The of statelevel society

In this light, there have evolved several theories trying to explain the origin of the state from several historians and scholars. Some of these theories give unsatisfactory records of events, while others have been unanimously accepted by different people as the sources of a satisfactory explanation of the origin of the state.
There are different scholars who have put their efforts to research and come up with the theories to explain the origin of the state. There are different models that these scholars have put in place to explain the foundations of their researches. Given the fact that every scholar must validate their researches to make their theoretical models products of the intellectual environment in which they live, there are assumptions that must accompany each theory. The main aim of this paper is to discuss and analyze two theories that explain the origin of the state. Each theory will showcase the model used in it, the assumptions and the evidence of archeology and history of civilization.
Many classical writers like Aristotle considered the state to be natural. Therefore, it did not require any explanation to its origin (Carneiro, The Evolution of Horticultural Systems in Native South America: Causes and Consequences 47-67). However, during the age of exploration, Europeans were made aware of the fact that people lived not in states, but in villages or tribes. This factor made the state look less natural. therefore, more explanation were required to shade light on the origin of the state. Amongst the many theories of the state origin that have been proposed, only few are normally considered and referred to in scholarly use. There are, for example, those theories with racial attachments, which have thoroughly been discredited. The belief that the state is an expression of the ‘genius of people, or that it came about through historical accident, are rejected, and theories with such basis are disregarded (Lanning 59).