The fourth was shared culture, through which the Greeks expressed a common identity, particularly in their manner of dress (they wore tunics, not trousers; cf. Evans & Abrahams 1964), their cuisine (they consumed wine and olive oil not beer and butter; cf. Wilkins & Hill 2006), their political systems (they were citizens not subjects; cf. Mitchell 2007) and their style of warfare (they fought with the spear not with the bow; cf. Hanson 2009). The Greeks then, clearly felt themselves to be a distinct and delimited group, and as their history reveals, their loyalty to this group was strong enough to form the basis for collective action against an outside power, such as Persia (cf. esp. Herodotus, The Histories, 1.1.0). However, while the Greeks formed one people, they lived in many different political communities, and their 'higher patriotism' was undercut by more local loyalties which focused firmly on the polis. 3. Lower Patriotism This quintessentially Greek socio-political system was found both in Greece proper and in the areas the Greeks colonised (for an inventory of which, see Hansen & Nielsen 2004). The term polis (pl. poleis) is often translated as city-state, but as Aristotle (Politics 1.1252b, 3.1276b; cf. Thucydides, History of the Peloponnesian War 1.10.2) reveals, the polis was neither a city nor a geographical location, it was, instead, a political community. This community was comprised solely of adult male citizens who exercised their political prerogatives within a wider and politically excluded population of women, children, slaves and resident foreigners (for further discussion, see Finley 1983). Of course, the precise nature of these communities varied but, as Murray (2012; cf. Runciman 1990) demonstrates, they had five things in common. Firstly, they were small. Athens, whose citizens numbered in their tens of thousands (Thucydides, History of the Peloponnesian War 2.13.6-7), was atypical: most Greek poleis were considerably smaller,

The realisation of the significance of Harappa and the excavation of Mohenjo Daro are events of outstanding importance in the progress of archaeology during the last fifty years. Harappa, a very old town- site in the Montgomery District of the Punjab, has been known for some time and a few small softstone seals and other objects have been found. Only gradually did it become clear that these remains had no relation to any other civilization of India. Harappa had suffered for many years from the inroads of brick-robbers and offered, by itself, little prospect of further significant information. The enthusiasm of Sir John Marshall led to the search for other sites of a similar nature. In 1922 such a site was discovered in the lower valley of the River Indus in the Province of Sind, south of the Baluchistan frontier. Since then other sites have been found and it has been possible to estimate, to some extent, the territorial expansion of an entirely unknown civilization which had attained an exceedingly high degree of development.Most of the work has centred round Mohanjo Daro, the site discovered in 1922, and, with the exception of Harappa, a great deal remains to be done before the full significance of the other sites can be made known. Such conclusions as have been reached are based mainly upon the excavations in Mohanjo Daro and to a lesser, though important degree, upon the findings in Harappa. That we have at present only a very unsatisfactory picture, is obvious from the opinion of Marshall that the Monhanjo Daro culture extended from beyond Harappa to the mouth of the Indus ‘in a south-easterly direction at least as far as the Gulf of Cambay. ‘