Journals / Çağdaş Yerel Yönetimler / 2015 / Cilt: 24 - Sayı: 1

Cities, state formation, exchange, cultural ınteraction and colonization in middle and Late Uruk periods (3700-3100 B.C.)

Orta ve Geç Uuk dönemi'nde (M.Ö. 3700 - 3100) kentler, devletleşme, ticaret, kültürel etkileşim ve kolonileşme

Pages
75–124
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

The reason is that these settlements participated in large networks of trade and cultural exchanges. 2- Uruk seems to have been at the heart of an interactive network of cities competing for import of raw materials necessary to produce “status goods” used by political elites as means of consolidating political power. 3- It is possible to classify the earliest cities as microstates. 4- The long-distance trade was one of the stimuli of early state formation. 5- The early city-states, which were characterized by their lack of economic self-sufficiency, had a natural inclination to seek for colonial expansion. 6- The Uruk expansion was an actual colonial phenomenon, involving the emergence of Mesopotamian trading enclaves among preexisting local polities.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Abstract: This study discusses the effects of cultural contact between lower and upper Mesopotamia during the so-called ‘Uruk expansion’ in the 4th millennium B.C. 1- The paper argues that the world’s first cities were developed in Southern Mesopotamia of the 4th millennium.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Abstract: This study discusses the effects of cultural contact between lower and upper Mesopotamia during the so-called ‘Uruk expansion’ in the 4th millennium B.C. 1- The paper argues that the world’s first cities were developed in Southern Mesopotamia of the 4th millennium.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:The reason is that these settlements participated in large networks of trade and cultural exchanges. 2- Uruk seems to have been at the heart of an interactive network of cities competing for import of raw materials necessary to produce “status goods” used by political elites as means of consolidating political power. 3- It is possible to classify the earliest cities as microstates. 4- The long-distance trade was one of the stimuli of early state formation. 5- The early city-states, which were characterized by their lack of economic self-sufficiency, had a natural inclination to seek for colonial expansion. 6- The Uruk expansion was an actual colonial phenomenon, involving the emergence of Mesopotamian trading enclaves among preexisting local polities.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

Abstract: This study discusses the effects of cultural contact between lower and upper Mesopotamia during the so-called ‘Uruk expansion’ in the 4th millennium B.C. 1- The paper argues that the world’s first cities were developed in Southern Mesopotamia of the 4th millennium. The reason is that these settlements participated in large networks of trade and cultural exchanges. 2- Uruk seems to have been at the heart of an interactive network of cities competing for import of raw materials necessary to produce “status goods” used by political elites as means of consolidating political power. 3- It is possible to classify the earliest cities as microstates. 4- The long-distance trade was one of the stimuli of early state formation. 5- The early city-states, which were characterized by their lack of economic self-sufficiency, had a natural inclination to seek for colonial expansion. 6- The Uruk expansion was an actual colonial phenomenon, involving the emergence of Mesopotamian trading enclaves among preexisting local polities.

Özet

Öz: M.Ö. 4. binyılda Güney Mezopotamya maddi kültürünün kuzeye yayılışından dolayı ‘Uruk yayılımı’ olarak adlandırılan süreç, erken kentin ve devletin oluşumuna büyük katkı sağlamıştır. 1- Tarihin ilk kentlerinin doğum yeri, Güney Mezopotamya’dır. 2- İlk kentlerin oluşturduğu ekonominin merkezi, siyasal kurumsallaşma/uzmanlaşma adımla- rıyla devletlerin gelişini haber veren Uruk yerleşimidir. 3- Uruk ve diğer güney kentleri, 3. binyıla doğru mikro-devletlere dönüşmüştür. 4- Erken kentin seçkinleri, kamusal alanın inşası için egzotik mallara/hammaddeye ihtiyaç duyarlar. Bunlara (yüksek kültüre) sahip olmanın yolu, uzun-mesafeli ticari yolları güvenlileştirmektir. 5- Statü göstergesi malların temin edildiği coğrafyalarda henüz kentli/devletli toplumlar yok ise, stratejik noktalara ileri karakol, üs ve koloni kurmak gerekebilir. 6-Uruk yayılımı, kolonyal bir yayılmadır, ticareti denetlemeyi amaç edinen programlı bir göçtür. Kuzey, bu süreçte Uruk hâkimiyetine girmemişlerse de, orada olgunlaşan kentli kültürden etkilenmiştir.

🔖

Cite This Article

ÇIVGIN, İ. (2015). Cities, state formation, exchange, cultural ınteraction and colonization in middle and Late Uruk periods (3700-3100 B.C.). Çağdaş Yerel Yönetimler, Cilt: 24 - Sayı: 1, 75–124. https://ajindex.com/articles/157625

References (18)

  1. Ağaoğulları, Mehmet Ali (1985), “La Boétie ve Siyasal Kulluk”, AÜ. SBF Dergisi, S 1- 4, s. 173-214.
  2. Ağaoğulları, Mehmet Ali (1989), Eski Yunan’da Siyaset Felsefesi, Verso A. Ş.: Ankara.
  3. Algaze, Guillermo (2008), Ancient Mesopotamia at the Dawn of Civilization: The Evo- lution of an Urban Landscape, University of Chicago Press:
  4. Chicago. Algaze, Guillermo (2013), “The End of Prehistory and the Uruk Period”, Crawford, Harriet (Ed.), The Sumerian World, Routledge: London and New York, s. 68-94.
  5. Baines, John ve Yoffee, Norman (2005), “Order, Legitimacy, and Wealth in Ancient Egypt and Mesopotamia”, Feinman, Gary M. - Marcus, Joyce (Eds.), Archaic States, School of American Research Press (4th paperback printing): Santa Fe, s. 199-260.
  6. Baltalı, Sevil (2007), “Culture Contact, Cultural Integration and Difference: A Case from Northern Mesopotamia”, Stanford Journal of Archaeology, Vol. 5, s. 1-17.
  7. Balter, Michael (2005), The Goddess and the Bull. Çatalhöyük: An Archaeological Jo- urney to the Dawn of Civilization, Free Press:
  8. New York. Chavalas, Mark (2005), “The Age of Empires, 3100 - 900 BCE”, Snell, Daniel C. (Ed.), A Companion to the Ancient Near East, Blackwell Publishing: Oxford, s. 34-47.
  9. Childe, V. Gordon (1950), “The Urban Revolution”, The Town Planning Review, Vol. 21, No. 1 (April), s. 3-17.
  10. Childe, Gordon (2006), Kendini Yaratan İnsan: İnsanın Çağlar Boyu Gelişimi, ÇevirenFiliz Ofluoğlu, 8. Baskı, Varlık Yayınları:
  11. İstanbul.
  12. Childe, Gordon (2009), Tarihte Neler Oldu?, Çev.: Alâeddin Şenel - Mete Tunçay, 5. Baskı, Kırmızı: İstanbul.
  13. Fisher, Kevin D. ve Creekmore III, Andrew T. (2014), “Making Ancient Cities: New Perspectives on the Production of Urban Places”, Creekmore III, Andrew T – Fisher, Kevin D. (Eds.), Making Ancient Cities: Space and Place in Early Urban Societies, Cambridge University Press: New York, s. 1-31.
  14. Çıvgın, İzzet (2014), “M.Ö. 6-5. Binyıllarda Mezopotamya ve Çevresinde Kültürel Te- mas ve Etkileşim”, Gaziantep Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, Cilt 13, Sayı 2, Nisan, s. 359-404.
  15. Çıvgın, İzzet ve Yardımcı, Remzi (2010),
  16. İlkçağ Tarihi, Maya Akademi: Ankara.
  17. Emberling, Geoff (1999), “The Value of Tradition: The Developpement of Social Iden- tities in Early Mesopotamian States”, Robb, John E. (Ed.), Material Symbols: Culture and Economy in Prehistory, Southern Illinois University - Center for Archaeological Investigations, Carbondale, s. 277-301.
  18. Emberling, Geoff (2003), “Urban Social Transformations and the Problem of the ‘First Ci