What do you think?
Rate this book
Erken Devlet
Devletin evrensellesmesinin bolunmeye anarsiye ve kaosa yolacabilen 'merkezkacli gucler' engelleme gibi sefliklerin cozemedgi yasamsal bir soruna kurumsal cozumler getirmesine dayandigi sonucuna ulasilan The Early State kolektif bilimsel calismanin ender karsilasilan basarili orneklerinden biri olarak Lahey'de Paris'te ve New York'ta ayni anda yayimlanimistir.
- GenresPolitics
338 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1978
2 people are currently reading
41 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 2 of 2 reviews
April 21, 2025
Konu çok ilginç ve özenle hazırlanmış . 2. Kitabı kitabın sonunda özet olarak alınmış . Belki 2 cilt olarak yeniden çevrilir . Detaylı yapılmış bir çalışma .
May 23, 2023
"...the development into statehood, in all cases, was triggered off by some action or event which took place a long time before, and was not directed especially towards this goal. The other obvious characteristic of the development to statehood is that it always shows something of a snowball effect: once it comes into motion, it grows faster and faster. This is a consequence of mutual reinforcement in all of the developmental processes studies between the phenomena and their effects. Thus we can speak of a positive feedback. This seems to confirm Shalin's suggestion that economy and politics grow together."
"Aside from historical progression a set of mutually corresponding factors appeared to play a role in several cases : 1. population growth and population pressure; 2. war, the threat of war or conquest, raids; 3. conquest; 4. progress in production and the promotion of a surplus, tribute, affluence; 5. ideology and legitimation; 6. the influence of already existing states"
"An expanding government apparatus, the need for some kind of military force (for offensive as well as defensive purposes), a developing state religion -- all these developments demand increased production, and increased production in its turn makes possible the further development of these institutions. This is also a most favourable situation for the stimulation and the promotion of the growth of (already existing) trade and markets."
"At the point where the development towards the early state was triggered off, this myth [religion/ideology of the society] may have been in need of adaptation to account for, or to justify, the growing social inequality, the increasing power of the sovereign, the necessity to defend home territory, or the exalted duty to raid the territory of neighbouring peoples."
"Qualitative changes [that mark the development of the early state], or the development of new traits, occur, we believe, in the development of legitimised power as manifest from: a. the power -- whether consensual or coercive -- to enforce the decisions of the central government; b. the power -- whether consensual or coercive -- to prevent fission."
"[at the end of the early state] Land as the basic means of production becomes an instrument in the hands of the members of that social class which is defined by its monopolistic control over the means of production."
"The early state is a centralised socio-political organisation for the regulation of social relations in a complex, stratified society divided into at least two basic strata, or emergent social classes -- viz. the rulers and the ruled --, whose relations are characterised by political dominance of the former and tributary obligations of the latter, legitimised by a common ideology of which reciprocity is the basic principle."
"...the development of the early state correlated with a considerable elaboration of social inequality, leading to a division of the society in question into at least two social categories (emergent social classes, superstrata), which division was at the same time concealed behind the notions of a 'social contract' ideology of which the idea of reciprocity was the key feature. The effort to overcome the problems posed by the growing cleavage of society resulted under specific circumstances, in the development of the socio-political organisation of the early state."
"Aside from historical progression a set of mutually corresponding factors appeared to play a role in several cases : 1. population growth and population pressure; 2. war, the threat of war or conquest, raids; 3. conquest; 4. progress in production and the promotion of a surplus, tribute, affluence; 5. ideology and legitimation; 6. the influence of already existing states"
"An expanding government apparatus, the need for some kind of military force (for offensive as well as defensive purposes), a developing state religion -- all these developments demand increased production, and increased production in its turn makes possible the further development of these institutions. This is also a most favourable situation for the stimulation and the promotion of the growth of (already existing) trade and markets."
"At the point where the development towards the early state was triggered off, this myth [religion/ideology of the society] may have been in need of adaptation to account for, or to justify, the growing social inequality, the increasing power of the sovereign, the necessity to defend home territory, or the exalted duty to raid the territory of neighbouring peoples."
"Qualitative changes [that mark the development of the early state], or the development of new traits, occur, we believe, in the development of legitimised power as manifest from: a. the power -- whether consensual or coercive -- to enforce the decisions of the central government; b. the power -- whether consensual or coercive -- to prevent fission."
"[at the end of the early state] Land as the basic means of production becomes an instrument in the hands of the members of that social class which is defined by its monopolistic control over the means of production."
"The early state is a centralised socio-political organisation for the regulation of social relations in a complex, stratified society divided into at least two basic strata, or emergent social classes -- viz. the rulers and the ruled --, whose relations are characterised by political dominance of the former and tributary obligations of the latter, legitimised by a common ideology of which reciprocity is the basic principle."
"...the development of the early state correlated with a considerable elaboration of social inequality, leading to a division of the society in question into at least two social categories (emergent social classes, superstrata), which division was at the same time concealed behind the notions of a 'social contract' ideology of which the idea of reciprocity was the key feature. The effort to overcome the problems posed by the growing cleavage of society resulted under specific circumstances, in the development of the socio-political organisation of the early state."
Displaying 1 - 2 of 2 reviews