first emerged with the, break-up of the latifundia in the later Roman empire when, slaves began to be settled on individual plots within large, estates. Due to the scarcity of slave-labour, latifundists had, found it more fruitful to retain only a small portion of the, estate to be managed directly by themselves. The portion of, the estate directly managed by the lord was surrounded by, the plots of land managed by former slaves who were still, liable to work for their master. Simultaneously, as the status, of more and more free peasants living in the vicinity of the, estate was depressed by powerful landowners, they too were, forced to work for the lord. These dependent peasants added, to the lord's supply of labour. All the dependent peasants,, · whether coloni or former slaves and their descendants, who, were tied in this manner t0 the lord's portion of the estate,, became an undifferentiated category-serfs-by the early, medieval period. There were, however, two vital differences, now. Firstly, many of the. landed estates had passed into the, hands of Germanic chiefs who had at their disposal peasants, from their own tribes or clans. Most of these peasants also, became serfs. Secondly,· the feudal lords had been formally, granted political and judicial· authority which increased their, coercive -capacity. The specificity of serfdom as an institution, lay in the coercion which the lord could now exercise over, dependent peasants or serfs., ··, It should not be thought that slavery did not exist in, medieval Europe. On the contrary there is enough evidence, to show that at the beginning of the middle ages there· was a, revival of slavery in some areas. Pierre Dockes has explored
Page 469 :
Feudalism in Medieval Europe, , I, , 443, , the phenomenon of medieval European slavery in his Medieval, Slavery and Liberation. In view of the acute shortage of labour, in the early medieval period feudal lords did not completely, abandon slavery as an option. Slave-labour was quite, widespread, especially on the demesnes. It has been estimated, that as much one-fifth of the total agricultural workforce in, Carolingian France consisted of slaves. The continuous warfare, of the eighth and ninth centuries replenished the supply of, slaves. Charlemagne's numerous campaigns, many of which, were directed against Germanic tribes, resulted in large-scale, enslavement of war captives thereby substantially augmenting, the slave workforce. This is not to suggest that slavery had, regained its former place in agricultural production. The, economic organization of the manor was radically different, from that of the ancient latifundia., The manor was an integrated economic unit. Each manor, was more or less self-sufficient since almost all articles of, everyday use were produced and consumed on it. This is, understandable when we remember that the manor operated, within a system in which there was hardly any exchange. As, we have noted, for the purpose of production the manor was, divided into two distinct parts, i) the demesne and ii), tenements of dependent peasants. The serfs occupied the, tenements and paid various dues to the lord. They cultivated, their holdings with their own labour and the labour of their, families. The peasant family was both a social and an economic, unit. In the early medieval period the arrangement which the, lords found most suitable for realizing dues was to make the, serfs work on their demesnes for a few days in a week (usually, three days). The serfs had to put in additional labour at those, times during an agricultural season when the demand for, labour increased (e.g. for ploughing, harvesting, threshing, etc.). This strategy provided the lord with a secure supply of, labour for the demesne., We might ask as to why the lord should have been, interested in having a portion of the estate under his direct, management. One reason for this was that there were not
Page 470 :
~4, , I, , Early Social Formations, , enough peasants/ serfs in relation to the total land that was, available. The lord could not have converted the entire estate, into small plots because it was impossible to find sufficient, dependent tenants (there were some rare exceptions to this, broad trend). The other reason was that the holdings of the, serfs were marked by low levels of productivity. This reduced, the volume of surplus available to the lords. They had to, therefore intervene directly by organizing production on the, demesne. The demesne had three advantages. First, the most, fertile and best located areas in the estate were reserved for, the demesne. Second, the lord had the means, which serfs, lacked, to invest in better agricultural techniques. At the, beginning of the feudal era demesnes played a key role in the, dissemination of new technology and improved methods., Thirdly, the lord .could exercise a high degree of coercion to, mobilize labour for the demesne. The labour services of the, serfs were upplemented by the labour of the lord's household, servants and slaves. With these advantages feudal lords could, maintain higher levels of productivity on their demesnes and, a large surplus accrued to them. On the other hand the, possibility of direct management of the entire estate was ruled, out both due to the shortage of labour and the need to give to, the dependent peasants a stake in production by allowing them, to have their own holdings (there were some exceptional cases, where the entire estate was managed directly). The success of, the whole arrangement depended upon striking the right, balance between demesne farming ; and peasant cultivation of, the estate., The manor was not only an economic unit, it was an, administrative unit as well. The authority of the lord was, supreme and all those who inhabited the manor were his, subjects. The lord laid down the law of the manor. The comm.on, people in the countryside were known by the respective, manors to which they belonged and not by the villages in, which they resided. The village did not figure as a separate, entity in the feudaf administrative and. socio-economic, structure. The rise of manors undermined the cohesiveness of
Page 471 :
Feudalism in Medieval Europe I 445, , the village. A given village was often split up among two or, more adjoining manors. Several villages might lie within the, jurisdiction of a single manor. These could have been entire, villages or else segments of different villages. There was no, fixed rule in the matter. In other words there was no one.:toone correspondence between the boundaries of a village and, the boundaries of manor. Moreover, mariors were, reconstituted from time to time when fiefs were granted. This, led to further subdivision of villages. Whenever land was, transferred the serfs who were attached to it were also, transferred along with it so that the population of a village, would be distributed among several manors. If a village had, been in existence for a long time the ties among villagers would, tend to be stronger. These ties promoted village-level, solidarity which in the later medieval perfod became a, significant factor in the struggle against serfdom., The exploitation of the serf by the lord was the dominant, surplus extraction relationship of the feudal social formation., Surplus was extracted from the serfs by various means. In the, early feudal period unpaid labour services demanded by the, lord were the heaviest burden that the serf had to bear. In, France these unpaid labour services were referred to as corvee, (corvee). Corvee included the agricultural work which the serf, had to do on the demesne as well as a variety of other tasks, involving heavy labour, ranging from construction work to, hewing or cutting of firewood. Besides, the serf had to pay, certain dues in kind. Some of these were extracted directly, while others were taken indirectly. Of the dues that were, extracted directly the most important was the taille (tallage)., Taille was. one of the many dues which the peasants had to, pay for the protection provided by the lord. It was imposed, arbitrarily whenever the lord wanted more resources. In a, sense it amounted to plundering the serfs and divesting them, of their meagre savings. Subsequently there were attempts to, regularize the taille and in the later medieval period it became, one of the major direct taxes collected by the French state. It, was abolished after the French Revolution.
Page 472 :
4.46, , I Early Social Formations, , Among other dues which were appropriated directly,, mention may be made of the tithe. The tithe was essentially a, tax that was payable to the church, but in the early medieval, period feudal lords managed to take away a large share of it., The concept of the tithe (literally, 'one-tenth') goes back to, the remote period when Christianity was still confined to, Palestine. At this time it was meant to be a voluntary, contribution for religious and charitable purposes. With the, spread of Christianity in the west the tithe became a regular, tax levied by the church (the ide~ of collecting tithe was never, fully established in the east). All Christians had to pay this tax, which theoretically amounted to one-tenth of their entire, inco,me. Whereas earlier the collection of tithe depended upon, the ability of the church in a particular area to demand it,, under the Carolingians the state began to enforce the tax, strictly. This was one way of compensating the church for the, property which was taken from it in the eighth century., Subsequently the church received back some of this property, in the form of gifts but the tithe was not abandoned. The, church, it needs to be emphasized, was one of the biggest, landowners of medieval Europe. It continued to insist upon, the payment of tithe wherever the higher clergy or monasteries, acted as feudal lords. Elsewhere too it demanded the tithe as, a religious tax and had the backing of the state for this., Nevertheless, if the local clergy was not in a position to assert, itself the tithe went to the lord. The tussle over the sharing of, the tithe was a constant feature of medieval European society., In addition to the abovementioned dues which were directly, extracted from dependent peasants, there were a series of, earnings which accrued to feudal lords indirectly. These were, an obvious manifestation of their extra-economic power. The, manor, being a self-sufficient economic unit, had facilities for, processing raw materials for everyday use. There were, workshops, smithies (workshops for iron objects), flour mills,, ovens and winepresses (machines for extracting juice from, grapes for making wine). These were all owned by the lord, of the manor. The peasants were compelled to make use of
Page 473 :
Feudalism in Medieval Europe I 447, , these facilities. They were not permitted to go anywhere else., For instance all their wheat had to be brought ·to the lord.' s, flour mill for grinding. The charges which peasants had to, pay were fixed arbitrarily by the lord. These privileges or, exclusive rights of the lord were called banalites (banaliles) or, monopolies., To sum up: the manorial system was based upon the lordserf surplus extraction relationship. In the early medieval, period the main forms of surplus extraction on the manor were, corvee, taille, tithe and banalites. Together they accounted for, the bulk of the surplus appropriated by the ruling class and, were the real source of its wealth., The different types of feudal landed property that we have, discussed so far, whether fief or peasant tenement, had one, thing in common. They all carried with them some kind of, obligation. The fief was granted on the condition that the, holder will render military service, while the peasant tenement, was linked to compulsory labour services and payment of, various dues in kind. However there was at least one type of, landed property in the medieval period which was free of, any obligations. This category of landed,= property was known, as allod. The allod was a product of Germanic 11tribal society., The word itself is of Germanic origin. In the tourse of the, transition from tribal to class society, land w);tlch had been, under the collective control of the tribe I clan f9r cultivation, and cattle-rearing was distributed on a semi-pefmanent basis, to individual families. This became the allod/of the family., Each family had its own allod. The allod ciuld be loosely, fenced and functioned as an economic unit/The tribal allod, referred not only to the enclosed land but included the family, and its dependents (i.e. all those who performed labour on, the land), cattle, and the dwelling-place., Though the allod was initially a peculiar form of tribal, property, over a period of time it became the private property, of the family which was settled on it. The members of the, family and their descendants held the land in full ownership., With growing class differentiation and acquisition of vast
Page 474 :
448, , I Early Social Formations, , landed estates by the Germanic warrior aristocracy after, settling down in Roman territories, some of the allods, increased in size. Alongside these allodial estates a large, number of small- and medium-sized allods too continued to, exist. The small- and medium-sized allods were holdings of, free peasants. By definition these peasants, and hence the land, they possessed, were not subject to any services. In the, medieval period the term allod was used for any property,, Germanic or otherwise, that fulfilled these criteria., ·, Theoretically there was a clear demarcation between, peasant allods and peasant tenements but in actual practice it, was unlikely that small or medium free peasants could resist, demands made on them by powerful feudal lords who, dominated their neighbourhood. As manors .progressively, tightened their grip over the countryside it became more and, more difficult for free peasants to retain their allods. The status, of free peasants was depressed and their allodial holdings were, absorbed by manors. The decline of the free peasantry as a, class was accompanied by the decline of small- and mediumsized allods. Peasant allods survived only in marginal areas., The case of allodial estates was quite different. Here we, are speaking of what the phenomenon of allodial property, implied at the level of the aristocracy. The allod of a feudal lord, was very distinct from his fief (it is unnecessary to point out, that peasants did not have fiefs). The fief was a grant received, by a vassal from his overlord on condition of military service,, whereas the allod was a personal possession which involved, no such obligation. The rights which a lord had in his fief, were limited; the rights which a lord had in his allod were, extensive. We might repeat here that a manor consisted of, different types of holdings which a lord possessed (allod, fief,, etc.). It was by adding fiefs to their allods that feudal lords, increased their resources. Further, it would not have been, easy for a lord to get a fief if he did not have some land of his, own. This might be an allodial estate or land which had been, seized from peasants. It is inconceivable that a person would, have been accepted as a vassal without having some resources
Page 475 :
Feudalism in Medieval Europe, , I, , 449, , of his own. After all, ordinary peasants did not become vassals, and therefore did not receive fiefs. Having an allodial estat~, improved the chances of getting a fief. By combining the fief, with his allodial holding a lord could recruit more troops and, also grant land to vassals of his own. Thus, eventhough allods, remained important at the level of the aristocracy, the character, of allodial estates underwent a change whenever a ,lord, granted a part of his allod to a vassal as a fief., , The early middle ages were a period of agricultural expansion, in the northern parts of western Europe. The prolonged crisis, in the slave mode of production, the decline of the Roman, empire, and the Germanic invasions had set in motion longterm processes which led to the emergence of feudalism. The, rise of feudalism created favourable conditions for the revival, of the economy, especially in northern France. This economic, revival marked -the culmination of changes in the pattern of, production-changes which had been taking place in the two, centuries preceding Carolingian ascendancy. The vitality of, the feudal mode of production was the result not only of, changes in relations of production (i.e. the replacement of, relations of production which had been prevalent in the slave, social formation of Greco-Roman antiquity by feudal relations, of production), but was also the product of significant, improvements in agricultural techniques., Several historians have pointed out that generally speaking, the feudal mode of production in Europe did not have a high, level of technology. Maurice Dobb, for instance, noted in his, classic Studies in the Development of Capitalism that the feudal, economy was marked by backward techniques which were, reflected in low productivity. This might be true when we, make an overall assessment of the state of agriculture in, medieval Europe, but subsequent research has shown that this, picture needs to be modified., Dobb's position has been questioned by scholars who have
Page 476 :
450, , I Early Social Formations, , drawn attention to the technological progress which occurred, in the early medieval period. We have to distinguish between, , the first phase of feudalism when a number of technical, innovations were introduced and the later phase of stagnation., Some of these innovations and their dissemination may be, dated to the seventh and eighth centuries. We also need to, distinguish between the low level of techniques on peasant, holdings and the relatively superior technology on the, demesne. The lord could afford better, and more expensive, techniques, whereas the peasant/· serf could not. Consequently, higher yields could be obtained on the demesne. Technology, was of course not the only reason for this. Access to the unpaid, labour of dependent peasants was an added advantage for, the lord. However, in the seventh and eighth centuries big, landowners did not have sufficient dependent peasants at their, disposai. Labour was in short supply. This gave them the, incentive to go in for new techniques to increase productivity., Once the improved methods of cultivation had demonstrated, their efficacy they helped to transform European agriculture, through their widespread application. This was all the more, so because the soils of northern Europe could not have been, efficiently exploited with the older technology., North-western Europe, where the most significant, developments. of early medieval agriculture were initially, concentrated, is an immense and fertile plaj,n. The ecology of, this region is so different from that of the Mediterranean zone, that agricultural techniques which were traditionally used in, the Greco-Roman world were not suitable for the north. GrecoRoman methods had evolved under Mediterranean condifa;ms., They were appropriate for light and dry soils. In north-western, Europe on the contrary the soil was heavy and moist. Unlike, the south where every effort had to be made to retain water,, in the north excess water had to be drained immediately for, otherwise the soil would become more wet and sticky., Moreover, northern Europe was an area with harsh winters, and mild summers whereas the Mediterranean had a more, temperate climate. In Greece and Italy (and several parts of
Page 477 :
Feudalism in Medieval Europe I 451, , West Asia) digging sticks, hoes, spades and scratch ploughs, had sufficed for breaking the soil. These basic implements of, Mediterranean farming were not of much use for handling, the soil of the northern plains. It has been suggested that in, antiquity northern Gaul lagged behind the core area of the, Roman empire precisely because the technology required for, its economic development was not available. This situation, began to change in the seventh and eighth centuries. The, introduction of a new type of plough, the heavy wheeled, plough, was the most outstanding technological breakthrough, in the agrarian sector during this period., Although rudimentary ploughs had been known since the, advent of the bronze age in West Asia, for a long time more, primitive tools such as digging sticks and hoes were the, mainstay of Mediterranean agriculture. The hoe is an, implement with an elongated inward curving blade (usually, of metal) attached to a wooden handle. The soil could be turned, by hitting against and digging up the earth with the sharp, edge of the blade. Greek farmers mainly practiced hoe, cultivation. The hoe suited their light and dry soils and small, fields. There are reference·s to simple wooden ploughs in, Homer and Hesiod which suggests that Greeks were already, familiar with this tool in the later.' dark ages', but they normally, preferred the hoe. The Romans too largely relied on the hoe, since the soils of Italy, southern Gaul and Mediterranean Spain, were also light and dry. Nevertheless given the greater extent, and ecological diversity of the Roman empire the range of, implements used for cultivation was much wider. Hoes were, supplemented by spades and light ploughs. The spade is a, spoon-shaped tool which consists of a small, slightly curved,, metal plate attached to a long handle. It serves to scoop out, the soil thereby loosening and turning it. A modified type of, spade known as bipalium was introduced into Italy in Roman, times. The bipalium consisted of foot-rests so that the spade, could be pushed into the soil more forcefully with the pressure, of the foot. This spade gradually replaced the hoe in many, areas;
Page 478 :
452, , I Early Social Formations, , The Romans seem to have used ploughs more extensively, than the Greeks. The bigger size of fields in the west and the, fact that big landowners in the Roman empire were relatively, more affluent (hoes and spades are inexpensive, whereas, ploughs are costly) made possible the rapid spread of plough, cultivation. Ploughing is a more efficient way of turning the, soil. Hoes and spades involve a striking motion at a particular, point. The motion has to be repeated over and over again at, numerous points in a field, which is both time consuming and, labour intensive. Moreover it is difficult to turn the soil, uniformly throughout the field with hoes and spades. The, plough breaks the soil by moving a blade in a straight line, along the soil. This produces a series of long continuous cuts, or grooves (furrows) in a field. The soil is thus broken up and, turned more comprehensively., The traditional Roman plough was the aratrum. This was a, light-weight scratch plough consisting principally of a long, wooden beam and an L-shaped cutting device (the, construction of the aratrum differs considerably from that of, the traditional Indian light plough). The vertical portion of, the L-shaped cutting device or mouldboard was attached to, one end of the beam and served as a handle for the plough,, while the horizontal part moved along the soil. The horizontal, part was the actual blade, or ploughshare, which cut the earth., The ploughshare was made of iron. The other end of the beam, was linked to draught animals for pulling the plough. The, Roman aratrum was drawn by two oxen., The aratrum could not have been applied in its existing, form to the heavy and rich soils of northern Europe. Here, a heavier plough with a more powerful ploughshare was, required. Pulling a heavy plough, especially when the soil, was stiff, was a difficult task. The addition of wheels to the, plough provided a solution to this problem. Eventually a, heavy wheeled plough, known as charrue, superseded the, Roman aratrum in the north. Wheels were the most, distinctive feature of this plough. The term charrue is, derived from the Celtic word carruca which referred to a
Page 479 :
Feudalism in Medieval Europe I 453, , type of wagon with two wheels. I11.i!ially the hJO words, were synonymous., The origins and dissemination of the charrue are rather, obscure. Historians broadly agree that the basic concept of, a wheeled plough had appeared as early as the sixth century., According to Lynn White there is evidence to suggest that, some Slavic communities were using such a plough at this, date. However it took a long time for the standard medieval, charrue to acquire all its features and even longer for it to, become the universal tool for turning the heavy soils of the, northern plains. The charrue was firmly established in, northern France by the tenth century. The evolution of the, charrue went through a number of stages, during th~ course, of which some of the features of the Roman- aratrum were, incorporated into it. The typical ploughshaie of the aratrum, was modified to suit the requirements of the north. A, double handle was added to the mouldboard so that the, plough could be operated with both hands. Finally, a sharp, knife-like blade, called coulter, was placed on the beam in, front of the mouldboard to make a preliminary incision in, the ground before the ploughshare turned it. In its complete, form the charrue was a very complex implement. It had a, beam with a mouldboard at one end of it. The mouldboard, had two handles and a heavy ploughshare made of iron. A, pair of wheels was placed in front of the mouldboard. Apart, from facilitating the movement of the plough, wheels made, the entire apparatus more stable. Between the mouldboard, and the wheels was the coulter which cut the soil ahead of, the ploughshare. The charrue represented a major, achievement and revolutionized European agriculture. The, actual details of the charrue varied from place to place but, the overall design was similar. In some areas of Europe, where the _soil was drier a wheelless plough called araire, was used., Since the charrue had much ~ore weight than the aratrum, it could not be pulled by just two oxen. At least six to eight, oxen were needed for drawing the charrue. This was both due
Page 480 :
454, , I Early Social Formations, , to the weight of the plough and the heaviness of the soil., Possessing so many draught animals was a very expensive, proposition and could have become an obstacle to the adoption, of the charrue on a mass scale. The peasantry found a way out, of this dilemma by combining their oxen. In any case the, holdings of peasants were so small that six to eight oxen could, not have been fully utilized on an individual basis. A few, peasants would get together and contribute their resources, to form a team of oxen. The team would plough the respective, fields of the peasants by rotation., Another consequence of the use of the charrue was that it, produced fields with long straight furrows. The aratrum often, necessitated cross-ploughing, i.e. ploughing lengthwise and, breadthwise, because the soil could not be sufficiently, loosened by just ploughing·in one direction. This pattern of, ploughing was reflected in the squarish shape of fields in, southern Europe. On the other hand the thrust of the charrue, was powerful enough to obtain deep furrows without having, to resort to cross-ploughing. Ploughing in one direction was, adequate for breaking the soil. With the charrue it was, preferable to have fields laid out in long rectangular strips, rather than in squares. It was more convenient to make the, six or eight oxen, with their heavy plough, cover a longer, distance lengthwise instead of having them turn around each, time they had moved a short distance (as would have, happened if the field was square)., The change in the shape of the fields in turn had its own, implications. In the south the peasants had been accustomed, to enclosing their fields by fencing them. But it was impractical, to enclose fields laid out in long strips for the simple reason, that they had a very narrow width. Adjacent fields would lie, very close to one another lengthwise (because they all had, narrow widths) but would be separated by extremely long, fences. Two long fences on either side made a field, unnecessarily cluttered and left little space for manouvering, along the breadth. Peasants I therefore dispensed with fencing, altogether. In place of individual fences they pooled all their
Page 481 :
Feudalism in Medieval Europe I 4.55, , holdings and then divided the entire land into two separate, sets of unenclosed or open fields. One lot would be taken up, for cultivation at a given time, while the other lot would be, left fallow to regain its fertility. There might be a loose fence, around the entire lot which was being cultivated to prevent, animals from damaging the crop., In a situation where combined teams of oxen had to be, regularly moved from one ·field to another, open fields were, a great convenience. An additional advantage of this system, was that the set ofopen fields which was left fallow . benefited, from -the manure provided by droppings of animals (cattle,, sheep etc.). The animals of the peasants now moved about, freely on the large unenclosed fallow land. All arrangements, pertaining to the pooling of oxen and land were made among, peasants. At times the relationships cut across the respective, manors to which the peasants belonged. What mattered more, at this level were ties of the village. In this context White, observes: 'The heavy plough of northern Europe reduced, individualism but built among the peasants a strong system, of self-government for their own affairs'. Naturally these, arrangements strengthened village-level solidarity without, which it would not have been possible for the peasants to put, up any resistance to feudal oppression., The two-field rotation, in which one part of the field (or, one cluster of fields) was taken up for cultivation while the, other part was left fallow, was gradually replaced in many, places by a three-field rotation in the northern plains., Cultivation in the south was based on the two-field system, and initially this pattern was duplicated in the northern areas., The spread ofthe heavy plough combined with the clini.atic, conditions of the north necessitated certain adjustments for, optimum utilization of the soil, leading to the rise of the, three-field system. Under this system a field or group of, fields was divided into three instead of two parts. One part, was taken up for cultivating autumn crops, the second part, for spring crops and the third was left fallow. In the south, the main sowing season was autumn. Crops sown in autumn
Page 482 :
456, , I Early Social Formations, , had the benefit of winter rainfall. In the north too autumn, was the season for sowing the major cereal crops such as, wheat, barley and rye. Northern Europe, unlike the, Mediterranean region, receives a lot of rainfall during, summer as well. Hence it was possible to plant an additional, crop during spring. The spring crop was nurtured by summer, rains. One part of the field was set aside for spring sowing., The most important spring crops were oats, beans and peas., The three-field syste.m had several advantages. First, beans, and peas greatly enriched the soil by adding much-required, nitrogen to it. Second, the peasants now had an additional, crop to fall back upon in case of drought or crop failure., Third, the availability of oats, a cereal with high nutrition, value both for human beings and for horses, made it easier, to use horses as draught animals. The two-field system was, never abandoned completely. The two patterns of rotation, coexisted, particularly since three-field rotation could not, be practiced on land with low fertility., We have already seen how the introduction of the stirrup, allowed horses to be used more effectively in warfare. few, other innovations related to the horse were also adopted in, early medieval Europe. These innovations helped to realize, the full potential of the horse .as a draught animal. The horse, is capable of drawing a huge burden while simultaneously, moving at a high speed. In Greco-Roman antiquity the ox was, the foremost draught animal. As a result, the existing, equipment for attaching loads to animals was designed for, oxen. This equipment primarily consisted of a yoke placed on, the neck of the animal. The object to be pulled was then linked, to the yoke. This type of harness was transferred to the horse,, but found unsuitable. If too much weight is placed across the, neck of a horse it cannot move fast or pull a heavy w:eight., Therefore the yoke as well as the object to be pulled had to be, relatively light. There was no point in using horses if they, could only draw light-weight objects. A radically different, harness was required for the horse if it had to pull heavier, weights., , a
Page 483 :
Feudalism in Medieval Europe I 457, , By the beginning of the ninth century a new type of harness, which took into account the specific anatomical features of, the horse was being used in the Carolingian empire. The yoke, was substituted by a rigid collar placed around the neck of, the horse, just above its shoulders. This shifted the weight 0£, the object being pulled from the neck to the shoulder. The, horse could now draw heavier objects with much greater force, and at a higher speed. The rigid collar and a few other, improvements in the harness were instrumental in establishing, the superiority of the horse as a draught animal. Horses are, much more efficient than oxen in terms of the weight they can, draw and the speed with which they can work. Once the, appropriate technique for harnessing the energy of the horse, was available, it took the place of oxen as a draught animal, for drawing the heavy plough. We have referred above to the, dissemination of nailed horse-shoes which by protecting the, delicate hoofs of the horse helped them to perform better., Last, but not least, the cultivation of oats provided sufficient, nourishment for horses at a low cost. Horses are more, expensive to feed than oxen, one of the reasons being that, horses need a lot of grain. Oats were discovered to be the, ideal grain for them. The production of oats under the threefield system went hand in hand with the widespread use of, the horse in the rural economy of western Europe., , IV, The feudal system was not a static structure, but had its own, dynamics of change. Economic historians have identified three, main phases of its development. The first phase which lasted, from c. 900 to 1200 saw the emergence, expansion and climax, of feudalism. The tenth to the thirteenth centuries may be, regarded as the classical age of western European feudalism., The second phase, from c. 1200 to the 1320s was a period of, significant changes in the feudal economy. Many of the, characteristics of the first phase were altered arid new trends, appeared. These trends (which we will discuss below) led to
Page 484 :
45S, , I, , Early Social Formations, , the third phase which began around the 1320s and continued, till the end of the fourteenth century. This phase was marked, by a prolonged crisis in the feudal system. We have examined, some of the features of feudalism as they had evolved by the, beginrung of the tenth century. The developments of the eighth, and ninth centuries had prepared the ground for the emergence, of feudalism in. the tenth century. During the course of this, century the feudal system of production acquired definite, shape. As the system became more stable, agricultural output, increased both due to higher productivity and extension of, cultivation. The economy was now capable of generating, sufficient resources to support a larger population. This was, reflected in the growth of population from the mid-tenth, century onwards. Moreover, higher yields placed a larger, surplus in the hands of the feudal lords thereby giving them a, stake in the perpetuation of the new system., The feudal economy began to expand in the eleventh, century and continued to do so throughout the twelfth. The, feudal mode of production displaced other modes in those, areas of France, northern Italy and central Europe which were, not yet feudalized. The pace at which the transition to, feudalism occurred in Europe varied from region to region., While the transition had already taken place in northern France, by the end of the ninth century, feudal relations of production, became dominant in other parts of western Europe somewhat, later at various points of time in the tenth and eleventh, centuries. By the twelfth century the feudal. mode of, production had made inroads into eastern Europe-starting, with Germany. The extension of cultivation in Germany was, a long-drawn process. It is pertinent to note that in c. 500 no, more than 2 per cent of the total area of Germany was under, cultivation. The feudal aristocracy took the initiative to colonize, land in Germany, especially in the zone lying east of the river, Elbe. Feudal relations began to appear in eastern Germany, around the twelfth century and serfdom of a very ruthless, type formed the basis of colonization and agricultural, settlement in these territories. The expansion of the feudal
Page 485 :
Feudalism in Medieval Europe, , I, , 459, , economy helped to sustain a growing population. The, European population was steadily rising throughout the, eleventh and twelfth centuries., The initial growth potential of the feudal economy had, been exhausted by the end of the twelfth century. The new, trends which became visible in the thirteenth century led to a, series of changes within the system. These changes brought, to the fore the inherent problems of the system and eventually, triggered a crisis which assumed serious proportions in the, first quarter of the fourteenth century. Research on the, economic history of medieval Europe has established that, population figures reveal a certain demographic pattern. There, was a cycle of agricultural growth, sizeable increase in, population, food shortages, famines, demographic crisis,, decline of population equilibrium and a repetition of the cycle., There were ai least two such cycles in western Europe betwe.en, the ninth and seventeenth centuries. The first cycle started, with the very slow rise of population in the mid-ninth century., Between 850 and 950 population was either static or increasing, very gradually. Then from the eleventh century it began to, grow very rapidly till it reached a peak during the first half of, the fourteenth century. It has been estimated that the, population of the whole of Europe in c. 1000 was 38.5 million, and that by c. 1340 this figure had jumped to 73.5 million. The, rate of growth was even more remarkable in the case of, western Europe where the population rose from 20 million to, 54 million in the same period. Subsequently there was a sharp, decline in population in the latter half of the fourteenth century., Though there was a marginal recovery in the first decades of, the fifteenth century, the population of the whole of Europe, in 1450 was about 50 million-considerably lower than what, it was in 1340. Another cycle began with population growth, from the end of the fifteenth century. This cycle continued up, to the seventeenth century when there was yet another, demographic collapse., Demographic changes are not isolated phenomena. They, have to be seen as part of a much larger picture. The end of
Page 486 :
460, , I Early Social Formations, , large-scale tribal invasions/ migrations by the tenth century, as well as the arrangements for providing security which, were built into feudalism, ensured that everyday life was, not disrupted as frequently and for such long durations as, in the centuries following the collapse of the Roman empire., Although the factors underlying demographic changes are, always very complex, the comparatively peaceful conditions, which prevailed in tenth century Europe was one of the, factors which stimulated population growth in the first phase, of feudalism. Technological changes and the reorganization, of production helped.in the revival of the agrarian economy, without which this growing population could not have been, fed., The increase in population solved the problem of labour., There had been an acute shortage' of labour right since late, antiquity. It was this shortage that had necessitated the, reorganization of production. The demesne, as we have seen,, was a critical component of the new pattern of production, that emerged in western Europe. The demesne with its, dependent labour, improved techniques, more fertile soil and, bigger investments-all of which became possible due to the, political and economic status of the lord and his direct, involvement in the productive process-was central to the, revival of the economy. In the first phase feudalism unpaid labour, services performed for the lords of his demesne "by dependent peasants, constituted the main source of surplus extraction by the feudal ruling, class. The higher productivity on the demesne allowed the, lords to maximize production and extraction of surplus and, thereby have a large volume of 'surplus to sustain their, luxurious lifestyles., Th:i,s situation began to change with the increase in, population. Sustained population growth placed more labour, at the disposal of the lords. The rise in population led to a, corresponding increase in the number of peasant tenements, as newcomers made clearings and extended cultivation. But, these were rarely free peasants. They were subject to the, authority of some lord. As more dependent peasants became
Page 487 :
Feudalism in Medieval Europe I 461, , subject to individual lords there was an increase in the volume, of surplus available to the feudal aristocracy. All dependent, peasants had to pay various feudal dues., Once the shortage of labour had been overcome by the, eleventh and twelfth centuries the lords were no longer, inclined to invest in improved techniques. After c. 1000 the, feudal economy became technologically stagnant. It was easier, for lords to maintain or increase the level of surplus accruing, to them by coercing a larger number of peasants to pay feudal, dues. There were now more hands for work on the demesne., However there was no point in engaging more and more, peasants on the demesne. There was a limit to the amount of, labour which could be employed productively on the total, land given to demesne farming. Consequently, instead of, taking feudal rent in the form of labour services the lords, began to demand dues either in kind (a portion of the produce), or money., Marc Bloch has stressed that trade and monetary exchange, were never entirely absent from the feudal economy. The selfsufficient feudal economy coexisted with a. tiny monetized, sector. Without some amount of monetary exchange, however, restricted it might have been, the lords would not have been, able to exchange their surplus for many of the luxuries that, they consumed. Even ordinary peasants bought and sold goods, in local markets or at village fairs. The money that came into, the hands of the peasants added to their petty savings which, they might keep for some particular occasion or emergency., The lords had always used their coercive power to take away, these petty monetary savings from the peasants by various, means (fines, taille, etc.). With population increase in the, eleventh and twelfth centuries there was an attempt to, regularly impose money-rent. The shift from labour services, to dues payable in money was facilitated by the growth of, urban centres and trade by the twelfth centu~y. The gradual, monetization of the economy gave an impetw.s to commodity, production (i.e. production for the market). There was one, other way in which money entered the rural economy. Some
Page 488 :
462., , I Early Social Formations, , of those who toiled on the demesne were paid in wages for, their work. In order to fully understand this development we, have to look at the changes which were taking place in the, organization of production on the manor., The demographic expansion of the twelfth and thirteenth, centuries brought about an increase in the size of the rural, workforce. All this labour could not be employed gainfully, on small peasant holdings. Further, as land became scarce a, proportion of the additional rural population was rendered, landless. In many cases the fragmentation of holdings due to, division of land among male children of peasant families, created an excess of labour. Those who possessed very small, tenements and/ or had holdings with poor quality soil were, forced to supplement their earnings by working elsewhere., Landless agricultural workers and small peasants with, insufficient resources were hired by lords and big peasants., They usually received wages in money. These wages were, used to buy food and other necessities. Thus, monetary, exchange in the countryside became more frequent and, encompassed a wider range of economic activities. On the, demesne itself two parallel processes were at work. First, the, lords no longer found it necessary to directly manage a portion, of the estate (i.e. the demesne). They preferred to split the, demesne into small holdings and rent these out to peasants,, at times retaining a little bit of land (obviously very fertile, land) to be managed directly by themselves. Production on, the demesne became increasingly marginal. Second, they now, tended to demand feudal rent in money or in kind. The lords, had little use for labour services because of the overall, reduction in the size of their demesnes and the possibility of, hiring workers to cultivate the land retained by them. In other, words the monetization of the economy was accompanied and, reinforced by the decline of demesne farming, the commutation, of labour services to money dues for purposes of realizing, feudal rent, and the emergence of a class of wage-earners in, rural society., The emergence of a class of wage-earners was an indication
Page 489 :
Feudalism in Medieval Europe, , I, , 463, , of growing class differentiation within the peasantry. There, was already some differentiation prior to this, both in terms, of size of holdings (there were small, medium and a handful, of big peasants) and in terms of the dues which the peasants, had to pay (we should remember that peasant allods had not, entirely disappeared), but the disparities among various strata, of the peasantry were much greater now. At one end of the, scale were the relatively more affluent peasants who had, benefited from monetization of the economy and increase of, population. The better-off peasants had larger holdings,, possessed their own ploughs and oxen/horses, engaged some, hired labour for seasonal work, and were able to dispose off, a portion of their produce in the market. At the other end, were the landless agricultural workers, many of whom, happened to be impoverished peasants. In between were the, small and medium peasants who were subject to varying, degrees of coercion by feudal lords. This coercion ranged from, the most degraded forms of serfdom which were, indistinguishable from slavery, to the payment of minor money, dues. While sqme small and medium peasants had very light, exactions imposed on them there were others whose serf status, wa~ virtually the same as that of slaves. In the thirteenth, ~entury the condition of the bulk of the peasantry deteriorated, further. Population growth had initially been a favourable, factor for the expansion of the agrarian economy since more, land could be brought under cultivation with additional labour., This meant more production. Part of this increased production, was absorbed by the larger population while part of it was, appropriated by the lords. The scarcity of land in relation to, labour placed the lords in an even more advantageous position, than earlier. They could now demand higher rent. In this way, they took away a considerable proportion of the increased, output. However, a stage was soon reached beyond which, only less fertile, or marginal, land could be occupied. Mounting, population pressure resulted in the occupation of inferior and, yet more inferior land. Simultaneously, feudal exactions in, the form of money rent became excessive as the demand for
Page 490 :
4M, , I, , Early Social Formations, , land exceeded supply. As the co_mpetition for land became, more and more intense the bargaining power of peasants visa-vis lords was correspondingly reduced. ,, In a situation where cultivation was being extended to, soils of low fertility, i.e. land on which productivity was low,, pushing up feudal rent had disastrous consequences for the, economy as a whole. Tb repeat feudal rent was going up due, to the scarcity of land, which in turn was the result of, population increase and the difficulties which peasants faced, in resisting feudal exploitation. Though there was an increase, in the total volume of production, yet this produce was not, sufficient to feed the total population. The increase in, production had been achieved by extending cultivation to, marginal land. Since the productivity of marginal land was, low, there was an overall decline in productivity, i.e. decline, in yield per unit of land (total output divided by total land, under cultivation). This implied that the total quantity of food, available to each person was declining., When we realize that food was not distributed equitably, the quantity of food available to poorer peasants would often, have been below the minimum level of subsistence. The attempt, of feudal lords to maximize the extraction of surplus effected, poor peasants most adversely since this section of the peasantry, already lived on the verge of starvation. Even the slightest, increase in feudal rent rendered them more vulnerable to, hunger. The small and medium peasants too suffered because, the rise in the rate of surplus extraction hardly left them with, any resources to reinvest in agricultural operations. According, to M.M. Postan the feudal aristocracy took away nearly half, of the total produce of dependent peasants. This was a very, high rate of surplus extraction. Under these circumstances, peasants could not afford to leave their land fallow for long, periods to allow it to regain its fertility. Continuous cultivation, reduced productivity in the long run. In the absence of, adequate resources or savings the peasant could not spend, much on manure, better quality seeds, improved techniques, etc. Agricultural production stagnated and eventually declined.
Page 491 :
Feudalism in Medieval Europe, , I, , 465, , This created a crisis due to inequitable dishibution of food, and continuous demographic expansion., It may be pointed out over here that the withdrawal of, lords from direct involvement in the production process put, an end to the possibility of maintaining a high level of, productivity in the economy through demesne farming. Now, that the lords were assµred of a large income through increased, coercion and a bigger population they were not interested in, investing a part of their income in superior methods of, cultivation. Rather, most of their wealth was expended on, conspicuous consumption and not on production. Rodney, Hilton has calculated that barely 5 per cent of the income that, accrued to feudal lords was reinvested in production. The, rest was utilized for non-productive purposes., Feudal lords had the means but not the incentive to invest, in agricultural improvements. They could simply exploit the, peasants more ruthlessly to extract a larger surplus. The extraeconomic power that they had, i.e. their political and legal, authority, made it easy for them to coerce the peasants. This, amounted to extra-economic coercion and should be, distinguished from the coercion that they could exercise due, to economic factors (e.g. control over the means of production,, population increase, scarcity of land and market mechanisms)., Extra-economic coercion exercised by the lords over peasants, was central to the feudal surplus extraction relationship., By the beginning of the fourteenth century there was a, serious scarcity of food supplies all over Europe. Agricultural, workers and poor peasants were hit the hardest. A sharp, increase in agricultural prices added to the misery of those, who hired out their labour for a wage. The availability of a, large landless workforce had pushed down agricultural wages., Wages were coming down while prices of essential, commodities were going up. Small peasants were unable to, benefit from the upward trend in agricultural prices as they, rarely had a marketable surplus. We find that the vast majority, of the rural population was engaged in a desperate struggle, for sheer survival. Rising agricultural prices pushed up the
Page 492 :
466, , i Early Social Formations, , ce>st of living in urban areas too. The wage-earning class which, resided in cities and towns (e.g. those employed in handicraft, production), found it more and more difficult to procure the, necessities of everyday life with their paltry earnings., Chronic food shortages led to frequent outbreaks of famine, during the first quarter of the fourteenth century. One of the, severest famines was that of 1315-16. Permanent famine, conditions prevailed in several parts of Europe. This had a, devastating impact on the population. Large-scale starvation, deaths caused by famines brought about a sharp decline in, population in the second quarter of the fourteenth century., This downward trend was accelerated by the middle of the, century when a terrible plague epidemic swept through, Europe. The plague epidemic which first appeared in eastern, Europe around 1347 spread to. the west by c. 1348 and swiftly, engulfed the entire continent. This was one of the worst, calamities to have struck Europe in the middle ages. The, virulent phase of the epidemic lasted till 1350-1. The plague, epidemic of 1348-51 is referred to as the 'Black Death'. It killed, between one-fourth and one-third of Europe's inhabitants., As a result of famines and plague there was a substantial fall, in the population of Europe in the second half of the fourteenth, century. The population of Europe at the end of the fourteenth, century was 40 per cent lower than what it had been in the, first half of the century (as already mentioned above the, population of Europe in c. 1340 was roughly 73.5 million)., The process of recovery began in the fifteenth century., Initially the growth of population was very slow. With increase, in population the feudal cycle which we have outlined above, was resumed. The fresh cycle continued down to the, seventeenth century when population increase led to another, crisis. Nevertheless there were major differences between this, cycle and the earlier cycle. A qualitative change had taken, place in the character of feudalism by the fifteenth century, and it was this change that determined the pattern of the cycle, which lasted from the fifteenth to the seventeenth century., Firstly, trade, monetary exchange, and handicraft production
Page 493 :
Feudalism in Medieval Europe, , I, , 467, , expanded rapidly in this period. This expansion was closely, associated with the development of towns and the rise of a, merchant class., Secondly, the system of production based on serfdom was, on its way out in western Europe. The shift from labour services, to money dues had already undermined serfdom to some, extent. However, the coercive power of the lords, had not, diminished. This power had in fact grown at the expense of, the peasantry during the thirteenth and early fourteenth, centuries. The unfree peasantry in the west had responded to, the crisis of the fourteenth century by putting-up a strong, resistance to the growing burden of feudal exactions. Most of, this resistance was spontaneous and at an individual level., Peasants might refuse to pay the dues demanded from them, or they might abandon their fields and flee to some other, place (the new urban centres which were emerging could, provide refuge to serfs who had fled; but serfs also escaped, to other villages/ manors). At the same time there were a large, number of organized peasant revolts in the fourteenth century, which played a decisive role in breaking the hold which lords, had over their serfs. From the 1320s there was a series of, peasant uprisings in France, Belgium and England. Of these, the most well known are the Great Peasant Revolt (known as, the 'GrandJacquerie') of 1358 in France and the Peasant Revolt, of 1381 in England. Through revolts and other forms of, resistance dependent peasants in the west succeeded in, loosening the bonds of serfdom. The weakening of serfdom, implied that feudal lords could no longer exercise extraeconomic coercion to extract ~urplus from the peasants., Thirdly, from the fifteenth century onwards the paths of, development of the east and the west began to diverge sharply., Whereas the western peasantry had by and large gained its, freedom, in the east (especially in east Germany, Russia and, Poland) feudal lords were able to increase their hold over the, peasantry. Thus, while serfdom was declining in the west it, was getting strengthened in the east. The strengthening of, serfdom in the east was not based on a self-sufficient agrarian
Page 494 :
468, , I Early Social Formations, , economy of the type which had prevailed in the early phase, of feudalism, but was related to the expansion of trade in, Europe. The feudal aristocracy in the east took advantage of, the commercialization of agricultural produce and em~rged, as major suppliers of foodgrains to the west. Though, production on their estates was based on serf labour, a large, proportion of the produce was meant for exchange. Feudal, lords in the east earned huge profits by exporting foodgrains, produced by cheap serf labour., · The new cycle of growth of population, followed by, massive demographic expansion, occupation of marginal lands,, declining productivity, higher feudal rent, food scarcity, famine, and starvation, culminated in another crisis. Economic, historians have termed this crisis as the 'general crisis of the, seventeenth century' which encompassed most of Europe., Given that the cycle which began in the fifteenth century, differed in many ways from the earlier cycle, it is not surpristflg, that the outcome of the crisis of the seventeenth centviry was, different from the crisis of the fourteenth century. After the, seventeenth century Europe did not go through another feudal, cycle but rapidly completed its transition from feudalism to, capitalism., ., Historians generally agree that demographic variations, and gr~wth of trade were the two main factors which, contributed to the transformation of the feudal economy and, paved the way for the emergence of capitalism. Yet there is, considerable difference of opinion over the question of which, of these two factors should be regarded as the primary cause, ('prime-mover') of change. Extensive research on the subject, in the past few decades has enriched our understanding of, the role played by demographic factors and monetization/, commercialization in medieval Europe. Some economic, historians, of whom M.M. Postan and E. Le Roy Ladurie are, the most prominent, have attempted to explain the dynamics, ·of the feudal economy in terms of the expansion and, contraction orpopulation. On the other hand scholars such as, Henri Pirenne and -Immanuel Wallerstein have laid greater
Page 495 :
Feudalism in Medieval Europe I 469, , emphasis on trade. More recently the entire debate has been, thoroughly re-exan;rined by Robert Brenner in a major article, published in 1976 (' Agrarian Class Structure and Economic, Development in Pre-Industrial Europe'). Brenner has argued, that even though the 'demographic model' and the 'trade, model' offer valuable insights they cannot by themselves, adequately explain why changes occurred within the feudal, system. He has presented an alternative hypothesis_ in which, changes are seen as the result of the actual outcome of an ongoing, class struggle in the medieval period. Peasants and feudal lords, were the two main contenders in this class struggle. Whenever, the outcome of this continuous struggle was in favour of the, peasantry, the burden of feudal exactions was reduced. If the, peasants could retairi some of the surpl~s they could reinvest, this in production and thereby improve their own condition, and overall agricultural productivity. When peasant resistance, failed there was an increase in the rate 9f surplus extraction, and a corresponding decline in productivity. The failure to, resist feudal exploitation in the phase of population expansion, would have even more serious consequences since the decline, in productivity would deprive a large section of the population, of its means of subsistence., According to Brenner population increase did not by itself, lead to shortage of food. The power of the lord to take away, a substantial portion of the produce from the peasants brought, about a fall in productivity. The pressure of the feudal, aristocracy made the economy more vulnerable to food scarcity, and famine. Brenner has emphasized the link between the, ability of feudal lords to extract a large surplus and the extraeconomic ceercion that they exercised over the peasantry. It, was the inability of the peasants to resist extra-economic, coercion that led to the deterioration of their economic status, and hence lower productivity, and vice versa. Brenner's, hypothesis was to some extent inspired by Maurice Dobb' s, views on the transition from feudalism to capitalism (as, outlined in Studies in the Development of Capitalism). For Dobb, extra-economic coercion was a key component of the feudal
Page 496 :
47(1 j, , Early Social Formations ., , mode of production. In his opinion the decline of this mode, of production commenced with the decline of serfdom, i.e., with the change in the balance of class relations once extraeconomic coercion was reduced. Brenner observes that the, struggle intensified in the fourteenth century. Widespread, peasant distress in this period led to several uprisings. By the, end of the fourteenth century sustained peasant resistance, had weakened serfdom in western Europe. He notes that, peasant resistance was more successful in western Europe, because village-level solidarity was traditionally stronger in, the west. In the east, village-level ties were weaker since, settlements here were of more recent origin. Moreover, colonization in the east was initiated by the feudal aristocracy., Consequently the lords had much greater control over villages, and village-level institutions., From the end of the fourteenth century the economy of, the west was no longer based entirely on serf labour., Nevertheless the decline of serfdom did not automatically, lead to capitalist relations of production in agriculture (i.e., large holdings cultivated by hired wage-labour). In France,, for instance, the state now competed with the feudal, aristocracy for a large share of the surplus. An absolutist state, which extracted surplus through heavy taxation was coming, into existence. The peasants gained freedom and manage(j. to, retain control over their small holdings (at times with the, support of the state). These holdings were too small and the, resources of the peasants were too meagre to allow the, adoption of improved methods of cultivation. This point will, become clearer when we compare this situation with the, historical evolution of England., The pattern of development in England was very different., In England the peasants had won their freedom by the end of, the fourteenth century (the Peasant Revolt of 1381 was the, real turning point in their struggle). Unlike the French peasants, they did not succeed in retaining their land. Much of this land·, passed into the hands of feudal lords who were able to create, large consolidated estates. These estates were then leased out
Page 497 :
Feudalism in Medieval Europe I 471, , on very favourable terms to capitalist farmers. The capitalist, farmers of England evolved into a distinct class, the rural, gentry. The peasants who had been deprived of land, constituted a vastly enlarged class of agricultural workers., These agricultural workers hired out their labour to the, capitalist farmers and received wages in return. Since hired, workers had to exchange their wages for food and other, necessities there was a corresponding expansion of the market,, which was the precondition for the rise of full-fledged, capitalism., The success of the new pattern of production in England, helped to overcome the problem of agricultural productivity., Large estates could make use of some of the latest agricultural, techniques. Prosperous capitalist farmers had the resources, to invest in these techniques. These techniques included a new, method of cultivation known as 'convertible husbandry'., Eric Kerridge, who has made a detailed study of the, Agricultural Revolution which was taking place in England in, the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, has described, convertible husbandry as the 'backbone of the Agricultural, Revolution'. This technique, which was very different from, crop rotation, involved giving up permanent cultivation of, crops on a field. A given field would be used for cultivating, crops for a few seasons and would then be converteH into, grassland for a few seasons. By converting a part of the/estate, into pasture or grassland for some seasons it was posJible to, rear cattle and sheep on a much larger scale. Convertible, husbandry completely revolutionized English agriculture, between 1560 and 1660. Kerridge states that the Agricultural, Revolution took place in England in the sixteenth and, seventeenth centuries and not, as is often assumed, in the, eighteenth and nineteenth. This revolution allowed England, to boost its agrarian production and thereby to escape the, general crisis of the seventeenth century. While other parts of, Europe were afflicted by a crisis (overpopulation, shortage of, food, famine, starvation deaths) in the seventeenth century,, the English economy continued to expand in this period. This
Page 498 :
472, , I Early Social Formations, , sustained growth was crucial for the Industrial Revolution, and could not have taken place without the Agricultural, Revolution. we· thus see that the different outcomes of the, class struggle during the fourteenth century had varying, consequences: (i) strengthening of feudalism in the east; (ii), end of serfdom and prevalence of petty peasant property in, France; and (iii) end of serfdom and growth of capitalist, farming in England. These differences determined the pace at, which the transition fro.m feudalism to capitalism occurred in, the respective regions.
Page 499 :
APPENDIX, , RELIGION IN THE ROMAN EMPIRE, , I, WHILE Rome was still a city-state,. Roman religion was the, religion of the original inhabitants of the city. The tribes settled, in Rome had their own deities. Worship of mother goddesses, and the forces of nature was prevalent. The gods and, goddesses of the Romans were similar to those of the, neighbouring Latin tribes. Traces of Etruscan influence are, also discernible in primitive Roman religion .. Once the city, acquired a distinct identity many religious practices in Rome, became uniform. It is possible to speak of a common religion, of the city by the time the republic was founded. The supreme, deity of the city was Jupiter who was regarded as the king of, gods. Mars, the god of war, was another prominent god. A, large temple dedicated to Jupiter was built on the Capitoline, Hill in Rome. According to tradition the construction of the, temple was undertaken around the time that monarchy was, abolished. The temple of Jupiter on the Capitoline Hill became, the main sanctuary of state religion in the empire., Roman religion was polytheistic. Many divinities were, worshipped simultaneously. At the beginning of the republican, period religion was already well-organized at the official level., Religion was an integral part of the state. Under the monarchy, the kings had presided over state rituals. There were .some, sacred rites which only they could perform. In their capacity, as priests the kings bore the title rex sacrorum. After the, overthrow of the Etruscan monarchy the religious duties of, the kings passed on to a high priest who carried the same
Page 500 :
474, , I, , Early Social Formations, , title. In the republic the rex sacrorum (sometimes just a,ddressed, as rex) had no political functions and wus merely a religious, official. He was selected from: among the patricians and was, ·appointed for life. The rex sacrorum was soon superseded by, another religious official called pontifex maximus (see below)., The religious practices of the Romans consisted of ancient, rituals which included prayers, festivals and sacrifices conducted by the state or by individuals. Sacrifice of animals was, considered essential for propitiating the deities. While making, a sacrifice, prayers had to be mechanically chanted in, accordance with strictly laid down formulae. There were, separate sets of prayers for different purposes. Major religious, events were public occasions in which the people participated, collectively. Public worship was organized by the state under, the supervision of the official priests. The inhabitants of, territories which were subordinate to Rome were expected to, ,, participate in these ceremonies., Foretelling 0£ the future was another feature of Roman, religion. The Romans, like the Greeks, regularly consulted, oracles to know about the future. There were priests who, interpreted these oracles. Besides, there was a method of, divination based on examining the flight of l?irds. This was, known as auspicium (auspicium literally means 'bird-watching', and the English word auspicious is derived from it). There, was a category of priests known as augurs who specialized in, telling the future by this method. A group of official augurs, was attached to the state and their advice was regularly sought, by the government to predict the future. Another way of, foretelling the future was by observing the stomach of a, sacrificed animal because it was thought that this contained, signs which would indicate whether or not the sacrifice had, been accepted by the gods., Religion was formally a part of the Roman state. The religious affairs of the community were regulated by institutions, wJ::uch were components of the structure of the state. An official, priesthood supervised all aspects of religion .. The priesthood, was elective. In the early republic official priestly positions
Page 501 :
Appendix, , I, , 475, , were monopolized by the patricians. The comitia qniata played, an important role in electing the priests. State religion wa-s, managed by a board of priests known as pontifices (singular,, pontifex). At the beginning of the republican period there were, tl)ree pontifices. By the time of Julius Caesar the number of, pontifices had gone up to sixteen. Initially all the pontifices, had .been patricians. From c. 300 BC half the pontifices were, elected from among the plebeians. The president of this board, was called pontifex maximus. The pontifex maximus was elected, for life. He could neither resign from office nor could he be, removed from the position. The pontifex maximus took over, most of the functions o{ the rex sacrorum whose post had become, defunct by the end of the republic., The pontifex maximus was the head of Roman state religion., This was one of the most prestigious positions in the state, and carried some political authority with it. The post was much, sought after by leading politicians in the late republic. Under, the Second Triumvirate Lepidus had been elected pontifex, maximus. Subsequently, when Lepidus was forced into political, retirement he still continued to be the chief priest since he, could not be divested of his office. Augustus was very keen, to assume the title of pontifex maximus after he declared himself, princeps in 27 BC. However he had to wait till the death of, Lepidus (12 BC) before he could become pontifex maximus. This, helped Augustus to further strengthen his authority by, bringing Roman religion under his control., The principal gods and goddesses of the Romans were, Jupiter (also called Javis); Juno, who was Jupiter's wife;, Neptune, brother of Jupiter, and god of the sea; Venus, goddess, of love, and the mother of Aeneas (Aeneas was the mythical, ancestor of the Romans); Mars, god of war, and son ofJupiter;, Pluto; Saturn; Minerva; Apollo; Mercury; Vulcan; Vesta; and, Diana. Of these divinities Juno, Venus, Minerva, Vesta and, Diana were goddesses. Greek and Hellenistic religious beliefs, moulded the evolution of Roman religion, especially from the, third century BC onwards when Rome began its expansion, into southern Italy and the Mediterranean. Roman divinities
Page 502 :
476, , I Early Social Formations, , were identified with Greek gods and goddesses and thereby, linked to Greek religious mythology. In the process, Roman, divinities gained wider acceptability in the Mediterranean, world. We may add over here that Greek culture and, ideology, which itself had been considerably modified in the, Hellenistic age, had a profound impact upon Rome during the, middle and the late republic, i. e. in the period when the, Romans-were creating an empire. The classical Roman writers, of the Augustan age (Virgil, Ovid, Horace) refashioned Greek, and Hellenistic themes, giving a more harmonious look to, Roman mythology., The major Roman divinities all had their counterparts in, the Greek pantheon. Jupiter was identified with Zeus; Neptune, with Poseidon; Venus with Aphrodite; Minerva with Athene;, and Diana with Artemis (see chapter seven). Roman gods were, now thought of as dwelling on Mount Olympus. Apollo, who, was one of the most popular Greek gods, had no .Roman, counterpart. The tradition of worshipping Apollo was, introduced into Roman religion relatively late, probably, around the third century BC. We have noted that the Dionysus, cult had a large following in Greece. The worship of Dionysus, or Bacchus-the god of wine:-was widespread throughout, the Roman empire also. Dionysian practices included ritual, drinking of wine and dancing ecstatically. Women participated, extensively in -these rituals. Bacchus festivals at Rome appear, to have become so unruly in the late republic that the state, had to take measures to control them. These festivals probably, attracted large crowds of poor and discontented people and, the authorities might have been anxious to prevent outbreaks, of violence on these occasions. Dionysus was at times identified, with Sabazius, another god of Thracian origin. The followers, of Sabazius consumed an intoxicating drink called sabaia (a, kind of beer), instead of wine, as part of their ritual. Otherwise, there were many similarities between the two cults., The dominant religion of the city of Rome, which was the, official religion of the Roman empire in the sense that it was, patronized by the Roman state, cannot be regarded as being
Page 503 :
Appendix, , I, , 477, , the total religious experience of the Roman people. With the, large-scale territorial expansion of Rome new trends appeared, in Roman religion. This was inevitable given the heterogeneous, nature of the vast empire over which the Romans ruled. The, different societies which formed a part of this empire had, their own religious beliefs. This was particularly so in the case, of the eastern Mediterranean. Egypt, West Asia, Anatolia and, Greece had highly developed religious traditions of great, antiquity. It was unlikely that the people of this region would, easily adopt Roman religion. On the contrary eastern religions, overwhelmed the Greco-Roman world. Roman religion should, not be regarded as a closed, static entity. It showed, considerable openness in accommodating foreign cults. After., all the majority of the inhabitants of the empire were nonRomans. The assimilation of their religious practices was crucial, for the survival of the empire and Rome exhibited remarkable, flexibility in this regard. In addition to the ready acceptance, of Greek religion, elements of Egyptian, Syrian and Phrygian, (Phrygia was a region located in ce:t;ttral Anatolia) religions, were incorporated into the Roman belief-system. We need to, bear in mind the role of traders, sailors, soldiers and even, slaves in the spread of new cults in the empire., Among the earliest eastern cults which gained general, recognition in the Roman empire were those of Serapis, Cybele, and Atagartis. The worship of Serapis had its origin in Ptolemid, Egypt. The Serapis cult was a combination of the worship of, Osiris and Apis. Apis was the sacred bull of Memphis. The, priests of Memphis seem to have brought tClgether the bull, cult of Memphis and the popular cult of Osiris. The two were, now worshipped as one composite deity-Serapis. Temples, dedicated to Serapis were called Serapiums. The Ptolemid, rulers of Egypt had extended official patronage to this cult, and had built a number of Serapiums throughout the country., The Serapium of Alexandria was the most magnificent of all., Isis was also worshipped in the Serapiums. There were also, separate temples dedicated to Isis (Iseums)., In the late republic Serapiums and Iseums began to appear
Page 504 :
478, , I Early Social Formations, , in Rome and in other Italian cities. The cult of Isis posed such, a big challenge to Roman religion that there are several, references to orders being issued by the senate towards the, end of the republic for the closure of Iseum:s which had, mushroomed in the capital. The cult, however, continued to, thrive. Later, Augustus as part of his endeavour to promote, Roman culture tried to suppress the Serapis and Isis cults at, Rome. To some extent his campaign against non-Roman cults, was a part of a conscious policy to eradicate all traces of, Egyptian ideology and culture at Rome. Augustus's hostility, towards Egyptian cults must be viewed in the context of his, long struggle against Antony and Cleopatra and his desire to, present himself as the saviour of Rome. Tiberius continued, with Augustus's policy, but the Serapis cult survived and the, Serapium of Alexandria remained one of the most sacred, · shrines of the Roman empire till the fourth century AD., Another important eastern cult which flourished~ in the, Roman empire was associated with a mother-goddess called, Cybele. Cybele was a popular deity of Phrygia (Anatolia), where she was known as Kubebe. Cybele had a companion, named Attis. Cybele was in fact the first eastern divinity to, be officially made a part of Roman religion. Her adoption, may be dated to the Second Punic War. The rituals associated, with the worship of Cybele were performed by special eunuch, priests. The Cybele cult was intimately connected with bull, sacrifices. The rituals of the cult included bull sacrifices which, were carried out in a sacred structure called taurobolium. This, structure consisted of an underground pit which was covered, by a platform consisting of a number of holes. A priest would, occupy the pit and the bull would be sacrificed on the platform, which covered the pit. The blood of the sacrificed bull would, flow down on to the priest through the holes in the platform., This symbolized a ritual purification. BuUcults and bull sacrifice, had been widespread throughout the eastern Mediterranean, and these appeared in various forni.s throughout the Roman, empire from the time that the Mediterranean was unified., For instance Mithraism, which we will discuss later, was a
Page 505 :
Appendix I 479, , West Asian religion which also had elements of the bull cult., With the conquest of the Seleucid territories in West Asia, Syrian cults penetrated the Roman empire. Atagartis was a, prominent Syrian female deity. This cult had a large hereditary, priesthood. The main centre of the cult was at HierapolisBambyce in Syria. One of the most popular gods worshipped, in Syria was a solar deity called Baal. Actually there were, several distinct Baal cults. We have already referred to one of, the Baal cults, the cult of Elagabal, which was patronized by, the Roman emperor Elagabalus (AD 218-222). It may be, recalled that Elagabalus belonged to the family ofJulia Domna,, the wife of Septimius Severus (see chapter nine). Julia Domna, was a Syrian and Elagabalus himself had been the head priest, of the Elagabal temple. During Elagabalus' s short reign the, Baal cult (in the form of Elagabal) became the official cult pf, the empire and this was one of the reasons for the unpopularity, of the emperor among t;he conservative sections of the capital,, leading to his assassination by the praetorian guards., Nevertheless, Syrian deities, especially Atargatis and Baal were, venerated by Roman troops stationed on the eastern frontiers., These soldiers regularly prayed to these deities for protection., When the soldiers retired they carried with them the religious, practices which they had adopted during their long stay in, the east to other parts of the empire. This was one of the, ways in which West Asian cults were disseminated over a, large area., At the popular level most of the inhabitants of the empire, continued with their age-old religious beliefs. A host of gods, and goddesses were worshipped throughout the length and, breadth of the territories ruled by Rome. The Greeks had, their own pantheon, the Anatolian communities had their own, deities, the ordinary Syrians, Mesopotamians, Egyptians and, north Africans had their own gods and goddesses. Primitive, tribal forms of worship prevailed in the outlying areas of the, empire. In Palestine the Jews, whom we will discuss in some, detail later, had their own very distinctive understanding of, god and religion. The Phoenicians of Carthage worshipped a
Page 506 :
480, , I Early Social Formations, , deity called Melqart. Melqart was the main deity of the, Phoenician settlements in the western Mediterranean. In, northern Europe the Celts of Gaul and Britain had their own, tribal religion which is generally referred to as Druidism. Very, little is known about Druidism. Druids were priests who, performed the religious rituals of these tribes. Druidism, centred around the worship of forces of nature and the rituals, included sacrifices. For reasons which are not very clear the, Romans ruthlessly suppressed Druidism in the mid-first century AD. The Germanic tribes had their own deities such as, Woden and Thor. Woden was later identified with M~cury, and Thor with Heracles (Hercules)., It would have been impossible for the Romans to regulate, the religious life of each and every community in the empire., The state by and large allowed the people to carry on with, their traditional forms of worship. Of course, the principal, official religious events took place in the city of Rome. Outside, Rome they were confined to areas of Latin c-6.ltural influence, (primarily Italy), Roman and Latin colonies, provincial capitals,, garrison towns, minor administrative centres, port-towns, and, cities with a sizeable Roman population. The local elites and, all those who were in some way or the other connected with, the government were expected to participate in official religious, functions at these places. There might at times.have been an, element of coercion in this. But as long as the people (or at, least the leaders of local communities) nominally adhered to, Roman official observances-even though this might be, involuntary-and showed outward respect for state religion, they were on the .whole left undisturbed. This was truer of, the rural rather than the urban areas.., This does not mean that religious persecution was unknown, or that the state did not from time to time try to define the, parameters within which the religious activity of a community, could take place. There were several instances where provincial, and local officials were extremely intolerant in religious matters, and conducted vigorous campaigns against those who did not, accept the religion of the Roman state. Jesus Christ was the
Page 507 :
Appendix I 481, , victim of one such official.. MorE;over, if the religious, assertiveness of a ccmununity _acquired political overtones, or, if religious dissent was perceived· as amounting to resistance, against the state, the government was quite ruthless in dealing, with such situations. We find this ll1 the case of the measures, taken against the Bacchus festiyals and the Isis· cult in the late, republic; the elimination of Druidism among the Celts, and, the suppression of the Jewish ·revolt of AD 66-70 in the, ptj.ncipate·. ~ the third century AD the religious outlook of a, section of the Roman ruling class became increasingly narrow, and uncompromising due to the growing crisis within the, empire. The state ·sought to impose ·a semblance of ideological, unity by imposing the official religion. However, as we shall, se_e, this led to further problems., . With the establishment of the principate,·state religion had, acquired some p.ew :features. The Seqmd T_riU:mvirate had, . institutl?d.the cult of Julius Caesar which received an impetus, under Augustus. Julius Caesar w.as regarded as a god and, there were temples dedicated to him. Augustus himself was, deified after his deatlJ_. The cults of Julius and Augustus Caesar, served the purpose of legitimizing the monarchy. In the first, _century .AD the city of Rome itself became an object of, veneration. Rome was the symbol of the_empire and the state, projected th.e city a;s a divinity.. Rome was worshipped as a, goddess in her own right. Th~ goddess Rome was associated, with Venus, the m9ther ~f Aeneas. Venus had a special place, among the state cults., ,, ·· It was natural. that Roman religion should reflect the, personal preferences of individual rulers. Augustus and, Tiberius -had forcefully rejected non-Roman cults. It may be, mentioned over here that Augustus had been quite enthusiastic, about Egyptian-religion prior to his conflict with Antony and, . Cleopatra. It is well known that Augustus had initiated the, constri.J.ction of a Serapium -at Rome when he was triumvir., All this chai:iged by the beginning of the principate. Augustus, and Tiberius strongly felt that non-Roman cults should be kept, away from. the core area of Latin culture. The successors of
Page 508 :
482 -I Early Social Formations, , Tiberius found it clifficult to carry on with this policy due to, the growing popularity of eastern religious beliefs in the, empire. From the time of Caligula onwards Egyptian,, Anatolian and Syrian deities were being patronized by the, emperqrs. Some of the emperors took part in Isis festivals., Vespasian prayed at the temple of Serapis in Alexandria when, he was declared emperor. Elagabalus introduced the public, worship of Baal in Rome. In the third century AD various, solar deities became popular with the emperors. There was a, tendency to identify the emperor with the sun. Baal was a, solar deity. Mithraism, which had a large following in Rome,, also contained elements of sun worship. The diverse tendencies, of the emperors encouraged the growth of a more composite, religious o..rtlciok in the Roman ruling class., , II, The creeds of West Asia began making inroads into the empire, after the Romans became a territorial power in the region., Religious movements in Iran and Mesopotamia affected the, course of Roman religion from the second century AD, onwards. It is therefore necessary to outline some of the salient, features of Iranian religions even though this area was not a, part of the Roman empire. In the Persian empire of the, Achaemenids (i. e. the empire founded by Cyrus and Darius I, in the sixth century BC which was later destroyed by Alexander, the Great) there were two major religions: Mithraism and, Zoroastrianism (or Mazdeism). The Mithra cult had its origins, among the early Inda-European tribes. There are historical, references to Mithra in documents· of the fourteenth century, BC. Mithra was one of the deities worshipped in Anatoli.ij in, Hittite times. The Mithra cult spread to northern Mesopotamia, and Iran with the Inda-Iranian tribes., As Mithraism evolved it absorbed several new ideas and, formulated its own worldview. Mithra was seen as a god who, represented light and was supposed to be engaged in a, struggle against darkness: One of the central concepts of the
Page 509 :
Appendix, , I, , 483, , religious philosophy of Iran; which permeated both Mithraism, and Zoroastrjanism, was that the universe is ruled by two, opposing supernatural forces. On the one hand are the forces, of light and goodness, and on the other are the forces of, darkness and evil. These two forces are engaged in a perpetual, contest. This philosophical conception of the world is referred, to as 'dualism'. There will come a time when the forces of, darkness will be finally defeated. Till then we can strengthen, the forces of light by being on the side of good. This can be, achieved through appropriate rituals and good deeds. In, Mithraism, Mithra symbolizes light. Mithra, as the embodiment, of light, was also conceived of as a solar deity, i. e. as a sun, god. There was an elaborate set of rituals which was connected, with this cult. The cult had a large following in Iran and, Mesopotamia by beginning• of the Achaemenid period., However Mithraism declined under Darius I. Darius gave, official patronage to Zoroastrianism and made it the state, religion., There was a revival of Mithraism in the Hellenistic age., The new Mithraism was somewhat different from its earlier, form. The devotees of Mithra now constituted a kind of secret, society. The god was not worshipped publicly nor were the, rituals of the cult performed in the open. Members were, admitted into the cult by performing certain secret rituals., The cult had its own priesthood which supervis~d the sacred, ceremonies of the cult at Mithraic places of worship. Women, were excluded from the cult. Mithraism was fused with the, bull cult and bull sacrifices were a key aspect of its secret, rituals. In Greco-Roman iconography Mithra is invariably, depicted as a bull-slayer. Bull cults, as already mentioned,, were prevalent throughout the eastern Mediterranean,, Anatolia and West Asia from a very remote period. The, sacrifice of bulls was linked with fertility rites. The sacrifice, had the power to fertilize., Soldiers who served in the eastern armies were among, the earliest Roman converts to Mithraism. Mithra became a, special deity of the Roman army and the troops were strongly
Page 510 :
484 ~ 1 Early Social Formations, , attached to it. Besides, the cult already had followers among, the local inhabitants of Roman territories in West Asia. In the, second century AD Mithraism had spread to the western, provinces. Here its devotees mainly belonged to the elite and, the middle class in urban. areas. The cult's secret places of, worship, called Mithraeums, appeared all over the empire., Archaeological excavations have brought to light nearly fifty, Mithraeums in Rome; eighteen Mithraeums in Ostia; several, Mithraeums in Alexandria and Carthage; and a large, Mithraeum in London. This is an indication of the extent to, which Mithraism had become part of the religion of the Roman, empire., In Iran itself Mithraism was overshadowed by, Zoroastrianism. The rise of Zoroastrianism (which is more, familiar to the people of the Indian subcontinent as the Parsi, religion), goes back to the sixth century BC when the legendary, prophet Zarathustra preached the main tenets of this religion., Zarathustra' s teachings provided the main framework of, Zoroastrianism. Zoroastrianism included some of the earlier, religious traditions of the Indo-Iranian people. The Zoroastrian, belief was that the universe is governed by two contending, powers, Ahuramazdah who is the god of truth and Ahriman, who symbolizes evil. A cosmic struggle is constantly going on, between the two. Ahuramazdah is worshipped as the, representative of light and good. Zoroastrianism is also, referred to as Mazdeism. Zoroastrian temples had a sacred, fire which was ~pt burning all the time. Fire was a symbol of, light in the struggle against darkness. Zoroastrian rituals were, conducted by a hereditary priestly class known as the Magi., The sacred book of the Zoroastrians was the Zend-Avesta., Under the Seleucids Zoroastrianism suffered a setback. In, the Parthian territories Zoroastrianism coexisted with, Mithraism. In this period both religions enriched each other, through an exchange of ideas. Zoroastrianism was restored, as the state religion under the Sassanids. Initially a new dualist, religion called Manichaeism, which combined elements of, Mithraism, Zoroastrianism and early Christianity, became
Page 511 :
Appendix I 485, , popular in the Sassanid empire. We will discuss Manichaeism, later in the context of the rise of Christianity. At the end of, the third century AD Zoroastrian Mazdeism was made the, state religion of the Sassanid empir~. The significance of, Zoroastrianism from the point of view of Roman religion lies, in the fact that Roman possessions in Syria, northern, Mesopotamia and parts of Armenia had a sizeable population, of Zoroastrians. Secondly, Zoroastrian ideas influenced some, of the religious trends of the empire, particularly Manichaeism, which for some time was one of the most powerful religious, movements in the empire., , III, The semi-arid strip of land which lies just south of the Syrian, coas~ has a unique place in the religious history of the Roman, empire. This narrow area extending from the south-eastern, corner of the Mediterranean to the northern tip of the Red, Sea was called Palestine (present-day Israel-Palestine)., Palestine is bound by the Jordan River and the Dead Sea in, the west. It was one of the territories conquered by Alexander, the Great. Following the death of Alexander, Palestine became, a part of the Ptolemid kingdom of Egypt. The Seleucids made, several attempts to dislodge the Ptolemies from this area. In, 200 BC Antiochus III annexed Palestine to the Seleucid kingdom., The Seleucids ruled over it till 63 BC. When the Romans put an, end to the Seleucid state and occupied Syria, Palestine was, absorbed into the Roman empire., Palestine was the home of two major religions: Judaism, and Christianity. In the fourth century AD Christianity became, the official religion of the Roman state. Judaism, which was, the dominant religion of Palestine before Christianity, provides, the historical backdrop to the birth of Christianity. We must, therefore begin with a discussion of Judaism before examining, the rise and spread of Christianity in the Roman empire., Judaism is one of the oldest living organized religions in, the world. Its beginnings go back to movements of Western
Page 512 :
486, , I, , Early Social Formations, , Semitic tribes in West Asia c. 2000. According to tradition, Judaism was founded during the course of. a migration of, tribes led by Abraham. Circa 1800 these tribal people, known, as Israelites, were travelling from Mesopotamia to SyriaPalestine. They had recently been unified and this unity was, expressed in the form of their accepting a common religion., When the Israelites were passing through northern, Mesopotamia they acknowledged the existence of one true, god, Yahweh Gehovah). At Haran Abraham is supposed to, have entered into an agreement with Yahweh to give up the, worship of idols and of all deities. Henceforth Yahweh, the, one and only divine power, would be worshipped. In return, Yahweh regarded the Israelites, or the Jews, as his chosen, people. They were promised the occupation of land in, Palestine. The story of this journey from Mesopotamia is, contained in the Book of Genesis which is a part of the Old, Testament of the Bible., The Israelites subsequently ~grated to Egypt due to the, harsh environment of Palestine. Here they dwelt for several, centuries. Jewish settlements flourished in the Nile Delta. The, Israelites had to later leave Egypt when one of the pharaohs, (pharaoh Ramesses II, 1304-1237) began to persecute them.·, The story of the Jewish exodus from Egypt is vividly narrated, in the Old Testament. The Israelites evacuated Egypt and, migrated to Palestine. They were led by Moses and wandered, for almost forty years before- reaching their destination. It, was during this migration that the Israelites formulated their, basic laws. These laws, known as the Ten Commandments,, constitute the earliest legal framework of the Jewish, community. They were divinely revealed to Moses on Mount, Sinai. J:he Ten Commandments helped the Israelite clans to, unify themselves into a nation. Moses died on the way to, Palestine. His successor Joshua finally succeeded in leading, the Israelites into Palestine c. 1200 BC. Recently a leading Israeli, archaeologist, Zev Herzog, has questioned the historicity of, the Jewish immigration to and exodus from Egypt. He has, suggested that the Israelites were one of the Semitic nomadic
Page 513 :
Appendix I, , 487, , tribes which had lived in Syria-Palestine for several centuries., They had very close ties among themselves. The clans, (mishpahah) met regularly for feasts and rituals. These ties were, strengthened when they accepted a common monotheistic, religion. Religion formed a common bond between these tribes, and created the conditions for state -formation., The stretch of land on which the Israelites settled was at, that time referred to as Canaan. It got its name from the Semitic, people known as the Canaanites who occupied the tract from, the Syrian coast to Palestine. The Phoenicians were a branch, of the Canaanites. Phoenician commercial settlements, dominated the coastline. Phoenician and Israelite expansion, in this area, between c. 1200 and 1000 BC, was closely, interlinked. The Israelites Hved in the proximity of the, Phoenician cities of Tyre and Sidon. At one point of time they, were politically aligned with Hiram, the Phoenician ruler of, Tyre. The IsraeUes helped the traders of Tyre to extend their, trade links. The association with Phoenician commerce speeded, up state formation and class differentiation among the Israelite, tribes. The Jewish tradition tells us that when the Israelites, settled in Canaan in c. 1200 BC they were divided into twelve, t_ribes. The tribes were ruled by priest-chiefs or Judges. Given, the poor soil con_ditions of area, trade was crucial for, augmenting the surplus. Trade led to the growth of Jewish, urban centres., Canaan was inhabited by numerous tribes which were, constantly engaged in a struggle for enlarging their territories., The conditions in Canaan remained unsettled because tribes, were all the time moving into or out of this passage lying at, the junction of Egypt, Syria and Mesopotamia. The main, opponents of the Israelites in their struggle for supremacy, were the Philistines. When the Hittite empire was disrupted, by tribal movements c. 1200 BC, some of the dislocated people, of the eastern Mediterranean settled in Canaan. One of these, tribes were the Pelest (Plishtim in Hebrew). The Pelest, who, are commonly referred to as Philistines in ancient literature,, established themselves in Canaan and gave their name to this
Page 514 :
488, , I Early Social Formations, , tract-Palestine (for the sake of convenience and in order to, avoid confusion we will henceforth use this name while, speaking of the entire area generally). The struggle between, the Israelites and the Philistines is a recurring theme in Jewish, literature pertaining to the period after the exodus., In the period between c. 1000 and 931 BC the foundations, of an Israelite state were laid. Circa 1020 BC the kingdom of, Israel was formed by king Saul. Saul was succeeded by David, in c. 1000 BC. Saul and David achieved notable victories over, the Philistines. They developed an administrative machinery, for governing the area occupied by the Israelites. ·So far the, Israelites had mainly been unified by their religion. They were, now constituted into a state. Circa 960 BC David was succeeded, by king Solomon. Solomon made Jerusalem the capital of the, Israelite kingdom. In his reign Jerusalem became a prominent, urban centre. Solomon built a large Jewish temple at Jerusalem,, making the city the focus of the religious life of the community., Solomon is believed to have lived very ostentatiously. The, lavish lifestyle attributed to him in legends might partly be an, exaggeration, but it does indicate that by this time there was, considerable social differentiation among the Israelites and, that the process of their transition from tribal to class society, had been completed. Disparities of wealth indicate that the, ruling class was able to appropriate a large surplus., After Solomon's death in 931 BC the kingdom of Israel, could not remain united. The conflicts among different, claimants to the throne were resolved by a partition of the, kingdom. The kingdom was divided into two s~parate, kingdoms: the northern kingdom of Israel and the southern, kingdom of Judah. Jerusalem now became the capital of Judah., In 722 BC Israel, i. e. the northern kingdom, was invaded and, by the Assyrians of Mesopotamia. Israel was subjugated by, the Assyrians, although Judah survived. Then in 586 BC the, Babylonian rulers of Mesopotamia invaded Palestine. This time, Judah was conquered and Jerusalem was destroyed. The, successive invasions of the Assyrians and the Babylonians, wiped out the states created by the Israelites. The Babylonian
Page 515 :
Appendix, , I, , 48{), , conquest was a serious disaster for the Jews. The Israelite, settlements were broken up and thousands of Jews were, forcibly deported to Babylon. Many others sought refuge in, Egypt and other parts of the Mediterranean. This dispersal of, the Jewish population is referred to as the Diaspora., The Diaspora changed the character of Judaism. The Jewish, people were no longer concentrated in one place but were, scattered in various countries. New Jewish settlements arose, in these countries. The Jewish communities tried to safeguard, their separate religious identity through strict adherence to, their distinctive beliefs and practices. It was in this period, that the traditions which had evolved in the previous centuries, were gathered together and systematized. The Jews who had, been banished to Babylon constituted the core of the followers, of Judaism. These Babylonian Jews were responsible for giving, concrete shape to Jewish religious doctrines while they were, living in exile., Judaism was one of the earliest religions which was, uncompromisingly monotheistic. Only one supreme god,, Yahweh, is worshipped by the Jews. Judaism was strongly, opposed to idol worship and strictly prohibited many of the, practices, as for instance human sacrifice, which were then, prevalent in the region. In the covenant (formal agreement), which Abraham is supposed to have made with god, the main, emphasis was on the exclusive belief in Yahweh. The, monotheism of Judaism was reiterated by Moses when he, was leading the Israelites out of Egypt. It is believed that, Moses, whom the Jews regard as their prophet and lawgiver,, symbolically smashed the figure of a golden calf as a token of, the absolute rejection of idol worship. It is likely that idol, worship did not completely disappear among the Israelites, even after they had founded a monarchical state in Palestine., Some of the early tribal rituals coexisted with the worship of, Yahweh. There is evidence to suggest that there was a revival, of the worship of local deities in the post-Solomon era. For, example, there are references to the veneration of Baal in the, reign of Ahab, king of Israel 873-52 BC. Strong measures were
Page 516 :
490, , I Early Social Formations, , taken to suppress these practices after Ahab. In all probability, it was in the period after the Diaspora that the entire Jewish, community became firmly committed to monotheism., The Torah is the sacred book of the Jews. It contains the, principal teachings of the prophets, the historical traditions of, the Jews, and the laws revealed to Moses on Mount Sinai (the, Ten Commandments). The Torah was compiled and written, down over several centuries, between c. 1000 and 500 BC. It, was given final shape around 450 BC. The book consists of five, parts and is also called the Pentateuch. Incidentally, the, Pentateuch is the first portion of the Old Testament of the, Bible. The civil and canonical laws of the Jews are gathered in, the Talmud. The early literature of Judaism is written in the, Hebrew and Aramaic languages., Judaism is an entire way of life. There are elaborate rules, for guiding believers in their daily routines. There is a lot of, emphasis on family ties. Males undergo circumcision as a mark, of their belonging to the Jewish community. The forms of, worship are basically quite simple in Judaism. The followers, assemble in synagogues, which are places where the faithful, read the holy scriptures. Anyone may read aloud from the, holy books at these assemblies. No specialist priests are, required. There are no complicated rituals which might require, a sect of priests. Historians have pointed out that the, development of a written literature which was accessible to, all Jews, and the collective reading of scriptures, played a, significant role in unifying the community., Babylonian rule over Palestine was brought to an end by, the rise and expansion of the Persian empire of the, Achaemenids. The area now came under the Persians, The, Achaemenids pursued a liberal and tolerant religious policy., The diverse communities which inhabited the vast Persian, empire enjoyed the freedom to worship according to their, respective beliefs. When Cyrus defeated the Babylonians in, 539 BC the Jews were allowed to settle in Jerusalem once again., It was soon_ after this event that the Jews built their Second, Temple at Jerusalem. Palestine witnessed a revival of Judaism'.
Page 517 :
Appendix, , I, , 491, , The final version of the Torah was put together in this period., Jewish communities of both Babylon and Jerusalem contributed, to the preparation of the text in its completed form., Mesopotamia, it may be mentioned, remained an important, centre of Judaism with a large Jewish population residing in, Babylon., In the Achaemenid and Hellenistic periods Judaism struck_, deep roots in West Asia, especially in Palestine. Palestine was, governed by Israelite chiefs who acknowledged the supremacy, of the Achaemenids, and later, of the Ptolemids and Seleucids., Jerusalem was the main political and religious centre of the, Jews. However, the politics of the region underwent a decisive, change with Roman expansion into the eastern Mediterranean., Roman campaigns against the Seleucid king Antiochus III (see, chapter eight) undermined the authority of the Hellenistic, kingdom of Syria. A full-scale Jewish revolt broke out against, the Seleucid state in 167 BC. The immediate provocation for, this revolt was the attempt of Antiochus IV (also called, Antiochus Epiphanes), who became king in 175 BC and was, the son of Antiochus III, to suppress Judaism. This was part, of Antiochus IV' s policy to vigorously Hellenize the Seleucid, kingdom. Such a policy had serious implications for Palestine, because Antiochus attempted to forcibly impose Greek high, culture on this relatively backward area. Moreover, Roman, demands for tribute from the Seleucids resulted in a bigger, financial burden being placed on the people. The poorer, economy of Palestine could not bear the increased taxation, and this added to the mounting resentment against Seleucid, rule., The Jewish revolt against Antiochus IV was led by Judas, Maccabaeus, a leading Jewish priest of Jerusalem. The revolt, lasted till 164 BC and the followers of Maccabaeus (Maccabeans), successfully resisted the cultural and.religious onslaught of, the Seleucid state. The Maccabeans entered into an alliance, with the Romans in their struggle against the Seleucids. This, was an opportunity that the Romans quickly utilized to make, further inroads into the region.
Page 518 :
492, , I, , Early Social Formations, , Antiochus IV died in 163 BC, but the Maccabean struggle, for independence continued. The family of Maccabaeus took, advantage of the declining power of the Seleucids to establish, an independent state of Judah (c. 145 BC). The Maccabaeus, family became the high priests of Jerusalem and autonomous, rulers of Palestine. To remain in power they had to make, compromises both with the Romans and the Seleucids. After, the Roman conquest, Palestine became a client-state of Rome., It was initially governed by pro-Roman Jewish priest-kings,, and was later placed under Roman prefects after a new, province of Judaea was carved out in Palestine in AD 6. The, priests were allowed some degree of autonomy in matters, relating to the Jewish community., In the century and a half following the Maccabaeus revolt,, the Jews split up into a number of sects. These divisions were, based partly on doctrinal differences among the sects. At the, same time they reflected a growing divergence between the, upper class urban Jews who had become part of the provincial, elite and the less affluent Jews who lived on the margins of, urban society. The Maccabeans themselves started as a sect, which did not submit to Antiochus IY, even though some other, Jews had accepted Hellenization. After c. 145 BC they were, looked upon as having surrendered the independence of the, Jewish state by entering into unscrupulous alliances to gain, . political power. The Maccabeans felt that it was impractical to, prolong the conflict with the Seleucid authorities. The Jews, did not have the resources for sustained fighting over a long, period of time. A compromise, it was argued, was better than, the elimination of the entire community.·Later, an offshoot of, the Maccabeans, called the Sadducees, consolidated their hold, over the Jewish state by accepting the overlordship of the, Romans. The Sadducees were the wealthy elite among the·, Jews who dominated the economy by their control over land, and trade. This was the group which was in power when Jesus, Christ preached in Palestine., Another sect were the Pharisees who had a large following, in the early principate. The Pharisees were critical of the shape,
Page 519 :
Appendix, , I, , 4'13, , which the Jewish state had taken after the Maccabean revolt., They accused the religious leaders of Jerusalem of corruption, and of having betrayed the cause of true Judaism. But unlike, some other sects they did not opt out of the settled Jewish, community. They resided in Jerusalem and its neighbourhood, and were an integral part of the social and economic life of, the city. The views of the Pharisees prevailed among the, common people who were divorced from the ruling class. The, Pharisees were of the opinion that the Jews could be truly, religious by literally following the rules laid down in religious, texts. The Sadducees on the other hand argued that the, Pharisees were being overenthusiastic in the attempt to, regulate every aspect of existence for which purpose they had, created hundreds of new rules which had no basis in holy, scriptures. In the long run the Pharisees also tended to conform, to the existing social and political system. In religious terms, what distinguished them were their more complicated rituals., Their notions eventually became the most widespread among, the Jews. Whereas the religious life of the Sadducees reyolved, · around the Temple of Jeru.salem, the Pharisees promoted the, growth of local synagogues for holding religious assemblies., These were the Jews with whom the later followers of Jesus, Christ had a prolonged conflict., ·, There were other Jewish sects which were opposed to, any compromise whatsoever. Among them were Jews who, propagated a more puritanical form of Judaism. The most, prominent puritanical sect were the Essenes, who opposed, both the Sadducees and the Pharisees. The Essenes preached, simplicity, had an austere lifestyle, shared their belongings, and laid emphasis on being virtuous. Their principles of, asceticism and celibacy led them to retreat from settled rural, and urban societies. They usually lived in surrounding hilly, tracts, often residing in caves. Here they formed isolated, communities of their own. As we shall see, there are many, similarities between Christianity and the doctrines of the, Essenes., ·, Roman rule over Palestine and growing Roman exactions
Page 520 :
494, , ! Early Social Formations, , sharpened the contradictions among the Jews. There were, some sects, like the fanatical Zealots, which advocated a, consistent armed struggle against the Romans until the Jewish, state became independent. Nevertheless, despite occasional, tensions, most of the Jews were reconciled to Roman rule by, the early principate. These included the Jews living in Palestine, and in settlements located in different parts of the empire., The main cause of the discord between the Jews and the Roman, authorities was the refusal of the Jews to recognize Roman, gods or to participate in official Roman worship. Over a period, of time the Roman state accommodated the monotheism of, Judaism. The Jews were accepted as a separate community, with its own observances., There were a few occasions when the Roman state, launched all-out campaigns against the Jews. This happened, in situations where the authorities were apprehensive of, organized resistance against the Roman state. The most serious, armed conflict between the Jews of Palestine and the Romans, took place in AD 66-70. This is known as the First Jewish, Revolt. The revolt was suppressed by Vespasian (see chapter, nine). Vespasian's son, Titus, occupied Jerusalem and destroyed, the sacred Temple of the Jews. After AD 70 the semiautonomous Jewish state ceased to exist as a separate political, entity. Henceforth the Jews were primarily a religious, rather, than political, community in the empire. The second upheaval, was the Second Jewish Revolt of AD 132-5. The revolt was, sparked by Hadrian's proposal to establish a Roman colony, at Jerusalem and reorganize the administration of the province., The rebellion spread to Egypt (Alexandria had a large Jewish, settlement) and Africa. For some years after AD 135 both sides, remained mutually suspicious of each other. By the time of, Antoninus Pius normal relations had been restored. We hear, of no major·incidents of persecution in the third century AD., In the following century things became difficult for the Jewish, communities after Christianity was adopted as the state, religion of the Roman empire.
Page 521 :
Appendix, , I, , 495, , IV, We have seen the historical conditions in Palestine at the, beginning of the prindpate. Christianity had its origins in this, milieu. Jesus Christ, whose teachings form the basis of Christianity, lived in the reigns of Augustus and Tiberius. He was, born at Bethlehem, near Jerusalem, into a humble family, in c., 6 BC. He spent the first thirty years of his life in his home, town, Nazareth, situated in northern Palestine. When Jesus, was about thirty years of age he began preaching his message., He was probably familiar with the doctrines of puritanical, Jewish sects like the Essenes and shared some of their beliefs., According to tradition, Jesus spent forty days in the desert, during which he fasted and prayed. He then began to spread, the divine message which had been revealed to him., Jesus spoke of the dawn of a new era, which would begin, with the establishment of the 'kingdom of heaven'. All evil, would be banished and only truth would prevail. Peace and, good would reign in the coming kingdom of heaven. The poor, and the humble would be given their proper due· in this, kingdom. Jesus asked the people to be virtuous and keep away, from everything that was bad and sinful. There was one, universal god who was loving and whose worship was open, to all. Everyone could seek his forgiveness. Jesus taught, compassion for fellow human beings and the need to care for, the needy. His teachings directly appealed to the common, people., Jesus Christ's mission lasted for about three years. His, teachings, which are summarized in what is called the Sermon, on the Mount, repeatedly highlighted love and compassion,, especially for the downtrodden . .The poorer sections of the, Jews were immediately attracted to these ideas. However,, when Jesus moved to Jerusalem he had to face the growing, hostility of the Jewish elite. The Sadducees prevailed upon, the Roman authorities to take action against him. The Roman, province of Judaea was at this time governed by a prefect, named Pontius Pilate (c. 25-36 BC). On the instructions of
Page 522 :
496, , I Early Social Formations, , Pontius Pilate Jesus was brought to trial on charges of sedition, and inciting the people to rebellion. He was condemned to, death by crucifixion. Jesus was about thirty-three years old, when he was executed., After Jesus had been crucified the Jewish councils initiated, strict action against his followers. They were probably alarmed, by the popularity which the teachings of Jesus enjoyed. It, should however be kept in mind that the opposition to these, teachings, i. e. to Christianity, came mainly from upper class, Jews and the.orthodox priests. On the other hand Christianity, found its earliest converts among the local Jews and the, puritanical sects like the Essenes. This is not surprising when, we note that the beliefs of the Essenes had a lot in common, with what Jesus had taught., In the late 1940s a large number of ancient Essene writings, were discovered in caves situated near the Dead Sea. These, documents have come to be known as the Dead Sea Scrolls., The Dead Sea Scrolls are religious texts of an Essene community·, which lived in the remote and inaccessible Qumran valley, which is set amidst hills of the Dead Sea area of Palestine. The, scrolls date back to the time of Jesus. They have revolutionized, our understanding of the formative phase of Christian, ideology. The Qumran community believed that the end of, the world was near and that a new order would soon be, established. There are references to the coming of the kingdom, of heaven. It was necessary to withdraw from the world till, that time so that one was not contaminated by evil. There, was the conviction that the tyranny of the Roman rulers and, their local Jewish collaborators would be overthrown through, divine interv·ention. The scrolls speak of a 'teacher of, righteousness' who would lead the people into the kingdom, of heaven. God would send a messiah or deliverer to show ·, the true path. The concept of the messiah was not a new one, as it was firmly rooted in ancient Jewish religious ideas. It is, likely that some of the Essenes thought of Jesus as the promised, messiah. We are not sure whether Jesus personally saw himself, as a messiah, but later on·his followers did look upon him as
Page 523 :
Appendix I 497, , one. Christ, the name bestowed upon Jesus, is derived from a, Greek word (christos) which has the same meaning as the, Hebrew mashiah or messiah., There are also many similarities between the teachings of, Jesus and another preacher known as John the Baptist who, was active at that time.John the Baptist was a popular religious, leader of the Essene tradition. Instead of cutting himself off, from settled society he actively propagated his ideas among, the common people. He asked them to prepare for the, impending end of the world by purifying themselves. Selfdiscipline and denial were essential to gain entry into the, kingdom of heaven which would soon be established. Only, the righteous would find a place in it. John the Baptist, advocated ritual bathing or baptism (baptism literally means, 'to dip') in the Jordan River as a form of purification. As for, himself he practised extreme austerity, scarcely even eating, anything. His teachings are supposed to have attracted Jesus, from Nazareth to the Jordan River at the beginning of his, aesus's) mission., Jesus left behind a small band of disciples who dedicated, themselves to spreading his message. The group was led by, Simon Peter (St. Peter) who had been nominated by Jesus as, his leading disciple or apostle. These disciples, who were, initially based at Jerusalem, converted many Jews in Palestine, to Christianity. Peter travelled to other parts of the empire,, including Italy. At Rome a small Christian community grew, up around him. Peter was executed in Nero's reign. His, martyrdom became a powerful religious symbol for the, Christians. Peter is traditionally regarded as the first bishop, of Rome and all Roman popes are considered to be his, successors., The growth of early Christianity owed much to the work, of Paul (St. Paul). Paul transformed Christianity into a major, religion within the Roman empire. Paul came from a Jewish, family of Anatolia. He was a minor official in which capacity, he had also been engaged in initiating measures. against the, Christians. He converted to Christianity in c. AD 37. The
Page 524 :
4()8, , I Early Social Formations, , history of Christianity underwent a radical change when Paul,, who never had any direct contact with Jesus, became a, Christian. Paul gave an organized shape to early Christian, religion. He may be regarded as the real founder of the Church., Paul travelled throughout the Roman empire to propagate, Christianity. From c. AD 45 onwards he sent missions to, various provinces for popularizing Christian ideas. Paul was, a well-read person and was familiar with religious trends in, West Asia and the Roman empire. He knew several languages, and was a prolific writer. His writings include a series of, letters, known as epistles, in which he outlined the life and, teachings of Jesus. The epistles of Paul comprise nearly half of, the New Testament of the Bible. Paul clarified, elaborated, upon and systematized what Jesus had preached. He clearly, stated that Jesus Christ was the promised saviour or messiah, who had been sent by God for t}:te salvation of humankind., The kingdom of heaven had already begun with the qrrival of, Jesus. Paul made Christianity intelligible to non-Jewish, inhabitants of the empire, thereby giving it a universal appeal., It should be remembered that initially Christianity had made, use of a lot of Jewish religious terminology which was not always, understood by those who were unfamiliar with it. Paul also, adopted several rituals from the religions of West Asia (lighting, of candles, use of holy water etc.) and made them a part of, Christian practices. Paul was executed at Rome in c. 64 BC., Initially the Romans had not been able to distinguish between Christianity and Judaism. The Christians were seen as a, break-away sect of .the Jews. However, whereas the, mainstream Jews enjoyed some freedom to worship according, to their own customs, the dissenting sects among them were, not viewed favourably by the authorities. They were, considered a potential source of trouble. The state therefore, did not hesitate to take action against Christians and puritanical, Jewish sects. In this they were sometimes assisted by Jewish, groups like the Pharisees and Sadducees. Significantly, the, early Christians also fell victim to any general persecution of, the Jewish population by the Roman state.
Page 525 :
Appendix, , I, , 499, , It has been pointed out that one of the reasons for the, suspicious attitude of the authorities towards the Christians, was the popularity which the faith had among the lower classes., Further, since the Christians were monotheistic they did not, worship Roman gods. They stayed away from state religion, and constituted separate communities. Nero came down with, a very heavy hand against the Christian community of Rome., The persecution launched by him resulted in several executions,, including those of Peter and Paul. It seems that by this time a, distinction was being made between the two religions., Nevertheless, the Christians must have suffered along with, the Jews during the anti-Jewish campaign of Vespasian and, Titus (AD 66-70)., The Christians were left more or less alone for the next, half-century. In the early second century AD we hear of, instructions being issued by Trajan that Christi.ans should not, be hunted out, but should o,:,.ly be punished if any specific, charges of not worshipping Roman gods were brought against, them. Relations between Christians and the Roman state, deteriorated under Marcus Aurelius. Simultaneously there was, tension between local Christian and non-Christian, communities in some parts of the empire. There is evidence to, show that there were arrests and executions of Christians in, Marcus Aurelius's reign. These continued under Commodus., The situation worsened under Septimius Severus. Septimius, Severus carried out the first large-scale persecution of the, Christians throughout the empire. This coincided with a, campaign against the Jews. No conversions were to be allowed., Sanctions were imposed against the Christians and many were, put to death or imprisoned. These policies continued to be in, force almost throughout the first half of the third century AD., After a brief reversal of this policy c. AD 250, the persecution, went on for another decade. Then, between c. AD 260 and, 303 the Roman rulers followed a more moderate policy with, regard to the Christians., When Diocletian became emperor in 284 BC there was no, significant shift in policy for the first two decades of his reign.
Page 526 :
500, , I Early Social Formations, , However, shortly before he abdicated the throne he embarked, upon a violent campaign to suppress Christianity. Some of the, advisors of the emperor had been advocating such a line for a, ·long time. Though he had agreed with them, he postponed, the implementation of the new policy as he was preoccupied, with various other problems. In AD 303 he started what is, known as the Great Persecution of Christians. Diocletian, wanted to reassert the traditional religious beliefs of Rome as, part of his overall scheme to strengthen the state. He, demanded strict adherence to official state religion. The, Christians were the most prominent among those who declined, to accept Roman gods and they now became the main targets, of Diocletian's religious persecution. Churches and religious, books we.re destroyed; assemblies of Christians were banned;, Christian government officials were removed from their posts;, and all those who professed the faith were threatened with, death or imprisonment. In the eastern provinces and northern, Africa, where Christianity had its main. strength, the, persecution was particularly severe. In all about 3000 persons, are known to have been executed. Many more were arrested, and tortured., The successors of Diocletian persisted with this policy till, AD 313. This date was a major turning point in the history of, Christianity. In AD 313 Constantine the Great issued an edict, known as the Toleration Edict (or the Edict of Milan) which, officially put an end to the persecution. The government had, apparently not realized that it would· encounter such stiff resistance in its.attempt to suppress Christianity. In any case the, religion had acquired such a large following in the empire by, the end of the third century AD that it would have been, virtually impossible to completely annihilate it. In West Asia, and north Africa a sizeable section of the ruling class had, become Christian. Carrying on with an anti-Christian policy, would have created too much instability in the eastern, provinces, something that Constantine was keen to avoid., During the third century AD Christianity had spread to rural, areas of Egypt and north Africa: It is estimated that as much
Page 527 :
Appendix, , I, , 501, , as half the population of Egypt was Christian by AD 300., Alexandria was a major centre of Christian learning· and, theology. The most outstanding religious scholars of, Christianity belonged to the east. Early Christian literature, was written in Greek or Aramaic., The growing popularity of eastern cults, which had a substantial following even among the Roman ruling elite,, eventually paved the way for the spread of Christianity in the, Roman territories. This was particularly true of the eastern, half of the empire in which Christianity had its roots., Constantine's Toleration Edict coincided with the permanent, shifting of the seat of government of the Roman empire to the, east (Constantinople) and the search for a new support base, among eastern peoples with the disintegration of the Roman, state in the west., Shortly before his death (AD 337) Constantine personally, converted to Christianity. He had already paved the way for, making Christianity the state religion of the Roman empire., Once the new religion replaced Roman divinities, the, traditional religion of Rome declined rapidly. As a state, religion it grew by leaps and bounds. In the fourth century, AD Christianity became the dominant religion of the Latinspeaking western provinces., By the beginning of the third century AD the Christian, Church had developed an elaborate infrastructure. Religious, assemblies of the faithful were mostly held in churches. The, church was the religious and social centre around which, Christian communities were organized. Church rituals were, controlled more and more by priests. As priestly functions, became specialized, the social distance between priests and, ordinary members of the community increased. On the other, hand the emphasis on charity, community service and care, for the poor and the elderly sustained internal cohesion., Christians, especially in the western provinces, haq. come to, recognize the primacy of the bishop of Rome. In AD 200, there were about 10, 000 Christians in Rome. The figure had, gone up to 40, 000 by c. AD 300 and to 80, 000 under Constan-, , c.
Page 528 :
502, , i Early Social Formations, , tine. One should bear in mind that even in the fifth century, AD the bulk of the Christian population resided in the east., , V, In the latter half of the third century and the early fourth, century AD Christianity had to contend with another religious, movement-Manichaeism. For some time Manichaeism was, the main rival of Christianity in -the Roman empire., Manichaeism originated in the Sassanid empire in the third, century AD. It was founded by a Babylonian named Mani., Mani was born in c. AD 216. He was brought up in a Christian, community and was deeply influenced by Christianity. Living, in the Sassanid empire (Babylon alongwith most of, Mesopotamia was ruled by the Sassanids) Mani had imbibed, the ideas of Zoroastrianism. He also had great respect for the, teachings of Buddha. Mani evolved a new religious ideology, which was a combination of Christianity, Zoroastrianism and, Iranian dualism. There are traces of Mithraism in his thought., The essence of Manichaeism is a dualist conception of the, universe. He thought in terms of an epic struggle between the, forces of light and the forces of darkness. The forces of light, would ultimately triull)ph. Meanwhile we have to be on the, side of good to defeat evil. The practice of Manichaeism was, based upon prescribed rituals for personal salvation and, purification. These included fasting, confessions, abstention, and self-denial. Arnold Toynbee has described Manichaeism, as 'Zoroastrianism in Christian dress'., · Mani first taught at Cstesiphon, the ancient Sassanid, capital. Cstesiphon was situated on the Tigris, close to Babylon., He declared himself to be the founder of a new world religion., The Manichaean community, he held , would eventually, embrace all humanity. For this he sent out missionaries to, preach his doctrines. He created an elaborate organization, with priests and monastic orders. The Manichaeans had their, own churches. Mani's teachings met with an overwhelming, response in Iran, Mesopotamia and Syria. He developed a
Page 529 :
Appendix, , I, , 503, , close relationship with the reigning Sassanid emperor Shapur, I, the son of Ardashir., The traditional Zoroastrian priests felt threatened by the, rise of Manichaeism and strongly opposed the new movement., After the death of Shapur I, the Zoroastrian priesthood, reasserted itself. Kartir, who was the chief Zoroastrian priest,, conducted an aggressive campaign against Mani. The Sassanid, government arrested ·Mani and he was put to death in c. 273, BC. His followers continued to propagate his teachings and by, the end of the third century AD Manichaeism was almost a, world religion with churches and followers in Europe, north, Africa, West Asia, Central Asia and China. However, once, Zoroastrianism had become the state religion of the Sassanid, empire and Christianity had been adopted by the Roman state,, Manichaeism could not hope for any official patronage. The, movement declined during the fourth century AD., When Christianity became the state religion of the Roman, empire it had already been in existence for three centuries., Several ideological differences had arisen in this period. Some, of the controversies had caused sectarian divisions among the, Christians. The first major controversy in the Christian Church, was over the question of whether Jesus was human or whether, he should be regarded as divine. A Christian scholar of, Alexandria named Arius (died AD 336) had forcefully argued, that Jesus was not divine but was essentially human. The, doctrine of Arius is called Arianism. A number of theologians, held the opposite view. They emphatically stated that Jesus, was not human but was God himself. He was inseparable from, the supreme father. Athanasius, also of Alexandria, was the, leading proponent of this conception of Jesus. This debate led, to such a serious conflict that Constantine convened a council, of Christian leaders to settle the matter. This council, known, as the Council of Nicaea was held in AD 325. The Council of, Nicaea was attended by clergymen from all over the empire, and the emperor was personally present at it. Arianism was, condemned by the council. Henceforth the dominant view, within the Church was that Jesus was the son of God and was
Page 530 :
504, , I Early Social Formations, , of the same substance as the Supreme Father. The Coun€il of, Nicaea was the first major assembly in the history of Christianity. By convening the council and referring the Arian, controversy to it Constantine sought a uniform official version, Christianity for the empire. In this he was largely successful., Arianism was rejected at the official level but it did not, die out. This doctrine had. a large following in parts of West, Asia. In western Europe Arianism witnessed a revival in the, late fourth century AD when some of the Germanic tribes, converted to Christianity, and accepted the Arian view., Arianism became the official creed of the Visigothic kingdom, of Spain. For about two centuries Arianism flourished in Spain, and some other parts of western Europe. But in the sixth, century AD the Visigoths became Catholics, i. e., followers of, the orthodox view which had been. upheld at the Council of, Nicaea., In the fifth. ce;ntury AD ,the Ge~manic states. of western, Europe accepted Christianity, mainly 41 its Catholic form. Western Christianity received a further boost with the conversion, of the Germanic tribes, and by the time the _1~.oman empire, came to an end the Christian ·faith had been adopted. by the, overwheJmiI:ig majority of Europeans. Till th~. rise· of Islam in, the seventh century AD it was also the main religion of the, eastern provinces, Egypt' and north Africa., .
Page 531 :
FURTHER READING, , GENERAL, , Perry Anderson, Passages from Antiquity to Feudalism, London, 1978., John Boardman et al (eds.), Oxford History of the Classical World,, Oxford, 1986., Henry C. Boren, The Ancient World: An Historical Perspective,, second edition, Englewood Cliffs: New Jersey, 1986., J. Bronowski, The Ascent of Man, London, 1973., V. Gordon Childe, What Happened in History, Harmondsworth,, 1942 (several reprints)., Brian Pagan, People of the Earth: An Introduction to World, Prehistory, sixth edition, Illinois, 1989. UNESCO, History, of Humanity, Volumes I-III, London, 1994-1996., HUMAN EVOLUTION, Basic, , V. Gordon Childe, What Happened in History, Harmondsworth,, 1942 (several reprints)., Maurice Daumas, A History of Technology and Innovation,, Volume I, New York, 1969., Brian Pagan, People of the Earth: An Introduction to World, Prehistory, sixth edition, Illinois, 1989. General Anthropology,, second edition, New York, 1975., Richard Leakey, The Origin of Humankind, London, 1996., UNESCO, History of Humanity, Volume I: Prehistory and the, Beginnings of Cim1imtion, edited by S.J. De Laet, London, 1994
Page 532 :
506, , I Early Social Formations, , Advanced, W.E. Le Gros Clarke, The Fossil Evidence for Human Evolution,, Chicago, 1955., Richard Dawkins, The Blind Watchmaker, Harmondsworth, 1991., PALEOLITHIC AGE, Basic, , V. Gordon Childe, What Happened in History, Harmondsworth,, 1942 (several reprints)., UNESCO, History of Humanity, Volume I: Prehistory and the, Beginnings of Civilization, edited by SJ. De Laet, London,, 1994., Brian Fagan, People of the Earth: An Introduction to World, Prehistory, sixth edition, Illinois, 1989., Richard Leakey, The Origin of Humankind, London, 1996., Graham Clark, World Prehistory in !yew Perspective, third edition,, Cambridge, 1977., Advanced, C. Emiliani, Planet Earth, Cambridge, 1995., , Peter Ucko and A. Rosefeld, Paleolithic Cave Art, London, 1975., NEOLITHIC AGE, Basic, , V. Gordon Childe, What Happened in History, Harmondsworth,, 1942 (several reprints)., UNESCO, History of Humanity, Volume I: Prehistory and the, Beginning of Civilization, edited by S,J. De Laet, London,, 1994., ., Brian Fagan, People of the Earth: An Introduction to World, Prehistory, sixth edition, Illinois, 1989., R. Wer· .e, Patterns in Prehistory) second edition, Oxford; 1984., Graham Oark, World Prehistory in New Perspective, third edition,, Cambridge, 1977. ·
Page 533 :
Further Readings, , I, , ,507, , Advanced, , Lewis Binford, 'Post-:Pleistocene Adaptations', in New, Perspectives in Archaeol.ogy, edited by, L.R. and S.R. Binford,, Chicago, 1968., j\,1.N. Cohen, The Food Crisis in Prehistory: Overpopulation and, the Origins of .Agriculture, New Haven, 1977., Stuart Struever, Prehistoric Agriculture, New York, 1971., THE BEGINNINGS OF CIVILIZATION AND BRONZE, AGE MESOPOTAMIA, Basic, , V. Gordon Childe, What Happened in History, Harmondsworth,, 1942 (several reprints)., Brian Fagan, People of the Earth: An Introduction to World, Prehistory, sixth edition, Illinois, 1989., J. Gates, Babylon, London, 1979., J.N. Postgate, Early Mesopotamia, London, 1992., George Roux, Ancient Iraq, third edition, Harmondsworth, 1992., UNESCO, History of Mankind, Volume I: Prehistory and the, Beginnings of Civilization, edited by J. Hawkes and L., Woolley, London, 1963., UNESCO, History of Humanity, Volume II: From Third, Millennium to Seventh Century EC, edited by A'. H. Dani, and J.P. Mohen, London, 1996., Advanced, , Gerda Lerner, The Creation of Patriarchy, New York, 1986., EARLY EGYPTIAN CIVILIZATION, Basic, , Brian Fagan, People of the Earth: An Introduction to World, Prehistory, sixth edition, illinois, 1989., T.G.H. James, An Introduction to Ancient Egypt, London, 1979.
Page 534 :
508, , I Early Social Formations, , Bruce Trigger et al, Ancient Egypt: A Social History, Cambridge, 1983,, , C, , UNESCO, History. of Humanity, Volume I: Prehistory and the, Beginnings of Civilization, edited by S. J. De Laet, London,, 1994, UNESCO, History of Humanity, Volume II: From Third., Millennium to Seventh Century EC, edited by A. H. Dani ., and J.P. Mohen, London, 1996., J. Bottero, E. Cassin and J. Vercoutter (eds.), The Near East:, The Early Civilizations, New York, 1967., Advanced, , 1.E.S. Edwards, The Pyramids of Egypt, Harmondsworth, 1961., A. Moret, The Nile and Egyptian Civilization, London, 1927., FROM BRONZE AGE TO IRON AGE: ANATOLIA AND, GREECE, Basic, , John Boardman et al (eds. t Oxford History of the Classical World,, Oxford, 1986., Brian Fagan, People of the Earth: An Introduction to World, Prehistory, sixth edition, Illinois, 1989., UNESCO, History of Humanity, Volume I: Prehistory and the, Beginnings of Civilization, edited by S. J. De Laet, London,, 1994., UNESCO, History of Humanity, Volume II: From Third, Millennium to Seventh Century BC, edited by A.H. Dani, and J.P. Mohen, London, 1996., Advanced, , M.I. Finley, The World of Odysseus, second revised edition,, Harmondsworth, 1979 (several reprints)., O.K. Gurney, The Hittites, Harmondsworth, 1952., Gerda Lerner, The Creation of Patriarchy, New York, 1986.
Page 535 :
Further Readings I 50(), , ARCHAIC AND CLASSICAL GREECE, Basic, , Perry Anderson, Passages from Antiquity to Feudalism, London,, 1978., Antony Andrewes, Greek Society, Harmondsworth, 1991., John Boardman et al (eds.), Oxford History of the Classical World,, Oxford, 1986., M.I. Finley, The Ancient Greeks, Harmondsworth, 1963, Advanced, , G. Glotz, The Greek City and Its Institutions, London, 1969., W.W. Tarn, Hellenistic Civilization, New York, 1952., George Thomson, Studies in Ancient Greek Society: The First, Philosophers, London, 1972 (especially part IV)., E.M. Wood, Peasant-Citizen and Slave: The Foundations of, Athenian Democracy, London, 1988., ANCIENT ROME, Basic, , Perry Anderson, Passages from Antiquity to Feudalism, London,, 1978., John Boardman et al (eds.), Oxford History of the Classical World,, Oxford, 1986., ·, D. Dudley, Roman Society, Harmondsworth, 1970., UNESCO, History of Humanity, Volume III: From Seventh, Century EC to Seventh Century AD, edited by Joachim, Hermann and Erik Zurcher, London, 1996., Advanced, , P.A. Brunt, Social Conflicts in the Roman Republic, London, 1971., M.I. Finley, The Anc;ient Economy, second edition,, Harmondsworth, 1992., Leon Homo, Roman Political Institutions: From City to State,, London, 1962., Robert Turcan, The Cults of the Roman Empire, second edition,, Oxford, 1996.
Page 536 :
5.l O, , I Early Social Formations, , THE ARABS, ISLAM, AND WEST ASIA UNDER THE, UMAYYADS AND EARLYABBASIDS; EARLY MEDIEVAL, WEST ASIA, Basic, , J.A. Boyle (ed.), The Cambridge History of Iran, Volume V: The', Saljuq and Mongol Periods, Cambridge, 1968., Albert Hourani, A History of the Arab Peoples, London, 1991., Maxime Rodinson, Mohammed, London, 1971., UNESCO, History of Humanity, Volume III: From Seventh, Century BC to Seventh Century AD, edited by Joachim, Hermann and Erik Zurcher, London, 1996., , Advanced, W.M. Watt, Muhammad at Mecca, Oxford, 1953., M.G.S. Hodgson, The Venture of Islam, Volume I, Chicago, 1974., P.M. Holt et al (eds.), The Cambridge History of Islam, Volume I:, The Central Islamic Lands, Cambridge, 1970., MEDIEVAL EUROPE, Basic, , Perry Anderson, Passages from Antiquity to Feudalism, London, 1978., T.H. Aston and C.H.E. Philpin (eds.), Brenner Debate: Agrarian, , Class Structure and Economic Development in Pre-Industrial, Europe, Cambridge, 1987., Marc Bloch, Feudal Society, Volume I: The Growth of Ties of, Dependence, second edition, London, 1962 (1982 reprint)., Carlo M. Cipolla (ed.), The Fontana Economic History of Europe,, · Volume I: The Middle Ages, Glasgow, 1972., Advanced, Pierre Dockes, Medieval Slavery and Liberation, London, 198i, Henri Pirenne, Mohammad and Charlemagne, New York, 1939., Lynn White Jr., Medieval Technology and Social Change, Oxford,, ., 1962.
Page 538 :
512, , I, , Early Social Formations, , Amenhotep IV 124, J\merica84, American56, Amratian culture 106, Anatolia 70, 83, 91, 130, 132, 197,, 207, 271, 335, 381, 399, Anatolain 128, Anderson, Perry 232, Angles401, Anglo-Saxon 402, 421, Antioch 255, 304, Antiochus III 207, 243, 282, 407, Antony, Mark 246, 247, 249, 257,, 261,279, Apennine mountains 198, Apollo 190,191,221, AppiusClaudius221, Arabs 333, 334, 351, 368, 381, 406, invaded France 435, Arab armies 432, Arab empire 336, Arab expansion 351, 412, Arab families 338, Arab invasions 400, 432, Arab invasion of France 412, Arab population 350, Arab tribes 327, 347, Arabia323, westem319., Arabian desert 72, Arabian sea 318, Aramaic265, Archaic Egypt 112, Argissa-Maghula 16, 139, Arianism 410, Aristotle 189, Armenia'265, 400, army 90, 229, 270, 297, artisans 298, Asia20,34, AsiaS:Central 128,140,310,367,376, Asia West 21, 33, 45, 48, 51, 55, 64,, 68, 75, 97, 206, 240, 269, 271,, , 284, 318, 399, 404, Asian apes 15, Asian, Central 309, Asians149, Assyrians 411, Athenian 173, Athenian navy 177, Athenian peasantry 181, Attila313, decisive defeat of 398, Atum-Re cult 124, Audoin402, Augustan age 256, 398, Augustus 247, 248, 249, 250, 252,, 253, 254, 256, 258, 260, 279, 284,, 404, Aurelius, Marcus 266, 267, 296, Aurignacian culture 36, Australopithecus robustus 24, Ayyubids 387, Azud-ud-daula 368, 373, Babylon 91, 95, Babylonian dynasty 91, Babylonian rule 413, Babylonian rulers 411, Badarian culture 106, Baghdad 353, 382, Balkans 140, Basra 337, 353, Beduin tribes 320, Belgium305, Bender, Barbara 63, 67, Bethlehem 417, Binford, Lewis 60, Bipedalism 32 ·, Black Sea 272, 274, 305, Blacks375, Bloch, Marc 423, Braidwood, Robert 59, Breuil Henri 34, bronze age 96, 141, civilization 71; cultures 140
Page 539 :
Index, Brunner, Heinrich 431, Brunt, P.A. 277, Bukhara366, Bulgaria 154, bureaucracy, centralized 397, Burgundians 311, Byzantine empire 313, 397, Byzantines 335, . ruling class 421, Byzantine strategy 399, Cairo 337, 371, Capelian dynasty 425, Campus Martins 218, Caracalla 268, Carburization 151, Carlomanll 414, Carolingian cavalry 433, empire438, military leadership 434, Carthage 204, 208, Carthagian empire 148, Caspian Sea 368, Catholic church 419, Cave paintings 36, Celtic Gauls 245, Celtic tribes 305, Chaghari Beg 380, Charlemagne 416, 424, 430, Charlemagne's victory 404, Charles II 425, Charles Martel 412, 413, 432, Cheops 118, Chephren 118, Chevalier de Lamarck 3, Childe Gordon 37, 59, 70, 76, 77,, 81, 82, 84, 88, 136-38, 151, Childerich I 409, chimpanzee 24, 29, 43, China 20, 31, 311, indent432, Chinese fossils 20, Chios 166, , I, , 5.13, , Chlotar-1 411, Christian 103, Christian government 422, Christianity 323,331,408,409,410,, 416,417,418,420,421,425,426,, , 446, distinctive features of 422, citizenship rights 236, civil rights 236, Oactonian tools 30, Oarke, Graham 77, classical world 420, classification 2, Oeopatra 257, Oovis411, coalition 145, Cohen, Mark 63, coloni298, communication 29, community 365, copper 76, 139, Coptic Church 323, Corinth. 208, Council of Nicaea (325) 410, Crassus 231, 244, cultivation 73, Cybele 400, Cyprus 142, 404, Cyrillic 422', Czech421;, Dailam368, Danubian troops 308, Darius 1404, 405, dark ages 180, Darwin, Charles 2, 4, 7, theory 8, Diana398, Diocletian 270, 397, Diocletian retirement of 274, Dionysian festivals 194, Dionysus 194, divorce 101
Page 540 :
; :. 1, , I Early Social Formations, , Dobb, Maurice 449, dowry 101, settlement of 101, Druidism 402, 403, Dumuzi96, Eastern desert 104, Eastern Europe 35, Egypt 56, 84, 104, 107, 108, 110, 120,, 124,128,145,152,195,197,206,, 208,209,250,254,255,271,273,, 284, 304, 333, 336, 337, 364, 366,, 367,387,399,400,408,440, Egypt religious, ideology of 121, Egyptian and Mesopotamian, civilizations 52, Egyptian chariots 136, Egyptian civilization 103, 107, 108,, 114,125, Egyptian myths 107, Egyptian religion 121, Engels287, environment 45, environmental changes 64, Ertebolle 47, Ethiopians 323, Etruscan kings 201, Etruscan monarchy 209, Etruscans 235, Euphrates 71, Europe 20, 21, 28, 34, 45, 46, 221,, 309,434,440, central 65, 314; eastern 269;, medieval 416, 419, 422, 436,, 438, 441, 449; northern 455;, souther 55, 97; warriors 434;, western 36, 205, 238, 303, 416,, 420,422, European civilization 198, European feudalism 431, 458, Evans, Sir Authur 141, evolutionary process 1, , Fabius Pictor 209, family relationship 100, Fatima370, feudal economy 458, feudalism 275, 428, 436, 438, 457, feudal lords 465, feudal relations 458, feudal system 425 ·, Fez 354, Finley, M.I. 177, 182, Flannery, Kent 61, Flavian dynasty 262, food arid clothing, rations of 300, food gathering 57, food production 5~, food, requirement of 278, food supply 57, 61, France 28, 34, 36, 440, Franchthi Cave 139., Frankish army 412, 432, 435, Frankish cavalry 432, Frankish custom 410, Frankish empire 414, Frankish kings 409, Franks 401, 405, 408, 410, 433, Gaius Gracchus 228, 238, Galba262, Gallo-Roman population 421, Gaul 250, 254, 255, 270, 295, 305, George de Buffon 2, Germanic customs.408, Germanic invasions 401, 406, 407,, 420, 431, 439, 449, Germanic languages 421, Germanic laws 317, Genrianic legal system 403, Germanic peasantry 432, Germanic peasants 408., Germanic tribes 306, 308, 309, 311,, 402,394,398,399,400,407,410,, 413, 420, 436, 437., Germany 21, 305
Page 541 :
Index, Gerzean culture 106, Ghaznavid 379, Gibbon, Edward 261, Glagolitic 422, Glotz, G. 162, Gobi desert 311, Goths 309, grain, distribution free 232, Great Peasant Revolt 467, Greco-Roman antiquity 419, 426,, 456, Greco-Roman slavery 296, Greco-Roman social formation 286,, 287, Greco-Roman society 285,286,287, Greece 84, 140, 143,154,399 Greek, 125,129,155,243,381,398,402, agriculture 180; alphabet 149,, 200; architecture classical 192;, armies 176; audience 209; cities, 255; civilization 153, 196;, democracy 169, 175; drama, 191; economy 184; god Apollo, 174; language 209, 281;, mythology 186; · peasant, soldiers 289; rebellion 208;, religion 190; settlements 163,, 185, 198; states 207; victory 177, Grunebaum, G.E. von 335, Halaf73, Halafian culture 74, Hammurabi 91, 94, handicraft production 184, ·, Hanifa tribe 333, Hannibal 207, Harun al-Rashid 352, Hashim clan 326, Hassuna73, culture74, Hattian civilization 131, Hellenistic age 195,197,398, Hellenistic kingdoms 273, , I, , 515, , helotry 181, Hera 190, Heracleopolis 124, Hijaz 319,322,324, Hijaz settlement 327, Hippocrates of Cos 187, Hittite 91, 405, Hittite empire 410, Hittite military 136, Hittite mythology 135, Hittite rulers 133, Hittite society 134, Homo erectus fossils 20, Homo erectus tools 27, homo habilis, emergente of 19, homo sapiens 21, 33, Hortensius Quintius 223, human evolution 15, human skull, modern 22, Hungarian language 422, Hun invasion 398, hunting57, and food gathering 70, Husayn341, lbn Zubayr 342, increased taxation 414, India, ancient 432, Indo-Aryans 129, Indo-European 129, 131, tribes 199; people 421, Indonesia 31, Ionian tribes 170, 171, iqta system 369, Iran 83, 140, 163,197,244,264,265,, 336, 347, 368, 381, 404, Iranian 381, dualism 424; traditions 351;, world351, Iraq 34, 54, 71, 129, 140, 197, 265,, 319,333,334,336,345,347,381, North 52, irrigation 86, 357
Page 542 :
516, , I, , Early Social Formations, , system of 373, Isfahan368, Islam 318, 319, 346, 351, Islamic world 327, 345, 353, 365, Israel 52, 412, Israelites 408, Italian bronze age 199, Italian cities 400, Italian peninsula 203, Italy 202, 207, 223, 233, 239, 242,, 267,270,279,283,285,295,401,, 415, invasion of 202, Jalaluddin Rumi 388, Jamdat Nasr 89, culture 75, 88, Jericho 54, Jerusalem 334, 411, 414, 417, 418, Jesus Christ 265, 403, 420, Jewish 327,409,414,417, Jewish sects 421, Jews 412, 415, 416, Jones, A.H.M. 291, Jordan 54,323, Jordan Valley 52, Juba-II 255, Judah414, Judaic103, Judiasm 322,331,408,411,412,416,, 421, Julia Domna 401, Julius Caesar 231,243,244,245,246,, 247,248,250,254,403, assassination of 258, Juno 397, Jupiter397, Justin399, Justinian 313, 314, 399, 400, Justinian-I 399, Kaba 329, Kalahari desert 56, , Karbala341, Kathleen, Kenyon 54, 68, 69, Kenya 19, Khadija 326, 327; 332, death of 333, Khalid360, Khariji 339, 342, Khentiamentiu 122, Khurasan 345, 367, 386, Khurasani 379, army 350, Khwarazm 381, Kinda tribe 224, Kinship and marriage 212, Kinship tribes 224, Kinnan368, Kish 94, Kongemose 47, Kufa 337, 341, 353, Kung 56, 57, labour 441, 462, services 441, 462; shortage (!f, 292; supply of 442, 443, Laconia167, Lambton, A.KS. 385, landowners 417, land redistribution 277, land reforms 228, 230, landless agricultural workers 462,, 463, landless citizens 231, 232, landlords 301, rich 182, Latin colonies 238 ·, Latin communities 236, Latin culture 255, . Latin literature 256, Latin towns 200, Latin villages 200, Le Gros Clarke 16, Leo-III 415, 416 ', Leakey, Mary 17, 24
Page 543 :
Index, Leakey, Richard 20, Lebanese coast 130, 148, Lee, Richard 56, Lepidus 246,247, Lerner, Gerda 178, Leroi-Gourhan, Andre 39, Libby, Willard 51, Libya267, Lieberman) Philip 43, Linnaeus2, Lombard415, kingdom 415, Lombards 402, London33, Louis-1425, Lucullus 243, Macedonia 154, 206, 207, Macedonain rule 195, Macedonain wars 226, 240, Madina 319,328,336,342,381, Madalenian culture 37, 45, Magdalenian economy 45, Maghrib 344, 354, 364, 366, 367, Maglemose 47, Mahmud of Ghazna 379, 380, 381,, 391, Mahmud's army 378, Malik Shah 366, 383, 385, 386, 390, Manetho 110, Manichaesim 424, manorial system 447, Marc Bloch 406, 429, 461, Marcomanni 307, Marius 231, 240, 242, death of 241, Marj Rahat 342, marriage 63, 100,101,213, Marsi233,, Martel, Charles 434, 435, Marwanids 352, Marx287, Mawara al-Nahr 368, , I, , 517, , Maximian 271, Mecca319,324,327,329,342,381, Meccan 325, 328, economy 325, Mediterranean 184, 203, 206, 255,, 302, 364, 400, 439 ·, Eastern 70; societies 128, Merovfugian empire 410, 411, Merovingians 414, mesolithic 45, , mesolithic cultures 46, 49, Mesopotamia 71, 78, 87, 96, 99, 121,, 128,129,130,135,145,152,163,, 244,264,400,404,405,408,411, Lower 76; Southern 72, 90, Mesopotamian environment 73, Mesopotamian literature 89, Messenia 167, Mexico62, military mobilization 408, Minoan civilization 141, 142, 143, Mitannail 29, Mithra405, Mithraeums 406, Mithraism 401, 404, 405, Mithridates-I 264, Mithridates-VI 240,242,243, Mithridatic wars 242, Mongols 366, 381, Morocco 354, mother-child bond 30, mother-child relationship 41, Mount Olympus 190, Mousterian culture .31, 33, 34, Muawiya-II 340-41, Muhammad 325,326, 327, 328, 329,, 331,332,336,362,365, of religious mission 326, Muhammad al-Baqir 363, Muntazar 364, Musa al-Kallin 363, Muslims 324; 328, 347, 349, 364, 365,, 366
Page 544 :
518, , I, , Early Social Formations, , population 351, Mycenaean age 146, 183, Mycenaean civilization 143, 144, Najd319, Natufian culture 49, 53, 55, neolithic economy 105, neolithic settlements 54, 105, neolithic women 69, Nero 261, 262, 280, 421, Nerva 263, Nesian 136, Nile valley 107, 121, Nizam al-Mull< 383, 384, 385, 388,, 391,392, Nizami287, Octavian 246, 247, Odoacer398, Oghuz375, Old kingdom 119, 123, 124, Old Testament of the Bible 408, Oldowan24, Oldowan tools 25, 26, 27, Olduvai Gorge 17, Olympian deities 192, 193, 194, Oman319, Omangod219, Oscans235, Osiriancult 125, Osirian family 123, Osiris 117, Osiris cult 123, Ostrogoths 311,314,398,401, Pahlavi343, paleolithic adaptation 27 ·, paleolithic age 31, 32, paleolithic art, upper 37, paleolithic cave paintings 37, paleolithic cultures 28, 31, 45, paleolithic economy 48, paleolithic groups 66, , paleolithic hunters, upper 57, 67, paleolithic paintings 38, 39, Palestine 52, 197,208,265, 324, 326,, 328, 333, 407, 408, 411, Parthian empire 264, Paleoponnese 154, 167, Paleoponnesian wars 165, 177, 188,, 189, peasants 442, Persia400, Persian empire 399, Persian Gulf 72,318,319,371,373, Persian wars 177, Pharisees 415, Philip-II 415, Philip-V 207, 208, Phoenician settlement 203, Pippin-I 412, Pippin-II 412, Pippin-III 413,414, Plato 189, pleistocene epoch 44, Polish421, Pompey 231,244,245, pottery making 79, Price, T. Douglas 47, Prophet 365,392, Punic226, Punic wars 204, 205, 206, 207, 208,, 209,279, Pyramid texts 123, Pyrrhus 203, _Qadisiya, battle of 334, Qarluq375, Quipchaq 375, Qirghiz375, Quran 326, 338, 364, 366, Quraysh 327, 328, 332, tribe 325, 326, rajaz 321, Ramesses-II 132
Page 545 :
Index, Red Sea 318, 371, 407, revenue collection 419, Rhine area 402, Rodinson 330, Roman 201, 202, 207, 265, 396, agriculture 292; aristocracy, 210; army 205, 218, 228, 231,, 260, 297, 308, 311, 406, 398;, campaign 207; citizens 215,, 218,223,225, 226, 297; citizenship 212, 235, 238; civilization, 313, 403, 440; court 236;, divinities 423; emperor 398,, 417; empire 263, 264, 270, 280,, 296,313,399,400,416,426,431,, 449 collapse of the 418; expansion 204, 240; expansion beneficiary of 211; infantry 227;, law 21, 235, 236, 280, 317, 397,, 399; military 210, 255; military, organization 217, 251;, peasantry 210; religion 395,, 398, 399, 400, 404; rule 233,255;, slavery 180, 287; social, formation 301; society 212;, state 222, 225, 232, 238; tribes, 225; victory 204, Rome 84, 201, 202, 203, 205, 207,, 243,258,260,285, Rome hills of 200, Romulus Augustulus 398, Roux Georges 74, Russian421, Saljuqs 279, 390, Samarra73, Samnites 233, Sassanids 335, Saudi Arabia 318, Saxons401, Scandinavia 46, Scipio Africanus 205, Sejanus260, , I, , 519, , Seleucid dynasty 207, Seleucid kingdom 206, Seleucid rule 414, Serbo-Croatian 421, Sertorius 242, Sesklo 139, Shiites 362-365, 366, Shiraz368, Siberia35, slave labour 278,283,442, slave social formation 286, slave war 282, slavery 278, 296, role of 180; types of 183,, Slavic languages 422, slaves 184, 280, 281, 283, 241, purchasing 291; shortage of, 291, Slovak421, social war 233, 240, Socrates 189, Solutrean culture 36, Spain 31,250,254,255,267,270,295,, 314,366,367,401,404,405, Spartacus 242, Ste. Croix 293, 294, Stone tool technology 34, Suebi 404, 405, Sulla 231, 241, 242, 244, 247, 248,, 253, Sumeria 72, Sumerian civilization 90, 103, Sumerian religion 94, Sumu-abum 91, Sunnis365, Sunnism 365, 390, Syria 52, 54, 129, 130, 135, 197, 207~, 208,243,244,250,254,255,254,, 255,264,265,304,326,328, 333,, 336, 345, 367, 381, Syrian desert 319, Syria-Palestine 371
