The Story of Humanity

Chapter 0 - Before History

How cities became states, how rulers gained power, and how the first empires changed the ancient world

For thousands of years, human communities had been growing in size and complexity. Farmers had learned to produce food in greater quantities. Villages had become towns, and some towns had developed into cities. Writing had appeared as a way to record information. Craftspeople had become specialists, traders had begun travelling longer distances, and religious institutions had become important centres of community life. But the rise of cities created a new possibility. A powerful city could attempt to control the land around it. A strong ruler could attempt to control neighbouring cities. Eventually, rulers would attempt to control entire regions.

This was the beginning of the age of kingdoms and empires.

The transition did not happen in one place or at one moment. Different societies developed political systems at different times and in different ways. Some kingdoms grew from powerful cities. Others emerged when several communities were united under a single ruler. Some expanded through military conquest, while others gained influence through trade, alliances and religious authority. The ancient world became increasingly shaped by rulers who controlled territories much larger than the communities from which they had originally emerged.

Mesopotamia was one of the earliest places where this transformation became visible. The region between the Tigris and Euphrates rivers had already produced some of the world's earliest cities. By the third millennium BCE, cities such as Uruk, Ur, Lagash and Kish had become important political centres. Each city controlled surrounding agricultural land and developed its own institutions, religious traditions and ruling families. These cities were often independent political communities, which meant that the history of Mesopotamia was also a history of competition between neighbouring states.

The city of Uruk might trade with another city one year and fight it another year. Agricultural land was valuable because it produced food for growing populations. Water was equally important because irrigation allowed farmers to cultivate land that might otherwise have been difficult to use. Control of canals, fields and trade routes could therefore determine the strength of a city. As populations increased, disputes over resources became more serious, and rulers began to rely increasingly on organized military forces.

War itself was not a new invention. Human communities had experienced violence long before cities appeared. What changed was the ability of organized states to mobilize larger numbers of people and resources. A ruler who controlled a city could collect agricultural products, organize labour, produce weapons and maintain soldiers. The state could build defensive walls, store food and support military campaigns. Political authority and military power became increasingly connected.

One of the earliest rulers associated with the creation of a large territorial state was Sargon of Akkad. He lived during the twenty fourth century BCE and established the Akkadian Empire in Mesopotamia. Much of the surviving information about Sargon comes from inscriptions and later traditions, so some stories about his early life cannot be treated as certain historical fact. What is much clearer is that he expanded Akkadian power across a large part of Mesopotamia and brought numerous cities under his authority.

Sargon's achievement was significant because he created a political structure that extended beyond a single city state. Instead of ruling only one urban centre and its surrounding farmland, he controlled a network of cities and territories. The people living in these places retained many local traditions, but they were now subject to a larger imperial authority.

This created a completely new challenge for government. Conquering a city was one thing. Keeping it under control was something else. A ruler needed officials to manage conquered territories. Resources had to be collected and transported. Orders had to reach distant regions. Local leaders had to be monitored or incorporated into the new political system. Soldiers had to remain available to suppress rebellions or defend the empire against external enemies.

The growth of empires therefore depended on administration as much as military power. An army could expand territory, but administrators were needed to maintain it.

The Akkadian Empire eventually declined. The reasons were complex and probably included political instability, external pressure and difficulties in maintaining control over a large territory. The empire did not last forever, but the political idea it represented survived. Later rulers would repeatedly attempt to unite Mesopotamia under their authority.

One of those rulers was Hammurabi of Babylon.

Hammurabi ruled during the eighteenth century BCE and expanded Babylonian power across much of Mesopotamia. Babylon became a major political centre under his rule. Today, Hammurabi is particularly famous because of a surviving collection of laws associated with his reign.

The laws deal with many areas of society, including property, agriculture, trade, marriage, family relationships, labour and personal injury. They reveal a society in which social status mattered. Different punishments could apply to people belonging to different social groups. This reminds us that ancient legal systems were not based on the modern idea of universal equality before the law.

The importance of Hammurabi's laws lies not simply in the punishments they describe. They also reveal how rulers presented themselves as guardians of justice and order. A king was expected to protect society, regulate disputes and maintain stability. Written laws could help demonstrate that the ruler was responsible for establishing an organized social system.

The development of kingdoms also changed the relationship between ordinary people and political authority. In a small village, many disputes could be settled through family relationships and community customs. In a large state, thousands of people might live far away from the ruler. Officials were therefore needed to collect resources, administer land, settle disputes and communicate government decisions.

Writing became extremely important in this process.

Scribes recorded taxes, agricultural production, property, trade and administrative orders. Written records allowed governments to manage information over large distances. The development of writing therefore supported the growth of political power.

The same technology that had originally helped cities keep track of grain and goods now helped rulers manage kingdoms and empires.

As states expanded, rulers also became increasingly interested in controlling trade routes. Mesopotamia had abundant agricultural land in many areas, but it lacked some important natural resources. Timber, metals and certain types of stone often had to be obtained from distant regions. Trade therefore connected Mesopotamian cities to surrounding territories.

A kingdom that controlled a major trade route could gain enormous advantages. Merchants could transport valuable goods across long distances, while rulers could collect taxes or tribute from trade. Ports, river crossings and mountain passes became strategically important.

This meant that geography could influence political power.

A city located near an important route could become wealthy. A kingdom controlling a river valley could support a large population. A state controlling access to valuable mineral resources could strengthen its military and economy.

Trade and warfare were therefore often connected. Rulers sometimes fought not simply to gain land, but to gain access to resources and routes.

As kingdoms became larger, armies also became more organized. Soldiers required food, weapons and equipment. Campaigns had to be planned. Fortifications had to be constructed. Horses and other animals had to be supplied. Large military operations required administrative systems capable of supporting them.

The rise of organized armies changed the balance of power between states. A small city might be able to defend itself against another small city, but a larger kingdom could mobilize resources on a much greater scale. Over time, political competition encouraged states to become more centralized and militarized.

This development can be seen clearly in the history of Assyria.

Assyria emerged in northern Mesopotamia and gradually became one of the most powerful states of the ancient Near East. Its rulers developed highly organized armies and expanded Assyrian control across large territories.

Assyrian military forces became known for their ability to conduct long campaigns and attack fortified cities. Their armies included infantry, archers and cavalry, and they developed effective siege techniques. Assyrian rulers also developed systems for governing conquered territories.

The Assyrians created provinces governed by officials who were responsible to the central government. Roads and communication networks allowed messages to move across the empire. The state could collect tribute and resources from conquered territories and use them to maintain the military and administration.

Assyrian royal inscriptions frequently described military victories in dramatic terms. These inscriptions were intended to demonstrate the strength of the king and the power of the empire. They should therefore be understood as political statements as well as historical sources.

This is an important lesson when studying ancient history. Written sources are not automatically neutral simply because they are old. A king writing about his own victories had reasons to present events in a particular way. He wanted subjects to respect his authority and enemies to fear his power. Historians therefore compare royal inscriptions with archaeological evidence and records from other societies.

Behind the official stories were millions of ordinary people.

A farmer living in a distant province might have cared more about the harvest than about the king's latest military victory. A potter might have spent most of his life producing household goods. A merchant might have been concerned with the safety of trade routes. A family might have been affected by taxes, military recruitment or population movements without ever appearing in a royal inscription.

Empires were therefore not simply stories of kings.

They were systems built from the lives of ordinary people. Farmers produced food. Craftspeople produced tools and weapons. Builders constructed walls and temples. Merchants moved goods. Scribes recorded information. Soldiers fought wars. Officials collected resources. Religious specialists conducted ceremonies. All of these activities were connected through the political structure of the state.

This connection created enormous possibilities. A large state could organize projects that would have been impossible for a small village. It could construct roads, temples, irrigation systems and defensive walls. It could support professional soldiers and administrators. It could connect distant regions through trade.

But the same system could also create heavy demands on ordinary people. States required resources, and those resources often came from agricultural production, taxation, tribute and labour.

Civilization therefore brought both cooperation and control.

The growth of kingdoms also strengthened the connection between political authority and religion. Ancient rulers often claimed that the gods supported their authority. Temples became important institutions, and rulers presented themselves as protectors of religious traditions.

In Egypt, the king was closely connected to the religious order of the kingdom. In Mesopotamia, rulers built temples and presented their victories as evidence of divine support. Across many ancient societies, religion helped explain why political authority existed and why rulers were entitled to govern.

For ancient people, politics and religion were not necessarily separate areas of life. The health of the kingdom could be understood as part of a much larger cosmic order.

A successful ruler was expected to protect the people, defend the territory and maintain the relationship between the human and divine worlds.

Monumental architecture became another way for rulers to demonstrate power.

A massive temple could show the wealth of a kingdom. A huge palace could communicate royal authority. A city wall could demonstrate military strength. A statue could preserve the image of a ruler for generations.

But every monument required human labour. Stone had to be quarried. Bricks had to be produced. Materials had to be transported. Workers had to be fed. Engineers had to calculate dimensions. Officials had to organize the project.

Monuments therefore provide historians with evidence not only about rulers, but also about the administrative systems that supported them.

The rise of kingdoms also changed how people understood their political identity. A person could belong to a particular city while also being part of a larger kingdom. As empires expanded, people from different communities could become subjects of the same ruler even though they spoke different languages and followed different customs.

This created new challenges for imperial government.

How could a ruler govern people who did not share the same language? How could different religious traditions be managed? How could local leaders be incorporated into the imperial system? How could distant territories remain connected to a central government? There was no single answer.

Different empires experimented with different approaches. Some relied heavily on military force. Some allowed local rulers to remain in place. Some incorporated local religious traditions. Some demanded tribute. Others developed more systematic provincial administrations. These experiments would influence later empires.

The Persian Empire, which would emerge centuries after the earliest Mesopotamian kingdoms, would develop one of the largest political systems of the ancient world. Its rulers would govern territories containing many different peoples, languages and religions.

But before the Persian Empire appeared, the ancient Near East continued to experience cycles of expansion and collapse.

Kingdoms rose. Kingdoms fell. Cities were destroyed and rebuilt. Dynasties disappeared. New rulers took power.

Yet knowledge and institutions did not simply vanish each time a kingdom collapsed. Later societies inherited technologies, writing systems, religious traditions, administrative practices and political ideas from earlier civilizations.

This is one of the most important patterns in history. Civilizations do not simply replace one another. They inherit from one another.

The people who came after the Akkadians did not forget everything the Akkadians had developed. Babylonian rulers inherited Mesopotamian traditions. Assyrian rulers drew upon earlier political and military systems. Egyptian civilization preserved traditions across many dynasties while also adapting to changing circumstances.

History therefore resembles a long conversation between generations.

Each society receives something from the past. It changes it. It adds something new. Then it passes part of that inheritance to the future. The first kingdoms were beginning this process on a larger scale than ever before. They were creating political systems that could survive individual rulers. They were developing bureaucracies. They were creating written records. They were organizing armies. They were connecting distant territories. They were creating the foundations upon which later empires would be built. But something else was happening at the same time. The ancient world was becoming increasingly connected through trade. Merchants were travelling farther. Ships were crossing seas. Caravans were crossing deserts. People were carrying goods from one region to another. Along with those goods came ideas. Technologies travelled. Religious practices travelled. Languages travelled. Artistic styles travelled. And people themselves travelled.

This movement created a world in which civilizations could no longer develop entirely in isolation.

A change in one region could eventually affect another. A new technology could spread across borders. A powerful empire could connect distant communities. A merchant could carry a product hundreds of kilometres from its place of origin. The ancient world was becoming a network. That network would eventually become even larger.

One of the most important powers to emerge from this interconnected world would come from the Iranian plateau.

The people who created this empire would build a political system that stretched across an enormous territory, from Central Asia to the Mediterranean and from Egypt toward the borders of India.

Their rulers would govern people from many different cultures and religious traditions. Their empire would become one of the defining political achievements of the ancient world. The story of the first kingdoms had begun with cities competing for land and resources. It was now moving toward something much larger.

The age of the great empires was about to begin.