{"id":3623,"date":"2026-11-13T01:34:13","date_gmt":"2026-11-13T01:34:13","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/tobelikethis.org\/?p=3623"},"modified":"2026-11-13T01:34:13","modified_gmt":"2026-11-13T01:34:13","slug":"the-dawn-of-everything-rethinking-human-history-inequality-and-freedom-david-graeber-1961-2020-and-david-wengrow-1972","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/tobelikethis.org\/?p=3623","title":{"rendered":"The Dawn of Everything: Rethinking Human History, Inequality and Freedom (David Graeber, 1961\u20132020, and David Wengrow, 1972-)"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n
<\/div>\n
\n

<\/h1>\n

In The Dawn of Everything: A New History of Humanity (2021), anthropologist David Graeber and archaeologist David Wengrow challenge one of the most common accounts of human history: that societies developed through a series of fixed stages, from small groups of hunter-gatherers to farming communities, cities and modern states. They argue that this account misrepresents the past and limits how we think about the future.<\/p>\n

Their central claim is that human societies have always been more diverse, inventive and politically aware than conventional histories suggest. Rather than following a single path towards greater complexity and inequality, people have experimented with different forms of social organisation for thousands of years.<\/p>\n

The book begins by questioning two influential views of human nature. Thomas Hobbes portrayed early human life as violent and insecure, requiring strong government to maintain order. Jean-Jacques Rousseau, by contrast, suggested that humans began in a condition of relative freedom and equality, which the growth of property and civilisation destroyed. Graeber and Wengrow argue that neither account captures the range of human experience. Both assume that human societies followed a common pattern, when the evidence suggests something much less predictable.<\/p>\n

Drawing on archaeological and anthropological research, the authors describe societies that combined features once thought incompatible. Some hunter-gatherer communities developed complex social hierarchies, while some large settlements appear to have existed without powerful rulers. At sites associated with the Trypillia culture in what is now Ukraine, for example, archaeologists have found evidence of vast settlements without clear signs of centralised kingship. At Teotihuacan in Mexico, changes in urban design suggest that forms of collective life may have displaced more hierarchical arrangements.<\/p>\n

These examples challenge the assumption that population growth, farming and urban life must lead to authoritarian rule.<\/p>\n

An important theme concerns the relationship between agriculture and inequality. Conventional accounts often treat the agricultural revolution as the decisive turning point in human history. Farming produced food surpluses, encouraged permanent settlement and allowed elites to control resources. Graeber and Wengrow dispute this simple chain of events. They show that farming developed over long periods, that communities often combined cultivation with hunting and gathering, and that some adopted agriculture without creating rigid class divisions.<\/p>\n

The emergence of inequality, therefore, was not an inevitable consequence of technological or economic progress. It involved social choices, conflicts and changes in political organisation.<\/p>\n

The authors also question the tendency to regard ancient people as passive subjects of environmental pressures. They describe communities that changed their social arrangements with the seasons, accepting forms of authority during some parts of the year while rejecting them during others. Such practices suggest that people understood different political systems and could choose between them.<\/p>\n

This leads to one of the book’s most important ideas: freedom is not simply the absence of restraint. Graeber and Wengrow identify three fundamental freedoms that appear throughout much of human history: the freedom to move away, the freedom to disobey authority, and the freedom to create or transform social relationships. They argue that modern societies have lost much of this capacity, despite their claims to support individual liberty.<\/p>\n

A further contribution concerns the influence of Indigenous thought on European political philosophy. Graeber and Wengrow argue that European thinkers encountered sophisticated critiques of hierarchy, wealth and coercive authority through contact with Indigenous American societies. They give particular attention to the Wendat statesman Kandiaronk, whose arguments challenged European assumptions about civilisation. This account questions the tendency to present Enlightenment ideas as an exclusively European achievement.<\/p>\n

The book has attracted substantial academic debate. Critics acknowledge the value of its archaeological evidence but question some interpretations. Smith (2022), for example, argues that the authors sometimes draw conclusions from weak comparisons between societies. Scheidel (2022) questions their emphasis on human choice at the expense of material conditions, while Appadurai (2022) suggests that the book struggles to explain why durable systems of domination emerged in the first place.<\/p>\n

<\/div>\n

These criticisms raise an important distinction. Showing that inequality was not inevitable does not explain why it became so widespread or why some societies found it difficult to reverse. Human agency matters, but so do ecology, economic resources, technology and the institutions through which power becomes entrenched.<\/p>\n

Nevertheless, the significance of The Dawn of Everything extends beyond its account of prehistory. It challenges the assumption that existing social institutions represent the natural outcome of human development. Its broader argument is that the ways people organise authority, wealth, work and community are historical arrangements rather than fixed features of human nature.<\/p>\n

This has clear implications for social psychology and political thought. Human behaviour develops within social structures, but those structures also emerge from human relationships, shared beliefs and collective action. The distinction between what people regard as natural and what they have learned to accept becomes central to understanding how societies reproduce inequality.<\/p>\n

The book’s most valuable contribution may therefore be its change of emphasis. Rather than asking when inequality first appeared, Graeber and Wengrow ask how people lost the capacity to challenge and reshape the social systems in which they lived. Their account does not establish that all forms of society are equally feasible, nor that freedom can overcome every material constraint. It does, however, provide grounds for questioning the claim that hierarchy, domination and extreme inequality are unavoidable features of complex human societies.<\/p>\n

The past, in this account, offers more than an explanation of how the present emerged. It provides evidence that human beings have organised their collective lives in many different ways, and that the apparent permanence of existing institutions deserves critical examination.<\/p>\n

References<\/h2>\n

Appadurai, A. (2022). The dawn of everything? Anthropology Today, 38(1), 1\u20132. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1111\/1467-8322.12694<\/a><\/p>\n

Graeber, D., & Wengrow, D. (2021). The dawn of everything: A new history of humanity. Allen Lane. ISBN 9780241402429.<\/p>\n

Scheidel, W. (2022). Resetting history’s dial? A critique of David Graeber and David Wengrow, The Dawn of Everything: A New History of Humanity. Cliodynamics, 13(1). Read the paper<\/a>.<\/p>\n

Smith, M. E. (2022). The dawn of everything: A new history of humanity [Book review]. Journal of Urban Archaeology. Read the review<\/a>.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n

<\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

In The Dawn of Everything: A New History of Humanity (2021), anthropologist David Graeber and archaeologist David Wengrow challenge one of the most common accounts of human history: that societies developed through a series of fixed stages, from small groups of hunter-gatherers to farming communities, cities and modern states. They argue that this account misrepresents […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":3624,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[29,32],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-3623","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-my-major-personal-project","category-pure-blog"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/tobelikethis.org\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3623","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/tobelikethis.org\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/tobelikethis.org\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/tobelikethis.org\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/tobelikethis.org\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=3623"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/tobelikethis.org\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3623\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":3625,"href":"https:\/\/tobelikethis.org\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3623\/revisions\/3625"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/tobelikethis.org\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/media\/3624"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/tobelikethis.org\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=3623"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/tobelikethis.org\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=3623"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/tobelikethis.org\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=3623"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}