A New Understanding of Human History and the Roots of Inequality | David Wengrow | TED

譯者: Lilian Chiu 審譯者: Shelley Tsang 曾雯海

In the summer of 2014,

2014 年夏天，

I was in Iraqi Kurdistan with a small team of archaeologists,

我身在伊拉克庫德斯坦，

同行的是一個小型考古學家團隊，

finishing a season of field excavations near the border town of Halabja.

我們在邊境小鎮哈拉布賈附近進行了

一整季的田野挖掘，現在要收尾了。

Our project was looking into something which has puzzled and intrigued me

我們的計畫所研究的主題，

是我打從開始學習考古

ever since I began studying archeology.

就一直感到困惑且著迷的題材。

We're taught to believe that thousands of years ago,

我們所學的是，數千年前，

when our ancestors first invented agriculture

當我的祖先初次在世界上的那個地區

in that part of the world,

發明了農業，

that it set in motion a chain of consequences

就啟動一連串的連鎖效應，

that would shape our modern world in a particular direction,

型塑了我們現代社會的前進方向，

on a particular course.

以及前進的路線。

By farming wheat,

藉由耕種小麥，

our ancestors supposedly developed new attachments to the land they lived on.

我們的祖先

可能對於他們所生活的土地 發展出了新的依附。

Private property was invented.

私有財產被發明出來。

And with that, the need to defend it.

隨之，也出現了需要保護它的需求。

Along with new opportunities for some people to accumulate surpluses,

隨著某些人有新機會可以累積盈餘，

came new labor demands,

新的勞動需求也出現了，

tying most people to a hard regime of tending their crops

讓大部分人被照顧自家 作物的辛苦起居給綁住，

while a privileged few received freedom

只有少數有特權的人

擁有自由

and the leisure to do other things.

以及閒暇時間可以做其他的事。

To think, to experiment,

可以去思考、去實驗、

to create the foundations of what we refer to as civilization.

去創造我們所謂文明的基礎。

Now, according to this familiar story,

根據這個耳熟能詳的故事，

what happened next is that populations boomed,

接下來發生的就是人口激增，

villages turned into towns, towns became cities,

村落變成了小鎮，小鎮變成了城市，

and with the emergence of cities,

隨著城市出現，

our species was locked on a familiar trajectory of development

我們這個物種就被熟悉的 發展軌道給限制住了，

where spiraling populations and technological change

在這個軌道上，不斷增加的人口

和科技的改變

were bound up with the kind of dreadful inequalities

會連帶著可怕的不平等，

that we see around us today.

現今我們在身邊都能看到。

Except, as anyone can tell you,

只是說，

只要看過中東的證據，就能知道，

who's looked at the evidence from the Middle East,

almost nothing of what I've just been saying is actually true.

我剛才說的幾乎都不是真的。

And the consequences I'm going to suggest

而我接下來要講的推論，

are quite profound.

相當深奧。

Actually, what happened after the invention of agriculture

事實上，在大約一萬年前 農業發明之後所出現的

around 10,000 years ago,

is a long period of around another 4,000 years

是一段長達約四千年的時期，

in which villages largely remained villages.

在這段時期，村落 多半都仍然是村落，

And actually there's very little evidence for the emergence of rigid social classes,

事實上，幾乎沒有證據顯示 有死板的社會階級出現，

which is not to say that nothing happened.

這並不表示什麼都沒有發生。

Over those 4,000 years,

在那四千年間，

technological change actually proceeded apace.

科技的改變以飛快的速度展開。

Without kings,

沒有國王、

without bureaucracies, without standing armies,

沒有官僚、沒有常備軍，

these early farming populations fostered the development of mathematical knowledge,

這些早期的務農人口

促成了數學知識的發展，

advanced metallurgy.

先進的冶金術。

They learned to cultivate olives, vines and date palms.

他們學會種橄欖、葡萄樹、棗椰樹。

They invented leavened bread, beer,

他們發明了發酵的麵包、啤酒。

and they developed textile technologies:

他們開發了紡織技術： 拉坯輪車、帆。

the potter's wheel, the sail.

And they spread all of these innovations far and wide,

且他們把所有這些創新都 散播到很廣、很遠的地方去，

from the shores of the eastern Mediterranean,

範圍從東地中海的沿岸

up to the Black Sea,

直達黑海，

and from the Persian Gulf,

且從波斯灣

all the way over to the mountains of Kurdistan,

一路到庫德斯坦的山區，

where our excavations were taking place.

也就是我們進行挖掘的地方。

I've often referred, half jokingly, to this long period of human history

我常會半開玩笑地把 這段很長的人類歷史稱為

as the era of the first global village.

第一個地球村的時代。

Because it's not just the technological innovations that are so remarkable,

因為，不僅科技創新非常卓越，

but also the social innovations

社會創新也同樣不凡，

讓大家能夠去做所有這些事，

which enabled people to do all these things

without forming centers

且不需要形成中心，

and without raising up a class of permanent leaders over everybody else.

也不需要拉抬出 一個永久領導者的階級，

在所有人之上。

Now, oddly enough,

奇怪的是，

this efflorescence of culture is not what we usually refer to

這段文化的全盛期

卻不是我們通常所謂的文明。

as civilization.

Instead, that term is usually reserved for harshly unequal societies,

反之，那個詞通常是保留給

數千年後出現的極不平等社會。

which came thousands of years later.

Dynastic Mesopotamia. Pharaonic Egypt.

王朝時期的美索不達米亞、 法老時期的埃及、

Imperial Rome.

帝國時期的羅馬

Societies that were deeply stratified.

分層非常明顯的社會。

So in short,

簡言之，

I've always felt that there was basically something very weird

我一直覺得我們對於文明的觀念

about our concept of civilization,

在根本上就有著非常奇怪之處，

something that leaves us lost for words, tongue tied.

讓我們無話可說，無言以對。

When we're confronted with thousands of years of human beings,

當我們面臨到數千年的人類去做……

say, practicing agriculture, creating new technologies,

比如實行農業、創造新科技，

but not lording it over each other

但不去統治彼此，

or exploiting each other to the maximum.

或把彼此剝削到極致。

Why don't we have better words?

為何我們沒有更好的詞？

Where is our lexicon for those long expanses of human history

當遇到行為模式並非 那樣的人類長歷史時，

in which we weren't behaving that way?

我們的詞彙表在哪裡？

Over the past ten years or more,

在過去十多年間，

I worked closely together with the late,

我有位密切的合作夥伴，是已故的

great anthropologist David Graeber

偉大人類學家，大衛‧格雷柏，

to address some of these questions.

我們試圖處理這類問題。

But we did it on a much larger scale

但我們做的規模更大許多， 因為以我們身為

because from our perspective as an archaeologist and an anthropologist,

考古學家和人類學家的身份，

this clash between theory and data,

理論和資料間的這種衝突，

between the standard narrative of human history

人類歷史的標準說法

與我們現今眼前證據 之間的這種衝突，

and the evidence that we have before us today

is not just confined to the early Middle East.

並不只發生在早期的中東。

It’s everything:

比比皆是：

out whole picture of human history that we’ve been telling for centuries,

數世紀以來我們一直 訴說的人類歷史全貌

it’s basically wrong.

基本上是錯的。

I'm going to try and explain a few more of the reasons why.

我接下來會試著用 幾個理由來解釋為什麼。

Let's go back to some of those core concepts,

咱們回到那些核心觀念，

the stable reference points around which we've been organizing

也就是那些牢靠的參照點， 我們一直根據它們

來整理和協調

and orchestrating our understanding of world history for hundreds of years.

數百年來我們對於世界歷史的了解。

Take, for instance, that notion that for most of its history,

以這個見解為例： 在大部分的人類歷史上，

the human species lived in tiny egalitarian bands of hunter gatherers,

人類以狩獵採集者組成的 小隊群形式過生活，

until the advent of agriculture ushered in a new age of inequality.

直到農業出現，

開啟了不平等的新紀元。

Or the notion that with the arrival of cities came social classes,

或者這個見解：隨著城市出現，

社會階級也跟著出現

sacred kings and rapacious oligarchs trampling everyone else underfoot.

神聖的國王及貪婪的寡頭政治執政者

把所有其他人踩在腳下踐踏！

From our very first history lessons,

我們最早接觸到的歷史課

we're taught to believe that our modern world,

就教我們要相信，我們現代的世界

with all of its advantages and amenities,

以及它所有的優點、便利措施、

modern health care, space travel,

現代健康照護、

太空旅行，所有美好 且讓人興奮的一切，

all the things that are good and exciting,

couldn't possibly exist

之所以會存在，

without that original concentration of humanity

靠的就是原先將人類集中

into larger and larger units

成為更大單位的做法，

and the relentless buildup of inequalities that came with it.

以及隨之而來

不斷增長的不平等。

Inequality, we're taught to believe,

我們學到的是要相信，不平等

was the necessary price of civilization.

是文明的必要代價。

Well, if so, then what are we to make of the early Middle East?

如果是這樣，那我們又要 如何看待早期的中東？

Perhaps one might say there was just a very, very, very long lag time,

有人可能會說，那只是非常 非常非常長的時間延擱，

延了四千年，

4,000 years,

before all these developments took place.

發展才出現。

Inequality was bound to happen, it was bound to set in.

不平等注定會發生，注定會出現，

It was just a matter of time.

只是時間早晚。

And perhaps the rest of the story still works

也許故事剩下的部分還能用，

for other parts of the world.

用在世界上的其他地方。

Well, let's think a bit about what we can actually say today

咱們來稍微想想看， 我們現今能夠怎麼說

about the origin of cities.

城市的源頭。

Surely, you might think, with the appearance of cities

你可能會想，當然，隨著城市出現，

came the appearance of social classes.

社會階級就會出現。

Think about ancient Egypt with its pyramid temples.

想想古埃及以及它的金字塔神殿，

Or Shang China with its lavish tombs.

或中國商朝和它的鋪張的墳墓，

The classic Maya with their warlike rulers.

或古馬雅以及它那些好戰的統治者，

Or the Inca empire with its mummified kings and queens.

或印加帝國以及它被製成 木乃伊國王及皇后。

But actually, the picture these days is not so clear.

但，實際上，我們對 那些時期的樣貌並不清楚。

What modern archeology tells us, for example,

比如，現代考古學能告訴我們

is that there were already cities

黃河的下段很早就已經有城市了，

on the lower reaches of the Yellow River

over 1,000 years before the rise of the Shang.

時間比商朝的興起還早了一千多年。

And on the other side of the Pacific,

且在太平洋的另一頭，

in Peru’s Rio Supe,

在秘魯的蘇佩河，

we already see huge agglomerations of people

很早就已經有大型的 人類聚落以及巨大的建築，

with monumental architecture 4,000 years before the Inca.

時間比印加還早了四千年。

In South Asia, 4,500 years ago,

在南亞，四千五百年前，最早的城市

the first cities appeared at places like Mohenjo-daro

出現在印度河流域的摩亨佐—達羅

and Harappa in the Indus Valley.

以及哈拉帕等地。

But these huge settlements present no evidence of kings or queens.

但這些大型的定居地都沒有證據

能證明有國王或皇后的存在。

No royal monuments, no aggrandizing art.

沒有皇家遺跡， 沒有吹捧的藝術品，此外，

And what's more, we know that much of the population

我們知道大部分的人都生活在

lived in high-quality housing with excellent sanitation.

高品質住房中，衛生良好。

North of the Black Sea,

在黑海的北方，

in the modern country of Ukraine,

在現在的烏克蘭，

archaeologists have found evidence of even more ancient cities

考古學家找到證據， 證明有更古老的城市存在，

going back 6,000 years.

可回溯到六千年前。

And again,

同樣的，

these huge settlements present no evidence

這些大型定居地也沒有證據

of authoritarian rule.

能證明有專治的統治存在。

No temples, no palaces,

沒有神殿，沒有宮殿，

not even any evidence of central storage facilities

甚至沒有證據顯示有中央的儲存機構

or top-down bureaucracy.

或由上而下的官僚制度。

Actually what we see in those cases are these great concentric rings of houses

事實上，在這些例子中，我們 看到的是宏偉的房舍同心圓，

arranged rather like the inside of a tree trunk

房舍的排列像是在排樹幹中一樣，

around neighborhood assembly halls.

以鄰坊的集會堂為中心。

And it stayed that way for about 800 years.

且約八百年來都維持如此。

So what this means is that long before the birth of democracy in ancient Greece,

這意味著，在古希臘的 民主誕生之前很久，

there were already well-organized cities

就已經有組織良好的城市了，

on several of the world's continents

好幾個大陸上都有，

which present no evidence for ruling dynasties.

且通通都沒有統治王朝存在的證據。

And some of them also seem to have managed perfectly well without priests,

其中有一些還管理得非常好，

不需要祭師、官吏，以及戰爭政客。

mandarins and warrior politicians.

Of course, some early cities did go on

當然，

當中也有些城市後來成了 王國與帝國的首都。

to become the capitals of kingdoms and empires.

But it's important to note that others went

重要的是要注意到， 其他城市卻完全走向

in completely the opposite direction.

相反的方向。

To take one well-documented example,

舉一個記錄完整的例子，時間大約是

around the year 250 AD,

西元 250 年，

the city of Teotihuacan, in the valley of Mexico,

特奥蒂瓦坎這個城市， 位在墨西哥谷，

with a population of around 100,000 people,

人口大約十萬，

turned its back on pyramid temples and human sacrifices

它背棄了金字塔神殿以及活人祭祀，

and reconstituted itself

將它自己重新改組，

as a vast collection of comfortable villas housing most of the city's population.

變成由大量的舒適莊園組成，

讓該城市大部分的居民居住。

When archaeologists first investigated these buildings,

考古學家最初在調查這些建築物時，

they assumed they were palaces.

還假設它們是宮殿，

Then they realized that just about everyone in the city

後來他們發現，幾乎城市中的每個人

was living in a palace with spacious patios

都住在宮殿裡，有寬敞的露台，

and subfloor drainages,

地下有排水系統，

gorgeous murals on the walls.

牆上有華麗的壁飾。

But we shouldn't get carried away.

但我們不能興奮過頭。

None of the societies that I've been describing

我剛才所描述的所有社會通通都不是

was perfectly egalitarian.

完美的平等社會。

But then we might also remember that fifth-century Athens,

但我們也別忘了第五世紀的雅典，

which we look to as the birthplace of democracy,

它被我們視為是民主的誕生地，

was also a militaristic society founded on chattel slavery,

它也是個軍國主義社會，

以奴役制度為基礎，

where women were completely excluded from politics.

那時的女性完全不能參與政治。

So maybe by comparison,

所以，也許，比較之下， 特奥蒂瓦坎這種地方不算太糟，

somewhere like Teotihuacan was not doing so badly

at keeping the genie of inequality in its bottle.

還能把不平等的精靈關在瓶子裡。

But maybe we can just forget about all that, we can look away.

但，也許我們可以把這一切 拋諸腦後別去看。

Perhaps all of these things I'm talking about are basically outliers.

也許我說的這一切基本上都是特例。

Maybe we can still keep our familiar story of civilization intact.

也許我們仍然可以原封不動 保有我們熟悉的文明故事。

And after all,

畢竟，

if cities without rulers were really such a common thing in human history,

如果沒有統治者的城市

在人類歷史上如此常見的話，

why didn't Cortéz and Pizarro and all the other conquistadors

那麼，科爾特斯、皮薩羅， 及所有其他的征服者為何不

find any when they began their invasion of the Americas?

在他們開始入侵美洲時 去找這類城市？

Why did they find only Moctezuma and Atahualpa

為什麼他們只遇到 蒙特蘇馬和阿塔瓦爾帕

lording it over their empires?

統治著他們的帝國？

Except that's not true either.

不過，那也不是真的。

Actually, the city where Hernan Cortéz found his military allies,

事實上，埃爾南‧科爾特斯 在一個城市中找到軍事盟友，

the ones who enabled his successful assault

讓他能夠成功地攻擊

on the Aztec capital of Tenochtitlán,

特諾奇提特蘭的阿茲特克首都，

was exactly one such city without rulers:

這個城市正是這種 沒有統治者的城市：

an indigenous republic by the name of Tlaxcala,

一個原住民共和國， 名為特拉斯卡拉，

governed by an urban parliament,

由城市議會負責管理，

which had some pretty interesting initiation rituals

對於想要成為政治家的人， 他們有些很有意思的進入儀式。

for would-be politicians.

They'd be periodically whipped

他們定期會被鞭打，

and subject to public abuse by their constituents

並被他們的選民公開辱罵，

to sort of break down their egos and remind them who's really in charge.

目的是要打破他們的自負，提醒他們

誰才是老大。

It's a little bit different from what we expect of our politicians today.

和我們現今對於 政治家的期望有些不同。

And archaeologists, by the way, have also worked at this place Tlaxcala,

順道一提，考古學家也有 在特拉斯卡拉這個地方作業，

excavating the remains of the pre-conquest city,

挖掘在征服之前的城市的遺跡，

而他們的發現相當值得注意。

and what they found there is really remarkable.

Again, the most impressive architecture is not temples and palaces.

同樣的，

最讓人印象深刻的建築 並不是神殿和宮殿，

It's just the well-appointed residences of ordinary citizens

而是一般市民設備完善的住所，

arrayed along these grand terraces overlooking district plazas.

以梯田的方式排列，十分壯觀，

俯瞰該地區的廣場。

And it's not just the history of cities

現代考古科學要大翻盤的，

that modern archaeological science is turning on its head.

不只是城市的歷史。

We also know now that the history of human societies

我們現在也知道，在農業 出現之前的人類社會歷史

before the coming of agriculture

is just nothing like what we once imagined.

也和我們以前的想像完全不同。

Far from this idea of people living all the time

並不是以前認為的，人類總是以 狩獵採集者的小隊群形式生活，

in tiny bands of hunter-gatherers,

actually, what we see these days

事實上，我們現今 所找到的證據能證明

is evidence for a really wild variety of social experimentation

在農業出現之前就有非常多樣化的

before the coming of farming.

社會實驗。

In Africa,

在非洲，

50,000 years ago,

五萬年前，

hunter-gatherers were already creating huge networks,

狩獵採集者已經創造了很大的網路，

social networks, covering large parts of the continent.

社會網路，涵蓋了 大陸上大部分的地方。

In Ice Age Europe, 25,000 years ago,

在冰河時期的歐洲，兩萬五千年前，

we see evidence of individuals singled out for special grand burials,

我們找到證據證明有些人

會被選出來，做特別盛大的埋葬。

their bodies suffused with ornamentation,

他們的屍體上滿是裝飾、

weapons and even what looked like regalia.

武器，甚至有看起來 像是盛裝的東西。

We see public buildings constructed on the bones and tusks of woolly mammoth.

我們發現有公共建築物 是用長毛象的骨頭和象牙

建造而成。

And around 11,000 years ago,

大約一萬一千年前，

back in the Middle East, where I started,

在中東，我最初開始的地方，

hunter-gatherers constructed enormous stone temples

狩獵採集者建造了巨大的石神殿，

at a place called Göbekli Tepe in eastern Turkey.

地點在哥貝克力山丘，

位在東土耳其。

In North America,

在北美，

long before the coming of maize farming,

遠在玉米耕種都還沒有出現之前，

indigenous populations created the massive earthworks of poverty point

原住居民就建造了 巨型的波弗蒂角土墩，

in Louisiana,

位在路易斯安那，

capable of hosting hunter gatherer publics in their thousands.

能夠容得下數千多狩獵採集者民眾。

And then Japan, again, long before the arrival of rice farming,

接著，在日本，

同樣也是遠早於稻米耕種出現之前，

the storehouses of Sannai Maruyama could already hold great surpluses

三内丸山的倉庫

已經能夠容納大量 過剩的野生植物食物。

of wild plant foods.

Now what do all these details amount to?

所有這些細節代表什麼？

What does it all mean?

這一切有什麼意涵？

Well, at the very least, I'd suggest

最少最少，我認為，

it's really a bit far-fetched these days to cling to this notion

現今，我們不該再那麼牽強地 緊緊抱持著這個想法：

that the invention of agriculture meant a departure from some egalitarian Eden.

農業的發明意味著

離開了某種平等主義的伊甸園。

Or to cling to the idea that small-scale societies

或者也不適合再抱持 這樣的想法：小規模社會

are especially likely to be egalitarian,

特別有可能是平等的，

while large-scale ones must necessarily have kings,

而大規模社會則一定會有

presidents and top-down structures of management.

國王、總統，以及 由上而下的管理結構。

And there are also some contemporary implications.

此外，還有一些當代的意涵。

Take, for example, the commonplace notion

以這個常見想法為例：

that participatory democracy is somehow natural in a small community.

參與式民主

在小社群裡面總是很自然的，

Or perhaps an activist group,

或者在激進的團體裡，

but couldn't possibly have a scale up for anything like a city,

但卻絕對不可能擴大到 城市這樣的規模，

a nation or even a region.

或者國家，甚至地區的規模。

Well, actually, the evidence of human history,

事實上，人類歷史的證據，

if we're prepared to look at it,

如果我們準備好看去看它們的話，

suggests the opposite.

證明實情恰恰相反。

If cities and regional confederacies,

如果主要靠共識和合作

held together mostly by consensus and cooperation

所形成的城市和區域性聯邦

existed thousands of years ago,

在數千年前就已經存在，

who's to stop us creating them again today

現今誰又能阻止我們 再次創造出它們？

with technologies that allow us to overcome the friction

我們可以用上讓我們克服 距離和數字障礙的技術

of distance and numbers?

來創造它們。

Perhaps it's not too late to begin learning from all this new evidence

也許現在還不算太遲，

可以開始從關於人類過往的 這些新證據中學習，

of the human past,

even to begin imagining

甚至開始想像

what other kinds of civilization we might create

我們還有可能創造出 哪些其他類型的文明，

if we can just stop telling ourselves

如果我們能停止不斷告訴自己

that this particular world is the only one possible.

現在的這個世界

是唯一有可能的世界。

Thank you very much.

非常謝謝。

(Applause)

（掌聲）