Both civilisations evolved into being over the course of many centuries, fairly contemporaniously. The "Fertile Crescent" as it was known, an arc from Persia to Egypt is known as the cradle of civilisation due to its perfect climate and water suppy, as well as suitable situation for agriculture.
In Egypt the river flooded annually, and provided fertile river banks and plains for good agriculture. In the Tigris and Euphrates two rivers region, it took more effort to harness the benefits of the rivers for agriculture, so they required more development to become agrarian. This led to the slightly earlier advance into civilisation.
2006-09-17 01:05:37
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
'i suppose because in Egypt the Nile's annual flood nourished and fertilised the land, whereas in Mesopotamia they had to build ditches and canals to ensure the the irrigation and fertility of the land the need to co-operate on big building projects. the translation of their word for king comes out as productive land manager also the beginning of organised religion there had some influence. it was a pretty grim religion and the texts seem to have a lot in common with the old testament.
2006-09-17 00:54:10
·
answer #2
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
It's actually questionable whether that's the case. Archeologists have recently found a winemaker's shop in northern Egypt which brings into question who was actually the first to invent writing. They found clay squares which seem to be intended as a type of writing to indicate places where the wine was to be delivered.
2006-09-18 03:49:37
·
answer #3
·
answered by cross-stitch kelly 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
Because that's where the Annunaki landed.
Your premiss is debateable. India's civilisation, by its own accounts, is older. Google "Harappa", "Dwarka" and "Vedas" for some of the evidence.
2006-09-17 01:56:03
·
answer #4
·
answered by MBK 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
The conditions were obviously more favourable there.
2006-09-17 00:34:35
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋