| | The development or evolution of government was continuous. I recommend highly that anyone interested in this read anthropology texts to compare and contrast how govenrment is expressed within hunter-gatherer, pastoralist,..., etc., ..., and post-industial societies. As noted, among the ancient Germans -- and with other marginalized "primitive" people today -- the leader of the war party or the hunt has no other enforcement role. He uses persuasion alone. That would apply to the distaff side as well. It is generally accepted that the acquistion of property items made "things" the standard of rank: the more "things" you owned, the higher your status.
Humanity is complex. I believe it was among the Natchez Indians that the ruling class was required by custom to marry "Stinkards" (their formal name). There are many expressions of "bride price" versus "dowry" arrangement and they reflect government: who rules and how. Here in Michigan, we have both dower rights and curtsey rights: all of hers is hers and half of mine is hers. We also have no capital punishment. We are a liberal state. It all ties together.
I agree with Robert that Catal Huyuk is perhaps the best case, but unfortunately as my anthropology prof warned me, so little is known than everyone reads into it what they want to find. The Cat Goddess chamber draws wiccans today. For Robert and me, Catal Huyuk is important because its discoveries validated the theoretical predictions of Jane Jacobs in The Economy of Cities. Above, when I mentioned hunter-gatherers and pastoralists, etc., you probably accepted the evolution of cities from farms: hunter-gatherers tamed animials, settled down, farmed and built cities and here we are today. No way. In truth, said Jacobs, the cities came first as permanent hunting campsites at which trade and commerce took place. From them grew cities which allowed agriculture. Want proof? Where are tractors made? On farms? Jacobs also predicted that where you find pastoralists, in the "middle" you can find a lost city that once supported farms.
The point is that "government" (so-called) can be found in all human society: kids obey their parents... or not.... However, formalized government as intended here began with cities.
Nonetheless, we need to parse the command side from the adjudication. You can find the Code of Hammurabi here. Read it. I assure you that the Michigan Criminal Code echoes it. I mean that: echoes -- the language is nearly identical in some places. But the Code of Hammurabi is a command code, not adjudication.
We need to separate those two functions of government. Friezes from Sumeria show people being beaten for not paying their taxes. That is not adjudication. " If any one buy from the son or the slave of another man, without witnesses or a contract, silver or gold, a male or female slave, an ox or a sheep, an ass or anything, or if he take it in charge, he is considered a thief and shall be put to death." That is not adjudication; it is law.
If you want to find adjudication, you should start with ancient Greece. We know Athens best. The Assembly heard suits and anyone could bring suit and anyone could argue on behalf of another. This mode probably began with the rise of popular government in Ionia circa 700 BCE.
We know the Roman Senate well, but the Romans had many councils, not just the Senate. The Senate was only the highest and most powerful.
You know, it is a funny thing, but you could make a case that government (so-called) only originated with the first theoretical considerations of what government is, how it originated (a meta-discussion), and what purposes it serves. Look to Aristotle.
Catal Huyuk or Sumeria may or may not have been "government" in the sense intended. Government as we here mean it -- as opposed to the fuehrer of the hunting band -- might actually be an invention of classical Greece.
(Edited by Michael E. Marotta on 7/01, 8:43pm)
|
|
