May 2026 • History 101 Miderm Essay
A response to Jared Diamonds "The Wost Mistake in the History of the Human Race"
The development of agriculture brought about permanent changes to the way our societies function and led to our first civilizations. Jared Diamond, a popular historian, makes the argument that agriculture introduced more negatives than it did positives, creating problems such as widespread diseases, warfare, gender hierarchy, and class divisions. The four ancient civilizations we have studied have both similarities and differences in relation to Diamond’s claim. There is evidence of similarities, particularly in the increase of infectious diseases and warfare. However, the civilizations differed in the extent of their gender hierarchies and class structures. By comparing each civilization we have covered, this essay will delve deeper into each of these categories and demonstrate why Jared Diamond's argument is only partially correct.
Whether class division is a universal concept for all civilizations caused by the development of agriculture is something that has been debated endlessly. Diamond claims that the start of agriculture and farming pushed class divisions with the new concept of food storage, something that only really started when humans began settling (The Worst Mistake in the History of the Human Race, Jared Diamond). Mesopotamia, which took root in about 6000 BC, is the first official civilization to be recognized and, therefore, provides us with some of the first evidence of class division within developing societies. One of the most important primary sources where class division is demonstrated is Hammurabi's Code of Laws. Hammurabi was a famous king in Babylonia around 1792 BC, known for turning the city into an empire by conquering the surrounding cities around Babylon. As king, he claimed Shamash, the god of the sun and justice, came to him in person with the code. (The Story of Mesopotamia, Lecture 1). With his laws, we can see that slavery existed, and it wasn't limited to gender, so both men and women could be slaves. There were also kings and noblemen who were at the top of the social hierarchy chain, and workers such as builders, physicians, and merchants were in the middle. People's social rankings dictated how they were punished if convicted for a crime. If the criminal and victim were of the same status, then an “eye for an eye” mentality applied; for example, if a merchant hurt a house builder, the merchant would be hurt the same way. If the criminal were of lower status compared to the victim, they would usually be punished more severely, like with public whippings. If the criminal were of higher status, then they would face easier punishments, such as having to pay a fine (Hammurabi's Code of Laws, pg. 5).
Ancient China is one of the most famous examples of a civilization adopting hierarchy. The first concrete evidence of social stratification goes back to approximately 1600 BCE, when the Shang Dynasty began. During the Shang Dynasty, which lasted between 1600 BCE and 1046 BCE, historians and archaeologists found evidence of giant elite tombs where high-status royals were buried with goods and their servants and guards. These tombs are a stark contrast to the simpler graveyards commoners were buried in. During this period, there were also human sacrifices, usually of women, slaves, and their masters. Over time, status seemed to change. For example, during the Zhou Dynasty period when Confucius was around, there was an increased emphasis on ethical governance, and scholars and educated officials started rising in social status, being recognized as elites. (The Story of China Documentary). These pieces of evidence demonstrate the hierarchies during different eras of China and how they developed throughout history. The existence of kings, noblemen, commoners, and slaves seems to have been around since the beginning of ancient Chinese civilization, or at least as far as we can see.
Ancient Egypt, which began shortly after 3000 BCE, also had deep class divisions. Pharaohs, their government officials, and priests made up the top 1-3% of the population in terms of power, money, and influence. High-class individuals, such as pharaohs, were buried in tombs filled with things like treasures, foods, and religious texts. Ancient Egyptians believed this was necessary for them to safely cross over to the afterlife. Elite Egyptians had access to resources that lower-class citizens did not, including doctors and expensive burial practices, which were only available for the top percent of society. In the middle-class range were the merchants and craftspeople. At the bottom of the hierarchy were beggars and slaves, some being immigrants who were enslaved looking for work. Social rankings mattered a lot in everyday life; workers of lower status had to spend all their days working to provide resources for elites and higher-class citizens who could afford to live in the cities. (The Story of Ancient Egypt Lecture 3).
The Indus Valley for a long time was believed to be egalitarian compared to the others. We now know that this is not accurate and social and class divisions still existed; however, they might have happened on a different level. There is no evidence of any sort of ruling individuals. The other three civilizations have tombs where royalty would have been buried or temples to worship their gods. Ancient India does not appear to show evidence for either (The Real Utopia: This ancient civilization thrived without war, pg. 3, Andrew Robinson). Even though the civilization had no kings, hierarchies presented themselves in the form of social classes. Research done on skeletal remains suggests that marginalized communities were more likely to be victims of violence and disease, demonstrating that lower-class groups who could not afford to live in formal city centers suffered disproportionately. Another piece of evidence is shown in how the exclusion from formal cemeteries led to higher rates of violence. This shows how inequality between classes affected survival rates (Violence, Infectious Disease and Climate Change Contributed to Indus Civilization Collapse, pg. 3, Appalachian State University). As we can see, while each of these 4 civilizations dealt with class division, they experienced it on different levels. There are notable patterns, such as some having large class divisions between kings and slaves. However, we can see not every civilization followed this sort of rule of thumb, proving that agriculture did not always force social/economic division to manifest identically across all civilizations.
Another one of Diamond’s claims is that agriculture contributed to the rise of gender inequality. This argument can be applied to some civilizations but does not apply the same in each one, and the differences seem to differ greatly between civilizations. Mesopotamia had a clear gender hierarchy where men tended to have more power than women. A major primary source shows the laws of Mesopotamia through multiple examples. For one, women were punished more harshly compared to men, with many of their punishments including death or some form of mutilation. There was also a dynamic in which men could have multiple wives or mistresses, but if a woman did the same, it was a crime. Men typically held the political power; they were the kings, priests, and lawmakers. Women were often seen and treated as property, and men also generally had control over property and wealth. Despite this, if a woman started her own business, all the money she made belonged to her, showing that women were given limited forms of financial independence. (Hammurabi's Code of Laws, pg. 2, 3, 4)
In ancient China, men were given prestigious rankings in the government and in specialized occupations such as military generals and scholars. They usually handled political and religious responsibilities related to warfare and ritual performances. Women did not have the same prestigious roles as men and were not treated equally; however, they could hold power in different ways. There are many examples of women taking political control; for example, during the Shang Dynasty, they could lead armies and control important domains, and in the Zhou Dynasty, they could be queens and noblewomen. Women from elite families especially had a greater chance of gaining power and influence through family ties and political connections. Over the years, though, women lost more of their influence and became less involved in public matters (Women in Ancient China, pg. 2, 3 Bret Hinch).
Unlike other civilizations where men were given the majority of rights, power, and status, women in Egypt seemed to have enjoyed many of the same luxuries as men. Egyptian women were given property rights, meaning that they could inherit, sell, and manage their own land. They also had the legal right to sue, testify, and draft wills, and they didn't need a male representative for any of these actions. These legal and property rights set them apart from other civilizations, where men still had sole rights to those things. In relationships, many marriages were probably arranged, but the civilization still valued love and romance. Instead of forcing women to stay at home and solely focus on maintaining the household and taking care of children, they were given the freedom to work outside of their home, participate in contracts, and own their own businesses. The reason for this is theorized to be because of their relationship with the king. (The Status of Women in Ancient Egyptian Society, pg. 1-4, Dr. Peter Picone) Speaking of royalty, women could also, although rarely, become pharaohs and hold other high positions of power, usually saved for men, such as priests (The Story of Ancient Egypt Lecture 4). However, just because they had more equal rights does not mean they did not face hardships. Evidence shows that women were victims of rape and other crimes, and women of lower status were more vulnerable since class hierarchy shaped how people were treated. The literacy rates were also lower for women compared to men, again especially within lower-class groups, showing that even though they had rights to participate in contracts and work, their limitations in education stopped them from fully being able to reach the same status as men (The Status of Women in Ancient Egyptian Society, pg. 5, Dr. Peter Picone).
The Indus Valley does not have as much definitive information compared to other civilizations discussed; however, we can get a little peek into how the daily lives of wives looked. Poems from ancient India written from women's perspectives reveal that they existed in a patriarchal society. They were expected to appear obedient, composed, and polite, never critiquing or defying their husbands. The poems also show that women were not allowed to have affairs, and if they were involved in one, it had to be kept secret; however, if a husband had a mistress, the wife was expected to forgive the behavior. These anonymous poems from ancient India give us a good glimpse into the restrictive and monitored lives of women at the time (Gaha Sattasai poems source). So, even though we see how settling contributed to the rise of gender inequality in some civilizations, it is also evident that not every place was affected in the same way. Some civilizations allowed men to have most of the control, with women hardly having any rights, and in some cases, like Egypt, women had significantly more economic and legal freedom. Therefore, it is not correct to solely blame farming for the problem.
Diamond also claimed that the development of agriculture affected the increase in warfare and tyranny, which does appear to have been present in all four civilizations. There is much evidence to support the idea that there was a good deal of violence in Mesopotamia. Archaeologists have found weapons such as wooden bows that date back to around 5000 BC. Another big piece of evidence is the pictorial monument “The Standard of Ur," which depicts people using chariots to travel with weapons. These chariots were considered highly technological for the time and were difficult to make and control. The reasons for war during this period were mainly territorial; they fought over things like trading routes and ownership over rivers (The Story of Mesopotamia lecture 2). The Mesopotamian military system was revolutionized later under Sargon the Great. Instead of temporary, ordinary men being forced to fight whenever called, a more permanent and organized army was implemented with properly trained soldiers. He also got rid of the difficult chariots and chose to focus more on trained infantry (Sargon the Great and the World’s First Professional Army, pg. 4, 5, Brian Geeslin).
In ancient China, ideologies, notably in the Shang Dynasty, idealized warfare. Even more notably, Di Xin, who was the last king of the Shang Dynasty, was famously a tyrannical ruler. He invented torture methods, raised taxes, and expanded borders by invading others' territory. His reign ended after King Wu from the Zhou state attacked, and his demise reinforced the idea that rulers could lose the “Mandate of Heaven” if they governed unfairly. Another famous example of warfare playing a big part in Chinese history is the Warring States period, which happened later between 475 and 221 BCE. During this period, there were mass beheadings, constant war between kingdoms, and internal conflicts within states (Overview of Warring States Lecture). These examples demonstrate how kingdoms cared about territory and how competition for more territory and political power led to a cycle of warfare and tyranny.
Egypt's warfare was actually one of the reasons for the civilization's downfall. The civilization had been invaded multiple times, with one of the more notable times being when they were invaded by the Hyksos. Ancient Egypt's weapons and means of transport were not as advanced as their invaders', who had chariots and armor, leading to them failing to defend their territory and driving Egyptians out. Between the periods of the Old, Middle, and New Kingdoms are also intermediate periods filled with political chaos and violence. (The Story of Ancient Egypt Lecture 4) As mentioned earlier, the Indus Valley was originally thought to have been one of the most peaceful civilizations, if not the most peaceful. However, evidence now suggests that violence was not only a problem but also a big contributing factor to the collapse of the civilization. More specifically, the city of Harappa has evidence of skeletal remains that have skull injuries, indicating that they may have been caused by violent attacks. Not only that, but as the city became more and more abandoned due to factors like climate change, disease, and resource stress, evidence shows that the city’s rates of violence only increased. (Violence, Infectious Disease and Climate Change Contributed to Indus Civilization Collapse, pg. 3, Appalachian State University)
The evidence from these civilizations demonstrates how warfare affected each one. We have civilizations like Mesopotamia or China that had more advanced militaries and weaponry, often fighting other civilizations or each other for territory, and then we have the other side of the spectrum, like the Indus Valley, which seemed to have experienced interpersonal violence amongst themselves with blunt-force injuries, and Egypt, which also didn't have the military or weaponry to defend themselves against enemies. Every civilization dealt with the consequences of warfare and tyranny, either as the attackers or the victims of attacks, which significantly affected how they developed or declined as a society.
Diamond argues that the development of agriculture also doomed us with diseases due to humans living in close contact with animals who carried them and passed them onto us. If we look at how these civilizations were affected by diseases, it's difficult to argue against him. Mesopotamia, being the earliest civilization, was naturally the first out of the 4 being covered to be largely affected by diseases. Before humans started settling in villages, they weren't as close in contact with animals and each other as they were after civilizations formed. As populations grew and became more concentrated in settlements, diseases spread faster than they had before when we were still hunter-gatherers. According to clay tablets from around 2000 BCE to 0 CE, Mesopotamians believed it was their gods that spread diseases to them out of anger. To combat the spread of diseases, they used a combination of modern techniques to stay safe, like isolation and spiritual practices such as rituals to appease their deities. (Epidemics in the Cradle of Civilization, pg. 2, 3, 5, Troels Pank Arbøll)
Egypt mainly fell victim to diseases that came from the Nile River, such as hookworm and malaria. The Nile River, which flooded annually, provided a convenient place for parasitic insects to breed. Ancient Egyptians were also more likely to contract tuberculosis through their unpasteurized cow milk and spread it amongst each other, especially during the New Kingdom, which had an increase in both population density and disease (The Story of Ancient Egypt, Lecture 4).
In the Indus Valley, the spread of disease is considered another one of the biggest factors in the downfall of the civilization. In ancient India, the population grew at a rapid pace, causing the cities to become crowded. This affected how much and how closely people interacted with each other. With the increase in population, the trade market also grew. This meant people were not only interacting within their own cities but also actively connecting with other regions and further spreading diseases such as leprosy. This, along with the increase of violence and climate change, can all be seen as reasons the city was abandoned and ultimately collapsed (Violence, Infectious Disease and Climate Change Contributed to Indus Civilization Collapse, pg. 3, 4, Appalachian State University).
Ancient China, according to datasets provided by McNeill and Durand, had many disease outbreaks, including two pandemics. Similarly to Egypt, the data shows a correlation between the density of outbreaks and population. As China grew and became more dense, the amount of disease and the frequency at which outbreaks occurred both increased (Epidemic and population patterns in the Chinese Empire, pg. 3-6, A. Morabia). This strengthens the idea that permanent settlements with larger populations were ideal for diseases to spread, supporting Diamond's argument about one of the negative outcomes of agricultural development. In all civilizations, we can see how living in close proximity with animals contributed to us catching more diseases, and the closer proximity to each other caused diseases to spread farther and faster than before as well.
While Jared Diamond is correct in claiming farming transformed how human populations are affected by gender inequality, class division, warfare, and disease, his argument generalizes complex societies and their systems too heavily to say he's completely correct or incorrect. The development of socio-political systems and cultural values in Mesopotamia, Egypt, the Indus Valley, and China differ considerably in some ways while bearing similarities in other ways regarding how agricultural civilizations evolved.