Mesopotamian and Egyptian Civilizations

Both "were dependent on rivers and the rich soil deposited by periodic floods; both had to develop and maintain organized systems of irrigation and flood control." Perhaps in part because of the relative stability both civilizations were able to enjoy, related to their geographical advantages, both "eventually had powerful kings and a priestly caste" and "believed in all-powerful gods who played an active role in the world" (2).

On the other hand, there were important differences between the two cultures, again related to geography:

Mesopotamia was not as well protected geographically as Egypt and was thus more open to attack. Her rivers were not as navigable, nor were the floods as regular as the Nile's. Her culture and religion reflected a sense of instability and pessimism in comparison to the stability and optimism that characterized Egyptian civilization (2).

In other words, the geography of these two civilizations was a central factor in not only their basic survival and success, but also in the way they envisioned the world and the nature of the universe.

They were similar in that they were both agriculturally dependent, both reliant on the rich and river-fed land on which they lived, but the differences in their

. . .
. . (8-9). The geographical realities of the two civilizations affected almost every aspect of the two societies. For example, in Egypt, a more secure society economically, militarily, politically, and religiously, expressed that security by giving its citizens more rights and responsibilities. Mesopotamia, less secure in these realms because of its geography, did not grant such relatively universal freedom to most of its citizens. In Egypt, for example, women's rights were greater than in Mesopotamia. In Egypt, "where internal disputes were effectively handled by the strong, centralized government [and] where wars usually took place beyond the borders, . . . women continually shared the burdens, full rights, and obligations of citizens" (26). 2. The traditional Indian caste system and the Imperial bureaucracy in China operated "successfully" (i.e. enjoyed mass-popular persistence and majority support) in their respective societies. In large part, both these approaches (with their social, political, economic, and even philosophical/religious ramifications) were means of structuring and controlling society. Clearly, the Indian caste system was designed to keep stability in the nation. If every individual is taught to b
. . .

Some common words found in the essay are:
China Imperial, Mesopotamia Egypt, Mesopotamian Egyptian, Epic Gilgamesh, Hymn Pharaoh, Confucius Confucianism, Han Dynasty, caste system, , imperial bureaucracy, indian caste, social political, indian caste system, hath unto hath, social political economic, protest caste, realm society, philosophy religion, protest caste system, caste status, imperial bureaucracy china, geographical situation, politically religiously,
Approximate Word count = 1438
Approximate Pages = 6 (250 words per page)

More Essays on Mesopotamian and Egyptian Civilizations