First let me confess to an "editorial bias" and that is one based on the cultural system of which I am a member.  For the most part, that system finds its tax foundation in English Common Law.  I'm sure that the histories and evolution of taxes in other cultures may be as colorful as mine, but I can only hope that other writers more steeped in those cultures may be encouraged to share them with us.  But, for my part ... I'll start with a little analogy:

The first tax lesson

Sometime in elementary school, a pupil starts across the playground toward the class building, when their progress is blocked by three bigger, older students.  "Give us your lunch money .... or we'll pound you into the ground."   Fearing physical harm, perhaps real or imagined, the pupil hands over the lunch money in hopes of passing the balance of the day, perhaps a little hungry but in relative safety.

 The next day the scene repeats with the same result.  Then again on the third day.  On the fourth day the day, the pupil determines to put the lunch money in two pockets.  When confronted, the pupil gives over the contents of one pocket and passes on to safety with the balance of the lunch money safely hidden.  (Please note:  there was never an indication that the three bigger, older students were bright.)

So the pupil learns the first principle of taxation - the bigger and stronger make the taxes.  To keep more of your money and avoid some of the taxes, you have to be smarter or learn to deceive.

 The history of taxes is not so very different.  Those who tilled the ground, baked bread, worked in trades or performed labor ended up giving part of what they produced or grew, to those who were bigger and stronger.  So is was: the land gave income (production or rents) and that income was converted to "valuable exchange" and was paid in part to the biggest and strongest.

 For awhile moving forward we'll assign "names" to those parties ... tillers, bakers, tradespeople were "peasants or commoners" - the bigger and stronger were "nobles or aristocrats" and the biggest and strongest were "royalty and monarchs."   

The presumption was that the royalty would protect the country from outside enemies, the nobles would protect the villages and farms from criminals and then everyone would be content to live in such a balanced society.

 The relationships between these three groups have been the source of political and social strife for centuries, but the important observation here is:  the basis of wealth and income - originated in the land .... And from that source grew the systems of taxation.