Bondarenko Dmitri M. Homoarchy

99
the correct rank. Some ranks led. Some followed. … Top to
bottom, Edo [i.e. Bini] chiefs, men, wives, children, and
even slaves were arranged into an enormous system of
ranks.
This is a nicely distinct condensed formulation of the Benin society’s
homoarchic nature.
To sum up, Benin cannot be considered as a state in terms of either
Marxism (see also Kochakova 1986: 9, 11; with respect to African “kingdoms”
in general see Tomanovskaya 1973), including “structural Marxism”, or
(neo)evolutionism, or structuralism; even the existence of the monarchy does
not presuppose the state character of society (Vansina et al. 1964: 86–87;
Vansina 1992: 19–21; Quigley 1995; Oosten 1996; Wrigley 1996; Wilkinson
1999; Simonse 2002; Skalnнk 2002) just the same as non-monarchical form of
government does not inevitably predict a society’s non-state nature. The 13 th –
19 th centuries Benin form of socio-political organization can be defined as
“megacommunity,” and its structure can be depicted as four concentric circles
which in their totality represent an upset cone: the extended family, community,
chiefdom, and megacommunity (kingdom) (for detail see Bondarenko 1994;
1995a: 276–284; 1995b; 1996c; 1998e; 2000b: 106–117; 2001: 230–263;
2004a; 2005a).
Having appeared as a result of integration on the basically communal
principles of not only autonomous communities but also chiefdoms,
furthermore – as a reconfiguration of the complex chiefdom of the Ogiso time,
the megacommunity not only preserved chiefdoms as its structural component
but also did not deprive them from sovereignty in their internal affairs. Vice
versa, from the Ogiso time the megacommunity inherited and even strengthened
such traits, characteristic of the complex chiefdom (see Kradin 1991: 277–278;
1995: 24–25) as, for example, ethnic heterogeneity (Ryder 1969: 2) and noninvolvement
of the suprachiefdom level managing elite in the subsistence
production (see Bondarenko 1993a: 156–157; 1995a: 229, 253). The degree of
social stratification in the society also increased (see Bondarenko 1993a; 1995a:
90–275). In the final analysis, as Ryder (1969: 3) rightly points out, without
chiefdoms and their evolution the Benin empire could have never risen.
But while the simple and the complex chiefdom represent basically the
same, chiefdom pattern of the socio-political organization, the same “quality” of
authority and power (“The general rights and obligations of chiefs at each level of
the hierarchy are similar…” [Earle 1978: 3]), the difference between both of these
types on the one hand, and the megacommunity on the other hand, is really
principal and considerable. In particular, Ogisos had no formalized and legalized
apparatus of coercion at their disposal. While the formation of effective central
authority is vitally important for the complex chiefdom (see above), it usually
proves unable to establish political mechanisms preventing the disintegration
(Claessen and Skalnнk 1981b: 491; Cohen 1981). Hence the breakdown into