摘要
王震中与易建平在国家定义立论基础上存在着一个重要分歧。王震中以"古代"来限定他的"国家",其定义立论根基存在着几个值得商榷的地方。第一,他以"带有垄断特征的凌驾于全社会之上的强制性权力"来界定他的"古代国家",这不太容易经得起历史材料检验。国家政权垄断强制性权力情况的出现,是在他所称之"现代国家",而不可能在"古代国家"。第二,王震中将克赖森与哈赞诺夫谈到的"早期国家"解释为"古代国家的早期阶段",这是不恰当的。"早期国家"可以出现于社会史分期上的"古代",也可以出现于"中世纪",还可以出现在王震中所论的"现代"。第三,王震中将恩格斯、韦伯、弗里德、塞维斯、弗兰纳利、吉登斯、桑德斯、卡内罗和哈斯所界说的"国家"统统划入"古代国家",这很值得讨论。总体上,那些学者论述的不是特殊形态的"古代国家",而是王震中所称"一般意义上的国家"。
This paper discusses a major difference in the theoretical foundation of the definition of 'state' between Wang Zhenzhong and Yi Jianping.Wang used the word 'ancient' to modify 'state',which is problematic.Firstly,his definition of 'ancient state' as 'the imperative power with monopolistic trait that overruled the whole society' cannot be supported by historical records.But according to his definition,the monopolistic and imperative power appeared in 'modern states' instead of 'ancient states'.Secondly,his interpretation of Claessen and Khazanov's 'early state' as 'the early stage of ancient state' was inaccurate.In the periodization of social history, 'early state' could appear in either the 'ancient era' or the 'medieval era',or even in Wang's 'modern era'.Thirdly,Wang's categorization of 'state' discussed by Friedrich Engels,Max Weber,Morton H.Fried,Elman R.Service,Kent V.Flannery,Anthony Giddens,William T.Sanders,Robert L.Cameiro,and Jonathan Hass into 'ancient state' was disputable.Generally speaking,what these scholars discussed was not specificcally the 'ancient state',but 'state in general' in Wang's term.
出处
《世界历史》
CSSCI
北大核心
2015年第6期95-113,159,共19页
World History
