10.11.2014 Views

Bondarenko Dmitri M. Homoarchy

Bondarenko Dmitri M. Homoarchy

Bondarenko Dmitri M. Homoarchy

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

ББК ********<br />

3<br />

This study has been supported by the Russian Foundation<br />

for Basic Research (project # 06–06–80459)<br />

<strong>Bondarenko</strong> <strong>Dmitri</strong> M.<br />

<strong>Homoarchy</strong>: A Principle of Culture's Organization. The 13 th – 19 th<br />

Centuries Benin Kingdom As a Non-State Supercomplex Society. – Moscow:<br />

Editorial URSS. – 184 p.<br />

ISBN 5–<br />

Until quite recently, cultural evolution has commonly been regarded as the permanent<br />

teleological move to a greater level of hierarchy, crowned by state formation. However,<br />

recent research, particularly those based upon the principle of heterarchy – “... the relation of<br />

elements to one another when they are unranked or when they possess the potential for being<br />

ranked in a number of different ways” (Crumley 1995: 3) changes the usual picture<br />

dramatically. The opposite of heterarchy, then, would be a condition in society in which<br />

relationships in most contexts are ordered mainly according to one principal hierarchical<br />

relationship. This organizational principle may be called “homoarchy”. <strong>Homoarchy</strong> and<br />

heterarchy represent the most universal “ideal” principles and basic trajectories of sociocultural<br />

(including political) organization and its transformations. There are no universal<br />

evolutionary stages – band, tribe, chiefdom, state or otherwise – inasmuch as cultures so<br />

characterized could be heterarchical or homoarchical: they could be organized differently,<br />

while having an equal level of overall social complexity. However, alternativity exists not<br />

only between heterarchic and homoarchic cultures but also within each of the respective<br />

types. In particular, the present article attempts at demonstrating that the Benin Kingdom of<br />

the 13 th – 19 th centuries, being an explicitly homoarchic culture not inferior to early states in<br />

the level of complexity, nevertheless was not a state as it lacked administrative specialization<br />

and pronounced priority of the supra-kin ties. The Benin form of socio-political organization<br />

can be called “megacommunity,” and its structure can be depicted as four concentric circles<br />

forming an upset cone: the extended family, community, chiefdom, and megacommunity<br />

(kingdom). Thus, the homoarchic megacommunity turns out an alternative to the homoarchic<br />

by definition (Claessen and Skalnнk 1978b: 640) early state.

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!