Why did ritual cities often create strong solidarity between rural and urban populations?

In the context of urban culture, ritual cities fostered strong solidarity between rural and urban populations because they functioned within "segmentary states," which lacked the class stratification and political coercion that often create antagonism between country and city.1

In these societies, political authority and economic wealth were widely dispersed rather than concentrated within the city. Because the city did not dominate the rural population through economic or political control, there was no inherent conflict between the two areas. Instead, the city served as a sacred center for the performance of rituals, royal ceremonies, and divine sacrifices. By broadcasting a shared message of tradition and sacredness, these cities bound rural regions together through common beliefs and cultural performances, forging a unified bond rather than a relationship defined by exploitation or inequality.1