State origins is the perpetual problem of the humanities. It excited curiosity of scholars working in such fields as philosophy, jurisprudence, sociology, political science, history, etc. There were advanced many opinions in this respect. There exist hundreds of books and thousands of articles on the theme. The first to have appeared were the so-called “sacral” and “patriarchal” theories. They were followed by the theory of “social contract”. These theories are based on philosophical premises. They all are believed to be the so-called “speculative” theories of state origins. Modern conceptions of the origins of the state working up in political anthropology have a set of basic features distinguishing them from classic theories that have been developed by historians, philosophers and lawyers. Formation of the state was the result of two interconnected processes. They are: consolidation of the society (the integrative or functionalist theory) and regulation of structural collisions in the society (the conflict theory). According to these theories the state fulfills functions useful for all, as well as expresses social antagonisms. Statehood is the result of getting control over such basic spheres of social life activity as economics and ideology. The important role is performed by armed supporters who make it possible both to establish control inside the society and to stir up the outside expansion. Nowadays there exist some most popular anthropological theories exposing different ways of the origins of the state. This article discusses such basic problems as the nature of statehood, signs of the state, theory of “the early state” and the stages of transformation of statehood through history, multiline character of the processes of politogenesis, the role of such concepts as “chiefdom” and “hierarchy”. It shows that in the recent decades many theories have been criticized in Western postmodernist and postcolonial anthropology. It is necessary to revise the West-centric and racist conceptions of world history, to take into account the gender factor, to understand that the straightforward comparison of prehistoric entities and their ethnographical analogies was false. However, postmodernists could not suggest any integral alternative to replace the theories of the second half of the twentieth century.

Keywords:

state, state origins, politogenesis, chiefdom, complex society, heterarchy, social evolution, political anthropology

References

Абелес М. Политическая антропология: новые задачи, новые цели // Международный журнал социальных наук. 1998. Т. VI. № 20. С. 27–44.

Агларов М.А. Сельская община в Нагорном Дагестане в XVII – начале XIX в. М., 1988.

Березкин Ю.Е. Вождества и акефальные сложные общества: данные археологии и этнографические параллели // Ранние формы политической организации: от первобытности к государственности. М., 1995. С. 165–187.

Берент М. Безгосударственный полис. Раннее государство и древнегреческое общество // Альтернативные пути к цивилизации. М., 2000. С. 235–258.

Бондаренко Д.М. Гомоархия как принцип построения социально-политической организации // Раннее государство, его альтернативы и аналоги. Волгоград, 2006. С. 164–183.

Бондаренко Д.М., Коротаев А.В. Политогенез, «гомологические ряды» и нелинейные модели социальной эволюции // Общественные науки и современность. 1999. № 5. С. 128–138.

Бочаров В.В. Политическая антропология // Журнал социологии и социальной антропологии. 2001. Т. IV. № 4. С. 37–67.

Васильев Л.С. Протогосударство-чифдом как политическая структура // Народы Азии и Африки. 1981. № 6. С. 157–175.

Васильев Л.С. Становление политической администрации (от локальной группы охотников собирателей к протогосударству-чифдом) // Народы Азии и Африки. 1980. № 1. С. 177–186.

Геллнер Э. Нации и национализм. М., 1991.

Гринин Л.Е. Государство и исторический процесс. Кн. 1–3. М., 2007.

Гумплович Л. Основы социологии. СПб., 1899.

Исследования по общей этнографии / Отв. ред. Ю.В. Бромлей. М., 1979.

Каутский К. Материалистическое понимание истории. М.; Л., 1931. Т. 2: Государство и развитие человечества.

Ковалевски С. Циклические трансформации в Северо-Американской доистории // Альтернативные пути к цивилизации. М., 2000. С. 171–185.

Кола Д. Политическая социология. М., 2001.

Коротаев А.В. Горы и демократия // Альтернативные пути к ранней государственности. Владивосток, 1995.

Крадин Н.Н. Археологические признаки цивилизации // Раннее государство, его альтернативы и аналоги. Волгоград, 2006. С. 184–208.

Крадин Н.Н. Вождество: современное состояние и проблемы изучения // Ранние формы политической организации: от первобытности к государственности. М., 1995. С. 11–61.

Крадин Н.Н. Империя Хунну. 2-е изд. М., 2002.

Крадин Н.Н. Кочевники Евразии. Алматы, 2007.

Крадин Н.Н. Политическая антропология. 4-е изд. М., 2011.

Крадин Н.Н. Современные тенденции политической антропологии // Политическая антропология традиционных и современных обществ. Владивосток, 2012. С. 219–241.

Куббель Л.Е. Очерки потестарно-политической этнографии. М., 1988.

Кунов Г. Всеобщая история хозяйства. М.; Л., 1929.

Лынша В.А. Загадка Энгельса // Альтернативные пути к ранней государственности / Отв. ред. Н.Н. Крадин, В.А. Лынша. Владивосток, 1995. С. 36–58.

Морган Л. Древнее общество или Исследование линий человеческого прогресса от дикости через варварство к цивилизации. Л., 1935.

От доклассовых обществ к раннеклассовым / Отв. ред. Б.А. Рыбаков. М., 1987.

Попов В.А. Вождество // Большая Российская Энциклопедия. М., 2006. Т. 5. С. 557.

Проблемы истории докапиталистических обществ / Отв. ред. Л.В. Данилова. М., 1968.

Ранние формы политической организации: от первобытности к государственности / Отв. ред. В.А. Попов. М., 1995.

Салинз М. Экономика каменного века. М., 1999.

Становление классов и государства / Отв. ред. А.И. Першиц. М., 1976.

Уасон П., Балдиа М. Религия, коммуникация и генезис сложной социальной организации в неолитической Европе // Альтернативные пути к цивилизации. М., 2000.

Хазанов А.М. Классообразование: факторы и механизмы // Исследования по общей этнографии. М., 1979. С. 125–177.

Эванс-Причард Э. Нуэры. М., 1985.

Якобсон В.А. Введение в историю бюрократии // Вестник древней истории. 2012. № 1. С. 81–125.

African Political Systems / Ed. M. Fortes, E.E. Evans-Pritchard. N.Y., 1940.

Archaic states / Ed. G. Feinman, J. Marcus. Santa Fe, 1998.

Blanton R.E., Feinman G.M., Kowalewski S.A. and Peregrine P.N. A Dual-Process Theory for the Evolution of Mesoamerican Civilization // Current Anthropology. 1996. Vol. 37. No 1. P. 1–14, 73–86.

Bondarenko D.M., Korotayev A.V. «Early State» in Cross-Cultural Perspective: A Statistical Re-Analysis of Henri J.M. Claessen's Database // Cross-Cultural Research. 2003. Vol. 37. No 1. P. 105–132.

Carneiro R. A theory of the origin of the state // Science. 1970. No 169 (3947). P. 733–738.

Carneiro R. The chiefdom as precursor of the state // The Transition to Statehood in the New World. Cambridge, 1981. P. 37–79.

Chapman P. Alternative States // Evaluating Multiple Narratives: Beyond Nationalist, Colonialist, Imperialist Archaeologies. N.Y., 2008. 144–165.

Claessen H.J.M. Kingship in the early state // Bijdragen tot de Taal-, Land- en Volkenkunde. 1986. Vol. 142. No 1. P. 113–129.

Claessen H.J.M. Before the Early State and After: An Introduction // Social Evolution & History. 2008. Vol. 7. No 1. P. 4–18.

Crumley C. Communication, Holism, and the Evolution of Sociopolitical Complexity // From leaders to rulers / Ed. J. Haas. N.Y., 2001. P. 19–36.

Crumley C. Heterarchy and the Analysis of Complex Societies // Heterarchy and the Analysis of Complex Societies. Washington, 1995. P. 1–5.

Earle T. Bronze Age economics: The beginnings political economies. Boudler, 2002.

Earle T. Chiefdoms in archaeological and ethnohistorical perspective // Annual Review of Anthropology. Vol. 16. 1987. P. 279–308.

Earle T. How Chiefs Come to Power: The Political Economy in Prehistory. Stanford (Cal.), 1997.

Ekholm K. External Exchange and the Transformation of Central African Social Systems // The Evolution of Social Systems / Ed. J. Friedman and M. Rowlands. L., 1977. P. 115–136.

Feinman G. Mesoamerican Political Complexity: The Corporate‑Network Dimension // From leaders to rulers / Ed. J. Haas. N.Y., 2001. P. 151–175.

Feinman G., Marcus J. Introduction // Archaic states / Ed. G. Feinman, J. Marcus. Santa Fe, 1998. P. 3–13.

Flannery K., Marcus J. The Creation of Inequality: How Our Prehistoric Ancestors Set the Stage for Monarchy, Slavery, and Empire. Cambridge, Mass., 2012.

Flannery K.V. The Ground Plan of Archaic States // Archaic states / Ed. G. Feinman, J. Marcus. Santa Fe, 1998. P. 15–57.

Fried M. The Evolution of Political Society: An Essay in Political Anthropology. N.Y., 1967.

From leaders to rulers / Ed. J. Haas. N.Y., 2001.

Gledhill J. Power and Its Disguises: Anthropological Perspectives on Politics. L., 2000.

Harvey D. The Condition of Postmodernity: An Enquiry into the Origins of Cultural Change. Oxford, 1989.

Kristiansen K. Europe before History. Cambridge, 1998.

Kuznar L. Reclaiming a Scientific Anthropology. Altamira, 2008

Lewellen T.C. Political Anthropology: An Introduction. Westport, 1992.

Lowie R.H. Origin of the state. N.Y., 1927.

Maisels Ch. The Archaeology of Politics and Power: Where, When, and Why the First States Formed. Oxford, 2010.

Mann M. The Sources of Social Power. Cambridge, 1986. Vol. I: A History of Power From the Beginning to A.D. 1760.

Neitzel J.E., Erale T. Dual-tier approach to societal evolution and types // Journal of anthropological archaeology. 2014. Vol 36. No 1. P. 181–195.

Oppenheimer F. Der Staat. Frankfurt am Main, 1919.

Pauketat T. Chiefdoms and Others Archaeological Delusions. Lanham; N.Y.; Toronto; Plymouth (UK), 2007.

Renfrew C. Beyond a subsistence economy, the evolution of social organization in prehistoric Europe // Reconstructing Complex Societies. Ann Arbor, 1974. P. 69–95.

Rivière C. Anthropologie politique. P., 2000.

Routledge B. Archaeology and State Theory: Subjects and Objects of Power. N.Y.; L.; New Delhi; Sydney, 2014.

Sáenz C. Lords of the waste: predation, pastoral production and the process of stratification among the eastern Tuaregs // Chiefdoms, Power, Economy, and Ideology / Ed. T. Earle. Cambridge, 1991. P. 100–118.

Service E. Origins of the State and Civilization. N.Y., 1975.

Service E. Primitive Social Organization: an evolutionary perspective. N.Y., 1962; 2^nd ed. 1971.

Service E. Profiles in Ethnology. N.Y.; L., 1963.

Skalnik P. Early State Concept in Anthropological Theory // Social Evolution & History. 2009. Vol. 8. No 1. P. 5–24.

Smith A.T. The Political Landscape: Constellations of Authority in Early Complex Polities. Berkeley; Los Angeles; L., 2003.

Specialization, exchange, and complex societies / Ed. E.M. Brumfiel, T. Earle. Cambridge, 1987.

The Early State / Ed. H.J.M. Claessen, P. Skalnik. The Hague; P.; N.Y., 1978.

The Study of the State / Ed. H.J.M. Claessen, P. Skalnik. The Hague, 1981.

Turchin P., Gavrilets S. Evolution of Complex Hierarchical Societies // Social Evolution & History. 2009. Vol. 8. No 2. P. 167–198.

Turnwald R. Die menschliche Gesellschaft in ihren ethno-soziologischen Grundlagen. B.; Leipzig, 1935. Bd. 4: Werden, Wandel und Gestaltung von Staat und Kultur im Lichte der Völkerforschung.

Vincent J. Anthropology and Politics: Visions, Traditions, Trends. Tucson, 1990.

Webster D. States of mind // Cambridge Archaeological Journal. 2005. Vol. 15. No 2. P. 260–264.

Wittfogel K.A. Oriental Despotism. New Haven, 1957.

Yoffee N. Myth of the Archaic State: Evolution of the Earliest Cities, States, and Civilizations. Cambridge, 2005.