David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Social Evolution and History 7 (1) (2008)
In the theory of the early state it was fundamentally new and important from a methodological point of view to define the early state as a separate stage of evolution essentially different from the following stage, the one of the full-grown or mature state. ‘To reach the early state level is one thing, to develop into a full-blown, or mature state is quite another’ (Claessen and Skalník 1978b: 22). At the same time they (as well as a number of other authors) indicated quite soundly that not all early states were able to become and actually became mature ones (see e.g., Claessen and Skalník 1978a; Claessen and van de Velde 1987b; Shifferd 1987). Thus there was formed exactly an evolutionary sequence of statehood in the form of a two-stage scheme: the early state – the mature state. And that explained a lot in the mechanisms and directions of the political evolution. However, the former of these two stages of the evolution of statehood (the early state) has been studied rather thoroughly, whereas the latter (the mature state) has not become the subject of a similarly close examination. Unfortunately, the analysis of the mature state has been little advanced in those several contributions to the subsequent volumes of the Early State project (further referred to as Project) where the subject was touched upon. In the present paper after a brief analysis of the Project participants' views on the mature state I will present my own approach to the distinction of the stages of the evolution of statehood which to my mind develops and supplements Claessen – Skalník's ideas on the subject. However, this has made it necessary to suggest new formulations of the main characteristics of each stage of the evolution of the state.
|Keywords||state early state mature state developped state Claessen|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
Leonid Grinin (2009). The Pathways of Politogenesis and Models of the Early State Formation. Social Evolution and History 8 (1):92-132.
Leonid Grinin, Robert Carneiro, Dmitri Bondarenko, Nikolay Kradin & Andrey Korotayev (eds.) (2004). The Early State, Its Alternatives and Analogues. ‘Uchitel’ Publishing House.
Leonid Grinin (2011). Complex Chiefdom: Precursor of the State or Its Analogue? Social Evolution and History 10 (1):234–275.
Charles A. Hart (1940). Philosophy of the State: The Individual; Civil Rights; the Democratic State; the Totalitarian State; the Corporative State; Church and State. [Washington, D.C.,G. Dawe].
Charles Sayward & Wayne Wasserman (1981). Has Nozick Justified the State? Pacific Philosophical Quarterly 62:411-415.
Matthew J. Webb (2006). Is There a Liberal Right to Secede From a Liberal State? TRAMES 10 (4):371-386.
Leonid Grinin (2004). Early State and Democracy. In Leonid Grinin, Robert Carneiro, Dmitri Bondarenko, Nikolay Kradin & Andrey Korotayev (eds.), The Early State, Its Alternatives and Analogues. ‘Uchitel’ Publishing House. 419--463.
Steven Jay Gold (1988). Towards a Marxist Theory of the State. Philosophy Research Archives 14:1-22.
Jieli Li (2002). State Fragmentation: Toward a Theoretical Understanding of the Territorial Power of the State. Sociological Theory 20 (2):139-156.
Milton Fisk (1985). The State and the Market in Rawls. Studies in East European Thought 30 (4):347-364.
Ahmet Öncü (2003). Dictatorship Plus Hegemony: A Gramscian Analysis of the Turkish State. Science and Society 67 (3):303 - 328.
Added to index2011-09-26
Total downloads14 ( #120,449 of 1,101,879 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #306,556 of 1,101,879 )
How can I increase my downloads?