Search our site

home
blog
92. What do we know of Ancient Indus
government?
slides
essays
q&a
articles
books
videos
resources
about us
Surely for a civilization to be so strong, it would need some sort of system of
government. Yet I have heard very little evidence of a ruling party or even so
much as a hierarchy or caste system within the civilization?

Gwen Robbins Schug

At various times over the past century, and in a manner that broadly
corresponds to the history of archaeology itself, the Indus civilization has been
characterized as hierarchical or more heterarchical. Piggott and Wheeler
famously described it as a prehistoric state built on hierarchical relations based
on analogy with West Asian civilizations in the third millennium and “casual
observations” of the archaeological record (Dhavalikar 2002). Possehl equally
famously argued for a more cooperative model of complexity without
bureaucracy, in which authority was collectively assigned and integration was
achieved through shared values (Possehl 2002).

The Indus civilization

© Harappa.com
was clearly 1995-2019
complex and 24! also ordered. However, new
approaches to the question of social organization are required given that the
same archaeological record has been used to support these opposing models. A
hierarchical social organization requires diversity combined with inequality,
which is evaluated in archaeology based on the emergence of exclusion in the
archaeological record. In other words, it should be evident that there was
unequal access to resources, goods, decision-making, and power. We already
know the civilization had a heterogeneous composition, in large part due to the
fact that many cities were built just prior to or at the beginning of the Urban
Period, they were laid out in an organized manner, and populated with
immigrants from the region and from as far away as Mesopotamia.

Recent analyses of mortuary treatment and evidence for significant differences

in trauma and pathological profiles between different burial areas at Harappa
have suggested that exclusion was also a fact of life in the Indus city of
Harappa. My colleagues and I have demonstrated that novel infectious diseases
appear in the Urban Period, mycobacterial infections that may have travelled to
the subcontinent along the extensive trade routes with West Asia. We have also
demonstrated that people interred in Area G had a much higher likelihood of
presenting skeletal lesions than those interred in Cemetery H or R-37. Further
excavation at Area G is required to elucidate the nature of the remains
assembled in this area but the remains uncovered thus far were also much
more likely than those buried in Cemetery H and R-37 to present evidence of
violent injury. People buried in the city cemeteries did present evidence of
leprosy and violent injuries, suggesting these were not the cause of exclusion
from the cemeteries. Rather it could be that people who were interred in Area
G were interred here for other reasons, things having to do with community
membership, individual or individual identity, or place of origin. This hypothesis
must be tested with additional evidence but at this point, the bioarchaeological
patterns of trauma and pathology are best explained as evidence of
heterogeneity combined with exclusion at Harappa, emergent features that
support a hierarchical model of social organization.

Massimo Vidale
Almost nothing. I agree with the scholars that think that the largest Indus cities
had a heterarchic form of government, somehow like some rich trading cities of
medieval Europe, that were ruled by lords elected or selected among a
restricted group of powerful families harshly competing for power and status.
Such an explanation accounts for many peculiar traits of the Indus society
(absence of a single evident seat of power or temple, equal distribution of
power and status signs among the various walled compounds, ecc.). But I
admitt that also this view, at present, is a mere conjecture.

Above: Side view of Priest King, Mohenjo-daro.

Governance

Log in or register to post comments

 Search our site

home
blog
50. Was there peace and egalitarianism in the
ancient Indus?
slides
essays
q&a
articles
books
videos
resources
about us
Deep cutting near north-west corner of monastery, showing pavement of
seventh stratum in Mohenjo-daro, 1920s.

Having toured the ruins of the Egyptian civilization in Cairo, Mayan in

Guatemala/Mexico, Inca in Peru, what intrigues me about the Indus Valley
civilization is that it was prosperous, peace loving AND egalitarian. I don't
believe there is other precidence of these elements in unison being maintained
over millenia. Clearly this is something worth researching to find clues of how
to create sustainability in today's world.

I have not come across scholarship yet that explains what sort of governance
and social structure nurtured these three elements in unison in the Indus
Valley. As a current day avid practitioner of yoga, I have a hunch that it has to
do with their pre-vedic yogic practices in which both at an individual and
collective level, the people were engaging in the balance of mind, body and
soul, without discriminatory socio-economic stratification tainting the
experience. Keeping the "flight and fight" response in check through yoga at an
individual and collective level, was possibly an essential ingredient of this
society. I would be keen on hearing the experts talk about how egalitarianism
and peace was nurtured amongst the people of the Indus Valley over millenia.
Submitted by Bilal Musharraf

Jane McIntosh
It is possible that the egalitarianism of the Indus civilization is something of an
illusion. Funerary practices often give good evidence of social hierarchy but the
number of Indus burials is extremely limited, so the picture is incomplete.
Similarly, in the cities, where social differences might be reflected in differences
in the size and wealth of houses, the areas that have been excavated may be
untypical. Nevertheless, the existing evidence indeed gives an impression that
the Indus civilization was relatively egalitarian: for example, good quality
products seem to have reached even villages, town and city houses are not
markedly different in size and wealth, the benefits of sanitation and water
seem to have been available to the whole urban population, there are no
obvious palaces, and so on.

In the light of Indian religion, it seems reasonable to suggest that in the Indus
civilization social status was not marked by degrees of wealth and comfort but
by degrees of ritual purity. Yoga may well have been involved, given that some
seals show a figure in what seems to be a yogic pose.

Nevertheless, there must have been a social and political hierarchy in order for
the state to function: the widespread distribution of goods and materials, the
degree of specialization and organisation in craft production, the massive
architectural achievements (eg the 7-metre-high platform underlying the
Mohenjo-daro citadel) all imply a very considerable bureaucracy and a
management hierarchy. Religion may have been instrumental in ensuring that
people played their part and accepted their lot in life.

The enormous natural wealth and resources of the Indus basin must have been
important in promoting peace within the Indus civilization: where there was no
pressure on resources and all needs were apparently supplied, there was no
spur to conflict. Conversely the supply of goods and materials from other parts
of the Indus realm put a premium on continuing harmonious cooperation and
preserving the status quo.

Similarly the Harappans' mutually beneficial relations with neighbouring

cultures, such as©the
Harappa.com 1995-2019
people of the Aravallis would
24! have promoted cooperation
and discouraged conflict. No other civilization was within military reach of the
Indus, so there was no possibility of conquest of or by the Harappans.

Evolution Daily Life Governance

Log in or register to post comments