Why were writing systems invented independently during roughly the same period across multiple civilizations?

Question

Homo sapiens have been around for 200,000 years, and spoken language is believed to have been around for 50,000 to 150,000 years.

Writing is a relatively new phenomenon. According to this source, writing is believed to have originated independently in multiple civilizations around 5,000 years ago.

If writing is a random invention that happens very rarely, this seems a really weird coincidence. Are there theories about why writing was developed around that time? Did the civilizations influence each other, or was the invention of writing facilitated by the development of specific tools or materials in that period of time?

Answer 1

From the source:

Full writing-systems appear to have been invented independently at least four times in human history: first in Mesopotamia (present-day Iraq) where cuneiform was used between 3400 and 3300 BC, and shortly afterwards in Egypt at around 3200 BC. By 1300 BC we have evidence of a fully operational writing system in late Shang-dynasty China. Sometime between 900 and 600 BC writing also appears in the cultures of Mesoamerica.

Only two of those are from "roughly the same period", Egypt and Mesopotamia. And those two are also much closer, geographically, than any of the others.

So the main theory I've seen is that proto-cuneiform, Egyptian hieroglyphs, and other early writing systems from that broad area (like Anatolian hieroglyphs) had an indirect influence on each other. While none of them were directly derived from each other, the idea of "writing can directly represent the sounds of spoken language" was likely transmitted through trade.

While direct evidence about the invention of these early writing systems is lacking, we see the same thing happening in America around 1820. The Cherokee syllabary is the result of an especially brilliant mind (Sequoyah) being introduced to the idea of recording the sounds of spoken language; he didn't know the details of any other writing system, just the fact that it was possible. It's easy to imagine a similar transfer of ideas between Mesopotamia and Egypt.

Answer 2

I will answer from a different point of view. I will not care if it happened here at 3500 BC while at the other place at 1500 BC and consider it, as in your question, both as almost at the same time relative to the long history of Homo sapiens sapiens or even the long history of agriculture and larger settlements (Jericho 10000 BC).

People did not need make complex records before a complex stratified society emerged. Notice that even when people did use writing in a certain part of the world already, less developed societies nearby, which did have important trade connections to them, did not adopt it. Even much later. Germans and Celts outside of the empire did not (almost) need writing for a very long time. Slavs did not need writing before creating better organized states (or whichever word is more proper) that accepted Christianity. Typical neolitic (or earlier) cultures did not have enough complex and stratified society to develop writing.

It was the development of complex societies in Egypt, Mesopotamia, India, China or Mesoamerica that enabled the need for real writing instead of just simple "strokes and incisions" (Črьnorizьcь Chraбrъ - O pismenьchъ).

Answer 3

In addition to what Vladimir said: Complex societies could only emerge when agricultural techniques were advanced enough to produce a surplus which could sustain a larger number of craftsmen, tradesmen and, tongue-in-cheek, unproductive managers like nobility and priests.

This surplus enabled the emergence of cities and palaces: Places that housed large numbers of people who were not directly concerned with producing food.

These had to be fed and sustained with food produced in the countryside. The food needed to be transported and stored in the palaces and cities.

Any large storage facility needs bookkeeping.

We know e.g. from indigenous Australians that the human mind is able to perform astonishing feats of memorization. The modern version of such a system are the German Ludolf brothers. Imagine a barn the size of half a soccer field, filled with piles of scrap metal parts 15 feet high:

The parts, stored in a warehouse, are sorted by a homegrown "cluster principle" with only Peter Ludolf knowing which part is in which pile. Each of the four brothers has a specific task. It's up to Peter to locate the desired part whether the customer is at the door or on the phone.

This could work for a while also in an god-emperor's palace. But it is not robust. People die, and memory is fallible. At some point people will start scratching pictures of the goods and a simple number system with lines on the doors and amphorae. From there it is a very slippery slope to a pictographic script.

We must assume that (indirect, relayed) communication and migration even over long distances like Mesopotamia and China existed, spreading ideas like agricultural technology and perhaps even the "bookkeeping meme". A culture that didn't improve their agriculture was bound to disappear in the long term; those that did at some point needed writing.

Answer 4

Adding a few bits to other answers and organising.

For writing to evolve:

• A need has to arise
• Need the means to write things down in a non-perishable way. (At least on the time-scale on which the information has value.)
• Need a stable group where all can read/write/understand the system and hand the knowledge over to new people.

Most of these were realised around the time that agriculture developed:

• Communities and then cities evolved.
• Surplus means commerce is possible.
• New professions evolve, creating additional types of goods.
• One to one bartering is compounded by storage and vendors.
• Ruling classes hoard resources for various reasons.
• Agreements, contracts and longer distance commerce evolves.
• A group can specialise in handling the above.

This subjective, but in my book, cave paintings and similar are not really writing systems as they are symbolic and only infer meaning. Plus they are from humans to some form of supernatural, so they are one-way and never really tested. They are projections of their wishes.

The bookkeeping/accounting phase on the other hand is meant to be a reproducible and unequivocal.

When it gets to language, you will find many opinions and arguments that of times end in subjective differences, so try to gather all of them and make up your mind.

One more note on the time comparisons: Human development, when it comes to culture and knowledge is close to being exponential, so when you compare times, unless some groups are close together to have frequent interaction, it makes sense to look at the timescales in a logarithmic scale. e.g. 3000 BCE vs 2500 BCE is not a big difference in this context. 1000 CE vs 1500 CE is a huge difference.

With the above in mind, developing agriculture created city societies around the same time. In Mesoamerica the process was similar, just delayed on the absolute timescale.