Chiefdom as a Phenomenon. III. 1. Chiefdom and the Chieftain Institution in its Potestary-political System: the “Classe of the Chiefs”, the Dual Chieftain Institution, the Paramount Chief

IF 0.1 Q4 HISTORY
Epohi Pub Date : 2020-06-30 DOI:10.54664/ookl3661
S. Yordanov
{"title":"Chiefdom as a Phenomenon. III. 1. Chiefdom and the Chieftain Institution in its Potestary-political System: the “Classe of the Chiefs”, the Dual Chieftain Institution, the Paramount Chief","authors":"S. Yordanov","doi":"10.54664/ookl3661","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The main problem, discussed in the article, is the place the chief takes in the potestary-political system of the so-called chiefdom and the so-called early state. The starting point is the conception that the chief¬tain institution is a polyvariant phenomenon. The data of the cross-cultural analysis of the problem concerning the chieftain institution of the late tribal epoch, the epochs of politogenesis and of the early state, respectively, outline comparatively distinctly several categories of chiefs: firstly, the sacralized institution of the chiefs of the separate segments of the clans, delocalized in communities, i. e. the leaders of the separate structural sections of these tribal organization, still consisting of clans, organized on the principle of the classification kinship; secondly, the chiefs who were connected with the leadership in the primary age-set system, and thirdly, the category of chiefs, designated with the ethnological term bigman. It was on the basis of these three categories of chiefs on which the chieftain institutions of the epoch of politogenesis are formed, building the supreme sections of the potestary-political system of the so-called chiefdom: the category of the hereditary sacralized chief-(priest), the category of the military chiefs (which is their most general qualification), and the category of the so-called bigmen. It is the figures of these three categories of chiefs that stand out strongly in the pote¬stary-political system of the epoch of the politogenesis and determine their definition as chiefdom. Undoubtedly, the good knowledge of the chieftain institution with its categories will be of great help to the study of genesis of the monocratic institution. In the current research the attention is focused on a limited number of questions – the “class of the chiefs”, the supreme chieftain colleges and the binary chieftain institution, the paramount chief.","PeriodicalId":29684,"journal":{"name":"Epohi","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.1000,"publicationDate":"2020-06-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Epohi","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.54664/ookl3661","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"HISTORY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The main problem, discussed in the article, is the place the chief takes in the potestary-political system of the so-called chiefdom and the so-called early state. The starting point is the conception that the chief¬tain institution is a polyvariant phenomenon. The data of the cross-cultural analysis of the problem concerning the chieftain institution of the late tribal epoch, the epochs of politogenesis and of the early state, respectively, outline comparatively distinctly several categories of chiefs: firstly, the sacralized institution of the chiefs of the separate segments of the clans, delocalized in communities, i. e. the leaders of the separate structural sections of these tribal organization, still consisting of clans, organized on the principle of the classification kinship; secondly, the chiefs who were connected with the leadership in the primary age-set system, and thirdly, the category of chiefs, designated with the ethnological term bigman. It was on the basis of these three categories of chiefs on which the chieftain institutions of the epoch of politogenesis are formed, building the supreme sections of the potestary-political system of the so-called chiefdom: the category of the hereditary sacralized chief-(priest), the category of the military chiefs (which is their most general qualification), and the category of the so-called bigmen. It is the figures of these three categories of chiefs that stand out strongly in the pote¬stary-political system of the epoch of the politogenesis and determine their definition as chiefdom. Undoubtedly, the good knowledge of the chieftain institution with its categories will be of great help to the study of genesis of the monocratic institution. In the current research the attention is focused on a limited number of questions – the “class of the chiefs”, the supreme chieftain colleges and the binary chieftain institution, the paramount chief.
酋长制度是一种现象。31. 土司制和土司制度在其陶器政治制度:“土司阶级”、双重土司制度、最高土司
本文讨论的主要问题是酋长在所谓酋长制和所谓早期国家的诗歌政治体系中所处的地位。出发点是主要制度是一种多变量现象的概念。关于部落晚期、政治发生时期和早期国家时期酋长制度问题的跨文化分析数据,分别较为清晰地勾勒出酋长的几种类别:首先是被神圣化的、分散在社区中的氏族各部分的首领制度,即这些部落组织中各结构部分的首领,这些组织仍然由氏族组成,按照宗族分类的原则组织起来;第二,在初级年龄设定制度中与领导有关的酋长,第三,酋长类别,用民族学术语bigman来命名。政治发生时代的酋长制度就是在这三类酋长的基础上形成的,并以此为基础建立起所谓酋长制度的诗歌政治制度的最高部分:世袭的神圣化的酋长(祭司),军事首领(这是他们的最一般的资格)和所谓大人物。正是这三类酋长的形象在政治发生时代的政治制度中十分突出,并决定了他们作为酋长的定义。对酋长制度及其类别的认识,无疑对研究君主制度的起源有很大的帮助。在目前的研究中,注意力集中在有限的几个问题上-“酋长阶级”,最高酋长学院和二元酋长制度,最高酋长。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信