I have a series of lectures on DVD by archeologist Scott MacEachern titled “The Origin of Civilization.” (I got them for $1 at a used book sale.)
MacEachern begins with Çatalhöyük, the world’s first city. It is unique in many ways.
MacEachern reports that there is no evidence of formal or informal leadership in Çatalhöyük (lack of evidence, however, is not evidence of lack).
I would speculate that certain individuals were recognized by the community as unusually adept at offering advice for resolving interpersonal issues that might arise. Others may have been recognized for their ability to offer successful solutions to practical problems. They could be described as community leaders or community organizers.
Such community organizers had absolutely no enforcement authority. Their advice was followed because the community members had confidence in the advice they offered.
That is my speculative thought, for which I offer absolutely no evidence.
Next, MacEachern describes the early city-states of Mesopotamia. They too display no evidence of formal or informal leadership (but may have had community organizers).
Later, some Mesopotamian city-states introduced the earliest public works. These included common grain storage areas and public gathering places. Building these structures required organization, specialization, and coordination of large numbers of people.
When formal leadership offices began to emerge in some city-states, there was a central zone where the leaders had the most influence. There was an area surrounding the central zone where the leader’s impact was less pronounced. An outer zone surrounded the city where the leader had almost no influence. There were people gathered beyond the outer zone who did not consider themselves part of the city. Many of them were transient occupants.
The Mesopotamian city-states had no formal boundaries. The ruler’s ability to exercise authority was limited by the lack of any enforcement mechanism. There was no bureaucracy, nor were there any enforcement organizations. Those institutions had not been conceived. There was no written law, one reason being that writing had not yet been invented.
A growing population was discovering ways to manage their collective living arrangement.
Progress over the ages is not linear. Regimes rise and fall; populations grow and shrink; technology advances and retreats; societies grow more complex, followed by greater simplicity; harmony is followed by chaos; hierarchical leadership arises and recedes.
While it may be that some hierarchical systems fade, they seem to eventually reassert themselves among large and massive populations. Hierarchical leadership is rarely found among small populations, those of, say, 150 or fewer. While hierarchy may not advance linearly, it seems to follow a generally upward trend as populations grow larger and societies grow more complex.
There seems to be a tendency towards hierarchical leadership, with bureaucracies and enforcement mechanisms, among massive and complex populations.
