The State: Its History and Development Viewed SociologicallyOppenheimer, Franz
History
The State: Its History and Development Viewed Sociologically
Oppenheimer, Franz
State, The
The Roman Empire was that state. But even this gigantic organism
finally succumbed to the consumption of population, caused by
capitalistic slave exploitation. In the interval, however, it had
created the first _imperium_, i. e., the first tensely centralized
state on a large scale, and had overcome and amalgamated all
territorial states of both the Mediterranean shores and its neighboring
countries, and had thereby for all time set before the world the model
of such an organized dominion. In addition to this it had developed
the organization of cities and of the system of money economy to such
an extent that they never were utterly destroyed, even in the turmoil
of the barbarian migration. In consequence of this, the feudal
territorial states that occupied the territory of the former Roman
Empire either directly or indirectly received those new impulses which
were to carry them beyond the condition of the normal primitive feudal
State.
CHAPTER V
THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE FEUDAL STATE
(a) THE GENESIS OF LANDED PROPERTY
We now return, as stated above, to that point where the primitive
feudal State gave rise to the city State as an offshoot, to follow the
upward growth of the main branch. As the destiny of the city State was
determined by the agglomeration of that form of wealth about which
the State swung in its orbit, so the fate of the territorial State is
conditioned by that agglomeration of wealth which in turn controls its
orbit, the _ownership of landed property_.
In the preceding, we followed the economic differentiation in the
case of the shepherd tribes, and showed that even here the law of the
agglomeration about existing nuclei of wealth begins to assert its
efficacy, as soon as the political means comes into play, be it in the
form of wars for booty or still more in the form of slavery. We saw
that the tribe had differentiated nobles and common freemen, beneath
whom slaves, being without any political rights, are subordinated as
a third class. This differentiation of wealth is introduced into the
primitive state, and sharpens very markedly the contrast of social
rank. It becomes still more accentuated by settlement, whereby private
ownership in lands is created. Doubtless there existed even at the time
when the primitive feudal state came into being, great differences in
the amount of lands possessed by individuals, especially if within
the tribe of herdsmen the separation had been strongly marked between
the prince-like owners of large herds and many slaves, and the poorer
common freemen. These princes occupy more land than do the small
freemen.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account