The Dawn of Everything

1. Challenging the Standard Narrative of Human History

Our aim in this book is to start putting some of the pieces of the puzzle together, in full awareness that nobody yet has anything like a complete set.

Dominant narratives. The conventional story of human history presents a linear progression from small, egalitarian hunter-gatherer bands to complex, hierarchical societies with agriculture, cities, and states. This narrative, often framed by the ideas of Rousseau and Hobbes, suggests that inequality and domination are inevitable consequences of societal development.

Flawed assumptions. This book challenges these assumptions by presenting evidence from archaeology, anthropology, and other disciplines that contradicts the familiar narrative. It argues that pre-agricultural societies were not confined to small, egalitarian bands and that agriculture did not necessarily lead to private property or inequality.

A new perspective. The authors propose a more nuanced and hopeful view of human history, emphasizing the capacity for social experimentation and self-creation. They aim to assemble a new world history, acknowledging the incompleteness of the current understanding and encouraging further research and debate.

2. The Indigenous Critique: A Foundation for Enlightenment

Revisiting what we will call the ‘indigenous critique’ means taking seriously contributions to social thought that come from outside the European canon.

European intellectual history. The Enlightenment, often seen as a purely European phenomenon, was significantly influenced by indigenous critiques of European society. Native American thinkers, such as the Huron-Wendat statesman Kandiaronk, offered insights on freedom, equality, and rationality that challenged prevailing European norms.

Challenging Eurocentrism. This book seeks to re-evaluate the contributions of indigenous commentators and observers, moving beyond simplistic portrayals of them as either "noble savages" or "devils." It aims to write prehistory as a dialogue between equals, recognizing the intellectual agency and impact of non-European voices.

Impact on Enlightenment thought. The "indigenous critique" exposed possibilities for human emancipation that shocked European audiences and inspired new ideals of liberty and equality. This critique became a menace to the fabric of European society, prompting the development of theories aimed at refuting it.

3. Beyond Hobbes and Rousseau: A More Accurate View of Prehistory

It is clear now that human societies before the advent of farming were not confined to small, egalitarian bands.

Rejecting simplistic models. The traditional dichotomy between Hobbes's view of a "nasty, brutish, and short" state of nature and Rousseau's vision of an egalitarian state of innocence is inaccurate and limiting. These models fail to capture the diversity and complexity of human societies before agriculture.

Evidence from archaeology. Archaeological evidence reveals that pre-agricultural societies were not confined to small, egalitarian bands. Instead, they engaged in bold social experiments, exhibiting a wide range of political forms and social structures.

The carnival parade of politics. The world of hunter-gatherers was far more diverse and dynamic than the drab abstractions of evolutionary theory suggest. It was a "carnival parade of political forms," characterized by experimentation and innovation.

4. The Protean Nature of Early Human Societies: Experimentation and Flexibility

We are projects of collective self-creation.

Human capacity for self-creation. The capacity to experiment with different forms of social organization is a quintessential part of what makes us human. It reflects our ability for self-creation and freedom.

Experimentation over time. It is unrealistic to assume that for hundreds of thousands of years, everyone on earth shared the same idyllic form of social organization. The capacity to experiment with different forms of social organization is itself a quintessential part of what makes us human.

Freedom and decision-making. The ultimate question of human history is not our equal access to material resources but our equal capacity to contribute to decisions about how to live together. To exercise that capacity implies that there should be something meaningful to decide in the first place.

5. The Myth of Progress: A Tool for Neutralizing Indigenous Critique

The whole story we summarized in the last chapter – our standard historical meta-narrative about the ambivalent progress of human civilization, where freedoms are lost as societies grow bigger and more complex – was invented largely for the purpose of neutralizing the threat of indigenous critique.

The invention of social evolution. The notion that human societies could be arranged according to stages of development (hunter-gatherers, farmers, urban-industrial society, etc.) has its roots in a conservative backlash against critiques of European civilization. This backlash began to gain ground in the early decades of the eighteenth century.

Neutralizing the critique. The prevalent "big picture" of history, shared by modern-day followers of Hobbes and Rousseau alike, has almost nothing to do with the facts. It was invented largely for the purpose of neutralizing the threat of indigenous critique.

The indigenous critique. The origins of that critique lie not with the philosophers of the Enlightenment but with indigenous commentators and observers of European society, such as the Native American (Huron-Wendat) statesman Kandiaronk.

6. The Trap of Inequality: How We Got Stuck

All ran towards their chains, believing that they were securing their liberty; for although they had reason enough to discern the advantages of a civil order, they did not have experience enough to foresee the dangers.

The concentration of capital. Framing social problems as "inequality" encourages half-measures and compromise. It allows one to tinker with the numbers without addressing the factors that people actually object to about such "unequal" social arrangements.

The illusion of inevitability. The ultimate effect of stories about an original state of innocence and equality, like the use of the term "inequality" itself, is to make wistful pessimism about the human condition seem like common sense. It suggests that living in a truly egalitarian society is impossible in any large, complex, urban, technologically sophisticated society.

Rediscovering freedom. If our species' future now hinges on our capacity to create something different, then what ultimately matters is whether we can rediscover the freedoms that make us human in the first place.

7. Reassessing the Origins of Agriculture: More Than Just Food Production

All ran towards their chains, believing that they were securing their liberty; for although they had reason enough to discern the advantages of a civil order, they did not have experience enough to foresee the dangers.

Beyond the "Agricultural Revolution." Agriculture did not mean the inception of private property, nor did it mark an irreversible step towards inequality. In fact, many of the first farming communities were relatively free of ranks and hierarchies.

The indigenous critique. The origins of that critique lie not with the philosophers of the Enlightenment but with indigenous commentators and observers of European society, such as the Native American (Huron-Wendat) statesman Kandiaronk.

A conceptual shift. To make that shift means retracing some of the initial steps that led to our modern notion of social evolution: the idea that human societies could be arranged according to stages of development, each with their own characteristic technologies and forms of organization (hunter-gatherers, farmers, urban-industrial society, and so on).

8. The Complexities of Early Cities: Beyond Kings and Bureaucrats

Far from setting class differences in stone, a surprising number of the world’s earliest cities were organized on robustly egalitarian lines, with no need for authoritarian rulers, ambitious warrior-politicians, or even bossy administrators.

Egalitarian cities. A surprising number of the world’s earliest cities were organized on robustly egalitarian lines, with no need for authoritarian rulers, ambitious warrior-politicians, or even bossy administrators.

The indigenous critique. The origins of that critique lie not with the philosophers of the Enlightenment but with indigenous commentators and observers of European society, such as the Native American (Huron-Wendat) statesman Kandiaronk.

A conceptual shift. To make that shift means retracing some of the initial steps that led to our modern notion of social evolution: the idea that human societies could be arranged according to stages of development, each with their own characteristic technologies and forms of organization (hunter-gatherers, farmers, urban-industrial society, and so on).

9. The Power of Imagination and the Rediscovery of Human Freedoms

What if, instead of telling a story about how our species fell from some idyllic state of equality, we ask how we came to be trapped in such tight conceptual shackles that we can no longer even imagine the possibility of reinventing ourselves?

The importance of imagination. The capacity to experiment with different forms of social organization is itself a quintessential part of what makes us human. That is, beings with the capacity for self-creation, even freedom.

The ultimate question. The ultimate question of human history is not our equal access to material resources (land, calories, means of production), much though these things are obviously important, but our equal capacity to contribute to decisions about how to live together.

Meaningful decisions. To exercise that capacity implies that there should be something meaningful to decide in the first place. If, as many are suggesting, our species’ future now hinges on our capacity to create something different, then what ultimately matters is whether we can rediscover the freedoms that make us human in the first place.

10. The Importance of Asking the Right Questions: A New Science of History

In this book we will not only be presenting a new history of humankind, but inviting the reader into a new science of history, one that restores our ancestors to their full humanity.

Shifting the focus. Rather than asking how we ended up unequal, we will start by asking how it was that "inequality" became such an issue to begin with, then gradually build up an alternative narrative that corresponds more closely to our current state of knowledge.

A new world history. This book is simply trying to lay down foundations for a new world history, rather as Gordon Childe did when, back in the 1930s, he invented phrases like "the Neolithic Revolution" or "the Urban Revolution."

The right questions. This book is also something else: a quest to discover the right questions. If "what is the origin of inequality?" is not the biggest question we should be asking about history, what then should it be?

Last updated: March 2, 2025