Areas that had previously supported wild crops and game could no longer withstand the droughts and livestock began to die out. In addition, farming provided the same amount of food as foraging had, however, much more work was involved. The population rose because families were rearing more children to help with the harvesting their own resources and they "ultimately abandoned some of the leisure of foraging society" (Thornton, 8). Life was not better for all in the agricultural society, because basic human instincts were compromised in order to adapt this new strategy for living. This lifestyle took thousands of years to become part of different cultures" main method of survival because the advantages were not obvious.
Because the agricultural revolution led to the development of towns, leaders emerged from each group. Farming communities began to specialize their produce for efficiency and the leaders began to manage inter-community trades. Thus, the Urban Revolution was born. Though there were many arguments between archaeologists about what actually constitutes a city, Englishman Colin Renfrew argued that the site in question may be deemed a complex civilization if the "archaeologist could show that social or economic reorganization had resulted in increased efficiency" (Thornton, 3). Through these reorganizations, Renfrew argued that government and politics had emerged from such civilizations. Currency also took its place in these societies because the leaders had control over the import and export of goods. However, this led to a large increase in social and economical inequality amongst the population. The export leaders had power, and therefore felt as though they could use their power to accumulate more wealth for themselves. .
Socially, the competing communities began to become more different themselves. Each society developed a certain pride for themselves, and thus became the beginnings of nationalism and elitism amongst other cultures.
