The concept of "city" (polis) reached at its zenith in the Archaic period (650-546). These years were also the peak years for architecture and trade. The fact that Mimnermus of Colophon who was famous for his delicate and elegant style came to live in Smyrna best illustrates the city’s distinctive position.

The written documents let us know that Miletus, Lesbos, Erythrai and Samos were ruled by the tyrants in the 7th century and in the first half of the 6th century BC.

The democratic principles of the Greek world view may be observed in the domestic architecture through the houses which had equal characteristics. However, the large complex which was excavated in the trench H, located in one of the most secure area in the city, provides clear evidence that it was owned by a king or a tyrant. The complex consists of seven buildings echeloned along a narrow and long court and an olive oil workshop. The Tantalus tomb in the necropolis area, which is dated to the 600 BC., bears similar features. This tomb situated in an isolated way on the southern slopes of the Yamanlar Mountain was obviously built for a tyrant or a king and the tyrant in question was contemporary to Thrncepasyboulos of Miletus. Within this framework, we should postulate, at least for present, that Smyrna was ruled by the kings or tyrants in this golden period as it was the case in the other Ionian cities.

Although the city-state was ruled by a king or a tyrant, democracy was still an integral part of the governance. For instance, the western side of the western terraces of the Athena Temple was not constructed as a result of respect for property right of the adjoined building. The construction of this western part of the terraces became only possible after the destruction of this building during Alyettes’ attack. However, it is still observable that the western wall was not constructed in a straight line but in a curved way in order to fit the eastern walls of adjoining houses.

Despite the fact that none of these tyrants’ names have been identified, there are clear references to the presence of tyranny. Moreover, the inscription on the bronze votive bar “Oinomatos, son of Protarkhos offered this votive to Athena” undoubtedly illustrates the higher position of the father and son in Old Smyrna. The Meeting Megaron, correspondingly, proves that it was used as a discussion platform where the king or tyrant discussed the problems of the city with the noblemen.

It is believed that Smyrna in the 5th and 4th century was ruled by a king or tyrant who acted under a powerful principle of democracy. The building complex with fourteen rooms indicates that the city was governed by kingship or tyranny especially in the 4th century BC. The rectagonal masonry of the rooms facing the court and similar kind of masonry of the double tumuli in the slopes in front (only one tumulus is surviving today) may be cited as evidence of the autocratic governance.

Smyrna which was founded as an Aeolic city in the 11th century BC was the largest and most important settlement in the Aeolic region between the years 650-546. According to written sources, the Ionians who dwelt in city centers such as Colophon, Erythrai and Teos began to expand towards the north under the influence of Panionion movement. They occupied the cities of Smyrna, Klazomenai and Phokaia. Herodotus tells that those who came from Colophon settled in Bayraklı, however, the archaeological material indicates that the Aeolic characteristic of the city continued to exist until the Persian invasion. Although it was founded as an Aeolic city since the very beginning, the events occurred afterwards caused the city’s name not to be cited as one of twelve Aeolic cities.

... The Aeolic cities are the following:—Cyme, called also Phriconis, Larissa, Neonteichus, Temnus, Cilla, Notium, Aegiroessa, Pitane, Aegaeae, Myrina, and Gryneia. These are the eleven ancient cities of the Aeolians. Originally, indeed, they had twelve cities upon the mainland, like the Ionians, but the Ionians deprived them of Smyrna, one of the number.

The following is the way in which the loss of Smyrna happened. Certain men of Colophon had been engaged in sedition there, and being the weaker party, were driven by the others into banishment. The Smyrnaeans received the fugitives, who, after a time, watching their opportunity, while the inhabitants were celebrating a feast to Bacchus outside the walls, shut to the gates, and so got possession of the town. The Aeolians of the other States came to their aid, and terms were agreed on between the parties, the Ionians consenting to give up all the moveables, and the Aeolians making a surrender of the place. The expelled Smyrnaeans were distributed among the other States of the Aeolians, and were everywhere admitted to citizenship”
Herodotus Book 1- 149-150

There is no precise evidence of the mentioned annexation however; some related archaeological results have been unearthed.

"Under the light shed by our present knowledge, we may claim that the Ionians first came to Smyrna in the Early Proto-Geometriz period (i.e. in the 1000s) and they began to cohabitate with the Aeolians. It will not be a misnomer to label the 1-3 settlement layers (1000- 875/850 BC) as Aeolic and Ionian settlement layer." ⁽¹⁾

Despite the presence of the materials belonging to the Ionian cultural sphere just in the beginning of the 1st millennium BC and what Herodotus told us about the Ionian invasion, Smyrna was long after accepted as one of the Ionian cities. This is rather a very interesting attitude difficult to be interpreted.