Statelessness in Harappa: Possibilities of Practical AnarchyWithin the realm of the ancient world, most of us are fascinated by such illustrious civilizations such as the Egyptians, the Greeks, and the Romans. These are entities with rich traditional culture, and immense influence on world-changing events. Yet, few have heard of Harappa, a civilization nestled in the Indus Valley during 2600 to 1700 BCE (“The Ancient Indus Civilization”), which is now modern day Pakistan.

This is an unfortunate circumstance, as Harappa is a city shrouded in alluring mystery. What makes Harappa particularly puzzling is that “Its [Harappa’s] writing, etched in signs on tiny, intricate seals and tablets, remains undeciphered, shrouding the ancient culture in mystery.” (Tharoor)

One of the greatest questions left unanswered about Harappan society is if indeed Harappa was a state. The question of statehood is an important one because it signifies the establishment of a sovereign government and a stable community.

For the purposes of this article we will be using the definitions most commonly held by political scientists; a nation is a group of people with perceived common ancestry, shared beliefs, and a dominant language. However, a state is an “institutional structure charged with exercising authority within a definable jurisdictional purview” (Rasmussen). In other words a state must have an individual or group of legitimate leaders who exercise control over a territory.

The modern day concept of the state and international recognition is directly tied to the 1648 Treaty of Westphalia. This idea is so pervasive that “[the term] “Westphalia” is often used as shorthand for a system of equal and sovereign states.” (Straumann)

However, in a historical sense the concept and reality of a state has existed long before this point in time. According to the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, “…Westphalia did not create a sovereign states system ex nihilo, for components of the system had been accumulating for centuries up to the settlement.”

What exactly were these components that made up the state in the ancient world? In order to delve into the specifics of whether or not Harappa exhibited traits of statehood, we must set a criterion to follow. According to Joshua Goldstein in his textbook International Relations, a state must at the very least have a defined territory and a population; these facts are not widely disputed in academia in relation to Harappa. It must also include a legitimate higher authority which rules over its own territory. (Criteria 1) In addition, other countries must recognize the state, and engage in diplomatic relations with it. (Criteria 2)

With this basis it is time to delve into the heat of the controversy pertaining to Harappa’s statehood. The bulk of those who do not believe in Harappa’s classification as a state point to Harappa merely being a complex nation or having the structure of a chiefdom. According to Dennis O’Neil, within a chiefdom “the government is essentially just the chief.” This type of society tends to be based on kin-relations and is almost synonymous with the idea of a nation.

According to Thomas Riisfeldt, “archaeological evidence suggests that the Indus Valley Civilization lacked a king and supporting elite.” Specifically Riisfeldt exclaims that the statues and figurines which have been uncovered in Harappa do not provide evidence of any king, or designated leader. Explicitly Riisfeldt examines two figurines titled “Bronze Dancing Girl” and “Priest King”, he concludes that these two figurines do not include descriptions or any verification of their leadership status amongst the society.

While the lack of regal imaginary is a deviation from Harappa’s contemporaries this does not suggest an entirely lacking authoritative political organization. Rather, the significance of state-level leadership lies within actions. Riisfeldt further states that unlike Egypt and Mesopotamia, “archaeological evidence suggests that the Indus Valley Civilization lacked an official, state-wide religion”. This view is shared by Walter Fairservis who links Harappa’s “generally amorphous” religion with chiefdom. (pg. 139)

In his book The Indus Civilization: A Contemporary Perspective Gregory Possehl states that “the absence of ostentatious buildings and facades says nothing of priesthood which may or may not have been present.” (pg. 153) Rather, Possehl states, it is conceivable that religion was done on an individual or familial basis.

N.K. Singh quotes Kenoyer as stating that “…ritual conception included a devotion to sanitation. Nearly every Harappan home had a bathing platform and a latrine.” (pg. 14) Possehl further explains that this devotion to sanitation is further emphasized by the creation of a public area called the “Great Bath”. Furthermore Possehl states that even the modern-day religions of the Indus Valley emphasize the use of bathing.

In his article “Water in World Religions” Brüesch shows how water has greatly influenced major world religions from Christianity’s purification through baptism and water sacrificing in Buddhism.

This concept of religion and baths leads us to another function of state-level leadership, the creation of public areas and city planning. It is already demonstrated that some entity created a public bath within Harappa. Riisfeldt argues that “the state is not the only political form capable of achieving heightened social complexity… the current anthropological association of statehood and complexity is too restrictive.” This complexity to which Riisfeldt speaks includes the planning of building structures.

What Rissfeldt fails to address is not Harappa’s complexity but rather its uncanny uniformity. Rai exclaims that “the basic layout of large Harappan cities and towns shows a regular orientation. One finds the streets and lanes lay out according to a set plan.” (Figure 1). While one could conceivably argue that this formation occurred due to need rather than central planning, the extreme precision and mathematical knowledge needed makes this unlikely.

Danino demonstrates that “Dholavira’s elaborate town-planning rests on the conscious use of specific proportions for its successive enclosures... [that] the Arthashastra’s scheme of linear measures conclusively has Harappan roots.” It is more likely then that a central authority provided strict boundaries to where buildings could be placed and did so for the common good.

In order to properly provide for a common good, most state-level nations need to extract a form of taxes from its populace. According to McIntosh (“The Ancient Indus Valley”) “Great granaries were presumed to store grain that was raised in tribute or as taxes”. McIntosh’s idea is solidified by the finding of uniformed cubical weights which would serve as a manner in which to measure the total weight of an object during trade or tax collecting (“Ancient Indus Weights, Harappa”). Due to the extensive amount of public projects provided by the city planners it is likely that indeed tax collectors were necessary.

Lastly, this unification of structures may hint to a society based on equity which would not allow for a ruling class, or administrative body, but in fact Harappan society did have some stratification. “The Harappan society was clearly stratified on economic and social bases. The layout of the Harappan cities consisted of two parts, a citadel on the western side and a lower town on the eastern side, the two separated by empty space.” (“Indus/Harappan Civilization”) (Figure 2).

Thus, it is more likely than not that a central authority existed which was able to exert sovereign control over its citizens. Now we go to our second piece of criteria, did others respect the sovereignty of Harappa? There are some that argue that Harappa had little to no contact with other nations, instead some such as Randall Law suggest that “'it now appears that practically all of the raw material of the raw stone and metal that Harappan’s used came from highlands surrounding the Indus valley” Inferring from this D.P Agrawal exclaims that while there were some trade routes, “the actual trade routes may not have been as regular and formalized…” as once mapped before.

While it may be true that trade was not frequent, there is no doubt that trade occurred. According to Kenoyer “…somewhat later at Harappa, we have evidence for the expansion of trade networks to the south, bringing chert and shell to the site from distant resource areas”. Furthermore, not only have foreign materials been excavated in Harappa but, “Seals played an important role in the administration and trade of early societies. Analysis of many features of the images on Harappan seals suggests that the information they encapsulated enabled the seals to be used as badges of office within the Harappan socio-political organization.” (McIntosh “Civilizations in Contact”) (Figure 3).

The trade with other cultures shows that Harappa was both capable of trade and an influential partner with other state-level nations. Through trade “recognition” of Harappa’s sovereignty occurred. Furthermore, Harappa’s trade was not done on an individual basis but was uniform through the use of seals, weights, and routes. This would suggest that Harappa was an organized state-level nation rather than merely a tribal band with chiefdom.

In conclusion, it is pertinent that we as persons remove ourselves from the blinds of ethnocentrisms and instead historiographically view other societies on a fair basis. It seems that most scholars who insist on a non-statist view of Harappa fundamentally view the state as harmful, Rissfeldt and others emphasize that a state contains “…an official religion and (usually) a monopoly of force.” This definition is not based on current or past international laws, or classic political science definitions. In fact, this definition of a state would exclude either in part or in whole many modern liberal democracies.

Overall, the Harappan civilization is woefully under-researched and must be further examined in order to fully appreciate the great historical value of this culture. However, it is greatly apparent that, although not as luxurious in architecture and artifacts as her contemporaries, Harappa was in fact a state-level nation, although stateless politically. The possibilities for research into a non-statist society could fundamentally disrupt the manner in which political power is view. As such, Harappa’s place in world history should not only be solidified but justified. SourcesFigure 1 Figure 2 Figure 3