What do you think?
Rate this book
What Makes Civilization? The Ancient Near East and the Future of the West
The targeted destruction of ancient sites and monuments in the Middle East provokes widespread outrage in the West. But what is our connection to the ancient Near East? In this updated edition of What Makes Civilization? archaeologist David Wengrow investigates the origins of farming, writing, and cities in ancient Mesopotamia (Iraq) and Egypt, and explores the connections between these two civilizations. It is the story of how people first created kingdoms and monuments to the gods and, just as importantly, how they pioneered everyday practices that we might now take for granted, such as familiar ways of cooking food and keeping the house and body clean. Wengrow asks why these ancient cultures, where so many features of modern life originated, have come to symbolize the remote and the exotic.
Today, perhaps more than ever, he argues, the beleaguered cultural heritage of ancient Egypt and Mesopotamia stands as a warning for the future. A warning of the sacrifices people will tolerate to preserve their chosen form of life; of the potential for unfettered expansion that exists within any cultural tradition; and of blood perhaps yet to be spilled, on the altar of a misguided notion of civilization.
Today, perhaps more than ever, he argues, the beleaguered cultural heritage of ancient Egypt and Mesopotamia stands as a warning for the future. A warning of the sacrifices people will tolerate to preserve their chosen form of life; of the potential for unfettered expansion that exists within any cultural tradition; and of blood perhaps yet to be spilled, on the altar of a misguided notion of civilization.
240 pages, Hardcover
First published July 15, 2010
18 people are currently reading
773 people want to read
About the author
David Wengrow
10 books219 followersDavid Wengrow is a British archaeologist and Professor of Comparative Archaeology at the Institute of Archaeology, University College London.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 23 of 23 reviews
April 21, 2022
This is quite an interesting but very hybrid book. Wengrow seems to be trying to refute Samuel Huntington's thesis on the clash of civilizations. The author is particularly opposed to the very static interpretation that Huntington gave to the concept of civilization, namely as if these were more or less separate containers. He is certainly not the only or the first one to give this justified criticism. The problem is that Wengrow then goes on to deal with very different aspects of ancient Near Eastern history, with very different themes and angles of view. His intent is to show how civilizations are constantly changing and also interacting with each other. He certainly regularly brings up interesting things, but you can not say that he convincingly makes his point. So mixed feelings. More about that in my History account on Goodreads: https://www.goodreads.com/review/show....
Read
June 7, 2025David Wengrow (b. 1972) is a British specialist in the archeology of the ancient Near East. In this book, he highlights various aspects of the peoples and cultures of this area, spanning the period from the earliest Neolithic times (about 9,000 BCE) to the classical antiquity. The focus is, as you would expect, on ancient Egypt and Mesopotamia, but Wengrow is making geographical forays to Europe and Iran-Afghanistan, and even touching upon the perception of the ancient period in early modern Europe. So he brings a lot of interesting material together, which gives me the impression that this book actually is an adaptation of earlier, separately published articles, with a rather academic slant, and therefore certainly not for the layman.
But the title of this book is: “what is a civilization?”, and that is certainly no modest theme. Wengrow opposes the view of civilizations as isolated units, which can therefore collide head-on. He explicitly mentions Samuel Huntington who, in his opinion, is guilty of this reductionist view. “Civilization, if we are to retain that term, should then refer to the historical outcomes of exchanges and borrowings between societies, rather than to processes or attributes that set one society apart from another.” It is a statement I can only wholeheartedly subscribe to, and which fits perfectly with what William McNeill already took as a starting point and illustrated in his masterpiece, The Rise of the West: A History of the Human Community (1963). Strange that Wengrow doesn't refer to that book.
In about ten chapters he discusses aspects of the ancient Egyptian and Mesopotamian civilizations. In addition, very interesting data is touched upon and he often sheds new light on old discussions. But only indirectly does his main point of view come into focus, namely cultural exchange. The readers have to puzzle that together themselves, and that is a drawback. Wengrow took take a more systematic approach in his The Dawn of Everything: A New History of Humanity published in 2021 with the now deceased David Graeber. But that book suffers from a few other ailments (see my review here).
But the title of this book is: “what is a civilization?”, and that is certainly no modest theme. Wengrow opposes the view of civilizations as isolated units, which can therefore collide head-on. He explicitly mentions Samuel Huntington who, in his opinion, is guilty of this reductionist view. “Civilization, if we are to retain that term, should then refer to the historical outcomes of exchanges and borrowings between societies, rather than to processes or attributes that set one society apart from another.” It is a statement I can only wholeheartedly subscribe to, and which fits perfectly with what William McNeill already took as a starting point and illustrated in his masterpiece, The Rise of the West: A History of the Human Community (1963). Strange that Wengrow doesn't refer to that book.
In about ten chapters he discusses aspects of the ancient Egyptian and Mesopotamian civilizations. In addition, very interesting data is touched upon and he often sheds new light on old discussions. But only indirectly does his main point of view come into focus, namely cultural exchange. The readers have to puzzle that together themselves, and that is a drawback. Wengrow took take a more systematic approach in his The Dawn of Everything: A New History of Humanity published in 2021 with the now deceased David Graeber. But that book suffers from a few other ailments (see my review here).
May 21, 2012
Archaeologist David Wengrow has written a cautionary political tract relating the ancient Near East to “the future of the West.” Most pointedly, his What Makes Civilization? is a critique of Francis Fukuyama's “The End of History?” (1989) and Samuel Huntington's “The Clash of Civilizations?” (1993).
Fukuyama's thesis optimistically predicted “the universalization of Western liberal democracy as the final form of human government.” Huntington's pessimistic rejoinder asserted that with the cessation of the Cold War ancient deep fissures between cultures and civilizations would reappear.
Wengrow's book is, at first and at length, an argument against Huntington's essentialism, a demonstration of the “interconnectedness of prehistoric and ancient societies” (p. 13) with particular reference to Egypt and Mesopotamia in the third millennium B.C.E. The shorter, second part of his work takes on Fukuyama and the apotropaic delusions of modern empire.
It is clear that Wengrow has studied ancient economies. His treatment of trade relations, currency, manufacturing, banking, commodity standardization and branding in the fertile crescent and environs is detailed with examples and arguments which are suggestively illuminating and impressive. If employed in a classroom, his portrayal of ancient economics would lead to discussion and debate.
His second part, however, is less impressive. Fukuyama's short-sighted faith in an end of history is on the level of Hegel's Grundlinien der Philosophie des Rechts (1820) or Marx and Engel's Manifest der Kommunistischen Partei (1848).
It is all-too-easy to show the falsity of such eschatological myths by the simple recounting of some of them. This is what Wengrow does, most broadly by contrasting the hoary beliefs in sacral kingship against more modern beliefs in democratic republicanism, while suggesting how such apparently antithetical faiths share common, irrational roots. With this and the current occupation of Iraq in mind he concludes with a question: “By elevating civilizations to the pinnacle of human achievement, or seeking to orientate our future around an idealized image of what they might become, are we not simply raising up new gods where old ones have fallen?” (p. 176).
Fukuyama's thesis optimistically predicted “the universalization of Western liberal democracy as the final form of human government.” Huntington's pessimistic rejoinder asserted that with the cessation of the Cold War ancient deep fissures between cultures and civilizations would reappear.
Wengrow's book is, at first and at length, an argument against Huntington's essentialism, a demonstration of the “interconnectedness of prehistoric and ancient societies” (p. 13) with particular reference to Egypt and Mesopotamia in the third millennium B.C.E. The shorter, second part of his work takes on Fukuyama and the apotropaic delusions of modern empire.
It is clear that Wengrow has studied ancient economies. His treatment of trade relations, currency, manufacturing, banking, commodity standardization and branding in the fertile crescent and environs is detailed with examples and arguments which are suggestively illuminating and impressive. If employed in a classroom, his portrayal of ancient economics would lead to discussion and debate.
His second part, however, is less impressive. Fukuyama's short-sighted faith in an end of history is on the level of Hegel's Grundlinien der Philosophie des Rechts (1820) or Marx and Engel's Manifest der Kommunistischen Partei (1848).
It is all-too-easy to show the falsity of such eschatological myths by the simple recounting of some of them. This is what Wengrow does, most broadly by contrasting the hoary beliefs in sacral kingship against more modern beliefs in democratic republicanism, while suggesting how such apparently antithetical faiths share common, irrational roots. With this and the current occupation of Iraq in mind he concludes with a question: “By elevating civilizations to the pinnacle of human achievement, or seeking to orientate our future around an idealized image of what they might become, are we not simply raising up new gods where old ones have fallen?” (p. 176).
March 8, 2019
In What Makes Civilization? The Ancient Near East and the Future of the West, David Wengrow argues the connections of Ancient Mesopotamia and Egypt with the West go beyond the perception of the former as the birthplace of civilization. He does this by dissolving the concept of distance and arguing that civilization consists of the exchange of culture between different societies.
Part 1 of his book focuses on a discussion of metals, gems, food preparation, food cultivation, trade, currency, dwellings, and culture in the civilizations of the ancient Near East. Through detailed and concrete examples, Wengrow demonstrates that prehistoric and ancient societies did not exist in isolation of each other. They were interconnected and inter-related in spite of geographical distances. His detailed and extensive analysis shows how the raw materials found in one location were consumed in a different location. He then demonstrates the similarities and differences in how the cultures tried to dissolve the distance between humans and gods.
Part 2 focuses on dissolving the distance between the ancient Near East with modern European history by drawing parallels between a belief in sacral kingship with the modern institution of monarchy.
Wengrow’s aim is to repudiate the idea of a clash of civilizations. Rather, he sees strong evidence of cultural sharing between civilizations—both past and present. He criticizes the West for regarding itself as the successor of ancient cultures, as if “Modern Civilization . . . is a unique possession of the West, but one nevertheless built upon (ancient) Eastern foundations.”
The book as a whole made for challenging reading because its details and plethora of examples bordered on being too technical, cumbersome, and confusing at times. But if we step back from the minute details and view the general argument, we can appreciate Wengrow’s promotion of an interesting perspective: civilization is to be found in the domestic and mundane and not simply in ancient structures; ancient civilizations interacted and engaged in cross-fertilization; and the lines which separate ancient civilizations of the Near East with the West are blurred, at best.
Recommended for its exploration of daily life in ancient Near East societies and for arguing for a fresh look at the meaning of civilization.
Part 1 of his book focuses on a discussion of metals, gems, food preparation, food cultivation, trade, currency, dwellings, and culture in the civilizations of the ancient Near East. Through detailed and concrete examples, Wengrow demonstrates that prehistoric and ancient societies did not exist in isolation of each other. They were interconnected and inter-related in spite of geographical distances. His detailed and extensive analysis shows how the raw materials found in one location were consumed in a different location. He then demonstrates the similarities and differences in how the cultures tried to dissolve the distance between humans and gods.
Part 2 focuses on dissolving the distance between the ancient Near East with modern European history by drawing parallels between a belief in sacral kingship with the modern institution of monarchy.
Wengrow’s aim is to repudiate the idea of a clash of civilizations. Rather, he sees strong evidence of cultural sharing between civilizations—both past and present. He criticizes the West for regarding itself as the successor of ancient cultures, as if “Modern Civilization . . . is a unique possession of the West, but one nevertheless built upon (ancient) Eastern foundations.”
The book as a whole made for challenging reading because its details and plethora of examples bordered on being too technical, cumbersome, and confusing at times. But if we step back from the minute details and view the general argument, we can appreciate Wengrow’s promotion of an interesting perspective: civilization is to be found in the domestic and mundane and not simply in ancient structures; ancient civilizations interacted and engaged in cross-fertilization; and the lines which separate ancient civilizations of the Near East with the West are blurred, at best.
Recommended for its exploration of daily life in ancient Near East societies and for arguing for a fresh look at the meaning of civilization.
April 10, 2015
This is one of the best books I have read in the last year or so.
There is more meat here than in books twice its size.
Points worth considering:
The short comings of the Three Age System
Differences and similarities in river valley cultures
The way the collective interacts with the divine (comparisons between Egyptian and Mesopotamian practice)
Dynastic cultures
The uses of the ancient near east in the self conception of the modern west.
This book jumps from Sumer to the steppe to the French Revolution & Weimar Republic.
I really can't recommend this book highly enough. It was great.
There is more meat here than in books twice its size.
Points worth considering:
The short comings of the Three Age System
Differences and similarities in river valley cultures
The way the collective interacts with the divine (comparisons between Egyptian and Mesopotamian practice)
Dynastic cultures
The uses of the ancient near east in the self conception of the modern west.
This book jumps from Sumer to the steppe to the French Revolution & Weimar Republic.
I really can't recommend this book highly enough. It was great.
November 4, 2015
A very good book which looks at the two main civilisations of the Near East - Sumerian and Egyptian - and looks at how they were inter-related, through culture, trade, religious practice and ideas. The book is well written and readable, with much of interest to say. A concluding section examines how the notion of 'the birth of civilisation in the Near East' has contributed to Western ideas of our own genesis. The earlier sections on the nature of religious practice and commerce are particularly good. Recommended to all interested in the appearance of historical (written) cultures 5,000+ years ago.
August 5, 2018
This book is fantastic, but far too short. A wonderful forceful repudiation of the idea of the strict demarcation "between civilisations", Wengrow masterfully compares and contrasts ancient Egyptian and Mesopotamian cooking, religion, and kingship. In the penultimate chapter, he also perfectly attacks the political dimensions of the genesis of modern museums, arguing that museums assert the liberal/secular order by stripping the sacred of their context and power.
"We have become accustomed to the cruelty of the modern state museum and its carnival-like parodies of sacred kingship. We have come to expect ... the sight of monumental gates leading nowhere, proud royal statues flanking nothing, once-hidden gods now revealed in transparent cases, and carefully preserved corpses exposed for inspection: the eviscerated 'body politic' rendered impotent, bizarre, even comical." (p. 172)
Much recommended!
"We have become accustomed to the cruelty of the modern state museum and its carnival-like parodies of sacred kingship. We have come to expect ... the sight of monumental gates leading nowhere, proud royal statues flanking nothing, once-hidden gods now revealed in transparent cases, and carefully preserved corpses exposed for inspection: the eviscerated 'body politic' rendered impotent, bizarre, even comical." (p. 172)
Much recommended!
August 1, 2019
- civilization = the capacity of societies to form a moral community (an extended field of exchange and interaction) despite differences of ethnicity, language, belief systems or territorial affiliation
- archaeological traces show that farming on the Nile, Tigris and Euphrates was done in a non-centralized manner (in Iran and Iraq in the 6th millennium BC, in Syria in the 4th millennium BC), in small scale irrigation systems => cooperation + conflict resolution
- Tigris and Euphrates had less favorable yearly floods compared to the Nile, the rising was taking place in spring => more labor to maintain artificial channels to have water in autumn + remove toxic salts deposits
- between 8000-6000BC much of Sahara Dessert was savannah, occupied by communities of hunter-gatherers; at 9000BC date some cooking vessels => the earliest in the area (the earliest are found in eastern Asia), in the Fertile Crescent, pottery appears only around 7000 BC
- lapis lazuli was first used in Mesopotamia and then in Egypt, beeing exotic for both regions; it was extracted only in northern Afghanistan and in western Pakistan and passing the Zagros Mountains; for Egyptians it represented life force, regeneration, for Mesopotamians it was a metaphor for great riches
- in Ohalo, northern Israel were found traces of grinding the cereals and meat roastery that date to 20000BC
- wheat, barley and flax were not native to Egypt, they were introduced after 4500BC from the Fertile Crescent, the same for sheep and goat, they came at around 6000BC as fully domesticated animals
- Gordon Childe (1936) identified 2 revolutions before the Industrial Revolution: the invention of farming in the Neolithic and the Urban revolution in 4000BC
- at 7000BC containers of goods had a band of clay over the mouth, impressed with an amulet to trace the origin of the product
- until 5000BC Mesopotamia was focused mainly on trade routes to the south, towards The Persian Gulp, which had a shallow basin and was densely inhabited by fishers, hunters and foragers. The 'dark millennium' brings a climatic deterioration that started around 4000BC: high aridity and abandonment along the Eastern Arabian coastline and this lead the Sumerians to orientate towards north and east
- cuneiform tablets record King List and describe the descent of kingship from heaven as a gift from gods and how each city held onto kingship
- en = high ranking title
- lugal = king and military leader, literally: a big man
- tell = artificial mound formed by people living in the same site for hundreds or thousands of years; they are spread in Near East, Eastern Europe, Central Asia, West Africa, Anatolia, Greece
- Uruk (in Akkadian) is Erech in the Hebrew Book of Genesis -> part of the Sumer Kingdom and the setting of Tower of Babel; the earliest evidence of cuneiform script (3300-3000BC): the tablets document the management of commodities and labor done for the city
- the story on Enmerkar, king of Uruk (beginning of 3000BC) tells how writing was invented: he wants to subdue Aratta and his message was too long for a messenger to remember, so he inscribes it on a clay tablet. Tablets were used already for 1000 years but for administrative purposes, using more than 1500 ideograms to depict goods, animals and numbers
- tablets contain very precise descriptions of the goods: texture, quality ( some are 'fit for the en'), purity, taste, color, weight (eg: they had 80 varieties of fish used for oil or dried protein); higher quality goods are packed in ceramic containers for storage and transport and are sealed with images that depict the origin => the guaranty of origin and quality
- walled cities at 2500BC: Shahdad, Shahr-i Sokhta (in the Iranian plateau), Tepe Yahya, Tal-i, Malyan close to Zagros Mountains, Zeravshan, Tedzen, Murghab in the Anatolian plateau, Badria, Margiana. There was a constant flow of goods between then that used the same volumetric system, but distinct seals and ceramics. The cities had a similar organization and used metal ingots as currency
- Eurasian metallogenic belt (from the Alps to the Himalayas down to the Indian Ocean): deposits of gold, silver, copper, tin
-vast amounts of silver, gold, bronze and lapis lazuli were kept in temples and palaces, and, when not returned in the society as currency, they were the source for weapons and jewelry
- Atrahasis (myth about how a man survives a great flood by building an ark) contains the description of the creation of the world: the primeval gods (sky, air, fresh water, salt water and fluvial mud) had the terrible burden of maintaining the beds of Tigris and Euphrates and procreate to make lesser gods in order to delegate the work. The newer gods object to the hard work and the compromise is to create humans to 'bear the load of the gods'. The first humans are created from a mixture of substances and the flesh and blood of one of the gods. The new people produced food for themselves and for the gods and when they multiplied too much, gods sent natural disasters to reduce their number.
Stone Age -~3.4 million years, until 8700-2000BC
Bronze Age - 3300-1200BC
Iron Age - 1200-550BC
- archaeological traces show that farming on the Nile, Tigris and Euphrates was done in a non-centralized manner (in Iran and Iraq in the 6th millennium BC, in Syria in the 4th millennium BC), in small scale irrigation systems => cooperation + conflict resolution
- Tigris and Euphrates had less favorable yearly floods compared to the Nile, the rising was taking place in spring => more labor to maintain artificial channels to have water in autumn + remove toxic salts deposits
- between 8000-6000BC much of Sahara Dessert was savannah, occupied by communities of hunter-gatherers; at 9000BC date some cooking vessels => the earliest in the area (the earliest are found in eastern Asia), in the Fertile Crescent, pottery appears only around 7000 BC
- lapis lazuli was first used in Mesopotamia and then in Egypt, beeing exotic for both regions; it was extracted only in northern Afghanistan and in western Pakistan and passing the Zagros Mountains; for Egyptians it represented life force, regeneration, for Mesopotamians it was a metaphor for great riches
- in Ohalo, northern Israel were found traces of grinding the cereals and meat roastery that date to 20000BC
- wheat, barley and flax were not native to Egypt, they were introduced after 4500BC from the Fertile Crescent, the same for sheep and goat, they came at around 6000BC as fully domesticated animals
- Gordon Childe (1936) identified 2 revolutions before the Industrial Revolution: the invention of farming in the Neolithic and the Urban revolution in 4000BC
- at 7000BC containers of goods had a band of clay over the mouth, impressed with an amulet to trace the origin of the product
- until 5000BC Mesopotamia was focused mainly on trade routes to the south, towards The Persian Gulp, which had a shallow basin and was densely inhabited by fishers, hunters and foragers. The 'dark millennium' brings a climatic deterioration that started around 4000BC: high aridity and abandonment along the Eastern Arabian coastline and this lead the Sumerians to orientate towards north and east
- cuneiform tablets record King List and describe the descent of kingship from heaven as a gift from gods and how each city held onto kingship
- en = high ranking title
- lugal = king and military leader, literally: a big man
- tell = artificial mound formed by people living in the same site for hundreds or thousands of years; they are spread in Near East, Eastern Europe, Central Asia, West Africa, Anatolia, Greece
- Uruk (in Akkadian) is Erech in the Hebrew Book of Genesis -> part of the Sumer Kingdom and the setting of Tower of Babel; the earliest evidence of cuneiform script (3300-3000BC): the tablets document the management of commodities and labor done for the city
- the story on Enmerkar, king of Uruk (beginning of 3000BC) tells how writing was invented: he wants to subdue Aratta and his message was too long for a messenger to remember, so he inscribes it on a clay tablet. Tablets were used already for 1000 years but for administrative purposes, using more than 1500 ideograms to depict goods, animals and numbers
- tablets contain very precise descriptions of the goods: texture, quality ( some are 'fit for the en'), purity, taste, color, weight (eg: they had 80 varieties of fish used for oil or dried protein); higher quality goods are packed in ceramic containers for storage and transport and are sealed with images that depict the origin => the guaranty of origin and quality
- walled cities at 2500BC: Shahdad, Shahr-i Sokhta (in the Iranian plateau), Tepe Yahya, Tal-i, Malyan close to Zagros Mountains, Zeravshan, Tedzen, Murghab in the Anatolian plateau, Badria, Margiana. There was a constant flow of goods between then that used the same volumetric system, but distinct seals and ceramics. The cities had a similar organization and used metal ingots as currency
- Eurasian metallogenic belt (from the Alps to the Himalayas down to the Indian Ocean): deposits of gold, silver, copper, tin
-vast amounts of silver, gold, bronze and lapis lazuli were kept in temples and palaces, and, when not returned in the society as currency, they were the source for weapons and jewelry
- Atrahasis (myth about how a man survives a great flood by building an ark) contains the description of the creation of the world: the primeval gods (sky, air, fresh water, salt water and fluvial mud) had the terrible burden of maintaining the beds of Tigris and Euphrates and procreate to make lesser gods in order to delegate the work. The newer gods object to the hard work and the compromise is to create humans to 'bear the load of the gods'. The first humans are created from a mixture of substances and the flesh and blood of one of the gods. The new people produced food for themselves and for the gods and when they multiplied too much, gods sent natural disasters to reduce their number.
Stone Age -~3.4 million years, until 8700-2000BC
Bronze Age - 3300-1200BC
Iron Age - 1200-550BC
April 3, 2018
The author states in his introduction that this book is, at least in part, a reply to Samuel Huntington’s assertion that ancient civilizations only rarely “clashed” (that is, interacted). He sets out to show Huntington wrong by providing evidence for extensive cultural sharing between two ancient cultures: Egypt and Mesopotamia (modern-day Iraq and Syria). The first—and longest—part of the book is a detailed accounting of evidence for such cultural sharing.
Perhaps it’s me, but this struck me as very old news. Even much of Wengrow’s cited evidence derive from archeological studies published 20 and even 30 years ago. The detail is laudable, much it quite interesting, and the author is reasonably succinct; however, Part 1 was rather dry reading for me. I certainly didn’t find much that surprised me.
Part II Of the book, comprising a mere 23 pages (of 176), was considerably more interesting (to me). Here, Wengrow describes with a touch of flair the socio-political roots of how a Euro-centric sense of superiority came to predominate how the West viewed these (and other) ancient cultures, and how the West/Europe regarded (regards) itself as the natural successor to these ancient cultures, which have fallen from grace and descended into chaos (thereby shading the West’s view of current events).
I suppose Part I is necessary to set the stage for Part 2. Unfortunately, those first 150+ pages seemed dry as (ancient) dirt.
Perhaps it’s me, but this struck me as very old news. Even much of Wengrow’s cited evidence derive from archeological studies published 20 and even 30 years ago. The detail is laudable, much it quite interesting, and the author is reasonably succinct; however, Part 1 was rather dry reading for me. I certainly didn’t find much that surprised me.
Part II Of the book, comprising a mere 23 pages (of 176), was considerably more interesting (to me). Here, Wengrow describes with a touch of flair the socio-political roots of how a Euro-centric sense of superiority came to predominate how the West viewed these (and other) ancient cultures, and how the West/Europe regarded (regards) itself as the natural successor to these ancient cultures, which have fallen from grace and descended into chaos (thereby shading the West’s view of current events).
I suppose Part I is necessary to set the stage for Part 2. Unfortunately, those first 150+ pages seemed dry as (ancient) dirt.
June 21, 2021
3-3.5 stars
What Makes Civilization? is simultaneously a dense and incomplete book, great as an overview but imperfect for someone looking to deeply explore the growth of civilizations in this area.
Instead, Wengrow is providing a counterargument to two predecessors in the field. He argues what seems an obvious point: that civilizations don’t evolve in vacuums. Focusing on primarily Mesopotamia and Egypt, he asserts that specialization isn’t what drives civilization development, but trade. What follows is the exploration of regionalized culture and cross-regional economics. It’s a fascinating undertaking that left me wanting more detail, particularly about the Neolithic periods.
Part II is abbreviated and rather an unnecessary afterthought in which Wengrow attempts to bring relevancy to the West’s fascination with Assyriology and Egyptology, but leaving out the imperial and economic factors that have allowed archaeologists to exploit and work in such areas undercuts his arguments. Naturally, neoliberal republicanism isn’t perfect and isn’t the idealized, utopian government (particularly not as practiced in actuality), and we cannot look down or think is completely removed from those that have come before us.
What Makes Civilization? is simultaneously a dense and incomplete book, great as an overview but imperfect for someone looking to deeply explore the growth of civilizations in this area.
Instead, Wengrow is providing a counterargument to two predecessors in the field. He argues what seems an obvious point: that civilizations don’t evolve in vacuums. Focusing on primarily Mesopotamia and Egypt, he asserts that specialization isn’t what drives civilization development, but trade. What follows is the exploration of regionalized culture and cross-regional economics. It’s a fascinating undertaking that left me wanting more detail, particularly about the Neolithic periods.
Part II is abbreviated and rather an unnecessary afterthought in which Wengrow attempts to bring relevancy to the West’s fascination with Assyriology and Egyptology, but leaving out the imperial and economic factors that have allowed archaeologists to exploit and work in such areas undercuts his arguments. Naturally, neoliberal republicanism isn’t perfect and isn’t the idealized, utopian government (particularly not as practiced in actuality), and we cannot look down or think is completely removed from those that have come before us.
January 17, 2015
What Makes Civilization? pretty much says it all right there in the title.
The author, Prof. David Wengrow, is a Comparative Anthropologist at University College London. What Prof. Wengrow had produced is a reasonably accessible introduction to the oft maligned, but necessary, concept of civilization.
What is civilization? Who is civilized [watch out for this one]? What constitutes civilization and why? These are some of the many questions asked and mostly answered.
The short answer seems to be urban culture [life in cities] and the author does not add much new to this notion, but for those puzzling over the question and new to the area this is an excellent contemporary primer.
Highly Recommended for those with an interest in history, ancient history, urban history, cultural and material archaeology, and the academic debate concerning the nature of civilization, especially now that civilization has moved into the post-post-colonial period this is a good place to started.
Rating: 5 out of 5 stars
For a discussion of the merits of Leviathan [the State or civilization] readers might also wish to read Steven Pinker’s The Better Angels of Our Nature.
The author, Prof. David Wengrow, is a Comparative Anthropologist at University College London. What Prof. Wengrow had produced is a reasonably accessible introduction to the oft maligned, but necessary, concept of civilization.
What is civilization? Who is civilized [watch out for this one]? What constitutes civilization and why? These are some of the many questions asked and mostly answered.
The short answer seems to be urban culture [life in cities] and the author does not add much new to this notion, but for those puzzling over the question and new to the area this is an excellent contemporary primer.
Highly Recommended for those with an interest in history, ancient history, urban history, cultural and material archaeology, and the academic debate concerning the nature of civilization, especially now that civilization has moved into the post-post-colonial period this is a good place to started.
Rating: 5 out of 5 stars
For a discussion of the merits of Leviathan [the State or civilization] readers might also wish to read Steven Pinker’s The Better Angels of Our Nature.
July 27, 2024
Certainly not the "easy" lecture I expected, nevertheless a very good read. Wengrow mainly argues against Huntingtons thesis of the formation of cultures in seperate distincive "bodies".
He -successfully- deconstructs Huntingtons arguments by demonstrating the highly dynamic cultural exchange between ancient Mesopotamia and Egypt.
In the somewhat underwhelming second part (only 23p.) he takes the comparison from the two ancient civilsazions to Antiquity and Modernity themselves and argues for their similarities and that also in "modern" times we take heavy inspiration and legitimize our actions by drawing from the past.
He concludes that "civilisations from a historic perspective are the result of a continuous process of exchange and borrow".
He -successfully- deconstructs Huntingtons arguments by demonstrating the highly dynamic cultural exchange between ancient Mesopotamia and Egypt.
In the somewhat underwhelming second part (only 23p.) he takes the comparison from the two ancient civilsazions to Antiquity and Modernity themselves and argues for their similarities and that also in "modern" times we take heavy inspiration and legitimize our actions by drawing from the past.
He concludes that "civilisations from a historic perspective are the result of a continuous process of exchange and borrow".
April 29, 2022
As a "modern" historian mostly, I think I missed a lot of the finer points of this book. It's essentially a brief survey of several parts of early civilization in Europe, Africa and Asia that support Wengrow's essential thesis, and having not studied either of those eras I feel like I got a brief idea but a lot of it went over my head as well. In all though I appreciate what Wengrow is doing here: using strong evidence to argue that early civilizations participated in international cultural exchange, and that the development of urban living was as much a bottom-up as it was a top-down social construction. I look forward to returning to this book after studying these eras much more.
May 14, 2020
This is an interesting take on the idea of civilisation applied in the context of the ancient Near East - based less on governance and technologies and much more on "... the capacity of societies to form a moral community - an extended field of exchange and interaction - despite differences in ethnicity, language, belief systems, or territorial affiliations." (p. xv). The themes explored include the interaction between the well-known (literate) civilisations of the Nile and Euphrates/Tigris (and the Indus) with one another - and with their (non-literate) banlieue. He quotes others (p. 30) who note that these cultures evolved on the back of their agricultural technologies and surpluses misses the important point that such surpluses cannot be magically transformed into "... bronze, cloth, palaces (of imported stone), fine jewellery and weapons.". He stresses the importance of commodities like lapis - and the fact that these lapis routes were "... channels along which meanings and values spread" (p.37) over great distances, demonstrating a huge web of commodity and idea exchange.
There is a huge insight - I'm pretty sure missing from Guns, Germs, and Steel: The Fates of Human Societies - that adds to Diamond's list of reasons why the civilisations of the Near East prospered and developed (adding to geography, and the range of domesticable crops and animals): the Eurasian Metallogenic Belt - running from the Alps to the Himalayas and "... comprising - at various points along its length - deposits of gold, silver, copper and tin" the latter two - of course - being the ingredients of the alloy bronze.
The second theme of the book - the promised consideration of the legacy of the ancient Near East in the context of the modern world - is something of an afterthought (the last 23 pages of an already short 176 page book). While interesting, it is cursory, and so somewhat disappointing. Ultimately the synthetic promise of the book is not cashed out as we might have expected.
There is a huge insight - I'm pretty sure missing from Guns, Germs, and Steel: The Fates of Human Societies - that adds to Diamond's list of reasons why the civilisations of the Near East prospered and developed (adding to geography, and the range of domesticable crops and animals): the Eurasian Metallogenic Belt - running from the Alps to the Himalayas and "... comprising - at various points along its length - deposits of gold, silver, copper and tin" the latter two - of course - being the ingredients of the alloy bronze.
The second theme of the book - the promised consideration of the legacy of the ancient Near East in the context of the modern world - is something of an afterthought (the last 23 pages of an already short 176 page book). While interesting, it is cursory, and so somewhat disappointing. Ultimately the synthetic promise of the book is not cashed out as we might have expected.
August 7, 2018
Basically a shout of support to Edward Said contra Samuel Huntington, providing the archaeological backup for Said's claims that 'civilizations' are not "shut-down, sealed-off entities" that do nothing but 'clash', but usually share a history of "exchange, cross-fertilization and sharing." As such it probably succeeded, though I'm not the one to ask as I didn't really need convincing.
I mainly read it as a general introduction to the ancient cultures in and around Mesopotamia and Egypt. As such it was probably alright - it contained a useful chronology chart, some nice maps, pictures, and it definitely cleared up some fog in my mind - though do I suppose that for that purpose there are probably better books out there.
The exploration of the connection in modern thought between the institution of monarchy and the so-called 'Ancient Near East' was a nice bonus though. I especially liked the idea of Kaiser Wilhelm II imagining himself to be Gilgamesh while felling trees at Doorn. Epic, as the kids say.
I mainly read it as a general introduction to the ancient cultures in and around Mesopotamia and Egypt. As such it was probably alright - it contained a useful chronology chart, some nice maps, pictures, and it definitely cleared up some fog in my mind - though do I suppose that for that purpose there are probably better books out there.
The exploration of the connection in modern thought between the institution of monarchy and the so-called 'Ancient Near East' was a nice bonus though. I especially liked the idea of Kaiser Wilhelm II imagining himself to be Gilgamesh while felling trees at Doorn. Epic, as the kids say.
December 24, 2015
Wengrow's focus on the connections between ancient Near Eastern societies was eye-opening. He gave a good overview of the ways that the ancient residents of the lands bordering the eastern Mediterranean (and to some degree beyond) borrowed from each other, traded with each other, and influenced each other. His archaeologist's focus on material culture gave me a different perspective on the region, and it provided an interesting background from which to view the religious and political developments of these ancient societies instead of interpreting the material culture through the lens of religious and political developments. His observations on contemporary culture were less interesting, in my opinion, but the book is well-written and seemed to be a good introduction to the ancient Near East.
July 9, 2020
A short but complete introduction to what is a civilization. The main difference is in the day to day.
Something important that Wengrow showed is the formation of trust. Trust is the hallmark of the contact between different cities: I can trust you and you can trust me, so we can exchange. The use of seals to mark the merchandise and now the origin is later translated to religious worship, and also the religion is used to share the riches and put in sage place the taxes.
A curious enigma of the hoards that were found between the commerce routes and the borders of the empires: could be anti fragility? You sacrifice and hide part of your money to save large quantities, as a payment for foragers and barbarians. It is a possibility, but we need more time to know.
Excellent introduction, totally recommended.
Something important that Wengrow showed is the formation of trust. Trust is the hallmark of the contact between different cities: I can trust you and you can trust me, so we can exchange. The use of seals to mark the merchandise and now the origin is later translated to religious worship, and also the religion is used to share the riches and put in sage place the taxes.
A curious enigma of the hoards that were found between the commerce routes and the borders of the empires: could be anti fragility? You sacrifice and hide part of your money to save large quantities, as a payment for foragers and barbarians. It is a possibility, but we need more time to know.
Excellent introduction, totally recommended.
January 31, 2023
This book set to be as a rebuttal against Huntington’s ideas of clash of civilization. Huntington believe that each civilizations grew in an almost incubator like environment; discrete and isolated from each other. Each of the civilizations grew alien towards each other at the most fundamental level; thus as soon as globalization arrives; tension would inherently results. A poignant picture that serve to display Huntington’s idea is Colonel Perry opening fire to the ports of Edo when the Shogunate refused to open its doors, thus effectively ending its hundred years of idyllic isolation.
The rest of the book, on the other hand, focuses more on showing how opposing sides of the Middle East (Egypt and Mesopotamia) actually lived on a more like symbiosis nature, rather than incubator-like as Huntington would like to perceive. But, I’m pretty sure I’m misreading this book, but I’m sure Huntington were focusing on inter-civilizational relations rather than intra-, Egypt and Mesopotamia according to Huntington, are indeed belonged to the same civilization.
But the title of the book piqued my interest; what makes civilization? A man that loves the paradox that I am, I would answer: culture. Some might get confused between civilization and culture, in my opinion, their relation is that culture is the genotype and civilizational attributes are its phenotype. Civilizational attributes are outward, secondary expressions of the abstract culture. When we visit a foreign city, heuristically we would be attracted to its architecture, its symbolism, its military, its colors, its scents; these are the civilizational attributes that the city possesses. Civilization are the totality of outward expression of a distinct culture.
And culture is the totality of inward determinations of an in-group bonded by their biological, linguistic factors and their historical continuity. In short, culture is the quantitative qualifier between in-groups; it sets one group from another. But civilization is the qualitative qualifier between them; it sets which group higher or lower from another. And the movement between degrees of culture of an in-group is determined by historical continuity each of the members of the group faced, and vice versa. The different races of Malaya have indeed morphed into Malaysians due to their united front in gaining independence from the British; while the Basques and the Scots are demanding independence because they saw no continuity with their overlords; only fractures. And the movement between stages of civilization is determined by the economical principle of excess.
This ubiquitous principle is found even in morality, the kernel of social relations between human beings. Ethics, especially, has always been thought to consist of sui-generis principles that self-propagate its validity and self-enforcing actions merely from the virtue of its principle. In real life, it’s not that easy. While ethical principles indeed should be a priori (thus universal in its validity), it is not sui-generic in terms of the enforcement of its principles. This marks the break between ethics and morality. Ethical is a vacuumed study of principle, while morality is the study of its movement.
The movement from inaction to action is not caused by the statement of ethical principles merely, as much as not all students can be prompted to study based on the lecturing of its teacher. Its movements are caused by excess modalities that a person has.
When a poor man encounters another poor man, he cannot do anything (prompted to action) because he is himself in deficit. He can only sympathize, or pray for him, which is not far from mere acknowledgement of the ethical principle of beneficence; he knows he must do something, but he does not do anything. For his inaction, it cannot be said that he is virtuous, he is merely someone who acknowledges. When a rich man passes through the same person, at his side lies all the resources needed to help the man, and at this level, he does not stand at merely the level of acknowledgement, but now he is at the disposition to enforce the principle into action. It is only in this situation, it is imperative to hold the person virtuous (if he gave something to the poor man), or he is not (if he decided not to give anything). Such is the negative proof for the principle of excess in morality.
A positive proof in principle of excess in morality can be seen in the moralizing effect of education to people. Education exposes excess at every angle to its participants; from the responsibility of knowledge, the type of peers he would be around to the future opportunity he would be open to. Education does not mean formal lecturings in university; it is actually sagacious observation of things in its proper place. The knowledge to know things in its proper place itself requires its observer to explore about the thing; an excess.
Thus, in the realm of civilization, the same principles exist; for everything is intensification and specification of one true principle at varying degrees. The Agricultural Revolution brought a surplus never seen by the hunter-gatherer societies before, that demands central control. Central control brought with it urbanization as in the center lies greater demand for specialization and labor.
To answer the question this book posed, what makes civilization: it is culture. Culture is generated by a group of people cemented by the same sentiments, the spirit of “asabiyah” as Ibnu Khaldun puts it. And its outward determination would be its civilizational attributes.
The rest of the book, on the other hand, focuses more on showing how opposing sides of the Middle East (Egypt and Mesopotamia) actually lived on a more like symbiosis nature, rather than incubator-like as Huntington would like to perceive. But, I’m pretty sure I’m misreading this book, but I’m sure Huntington were focusing on inter-civilizational relations rather than intra-, Egypt and Mesopotamia according to Huntington, are indeed belonged to the same civilization.
But the title of the book piqued my interest; what makes civilization? A man that loves the paradox that I am, I would answer: culture. Some might get confused between civilization and culture, in my opinion, their relation is that culture is the genotype and civilizational attributes are its phenotype. Civilizational attributes are outward, secondary expressions of the abstract culture. When we visit a foreign city, heuristically we would be attracted to its architecture, its symbolism, its military, its colors, its scents; these are the civilizational attributes that the city possesses. Civilization are the totality of outward expression of a distinct culture.
And culture is the totality of inward determinations of an in-group bonded by their biological, linguistic factors and their historical continuity. In short, culture is the quantitative qualifier between in-groups; it sets one group from another. But civilization is the qualitative qualifier between them; it sets which group higher or lower from another. And the movement between degrees of culture of an in-group is determined by historical continuity each of the members of the group faced, and vice versa. The different races of Malaya have indeed morphed into Malaysians due to their united front in gaining independence from the British; while the Basques and the Scots are demanding independence because they saw no continuity with their overlords; only fractures. And the movement between stages of civilization is determined by the economical principle of excess.
This ubiquitous principle is found even in morality, the kernel of social relations between human beings. Ethics, especially, has always been thought to consist of sui-generis principles that self-propagate its validity and self-enforcing actions merely from the virtue of its principle. In real life, it’s not that easy. While ethical principles indeed should be a priori (thus universal in its validity), it is not sui-generic in terms of the enforcement of its principles. This marks the break between ethics and morality. Ethical is a vacuumed study of principle, while morality is the study of its movement.
The movement from inaction to action is not caused by the statement of ethical principles merely, as much as not all students can be prompted to study based on the lecturing of its teacher. Its movements are caused by excess modalities that a person has.
When a poor man encounters another poor man, he cannot do anything (prompted to action) because he is himself in deficit. He can only sympathize, or pray for him, which is not far from mere acknowledgement of the ethical principle of beneficence; he knows he must do something, but he does not do anything. For his inaction, it cannot be said that he is virtuous, he is merely someone who acknowledges. When a rich man passes through the same person, at his side lies all the resources needed to help the man, and at this level, he does not stand at merely the level of acknowledgement, but now he is at the disposition to enforce the principle into action. It is only in this situation, it is imperative to hold the person virtuous (if he gave something to the poor man), or he is not (if he decided not to give anything). Such is the negative proof for the principle of excess in morality.
A positive proof in principle of excess in morality can be seen in the moralizing effect of education to people. Education exposes excess at every angle to its participants; from the responsibility of knowledge, the type of peers he would be around to the future opportunity he would be open to. Education does not mean formal lecturings in university; it is actually sagacious observation of things in its proper place. The knowledge to know things in its proper place itself requires its observer to explore about the thing; an excess.
Thus, in the realm of civilization, the same principles exist; for everything is intensification and specification of one true principle at varying degrees. The Agricultural Revolution brought a surplus never seen by the hunter-gatherer societies before, that demands central control. Central control brought with it urbanization as in the center lies greater demand for specialization and labor.
To answer the question this book posed, what makes civilization: it is culture. Culture is generated by a group of people cemented by the same sentiments, the spirit of “asabiyah” as Ibnu Khaldun puts it. And its outward determination would be its civilizational attributes.
December 19, 2023
A 30,000-foot view of the history of civilization, focusing on the interplay between "civilizations" rather than separate civilizations. Fascinating chapters on the "global village" (the shared culture that spanned villages prior to urbanization) and the interplay of gods and kings.
June 16, 2025
I enjoyed this book at first. It is provocative and tells some good stories. Part I is full of interesting observations about how intertwined ancient cultures from Italy to India were, even as early as the neolithic. But as it progresses it puts forward a series of theories and interpretations that are simultaneously non controversial and poorly supported. Much of the book is dedicated to burning a strawman version of the clash of civilizations, but does anyone really doubt that the west was heavily influenced by the east? Why can't civilizations both clash and exchange goods and ideas?
Meanwhile, I didn't really understand Part II at all. Something about how the hegemonic ambitions of western capitalism and democracy are as illusory as the divine right of kings. I don't disagree but the argument is so incoherent that I'm not even sure what it was. My favorite anecdote from this section was that Kaiser Wilhelm II wrote a book attempting to trace his monarchial line back to Sumer!
A fun, short read, but highly uneven.
Meanwhile, I didn't really understand Part II at all. Something about how the hegemonic ambitions of western capitalism and democracy are as illusory as the divine right of kings. I don't disagree but the argument is so incoherent that I'm not even sure what it was. My favorite anecdote from this section was that Kaiser Wilhelm II wrote a book attempting to trace his monarchial line back to Sumer!
A fun, short read, but highly uneven.
May 29, 2022
I really liked it :] misses the 5th star bc I wasn't massively sure what his main point was? but each chapter was like an interesting vignette of archeology.
May 28, 2024
It's interesting but quite dry and doesn't stray too deep into any topic or area in an effort to provide an overview. Neat stuff though.
June 16, 2016
Really interesting idea for a book supported by some really interesting and often convincing ideas. For a book with ideas on this scale, however, I would have liked more concrete examples and analyses to illustrate and support these ideas better. I have a PhD and sometimes it wasn't entirely clear to me what was the author was arguing I think because of the lack of concrete examples.
Displaying 1 - 23 of 23 reviews