Civilization

Piotr:
V. Gordon Childe's criteria are a proposal which some folks buy and
others don't. You can't call them universally persuasive. Many other
definitions of "civilisation" have been offered and they're all somewhat
arbitrary. With his Marxist leanings, Childe was inclined to think in
terms of dialectical materialism, general laws of social development and
objective criteria for pinpointing any social organism and classing it
according to how "advanced" it was. There was a time when it seemed
indisputable that "savages" (hunter-gatherers) must pass through the
"barbarian" (nomadic) stage of evolution before raising themselves to
the dignity of "civilisation" (with sedentary life, farming, urbanism,
centralised power, writing, literature, philosophy and other modern
conveniences, culminating in space flights and the Internet).

Gerry here: I've never seen nomadic referred to as Barbarian. Do you
have a reference per chance? And as far as Childe classifying "stages"
of development, I think you might have him mixed up with another
archaeologist; usless of course you can cite specific references.


While there is a grain of truth in the almost trivial observation that
cultural innovations tend to accumulate, and social and economic
structures tend towards increasing complexity in the course of time, the
view of social evolution as progressing from one well-defined stage to
another is no longer taken that seriously.

Gerry: Yes I agree with you that progress from one stage to the next is
outdated; passe.

We can use labels like "hunter-gatherer" for convenience but they are
hardly more objective than classifying a living thing as an "alga", a
"worm", or an "invertebrate". We know of societies who made pottery but
did not know agriculture, and "savages" who turned directly into
farmers, and of "nomads" who erected gorgeous cities and had kings and
aristocracy, and who produced exquisite art but left no written
literature. The whole issue of "nomadic pastoralism" and its alleged
place in the ladder of progress is being reassessed right now, as you
surely realise.

Gerry: I do like the term "nomadic pastoralism". Did the pastoralists
move according to the changing seasons or did the nomads practice
pastoralism?


"Civilisation" is a useful informal term. You can invent any number of
formal criteria to narrow down its meaning, but it's a little like
hunting the snark with thimbles, care, forks and hope, railway-shares,
smiles and soap.

Gerry: I like your hunting the snark ... from where do you quote.
Sounds a bit like Lewis Carroll. And about the term _civilization_;
it's useful in a sense because it allows us to understand that the Dobe
!Kung had a loosely formed social organization but did not have a
civilization. By identifying major civilizations, a country can best
determine how to spend it archaeological preservation budget. Granted,
it would be fine if everything could be preserved, but there just isn't
enough money to go around!

I've read of some frozen Scythian tombs in the Altai area (with
fascinating tattoos visible on the preserved bodies) but I'm not aware
of any DNA results. I'll send you word if I learn of something.

Gerry: Thanks for the thought.
Gera