Conny Waters – AncientPages.com –<\/strong> A new global study of ancient societies is rewriting what we thought we knew about democracy. By examining archaeological and historical evidence from 31 ancient societies across Europe, Asia, and the Americas, researchers have found that forms of shared, inclusive governance were far more widespread than previously assumed.<\/p>\n This suggests that the roots of collective decision-making and power-sharing run deeper and are more diverse than our traditional narratives have acknowledged.<\/p>\n Teotihuac\u00e1n. Credit: Burkhard M\u00fccke – CC BY-SA 4.0<\/em><\/p>\n \u201cPeople often assume that democratic practices started in Greece and Rome,\u201d said Gary Feinman, the study\u2019s lead author and the MacArthur Curator of Mesoamerican and Central American Anthropology at the Field Museum\u2019s Negaunee Integrative Research Center. \u201cBut our research shows that many societies around the world developed ways to limit the power of rulers and give ordinary people a voice.\u201d<\/p>\n In an autocracy, political power is concentrated in the hands of a single individual or a small group. Common examples include absolute monarchies, where a monarch holds unchecked authority, and dictatorships, where one leader or party dominates the state.<\/p>\n In a democracy, by contrast, decision-making power is distributed among the people, typically through mechanisms such as voting, representation, and public participation in governance. While elections are a common feature of democracies, they are not exclusive to them. Some autocratic leaders have come to power through elections that were formally free, even if later developments limited political freedoms or weakened democratic institutions.<\/p>\n A carved stone stela from Cop\u00e1n, a Maya city located in present-day Honduras, features the depiction of a ruler. This imagery reflects Cop\u00e1n\u2019s more autocratic style of governance, in which political power was concentrated in the hands of a single, dominant leader. Credit: Linda Nicholas, Field Museum.<\/em><\/p>\n \u201cElections aren\u2019t exactly the greatest metric for what counts as a democracy, so with this study, we tried to draw on historical examples of human political organization,\u201d says Feinman. \u201cWe defined two key dimensions of governance. One of them is the degree to which power is concentrated in just one individual or just one institution. The other is the degree of inclusiveness\u2014how much the bulk of the citizens have access to power and can participate in some aspects of governance.\u201d<\/p>\n Feinman and his colleagues analyzed 40 cases from 31 distinct political entities across Europe, North America, and Asia, spanning several millennia. These societies used a variety of record-keeping systems, and some did not leave written documents at all. As a result, the researchers had to rely on alternative forms of evidence and indirect indicators to reconstruct and infer the nature and structure of governments in these historical settings.<\/p>\n \u201cI think the use of space is very telling,\u201d says Feinman. \u201cWhen you find urban areas with broad, open spaces, or when you see public buildings that have wide spaces where people can get together and exchange information, those societies tend to be more democratic.\u201d<\/p>\n On the other hand, some architectural and city-planning remnants indicate a society where fewer people concentrated power. \u201cIf you see pyramids with a tiny space at the top, or urban plans where all the roads run toward the ruler\u2019s residence, or societies where there\u2019s very little space where people could get together for exchanging information, those are all proxies for more autocratic cases,\u201d says Feinman.<\/p>\n The team reviewed 40 documented cases compiled over generations of archaeological and historical research, then systematically analyzed key features of each society\u2019s architecture, art, and urban planning. For example, artwork that portrays rulers as larger-than-life figures and the presence of monumental royal graves suggest a more autocratic system. In contrast, open public plazas and infrequent depictions of rulers indicate a more distributed, less concentrated form of power.<\/p>\n To quantify these patterns, the study examined buildings, inscriptions, city layouts, administrative structures, and evidence of wealth inequality. Using these data, the researchers assessed how political power was shared or concentrated and identified the main factors shaping different forms of governance. They then developed an \u201cautocracy index\u201d to position each society on a continuum ranging from highly autocratic to strongly collective.<\/p>\n \u201cAmong archaeologists, there\u2019s entrenched thought that Athens and Republican Rome were the only two democracies in the ancient world, and that in Asia and the Americas, governance was tyrannical or autocratic,\u201d Feinman says. \u201cIn our analysis, we saw societies in other parts of the world that were equally democratic to Athens and Rome.\u201d<\/p>\n \u201cThese findings show that both democracy and autocracy were widespread in the ancient world,\u201d observes New York University Professor David Stasavage.<\/p>\n Coauthor Linda Nicholas, Adjunct Curator of Anthropology at the Field Museum, notes that \u201csocieties also developed ways for people to share power and facilitate inclusiveness, revealing that democracy has deep and widespread historical roots. I think a lot of people would find that surprising.\u201d<\/p>\n The ancient Mexican city of Teotihuacan featured wide open plazas and broad avenues that served as central gathering spaces. These public areas suggest a society where communal life was important and where people may have had more opportunities to participate and express their voices within the social and civic structure. Credit: Linda Nicholas, Field Museum.<\/em><\/p>\n The researchers found that neither population size nor the number of political levels could explain whether a society became autocratic. This challenges the long-standing assumption that larger, more complex societies naturally produce strong, centralized rulers. Instead, as Feinman explains, \u201cthe strongest factor shaping how much power rulers held was how they financed their authority.\u201d<\/p>\n Societies that relied heavily on revenue sources controlled or monopolized by leaders\u2014such as mines, long-distance trade routes, slave labor, or war plunder\u2014were more likely to develop autocratic systems. By contrast, societies funded primarily through broad-based internal taxes or community labor tended to distribute power more widely and sustain forms of shared governance.<\/p>\n The study also indicates that societies with more inclusive political systems generally exhibited lower levels of economic inequality. According to Feinman, \u201cThese findings challenge the idea that autocracy and great inequality are natural or inevitable outcomes of complexity or growth. History shows that people across the world have created inclusive political systems\u2014even under difficult conditions.\u201d<\/p>\n This broader perspective is particularly relevant today, as wealth and power are increasingly concentrated in the hands of a small number of individuals. Understanding the key features of autocracy and democracy can help us recognize emerging threats and slow or prevent the rise of new totalitarian regimes.<\/p>\n See also:\u00a0More Archaeology News<\/a><\/strong><\/p>\n \u201cWhen you do archaeology, you\u2019re looking for patterns that contain potential lessons for the world today,\u201d says Feinman. \u201cOur findings in this study give us a perspective and guidance that we didn\u2019t have before, and they’re extremely relevant to our lives.\u201d<\/p>\n The study was published in the journal Science Advances<\/a><\/em><\/p>\n Written by Conny Waters – AncientPages.com <\/strong>Staff Writer<\/p>\n<\/div>\n![\"Democracy](\"https:\/\/www.ancientpages.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/03\/ancientdemocracy.jpg\")
<\/a><\/p>\nTwo Key Dimensions Of Governance Examined<\/h2>\n
<\/a><\/p>\nWhat Can Architecture, Art, And Urban Planning Reveal About Ancient Democracy?<\/h2>\n
Ancient Lessons For The Modern World<\/h2>\n
<\/a><\/p>\n