CIVILIZATION AND URBANISM, RISE OF

Deborah L Nichols, Dartmouth College, Hanover,NH, USAR Alan Covey, Southern Methodist University, Dallas,TX, USAKamyar Abdi, Dartmouth College, Hanover, NH, USA

2008 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Glossary

urbanism The study of cities their economic, political, socialand cultural environment, and the imprint of all these forces onthe built environment.

city A center of population, commerce, and culture; a town ofsignificant size and importance.

state A regional polity characterized by social stratification andcentralized and specialized administration.

When the archaeologist V. Gordon Childe coined the

nowhere was this transformation entirely peaceful(or entirely coercive). Differences in the size, form,and organization of early urban centers haveprompted discussion regarding whether there wereearly civilizations without cities or whether citiesdeveloped in the absence of states, what the appro-priate definition of a city is, and why some earlycivilizations were more urban than others. There is adevelopmental trajectory in ancient urbanism, withsome state institutions evolving over time that werenot present in the first cities.Archaeologists have moved away from definitions

based strictly on absolute size and density criteria totypological approaches that relate variations in formto the development of social institutions and/or func-tional approaches that emphasize the role of citiesrelative to their hinterlands. It has not proved to beespecially useful to focus on notions of cities as sharp-

CIVILIZATION AND URBANISM, RISE OF 1003Figure 1 Schematic world map showing regions with early cities.term urban revolution, he posed a central question forarchaeology: what is the relationship betweenthe development of the earliest cities and states? Theemergence of the first cities entailed an historicaland evolutionary transformation in human social rela-tions and the landscapes where these developmentsfirst took place:Mesopotamia, Egypt, the Indus Valley,China, Mesoamerica, and South America (Figure 1).The first cities did not necessarily develop gradual-

ly; some early centers grew explosively as regionalpopulations relocated to them. Most early citiesformed in a network of interacting peer polities andly demarcated, autonomous, corporate communities.Cities were embedded in larger societies and cannotbe understood apart from that wider frame. People inearly civilizations did not always draw as sharp adistinction between city and countryside often theimportant social entity was the political territory con-trolled by a ruler.Early cities were centers of population and con-

trasted with less densely occupied hinterlands. Elitesconcentrated in early cities that were centers for theproduction and distribution of wealth and politicaland ritual activities. All early states had such centers

Because of the presence of impressive monumental

1004 CIVILIZATION AND URBANISM, RISE OFwhere the social transformations of state formation innovations in forms of governance, social institu-tions, and ideological programs were materialized.The form of early cities ranged from the dispersedcenters of the Classic Maya to the compact, walledcities of Mesopotamia. Early cities of the OldWorld usually were walled, a characteristic oftenattributed to military tactics, although land valuesmight have been an influencing factor.Some archaeologists feel that distinguishing be-

tween networks of small states, each comprised of acapital town/city and hinterland, and large regional/territorial states explains much variation in earlycities and urbanism. Generally, territorial stateswere less urbanized than city-state systems, althoughnot all small polities were very urbanized. Largestates did not always have very urbanized capitals.Many archaeologists emphasize economic factorsand the role of markets and merchants in thegrowth of large cities and urbanism. Contrary toearly views of preindustrial cities, certain early citiesexhibited considerable economic differentiation andcommercial development. Other researchers focuson the role of technology, especially transportationtechnology, and ecology in accounting for urban sizedifferences.Politics and ruralurban relations also shaped the

form and size of early cities. Rulers of large territorialstates frequently moved between multiple capitalsand sometimes shifted locations of capitals. Theircapitals were often dispersed, which archaeologistBruce Trigger attributes to the absence of threats ofexternal attack. The cities of Classic Lowland Mayakingdoms, however, were dispersed also, despite reg-ular conflicts between them. The absence of a singleurban nucleus might reflect weak central politicalauthority or multiple hierarchies.Rulers of large states had to delegate authority to

people outside the capital, thus creating a hierarchyof administrative centers; in the case of imperialcolonies, urbanism sometimes was imposed. Colonialcenters were not always well integrated with thecountryside and their persistence or collapse wasclosely linked with the fortunes of the imperial state.Some city-states and their urban centers also expand-ed through conquest to form empires or hegemonicstates, although they often were short-lived.As political capitals, the earliest cities often symbo-

lized the state or kingdom and stood at its cosmologi-cal center. Monumental architecture was a prominentfeature of most early cities because conspicuous con-sumption was an important strategy of early rulers andelites. Palaces served as both residences and adminis-trative headquarters. Temples and shrines to deitiesand the cosmic forces of the universe towered over thearchitecture, often sites of state religious rituals, thesymbolic dimension of early cities has long attractedattention. Although the notion that the earliest citieswere primarily religious centers is mistaken, howideology was incorporated into the urban landscapeas a built environment remains a current topic. Werecities by-products of technological and sociopoliticalchanges or were they created? Rather than viewingcities as a passive backdrop for expressions of power,some scholars advocate the view that cities were builtand maintained to legitimize and constitute authority.In some world regions, cities or sacred precincts inthem were deliberately designed to represent aspectsof cosmology.Another recent research direction examines the so-

cial composition of cities and household and neigh-borhood organization. Many early city dwellers werecommoners, and in certain regions, such as Meso-america, substantial numbers of farmers lived in theearliest cities for political and defensive reasons.People of the highest status tended to live in thecentral part of cities; however, neighborhoods oftenincluded a mix of high- and low-status households.Such residential divisions, the physical separation ofadministrative, religious, and market centers, anddispersion of manufacturing areas, seen especially incity-state centers, reflect the internal divisions of earlystates.A regional perspective directs attention to hinter-

lands and urbanrural relations. In addition tosupplying food, raw materials, and goods, citiesdepended on rural villages for labor and immigrants.Immigration fueled the rapid growth of the earliestcities and helped sustain them thereafter. The possi-bility that crowding, poor sanitation, and inadequatediets caused mortality rates to exceed fertility rateshas been raised by a few studies but this importantissue warrants more systematic study.The archaeology of the earliest cities faces particu-

lar challenges because later settlement often overliesthe early ruins or they have been destroyed by humanactivities or environmental changes. As describedbelow, there is considerable diversity in the earliesturban forms that reflects diversity in the organizationof the earliest states themselves.

Sumer

The land of Sumer southern Mesopotamia fromsouth of Baghdad to the marshlands at the head ofurban landscape. Where cults of kings developed,funerary monuments were built in cities to honorancestral rulers. Where states emphasized corporatestrategies, depictions of rulers were rare.

CIVILIZATION AND URBANISM, RISE OF 1005the Persian Gulf has been called the heartland ofcities (Figure 2). Here we find ample evidence fortwo major developments in human history: the begin-nings of urban life and the formation of the first states.Many theories on these landmark developments relyon archaeological data from this region. Althoughthese theories may debate the causes, mechanisms,and relationships between urbanism and state for-mation, they agree that cities and states developed inthe context of a rich agricultural regime dependenton the fertile alluvial plains created by the Tigris andEuphrates rivers.The earliest phases of settled life in Mesopotamia

began farther north and it was not until the early sixthmillennium BC, with the emergence of the Ubaidculture, that villages and small towns appeared inSumer. Archaeological evidence from Ubaid settle-ments suggests a gradual change toward increasingsocioeconomic complexity. However, as town dwell-ing in Sumer was undergoing its organic development,

Figure 2 The southern tip of the Mesopotamian plains with the appromentioned in the text. After Susan Pollock, 1999. Ancient Mesopotam

modifications.some evidence suggests that the shift to urbanisminvolved the introduction of a new form of settlement,the city-state, that came to characterize Sumer laterin the Early Dynastic period (c. 29002334BC). Eachcity-state consisted of an urban center exercisingcontrol over a hinterland of a 1520km radius, dottedwith smaller settlements engaged in the productionand collection of foodstuffs. An underlying feature ofeach urban center was the Sumerian concept thateach was the dwelling of a particular god or goddess,the patron deity of the city (and the state) whosetemple formed the citys focal point. Cities and statesemerged from these temple-based settlements, the firstexample of which can perhaps be witnessed at Eridu.

Eridu

According to Sumerian literature, Eridu was the firstcity to receive kingship from the gods in antediluvialtimes. Eridu was the site of e-bazu, the temple ofEnki, the supreme deity of the Sumerian pantheon

ximate shore of the Persian Gulf and the location of important sites

ia. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, figure 2.1, with some

surge from the Middle Uruk to Jemdet Nasr periods

Kish

1006 CIVILIZATION AND URBANISM, RISE OF(36002900BC), and reaching 400 ha by the EarlyDynastic II period (c. 2700BC). Surveys of the Urukcountryside suggest that there was a continuousmigration of people into the city, leading to theabandonment of many smaller settlements. MiddleUruk period settlement patterns indicate a four-leveladministrative hierarchy for the region, interpretedby archaeologists as a marker of a state system.Excavated evidence from the city also suggests

state institutions. In the Eanna precinct, a series ofmonumental buildings were discovered, but mostdate to later phases of the Uruk period. The so-calledLimestone Temple, Stone Building, and Stone ConeTemple, all with foundations made from limestoneslabs quarried from the Arabian Shelf some 80 kmeast of the city, date to the Uruk V period (c. 3600BC) when, presumably, a state was already in place.and god of subterranean freshwater. Construction ofa modest mudbrick building at Eridu at the southern-most edge of the alluvial plain during the early Ubaidperiod marks an important landmark in human his-tory. This building interpreted as a shrine is super-imposed by foundations of 15 increasingly largerstructures, and finally by a ziggurat for Enki built bykings of the Third Dynasty of Ur some 3500 yearslater. The superimposition of the buildings, from themodest examples of earlier levels to the elaborateexamples of upper levels to the Ziggurat of Enki,stressed the sanctity of this location.Little is known about the settlement surrounding

these early shrines, but the largest recorded Ubaidcemetery was discovered here, with an estimat-ed 8001000 graves showing evidence for socialdifferentiation.

Uruk

The pattern observed at Eridu may have been repeat-ed at other sites. For example, the city of Uruk wasalso founded during the Ubaid period. Beneath thetemple precinct of the goddess Inanna (called Eanna,house of heaven), deep soundings have reachedbuildings that may have been cultic structures similarto those at Eridu.At this time, the head of the Persian Gulf was about

80 km northwest of its present location with theTigris and Euphrates Rivers each forming its owndelta. This turned the area around Uruk into a well-watered, alluvial, and marshy land that allowed a richagricultural regime to flourish.By the end of the Ubaid period, Uruk was a town

of modest size, but it grew gradually throughout thefollowing Uruk period (traditionally associated byarchaeologists with state formation), experiencing aThe city of Kish in the northernmost part of Sumerwas also founded during the Ubaid period. Kishexpanded and attained prominence in the EarlyDynastic period, when it was considered to bewhere the kingship descended from heaven after theGreat Flood. The prestigious title King of Kishsignified, at least nominally, political hegemony overthe land of Sumer. The authority of the king of Kishderived from military might as well as a coalitionamong several city-states, evidence for which comesfrom seal impressions from Ur and Jemdet Nasr.Excavations at Kish are more limited than at Eridu

or Uruk, but the first example of a Mesopotamianpalace was discovered here in Area A. To the north-west of this palace (in Area P), a large building withextensive storage facilities and thick buttressed wallsmay have been another palace or a heavily fortifiedadministrative building. Also in the Early Dynasticperiod, at least two structures were built at Kishthat have been interpreted as ziggurats, perhaps dedi-cated to Zababa, the important god of Kish.With the rise of Sargon of Agade, Sumerian city-

states lost their autonomy and were absorbed into theAkkadian Empire. Some attempts were later made torevive the city-state form of government, for example,during the IsinLarsa period (20171763 BC), but theIn the next phase (Uruk IV), several other monumen-tal buildings were constructed around the GreatCourt, including Buildings AE, Hall of Pillars, Hallof Round Pillars, and the Subterranean Buildingmade from riemchen (a kind of small brick with asquare cross section). In the Uruk IV period, theappearance of the earliest protocuneiform numericaltablets, apparently used to record economic transac-tions, is also observed.In the Late Uruk period, a mudbrick wall was con-

structed around the city that was rebuilt on a largerscale in the Early Dynastic I period (c. 2900BC).Sumerian texts attribute this undertaking to Gilga-mesh, the semi-mythical ruler of Uruk. To archaeol-ogists, the construction of a wall signals the rise ofother competing polities.By the Early Dynastic II period (c. 27502600 BC),

the land of Sumer was divided among as many as 35city-states. Some, including Lagash, Umma, Ur, Isin,Shuruppak, and Adab, played a more importantpolitical or military role. Two lines of evidence indi-cate the consolidation of states in this time: royaltitles indicating established kingship, and buildingsinterpreted as palaces. The most solid evidencefor both comes from the quintessential Sumeriancity, Kish.

should not ignore the fact that large cities would

for the kings of the first and second dynasty, turnedAbydos into the most prominent necropolis in Egypt,

Naqada

In the protodynastic period, the South Town atNaqada (ancient Nubt) housed a large mudbrick en-closure, perhaps a royal compound, some 50m longand 34m wide with walls 2m thick. At the Naqadacemetery, one can also see increasing evidence forsocial differentiation in larger, better constructed,and more lavishly furnished tombs. One particularexample is Tomb T5, where an individual was foundaccompanied with remains of human sacrifice.

Hierakonpolis

The city of Hierakonpolis (ancient Nekhen), perhapsthe most important protodynastic center in Upper

THISAbydos

NAGADA

HIERAKONPOLIS

Stage 1

Stage 2

Stage 3

Protokingdom ofUpper Egypt

Elephantine

Nubia

Qustul

Figure 3 The protokingdoms of Upper Egypt in protodynasticperiod, with the location of sites mentioned in the text. After Barry

J. Kemp (1989). Ancient Egypt: Anatomy of a Civilization. London:

Routledge, figure 13.

CIVILIZATION AND URBANISM, RISE OF 1007already signifying its later importance as the maincult center of the god Osiris, the primary god of theland of the dead.hardly have had enough room to flourish in the tightNile Valley (Figure 3).From the beginning of sedentism in the Nile Valley

up to the unification of Upper and Lower Egypt and thefoundation of the Egyptian state (c. 45003100BC),one can distinguish three broad patterns of settlementdevelopment:

Phase 1 TasianBadarian period (c. 45003900BC). Small, more or less self-sufficient farmingcommunities were located on the margins of thefloodplain, levees, and the low desert to avoidannual flooding, but to have easy access to richalluvium left behind by the Nile.

Phase 2 Amratian or Naqada I period (c. 39003500BC). Small towns, perhaps centers for craftactivities, involved in regional exchange, werelocated along the edge of the floodplain and on thelevees. These towns were usually associated withcemeteries that began to exhibit signs of socialdifferentiation.

Phase 3 Gerzean or Nagada II period (c. 35003200BC). Small cities that housed protokingdomsexercised control over a stretch of the floodplainand towns and villages within it. The Egyptianstate seems to have emerged in Naqada III or pro-todynastic period (c. 32003000BC) within thecontext of competition and coalition among threemajor protokingdoms in the Upper Egypt: This,Naqada, and Hierakonpolis.

This

This or Thinis (ancient Abedjo) is actually famousfor its funerary satellite site Abydos. Abydos mayhave started out as a burial ground on the outskirtsof the city of This, but a large number of protodynas-tic burials, not to mention the main burial groundnature of Mesopotamian government had alreadyshifted from city-states to polities oriented towardinter-regional hegemony.

Egypt

Egypt has been called the civilization without cities.While the lack of evidence for major urban centerswith domestic residential quarters dating to the earli-er part of Egyptian history may partially be due toheavy sedimentation or later human activities, oneMerimda

MemphisFayum

Maadi/Helwan

Buto

no settlement remains earlier than the First Intermedi-ate period have been discovered, mostly due to heavy

1008 CIVILIZATION AND URBANISM, RISE OFButo

Founded in the mid-fourth millennium BC on a sanddune about 30 km south of the Mediterranean coastin marshlands of northwestern delta, Buto soonbecame an important town engaged in exchange net-works of the eastern Mediterranean, evident in pot-tery finds from the Levant and Syria and the so-calledclay-cones reminiscent of Uruk Mesopotamia.By the Naqada II period, people from Upper Egypt

began expanding northward into Lower Egypt. Whilethis movement may have initially been a peacefulprocess to allow people of Upper Egypt more directaccess to the eastern Mediterranean and its resources,archaeological and iconographic evidence suggeststhat the political unification of Upper and LowerEgypt was achieved through military campaignswaged by several generations of Upper Egyptian rulersculminating in a Thinite ruler called Narmer.According to Manetho, the third century BC high

priest at Heliopolis who composed a history of Egypt,the legendary first pharaoh of Egypt, Menes (whomay or may not be the same person as Narmer),founded a city at the juncture of Upper and LowerEgypt to serve as the capital of the unified kingdom.This city came to be called inbu-hedj (white walls) inEgyptian and Memphis in Greek.Egypt, consists of two zones: the low mound locatedin the floodplain where the remains of the town andthe Temple Mound are found, and a group of inter-related sites stretching westward for 2 km into theWestern Desert. Excavations at the Temple Moundhave exposed traces of an early shrine perhapsdedicated to Horus, the god of Hierakonpolis inwhich the famous Main Deposit was discovered,including some of the most important artifactspertaining to the era of state formation, such as theKing Scorpion macehead and the Narmer Palette. Tothe north of the Temple Mound, remains of a monu-mental building have been excavated, featuring a20m wide gate built with mudbrick in the distinctniche-and-buttress style reminiscent of Uruk periodMesopotamian masonry.Excavations at the Hierakonpolis cemetery indi-

cate an accelerated process of social differentia-tion from late predynastic to protodynastic period,as one can see a marked difference in the size andcontents of the burials. One remarkable burial isTomb 100, where the walls are decorated with color-ful painting combining Egyptian and Near Easternmotifs.As urbanism and political developments were un-

derway in Upper Egypt, a number of cities flourishedin Lower Egypt, most importantly Buto.overburden of later periods. The city of Memphis isimportant for a number of monuments, includingthe Temple of Ptah that may have begun in EarlyDynastic period, although nothing earlier than Nine-teenth Dynasty has been discovered so far. The areaaround Memphis is, however, dotted with remains ofEarly Dynastic and Old Kingdom times: to the southis Saqqara where mastabas of the Early Dynasticofficials and the Step Pyramid of Djoser are located,and to the northGizawhere the pyramid complexes ofthe Fourth Dynasty pharaohs Khufu, Khafra, andMenkaura are to be found.As the capital of Egypt during Early Dynastic and

Old Kingdom times (c. 30002165 BC),Memphis wasthe most important political and cultural center in theland. The temple of the sun god Ra at Heliopolis tothe northeast of Memphis was an important religiouscenter with strong influence on Old Kingdom royalideology, gradually replacing Horus with Ra as theprimary deity associated with the pharaoh. Memphisalso produced one of the more important Egyptianmyths of creation revolving around Ptah. Ateliersworking out of Memphis under the patronage of theroyal court were responsible for creating splendidworks of art and architecture that characterize thedistinct Old Kingdom style, highly regarded andemulated in later phases of Egyptian history. However,despite its political and cultural importance, Memphiswas basically a royal city where the court and highofficials resided, while the population continued to livein small towns and villages along the Nile.With the decline of the Old Kingdom and disinte-

gration of the central government, Memphis ceasedto be the capital and two other cities laid claim topower: Herakleopolis in Middle Egypt where theNinth and Tenth Dynasties ruled and Thebes inUpper Egypt where Eleventh and subsequentlyTwelfth Dynasty pharaohs embarked on anotherseries of campaigns to reunify Egypt and establishthe Middle Kingdom.

Indus

The early Indus civilization covered a vast area of500 000 km2 and extended well beyond the IndusRiver basin to parts of Afghanistan in the north andto Gujarat in the south to the Indo-Gangetic divide inMemphis

The ruins of Memphis, about 20 km south ofCairo, occupy an area of c. 4 km from north tosouth and 1.5 km from east to west. Despite sustainedarchaeological fieldwork since the nineteenth century,

CIVILIZATION AND URBANISM, RISE OF 1009the east and the Makran coast in the west (Figure 4).The early cities of the Harappan phase of the IndusValley Tradition of Pakistan and western India devel-oped by 2600 BC and lasted as late as 1300BC insome areas. The region was not politically unifiedand the degree of integration of Harappan centers isdebated. At least five centers were large enough to beconsidered cities: Harappa, Mohenjo-daro, Dhola-vira, Ganweriwala, and Rakhigarhi, each with a hin-terland of 100 000150000 km2. All Indus citiesshared some common features: walled settlements,urban planning of streets and buildings, sophisticateddrainage systems, a common writing system and sys-tem of weights, and similar styles of pottery and othergoods (see Asia, South: Indus Civilization).The nature of urbanrural integration is not well

understood. Some archaeologists have even questionedwhether early Indus polities were states because ofan absence of monumental religious architecture,palaces, and depictions of rulers and limited evidenceof warfare. The Great Bath at Mohenjo-daro indi-cates that ritual bathing has a long religious tradi-tion in the region. The lack of glorification of rulersis not unique among early civilizations and suggestsa corporate form of rulership. The absence of recog-nized archaeological evidence of warfare does not

Figure 4 Schematic map showing locations of early cities in the Indnecessarily indicate an absence of warfare, as thehistory of research on Classic Maya civilizationdemonstrates. The size, complexity, and urban plan-ning of Indus cities are consistent with the state formof organization.The Indus script is yet to be deciphered. Recent

archaeological investigations, however, have provi-ded new details of Indus cities and also correctedmisconceptions from their initial discovery in the1920s.

Harappa

The city of Harappa was first settled around 3300 BCand expanded to cover at least 150 ha. The urbanpopulation ranged from 40000 to 80 000 persons,depending on the time of year. Four mounded areaswere clustered around a central depression that mighthave held water. The mounded areas were walled, aswas the entire city, and entered by gateways. Becauseof poor preservation, it is difficult to determine thelayout of houses and the function of buildings. Work-shops occur along with residences in each of themounded areas. Various functions for the walls havebeen suggested: defense, flood control, and thedemarcation of sociopolitical boundaries. Workshops

us Valley and China.

Little excavation has been undertaken at either

Chinese urbanism developed out of Neolithic and

Clear archaeological and textual evidence for urbansettlements with populations numbering at least in

1010 CIVILIZATION AND URBANISM, RISE OFRakhigarhi or Ganweriwala, two cities identifiedthrough survey. Much work remains to be done tounderstand early Indus cities more thoroughly. Thecities were connected through trade networks. Theyimported raw materials and finished goods formCentral Asia and Afghanistan, and carnelian beadsand shell bangles made in Indus cities have beenfound in Mesopotamia and Central Asia.Around 1900BC, the cities began to lose popula-

tion, and other defining characteristics of early Induscivilization such as its system of weights were nolonger practiced. Foreign invasions, natural disasters,Dholavira

Dholavira is the most recently discovered Harappancity. It is located on Kadir Island in the Gulf of Kutchand was founded as an outpost or colony. The mixof artifact styles suggests that along with the localpopulation, Indus Valley elites and artisans lived inthe city. Dholavira had a very different layout thanthe better-known cities of Mohenjo-daro and Har-appa. The outer city wall enclosed a series of walledrectangular and square compounds. Residential andcraft areas occurred in the lower or outer town that isdivided by streets running in cardinal directions.Large structures were present on the acropolis.and multistory residences built of kiln-fired bricksoccur in all the mounded areas, suggesting that thewalls may represent political and/or social divisions,along with defensive aspects. The city was laid out toseparate public and private areas.Indus cities had sophisticated water- and waste-

management systems. Wells for drinking water oc-curred in and around Harappa. Houses had bathingareas, latrines, and sewers that connected to largerdrains that emptied beyond the city walls. The fertilewaste water was deposited on agricultural fieldssurrounding the city.

Mohenjo-daro

Mohenjo-daro, located on the lower Indus, is thebest-preserved Indus city. It covers 200 ha. The walledcitadel mound includes several large buildings thatmight include elite residences, along with the famousGreat Bath. A lower town covering 8 ha is divided byfour major eastwest and northsouth streets thatdivide into blocks that are further subdivided bysmaller streets and alleyways. Houses are groupedaround courtyards and included bathrooms and elab-orate drainage systems. Workshops where varioustypes of commodities were produced are distributedthroughout the city.the thousands is more readily available from the mid-second millennium BC. Shang period sites of theCentral Plain (Zhongyuan region) in North China.The Middle Shang (c. 1600 BC) city of Zhengzhouconsists of a walled area surrounded by areas of craftChalcolithic patterns of site layout (Figure 4). Overseveral millennia, village sites began to exhibitspecialized architecture, distinguishable residentialclusters, and the construction of defensive ditches.By Longshan times (c. 26002000BC), square orrectangular precincts with nucleated populationswere enclosed by walls of rammed earth (hangtu),which are thought to have housed and protected anemerging elite. Walled sites from the Longshan peri-od include Wangchenggang, Dantu, Bianxianwang,Pingliangtai, Shijiahe-Tucheng, and Laohushan. Thewalls of these sites enclose a modest area (generallyless than 10ha), and although residential areas areknown outside of the walls, it is probably inaccurateto consider such sites to be the urban capitals of earlystates. (In comparison, the average city size for EasternZhou capitals (770221BC) has been estimated to beabout 16km2.) Recent archaeological surveys indicatethe establishment of multitier settlement hierarchiesduring Longshan times, with some very large sitesdeveloping. Despite large settlement sizes, clear ar-chaeological indications of centralized states do notappear to be present during the third millennium BC.Longshan period developments culminated in the

emergence of a suite of new artifactual and architec-tural forms known as the Erlitou culture (that manyresearchers using texts link to the Xia Dynasty).Erlitou is a sizeable settlement that has foundationsof what is interpreted as a palace, as well as severalcraft workshops. Although no wall has been found atthis site, rammed-earth foundations have been identi-fied, the largest of which were surrounded by anenclosure wall and held large halls in which ritualswere conducted. In its later phases, the Erlitou site isthought to have developed into the urban capital of acentralized state.

Zhengzhouand disruption of trade networks with southwest Asiaused to be the conventional explanations, but archae-ologists now favor an interaction of factors thatmight have disrupted trade networks and underminedthe power of elites, but the details remain unclear.

China

in the area around the palaces. The Xiaotun sector

rounded by commoner settlement. By the mid-secondmillennium BC, Chinas largest sites covered several

CIVILIZATION AND URBANISM, RISE OF 1011is thought to be the administrative-ceremonial coreof Anyang, administering a web of surroundingsettlement clusters.One of the outlying sites that constitute the Anyang

urban web is Xibeigang, where 13 monumentaltombs have been excavated. All of these consist of aprimary pit accessed by ramps that share the sameorientation and have evidence of extensive sacrificialburials (including humans, dogs, horses, and otheranimals) associated with the burials of prominent indi-viduals. Although these have been extensively looted,the FuHao tomb excavated atXiaotun offers us a senseof the wealth of grave goods placed with prominentindividuals. This tomb belonged to a wife of the rulerWu Ting and contained 16 human sacrificial victims,production, and is thought to have been the capital of aShang state. The walled sector of the city enclosed anarea of nearly 3 km2, within which are a number oframmed-earth platforms that may have held elite resi-dences. While the walled part of the city is consideredto have housed an elite population, craft productionareas have been identified outside the walls, includingbronze smelting, bone ornament and tool production,and pottery production. Cemeteries are also foundoutside the walled city.A number of smaller cities appear to have devel-

oped around the same time as Zhengzhou, includingPanlongcheng and Shixianggou. The latter site hasa walled precinct laid out with wide avenues andhas a large palace enclosure that occupies about 4 ha.

Anyang

The later Shang capitals at Anyang and Shangqiu arebetter known archaeologically. Anyang is thought tohave been the sixth and final capital of the Shangdynasty. By around 1200BC, the city comprised ametropolitan area of some 15 km2, consisting of mul-tiple occupation clusters spread along a 6 km stretchof the Yellow River. Anyang was not merely a con-glomeration of villages large-scale residential foun-dations thought to be palaces have been found atXiaotun, and tombs of a scale indicative of royalburial are present at Xibeigang, where a large num-ber of inscribed oracle bones attest to a qualitativechange in social organization. Three clusters ofhangtu foundations have been identified at Xiaotun,a total of 53 individual foundations of which thelargest is 2800m2. Storage pits containing the remainsof grain, bronze weapons, oracle bones, and finepottery have been identified around the palatial foun-dations. Craft workshops and commoner residencesare also present, indicating that bronze casting andjade, shell, bone, and stone working were conductedsquare kilometers and had sizeable precincts (some-times walled) in which monumental architecture,palatial residences, ritual spaces, and storage facilitieswere located. Craft production appears to have be-comemore specialized and was carried out on a largerscale in workshops outside of the inner city. Farmerslived in rural communities outside of the cities. Itappears that the inner parts of these early cities wereplanned to a degree not seen at the urban periphery,which grew more organically in a number of linkedsettlement clusters.

Mesoamerica

By the early sixteenth century, when the Aztec capital ofTenochtitlan was among the largest cities in the world,Mesoamericas urban traditionwas over 2000 years old(Figure 5). Prehispanic cities took different forms andvaried significantly in size. Most archaeologists placethe beginnings of urban life and development of stateorganization during the Late or Terminal Formative/Preclassic with the formation of civilizations in boththe highlands and lowlands.

Teotihuacan

By the end of the Late Formative at 300 BC or slightlythereafter during the Early Terminal Formative(300100 BC), two urban regional centers dominatedthe Basin of Mexico in the central highlands Cuicuilco in the southwest and Teotihuacan in thenortheast each head of a state system. About 100BC, Teotihuacan grew explosively as most of thesix dogs, 7000 cowrie shells, andmore than 1600 otheritems (bronzes, jades, oracle bones, stone objects, ivorycarvings, pottery, and shell objects).More research is needed to clarify patterns of

urban development in China, but it is clear that citieswith populations exceeding 100 000 had developedby Eastern Zhou times (771221BC), when urbansettlements exhibit a more nucleated character anda more consistent layout. By this time, the urbanform included a walled inner city (wangcheng) thatcontained a palace, an outer city (guo), and a sur-rounding hinterland of suburbs (jiao) and farminghamlets (yie). Zhou cities were commercial centerswith thriving craft industries and well-developedadministrative hierarchies.It is undeniable that these cities developed out of

millennia-long traditions of settlement organization.Longshan social development saw the appearance ofwalled compounds of a few hectares, possibly areasof elite residence and craft production that were sur-

1012 CIVILIZATION AND URBANISM, RISE OFbasins population relocated to the city. Volcanic erup-tions destroyed Cuicuilco and its immediate hinter-lands leaving Teotihuacan as the sole power in thebasin until CE 650/750. It became the most influentialcity in Classic period Mesoamerica.The city expanded to 100 000125000 people and

covered 20 km2 by CE 300. In prehispanic Meso-america, only Tenochtitlan in the early fifteenth cen-tury was larger. Following the aggregation of thebasins population at Teotihuacan, its rulers under-took a massive reorganization of the city structuredaround a cruciform plan. Monumental buildingswere constructed along a main northsouth artery(Figure 6). A one-story apartment compound becamethe standard residential unit that housed relatedfamilies, each with their own apartment.Although many farmers lived at Teotihuacan, craft

Figure 5 Schematic map of Mesoamerica showing locations ofearly cities.specialization expanded as the city became a majorcommercial center. Teotihuacan was a primate citywhose size, military, politicoeconomic, and ideologi-cal importance inhibited the development of rivalcenters. By the mid-500s, however, the city hadincreasing economic and political difficulties in itshinterlands, and around CE 650 or 750 major tem-ples and other public buildings at Teotihuacanwere burned and figures smashed. The collapse ofTeotihuacan marked the start of the Postclassic city-state systems, and, although greatly reduced in sizeand influence, Teotihuacan became an Epiclassic (CE650950) city-state center.

Monte Alban

In the Valley of Oaxaca in the southern highlands ofMexico, the city of Monte Alban became the politicaland cultural center of the early Zapotec state. Towardthe end of the Middle Formative (about 500BC),Monte Alban was founded for defensive and ideolog-ical reasons atop a cluster of hills in the center of thevalley. To some archaeologists, the establishment ofMonte Alban signals the political unification of thevalley and beginnings of state organization. An alter-native interpretation posits that a chief from thenorthwest Etla branch of the valley moved his capitalto Monte Alban and subsequently unified the valleyin the Terminal Formative (200 BCCE 300).Located on the main plaza are the famous Dan-

zantes that date to 350200BC. This gallery of 300life-size carved stone monuments depicts slain indivi-duals, probably war captives attesting to the impor-tance of warfare in regional politics and in thefounding and growth of the city. At the end of theLate Formative or during the Terminal Formative, a2 km long defensive wall was built on the northernand western slopes of the city as Monte Alban for-cibly extended its control into surrounding regions.Monte Alban reached its maximum size of 17000

Figure 6 Teotihuacan looking down the Street of the Dead.30000 people during the Classic period (CE 200700).Monumental temples and a palace were added to themain plaza, along with stelae depicting Monte Albansrulers. In contrast to the broad main avenue of Teoti-huacan, the main plaza at Monte Alban was designedto restrict access.As the urban population grew, people created ter-

races on the hillslopes where they built their houses.Many commoners who lived at Monte Alban werefarmers who traveled down the hill to farm theirfields. Some craft specialists might have resided to-gether in barrios.Most construction in the main plaza stopped by

c. CE 700, and the citys population shrank. WithMonte Albans decline as a regional political capi-tal, other centers expanded. Small kingdoms, city-states, or cacicazgos, each with a central town or

ship collapsed. Cities in the northern lowlands, how-

al degradation from over-intensification, intensifiedwarfare, and elite competition, and a rejection of theinstitution and ideology of Maya kingship contribu-ted to the collapse of most southern cities.

Andes

The capitals of late prehispanic Andean empires weresizeable cities, with populations in the tens ofthousands (Figure 8). Researchers have not reacheda consensus regarding the antiquity of the firstAndean cities and the development of the first centra-lized state governments. Despite ongoing debate, theMochica, Wari, and Tiwanaku can be considered tohave been early states in their respective regions andprovide case studies for exploring urbanism and therise of civilization. The capitals of these polities bearwitness to the transformations concomitant with theestablishment of centralized state governments.

Huacas of Moche

The capital of the Mochica state was located at themouth of the Moche Valley, at a site comprising theHuaca del Sol, Huaca de la Luna, and the interveningvalley bottom. This site, which spanned more than

CIVILIZATION AND URBANISM, RISE OF 1013ever, experienced their apogee during the TerminalClassic (CE 8001000). One view sees the ninth-century abandonment as a pan-lowland collapse.city, became thedominantpolitical formin thePostclas-sic (see Americas, Central: Postclassic Cultures ofMesoamerica).

Lowland Maya

Rainforests provided the setting for the developmentof Maya civilization in southern Mexico, Guatemala,Belize, western Honduras and El Salvador. During theMiddle Preclassic (900300 BC), large chiefdom cen-ters developed in parts of both the Maya lowlandsand highlands. The Late Preclassic saw the emergenceof the earliest cities in the central lowlands at ElMirador, Nakbe, Cerros, and Tikal, and the establish-ment of the essential elements of Maya kingship andGreat Tradition. El Mirador is the largest-knownearly city in the lowlands, with two acropoli of tem-ples, palaces, and plazas connected by a causewayand hundreds of residential platforms scatteredover 16 km2. Toward the end of the Late Preclassic(300 BCCE 250), El Mirador, Nakbe, and Cerroswere mostly or completely abandoned, perhaps dueto local overpopulation, conflict, and/or eruption ofthe Ilopango volcano c. CE 250.Lowland Maya civilization of the Classic period

(CE 250800) consisted of a network of kingdomscross-cut by a broadly shared elite culture. Somekingdoms grew larger than others through alliancesand conquests but none formed a stable regional/territorial state.Maya centers varied from a few thousand to popu-

lations in the tens of thousands, reaching c. 60 000people at Tikal.Maya cities were ritual-regal or court-ly centers of royalty and elites. Masonry temples,palaces, ball courts, and the funerary monuments ofancestral rulers were arranged around large open pla-zas (Figure 7). Stone stelae with depictions of rulers,hieroglyphic writing, and dates proclaimed importantevents in the lives of divine kings. Major plaza groupswere separated from each other within a city andconnected by causeways. Cities grew by accretionwith little indication of overall planning.Scattered between the plaza complexes were house-

hold groups of farmers and craft specialists and lessernobles. Maya cities were not tightly bounded. Settle-ment became increasingly dispersed away from theurban core with gardens and fields between houseclusters.Beginning in the ninth century, major cities in the

southern lowlands were abandoned, their hinterlandsexperienced marked population reductions, and king-Others disagree and point to some centers whoseoccupation continued into the Postclassic. Agricultur-

Figure 7 Tikal Temple 1.

1014 CIVILIZATION AND URBANISM, RISE OF72 ha and had a population estimated in the thousands,is known today as Huacas of Moche. The principalmonuments were laid out so as to capitalize onnatural topography while also bounding the area ofurban residential population. A major avenue setsthe Huaca de la Luna and adjoining elite residencesapart from the urban residential area (Figure 9). The

Figure 8 Schematic map of the Andes showing locations ofearly cities.two huacas appear to have been used by elites aspart of the religious and political activities of thestate other ceremonial activities are known tohave been conducted in nearby elite households.Recent excavations have revealed that the area be-

tween the major civic-ceremonial complexes wasdensely occupied in the Moche IV period (CE 400700). Researchers have identified multiple domesticcompounds that are thought to have been the resi-dences of extended family units. Compounds wereenclosed groups of rectangular structures of varyingsize and construction quality, which containedmodest open spaces and storage facilities. Theseunits were separated from each other by narrowstreets (generally less than 2m wide). Excavationshave revealed that the occupants of these compoundswere generally not a farming population, but weremostly craft specialists evidence of weaving, ceram-ic production, shell working, smelting, and the work-ing of lapidary ornaments has been identified, whilefarming and fishing tools are virtually absent.The rise of Mochica civilization included the exten-

sion of administrative control or hegemony over anumber of coastal valleys to the north and south ofthe Moche Valley. In some areas, local settlementpatterns were disrupted as secondary administrativesites were established and irrigation systems wereextended. The Mochica capital itself seems to havegrown and been laid out to meet the new needs ofstate administration. Monumental building projectsincreased dramatically at the capital, with elitesdirecting the construction of not only the major hua-cas, but also palatial residences and elaborate tombs.Specialized craft production also increased at thistime, and major agricultural intensification projectswere completed as well.

Wari and Tiwanaku

The Wari and Tiwanaku polities were the first statesto develop in the central Andean highlands and theTiticaca Basin, respectively. Both polities are knownto have had urban capitals that developed around thetime of the first territorial expansion outside of theircore regions. Wari and Tiwanaku secondary centersand provincial outposts were constructed with certainaspects of an urban template in mind, but the popula-

Figure 9 Urban compounds at Huacas of Moche site.tions of secondary sites appear to have been toomodest to consider them as cities.

Tiwanaku At its maximal extent, Tiwanaku was acity of 6 km2, with a population estimated in the tensof thousands. At the center of the city lay a ceremoni-al precinct that was surrounded by a large artificialmoat. Certain of the citys most important monu-ments are located within the enclosed area (viz., theKalasasaya and Sunken Temple), as are residentialcompounds identified as elite and royal palaces. Theinner city at Tiwanaku was renovated after CE 800,replacing previous residential areas with a smallernumber of compounds occupied by elites with closeties to state ceremonial activity.

Outside of the urban core, archaeologists haveexcavated domestic compounds interpreted as theresidences of minor state officials. These exhibit adegree of central planning and take the form ofwalled compounds that contained the residences ofextended families. Streets and drains separate thesecompounds and provide access through the site. Someworkshops have been identified in the outer part ofthe city, but the residences of craft specialists have

officials, and artisans whose workshops tended to belocated outside themain religious-administrative areas.Housing tends to take the formofwalled compounds inwhich extended family groups resided. Residentialblocks were separated by streets that appear to havebeen narrow and opportunistically built, althoughthere is evidence that the state did lay out major ave-nues and invested in programs of urban renovationresulting in better access and urban infrastructure.

en Mesoamerica. Urbanism in Mesoamerica. Mexico City:Instituto Nacional de Antropologa e Historia and University

University Press.

CIVILIZATION AND URBANISM, RISE OF 1015been difficult to identify unambiguously. Agriculturallaborers lived mainly in the citys hinterland, near tothe system of raised fields that provided sustenancefor the population of the Tiwanaku heartland.

Huari The Wari state developed in the Ayacuchoregion of highland Peru. Its capital (Huari) was estab-lished on the site of several previously autonomoussettlements, growing from c. CE 400900 and exhibi-ting the characteristics of an urban center by theseventh century. The urban core of Huari was 4 km2

at its maximum extent and contained several monu-mental religious complexes, areas for public feasts,storage facilities, and residential compounds. Walledtemple compounds such as the SemisubterraneanTemple and the Vegachayoq Moqo complex werelaid out and separated by narrow streets, and domes-tic architecture in later phases takes the form ofwalled compounds as well. As domestic residentialblocks filled in the open areas between religious com-plexes, the city grew more crowded, and second-storyarchitecture was built. Residential compounds werelaid out as walled enclosures in which a series of hallsand smaller rectangular structures were built arounda central patio area. The excavated assemblage inthese compounds has been interpreted as belongingto mid-level state officials.The first cities in the Andes grew rapidly, outpa-

cingsimilar growth processes at secondary centers(e.g., Lukurmata, Conchopata). As capitals of earlystates, these cities grew around precincts of monu-mental religious architecture in which elite residenceshave been identified. Open spaces for large-scalegatherings and feasts were built as part of the majorreligious complexes, and more modest plazas areoften found in elite residences. The occupants ofthese early cities included the ruling elite, minor statePark, PA: Pennsylvania State University.Smith ML (2003) The Social Construction of Ancient Cities.

Washington, DC: Smithsonian Institution Press.

Storey G (ed.) (2006) Population and Preindustrial Cities. Tusca-loosa: University of Alabama Press.

Trigger B (2003)Understanding EarlyCivilizations: AComparativeStudy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Yoffee N (2005) Myths of the Archaic State: Evolution of theEarliest Cities, States, and Civilizations. Cambridge: CambridgeSee also: Africa, North: Egypt, Pre-Pharaonic; Americas,Central: Classic Period of Mesoamerica, the Maya;Postclassic Cultures of Mesoamerica; Americas, South:Inca Archaeology; Asia, East: Chinese Civilization; Asia,South: Indus Civilization; Asia, West: Achaemenian,Parthian, and Sasanian Persian Civilizations; Mesopota-

mia, Sumer, and Akkad; Cities, Ancient, and Daily Life;Classification and Typology.

Further Reading

Cowgill GL (2004) Origins and development of urbanism: Ar-chaeological perspectives. Annual Review of Anthropology 33:525549.

Feinman G and Marcus J (eds.) (1998) Archaic States. Santa Fe,New Mexico: SAR Press.

HansenMH (ed.) (2000)A Comparative Study of Thirty City-StateCultures. Copenhagen: Royal Danish Academy of Sciences andLetters.

Hansen MH (ed.) (2002) A Comparative Study of Six City-StateCultures. Copenhagen: Royal Danish Academy of Sciences andLetters.

Kenoyer JM (1989) Ancient Cities of the Indus Valley Civilization.Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Nichols DL and Charlton TH (eds.) (1997) The Archaeology ofCity-States: Cross-Cultural Approaches. Washington, DC:Smithsonian Institution Press.

Sanders WT, Mastache AG, and Cobean RH (2003) El urbanismo

CIVILIZATION AND URBANISM, RISE OFGlossarySumerEriduUrukKish

EgyptThisNaqadaHierakonpolisButoMemphis

IndusHarappaMohenjo-daroDholavira

ChinaZhengzhouAnyang

MesoamericaTeotihuacanMonte AlbaacutenLowland Maya

AndesHuacas of MocheWari and TiwanakuTiwanakuHuari

Further Reading