CHAPTER-3: STATE- elements and

nature, theories of origin

Definitions-
The state is the most universal and most powerful of all social
institutions. The state is a natural institution. Aristotle said man is a
social animal and by nature he is a political being. To him, to live in the
state and to be a man were identical.
the state has been understood in four quite different ways; from an
idealist
perspective, a functionalist perspective, an organizational perspective
and an international perspective.
1. The idealist approach to the state is most clearly reflected in the
writings of G. W. F. Hegel. Hegel identified three ‘moments’ of
social existence: the family, civil society and the state. Within the
family, he argued, a ‘particular altruism’ operates that encourages
people to set aside their own interests for the good of their children
or elderly relatives. In contrast, civil society was seen as a sphere of
‘universal egoism’ in which individuals place their own interests
before those of others. Hegel conceived of the state as an ethical
community underpinned by mutual sympathy – ‘universal
altruism’. The drawback of idealism, however, is that it fosters an
uncritical reverence for the state and, by defining the state in
ethical terms, fails to distinguish clearly.
2. Functionalist approaches to the state focus on the role or purpose
of state institutions. The central function of the state is invariably
seen as the maintenance of social order. Such an approach has, for
example, been adopted by neo-Marxists (see p. 64), who have been
inclined to see the state as a mechanism through which class
conflict is ameliorated to ensure the long-term survival of the
capitalist system. The weakness of the functionalist view of the
state, however, is that it tends to associate any institution that
maintains order (such as the family, mass media, trade unions and
the church) with the state itself.
3. Organizational view defines the state as the apparatus of
government in its broadest sense; that is, as that set of institutions
that are recognizably ‘public’, in that they are responsible for the
 collective organization of social existence and are funded at the
public’s expense.
4. The international approach to the state views it primarily as an
actor on the world stage; indeed, as the basic ‘unit’ of international
politics. This highlights the dualistic structure of the state; the fact
that it has two faces, one looking outwards and the other looking
inwards. Whereas the previous definitions are concerned with the
state’s inward-looking face, its relations with the individuals and
groups that live within its borders, and its ability to maintain
domestic order, the international view deals with the state’s
outward-looking face, its relations with other states and, therefore,
its ability to provide protection against external attack.

Definitions of State-
To Woodrow Wilson, 'State is a people organized for law within a
definite territory.'

Aristotle defined the state as a 'union of families and villages having for
its end a perfect and self - sufficing life by which it meant a happy and
honourable life'.

To Holland, the state is 'a numerous assemblage of human beings

generally occupying a certain territory amongst whom the will of the
majority or class is made to prevail against any of their number who
oppose it.'

Burgess defines the state as 'a particular portion of mankind.”

According to Sidgwick. 'State is a combination or association of

persons in the form of government and governed and united together
into a politically organized people of a definite territory.'

According to Garner, 'State is a community of people occupying a

definite form of territory free of external control and possessing an
organized government to which people show habitual obedience.'

Prof. Laski defines 'state as a territorial society divided into

government and subjects whose relationships are determined by the
exercise of supreme coercive power.'

How concept of Modern state came into being-?

  Conceptual history tries to examine the different meanings that a
concept has had over the ages. Conceptual history suggests that
words may not change, but their significance does, depending on
historical and social contexts. The word ‘state’ derives from the
Latin word from status (a standing or condition).
 Many political philosophers point out that the idea of the modern
state could be traced to the late medieval ages, especially in the
writings of Nicolo Machiavelli, who is often credited with first
using the concept of the state—stato—to refer to a territorial
sovereign government in his work Il Principe or The Prince, which
was published in 1532.
 In Western political theory, it is with Hobbes that the theorization
of power moves on to an abstract, non-human entity, the modern
sovereign state.
 The Montevideo Convention on Rights and Duties of States in 1933
put forth what is widely regarded as the classic legal definition of
the state. According to it, states must possess the following a
permanent population, a defined territory, and a government
capable of maintaining effective control over the corresponding
territory and of conducting international relations with other
states.

Elements of State
The State may thus be said to consist of four elements namely;
 Population,
 Territory,
 Government,
 Sovereignty
Population
 State being a human institution, cannot be conceived of
without human beings. Population is essential to a state as
threads are to a piece of cloth. A desert or a mountain peak where
people normally do not live, cannot be described a state. This much
is, therefore, certain that there must be some people to
constitute a state.
 Now the question arises how many people should be there to form
a state? This question regarding the number of persons necessary
or desirable for constituting a state cannot be answered in
concrete terms. There is no limit to the size of its
population. All that is required is that there must be some
human being living in it. This does not mean a dozen people or
so living in place will form a state. Their number should not be
 very small, but there is no ceiling (limit) to the population
of the state.
 Some writers have tried to suggest a limit, for example, Plato felt
that an effective number of 5040 citizens should be
sufficient.
 His disciple Aristotle opined that the population should
be large enough to be self-sufficing and small enough to
be well-governed. According to him a hundred persons would
rather be too small a number but a hundred thousand would be too
unmanageable.
 Likewise Rousseau, a great admirer of small republics and
direct democracy, thought that ten thousand may be an ideal
number.
 While some states like the U.S.A., Russia, and Canada are
still under populated relative to area, resources and similar
factors. Other states like India, China and Italy are
confronted by the problem of a population which is
expanding too rapidly for their natural or technological resources.
 Therefore, every state strives to confine its population
within its exiting or potential resources. The former set of
states (U.S.A., former U.S.S.R. and Canada) encourages increased
population in comparison to the latter which attempts to control
the population.
Territory
 Territory is the second essential element of the state. The
people do not become a state unless they permanently settle down
in some territory.
 Previously, philosophers like Hall, Duguit, and
Seeley etc. did not attach much importance to the
permanent settlement of a people on some territory.
 There is now a consensus that nomadic people do not
form a state though they may not be deficient in political
organisation.
 There have been numerous organised groups in the early periods
of human civilization which occupied no fixed territory.’ It is now
a fairly common opinion that such tribal formations, so
long as they do not settle down on a definite piece of
territory, do not constitute states.
 There is no such thing as migratory state, For
example, the Jews were not able to form themselves
into a state till recently because they had no
homeland of their own. They lived scattered over
 various parts of Palestine and the Jewish state of
Israel; has consequently come into being.
 Therefore, territory is indispensable in the making of the
state. The authority of the state extends not only over persons, but
over the territory also.
 With regard to the extent of territory also we cannot fix
any hard and fast rules. The modern states vary greatly in
size. On the other hand, the state of San Marino has an area of
only 38 square miles. There was a time when political thinkers
considered the smaller state to be better. This view prevailed
in ancient Greece. Aristotle was of the opinion that if the
size of the state was very large, good administration was
difficult. Rousseau also subscribed to this view.
 These writers were to some extent justified partly because
the means of transport and communications were
then un-developed and partly because the representative
institutions had not yet been well organised.
 But now when the problems of communication and
government no longer hamper us, large size states
are preferable. That is why we find smaller states drawing
closer to each other and forming federations. Larger states
have an added advantage of a vast economic
potential.
 The extent of territory that a state should possess depends
upon the size of the population it has to support.
 If the population is larger than what the natural resources of
the country can sustain, complications are likely to arise
unless it rapidly becomes highly industrialised and
economically efficient.
 On the other hand, if the population is small many tracts of
the territory and the population of the state had impelled
Aristotle to remark that the territory of a state should be
small enough to be well governed and large enough to be
self-sufficient.
 It may be added that the territory of a state also includes,
besides the land surface the entire air space above the
land surface. Further, the authority of the state also
extends over a part of the sea that touches its territory
coast. The extent of this maritime or coastal belt as it is called
is generally three miles.
 Finally, it may be remarked that the territory of a state
should preferably be contiguous. If it scattered and
separated, it will pose administrative difficulties.
  Pakistan as it existed before the creation
of Bangladesh consisted of the East and West
Pakistan separated from each other by two thousand miles
has been a victim of this geographical misfortune.’
Government
 Government is the concrete expression of the state. The
people may live in a particular piece of territory, but that inhabited
territory cannot be termed as state unless the people are
controlled by a common government.
 Government forms the agency through which the will of
the state is formulated, expressed and executed.
 Population in the absence of government is only
an unorganised mass of people. The government brings
about regulation and adjustment in the life of the people.
The ends of the state can be achieved through the
government only.
 Moreover, the state is incapable of collective action in
any sphere without such an agency. All this means that
government in one form or another is essential for the
existence of the state.
 The Government has three branches: legislature, executive
and judiciary. The legislature makes laws, the executive
enforces and execute them and the judiciary interprets
and punishes the breach of laws.
 The government exercises the physical coercion at the
disposal of the state and “punishes disobedience to its
command.
 The form of Government is immaterial so far as the state is
concerned. It may be kingship, democratic or dictatorial,
parliamentary or presidential, federal or unitary. A change
in government does not bring a change in the state.

Sovereignty
 Sovereignty is the most important element of the state. It
alone distinguishes the state from other associations. There
are two kinds of Sovereignty (a) Internal and (b) External.
 Internal Sovereignty implies the supremacy of the
state over its citizens, over all their associations and
over their entire possessions. This means that the state
possesses authority to secure unquestioned obedience from
all citizens to its laws. If any one of them throws a challenge
to its authority by disobeying its laws, it can inflict upon him
any type of punishment, ranging from a simple warning to
 death penalty depending of course on the gravity of the
crime.
 External sovereignty implies that a state is
independent in its external actions. This means that
outside the territorial bounds of the state, there is no other
state, government, king or any authority, who may issue
command to this state. It is completely free from any such
limitation. It may voluntarily accept and abide by the dictates
of the international law and obligations.

THEORIES OF ORIGIN OF STATE-

1. DIVINE ORIGIN THEORY

 Divine Origin Theory is the oldest theory of the origin of the
state, also called the Divine Right of Kings.
 The state is believed to be created by God, not by human
effort.
 The King is seen as God’s representative or agent on
earth.
 The King’s authority comes directly from God.
 The King is responsible only to God, not to the people.
 Obedience to the King is considered a religious duty;
disobedience is viewed as a sin.
 The King is above the law, and subjects have no right to
question his actions or authority.

History-
 Ancient peoples believed the state was created by God and the
King was God’s representative on earth.
 Religious texts like the Bible and Manusmriti support this idea. In
the Bible, St. Paul states that all governing powers are ordained by
God and resisting them is equivalent to resisting God. In
Manusmriti, when the world fell into chaos, people prayed to
God, who appointed Manu as ruler—another expression of divine
origin.
 Sir Robert Filmer in The Law of the Free Monarchies (1680),
argued that all Kings descended from Adam.
 In ancient India, religion and politics were united under Dharma.
 In medieval times, both church and state used the theory to claim
supremacy.
 Kings like James I directly from God and insisted subjects had no
right to rebel, even against a bad King.
 In the 19th century, rulers of Austria, Prussia, and Russia
formed the Holy Alliance, believing they were chosen by God.

Gilchrist’s criticisms:
 State is a human institution — modern thinkers reject the idea
that God creates the state or chooses rulers.
 Leads to despotism — a semi-divine King, responsible only to
God, can rule arbitrarily without considering public opinion.
 Unrealistic — bad rulers like James II and Louis XVI were
removed by the people, which contradicts the idea of divine
authority.
 New Testament opposes it — “Render unto Caesar…” suggests
the state is human, not divine.
 Unscientific — rejected by anthropologists and sociologists after
scientific study.
 Against historical evolution — the state developed through
historical factors like family, religion, force, and political growth,
not divine creation.
 Undemocratic — the theory supports absolute monarchy and
goes against democratic principles.

 The Patriarchal Theory as the Origin of the State

 Sir Henry Maine is the chief advocate of the Patriarchal Theory.
 He argued that early society was formed from patriarchal
families governed by the eldest male, who exercised strong
authority over all members.
 This patriarchal family was the earliest organized social
institution.
 As families expanded through marriage, they formed a gen
(household group).
 Several gens combined to form a clan, clans formed a tribe, and
tribes united—based on common ancestry—for mutual defense.
 This union of tribes created a commonwealth, which eventually
evolved into the state.
Sir Henry Maine’s analysis of the growth of the state is- “The
elementary group is the family connected by the common
subjection to the highest male ascendant. The
aggregation of families forms the gens or the houses. The
aggregation of houses makes the tribe. The aggregation of
the tribes constitutes the commonwealth.”
  Edward Jenks, another major supporter of the patriarchal
theory, believed the state originated from male kinship,
permanent marriage, and paternal authority.
 The theory emphasizes that families expanded through the
father’s lineage, not the mother’s.
 Population grew through marriages—both monogamy and
polygamy—and the eldest male held a dominant position.
 Aristotle also supported this idea, stating that families unite into
villages, and villages unite into a self-sufficient state.
 Historical examples include:
o The twelve tribes of Israel forming the Jewish nation.
o In ancient Rome, the patriarch of each family unit exercised
near-absolute authority.
Criticisms-
 The state has multiple causes, not just the family. Factors like
religion, force, and political needs also contributed. As J.C. Frazer
said, society is built on a complexity of causes.
 Many critics argue that matriarchy, not patriarchy, was the
earliest social unit. Thinkers like McLennan, Morgan, and even
Jenks point out that polyandry and female-line kinship played
a major role in early social organization.
 The theory rests on the false assumption that the family evolved
directly into the state. Jenks later clarified that the tribe, not the
family, was the first political unit.
 Sir Henry Maine oversimplified the origin of the state by
attributing it solely to the family.
 The authority of the father is temporary, ending when children
grow up, whereas the authority of the state is permanent,
showing that the family cannot be the true model for the state.

The Matriarchal Theory as the Origin of the State:

 Morgan, McLennan, and Edward Jenks are the main
supporters of the matriarchal theory. They argue that early
societies did not have patriarchal families; patriarchy
appeared only after permanent marriage developed.
 Primitive society was marked by sexual anarchy, with no fixed
marriage system. As a result, the mother became the head of
the family, and kinship was traced through the female line.
 Based on his study of Australian tribes, Jenks found that they
were organized into totem groups—unions based not on blood
ties but on symbolic associations with animals or plants. Marriage
rules between totem groups led to polyandry and polygamy.
 The matriarchal system lasted until the pastoral age, when
permanent marriage emerged.
 Historical traces of matriarchy can be seen in societies like
Malabar, where queens ruled, and Maratha regions, where
princesses held authority.
Criticisms-
 The state has multiple causes, and the family—whether
matriarchal or patriarchal—is only one of them. Force, religion,
politics, and contract also contributed to the growth of the state, so
the theory gives only a partial explanation.
 Like the patriarchal theory, it mistakenly treats the origin of
the family as the origin of the state. The state is far more
complex than an extended family and differs in structure, function,
and purpose.
 The theory is historically incorrect because matriarchy was not
the only early social system. In reality, patriarchal and
matriarchal systems existed simultaneously, developing in
parallel.
 As Stephen Leacock notes: “Here it may be a patriarchal
family; there it may be a matriarchal family, but family is
at the basis of the state.”

4. The Force Theory Of The Origin of State :

• According to Leacock, Force theory means Government is the
outcome of human aggression. Force is the basis of the state.
• Herbert Spencer advocated the principle of the survival of
the fittest.
• There are various stages in the development of state
• Firstly, there is a continued process of aggression. The
conquerors captured the properties of the defeated person.
• Secondly, the weaker are enslaved and exploited.
• In the third stage, there is co-operation between the
conquerors and conquered for mutual benefit. People united
to fight against common enemies.
• In the 4th stage, a government is formed for the settlement of
disputes.
History-
The exponents of this theory hold that wars and aggressions by
some powerful tribe were the principal factors in the creation of the
state.
They rely on the oft-quoted saying “war begot the King” as the
historical explanation of the origin of the state.
  Edward Jenks argues that historically, all modern political
communities originated from successful warfare.
 As states grew in size and population, their military techniques
improved, leading to frequent conflicts among small states.
 Stronger states defeated weaker ones, gradually forming larger
political units.
 Historical examples include the creation of the kingdoms of
Norway, Sweden, Denmark, and the rise of Spain in the 6th
century A.D.
 The Normans built the states of Russia (9th century) and
England (11th century) through conquest.
 Stephen Leacock summarizes that states began through capture,
enslavement, conquest, and subjugation, and that the
evolution from tribe to kingdom and empire followed the same
force-driven process.
Criticism-
 Force is only one factor in the origin of the state; other forces
such as religion, family, politics, and social evolution also played
major roles. The theory commits the error of treating one cause
as the only cause, as Stephen Leacock notes.
 A state may be created by force temporarily, but its permanence
requires more than coercion—it needs stability, cooperation,
and shared values.
 The theory contradicts T.H. Green’s principle that “Will, not
force, is the basis of the state.” A lasting state requires the
voluntary acceptance of its people, not mere military
domination.
 It is incompatible with individual liberty; if force is the
foundation of the state, freedom cannot flourish. This suits
despotism, not democracy.
 Applying “survival of the fittest” from the animal world to
human society is flawed. Human history, such as Gandhi’s non-
violent triumph over British rule, shows that moral and political
will can defeat brute force.
 Ultimately, the theory fails because political consciousness, not
force, is the true origin of the state; humans form states because
they are naturally political beings.
· The people did not surrender their natural rights to the Sovereign.
. Locke thus makes 'consent' the basis of government and authority.
. Locke lays down the constitutional government, and he distinguishes
between the legislature and the executive.
· Locke recognized the people's right to revolution. To him individual is
prior to state.
. The government aims at the good of the community.
. The doctrine of Constitutional Monarchy is a great
contribution of Locke to political science.
[Link]'s Theory of Social Contract(1712-1776) :
. Rousseau explained this theory in his famous book 'Social Contract'.
. According to him man is essentially good and sympathetic.
. Man in the state of nature was noble savage and lived an idyllic life.
. The natural man lead innocent life and with perfect freedom and
equality.
. He was not bound by any artificial laws and lived in highest happiness.
. Rousseau says 'original man had not the least notion of mine and
thine, no true of justice.
. Man is guided by a conscience and has two primal instincts 1. Self love
2. sympathy.
· There was no competition, no jealousy and no private property.
· With the increase in population, development of science and
technology, emergence of culture and property the peace of the state of
nature was vanished.
. By a social contract every one surrendered all his rights to the
community. The community became sovereign.
. Rousseau identified sovereignty with the general will of the community.
. Law was the expression of the general will.
· Sovereignty resided in general will which was infallible, indivisible,
inalienable and absolute.
. The absolutism of Rousseau's sovereign is based on consent.
. General will corresponds to the common interest of all the
members of the community. It aims at common good.

Criticisms of the Social Contract Theory:

 No historical evidence: No record shows that early people ever
formed a state through an actual contract. Examples like the
Mayflower Compact or the Dutch deposition of Philip II involved
societies that already had political structures, so they do not prove
a contract-created state.
 Reverses historical development: Sir Henry Maine argued the
theory “puts the cart before the horse.” Societies evolved from
status to contract, not from contract to society. Contract is a
later social development, not an origin.
 Assumes political awareness before the state existed: The
theory wrongly assumes people in a “state of nature” understood
political concepts like public good or state authority despite having
no experience of them.
 Rights cannot exist without the state: The idea of “natural
rights” before society is illogical because rights depend on an
organized civil authority for recognition and protection.
 State is a product of gradual evolution: History shows the
state developed slowly through many factors—kinship, force,
religion, family structures—not by a sudden deliberate agreement.
Humans never lived in a completely pre-social condition.
 State is not man-made like a contract: Treating the state as a
deliberate human invention is misleading and politically
dangerous because it implies people can dissolve it at will. Only
government, not the state, is consciously created.
 Strong criticism by modern scholars: Many political thinkers
reject the theory—Bentham called it a “rattle,” Bluntschli labelled it
dangerous, Pollock deemed it politically fraudulent, and Maine
considered it worthless for explaining the state’s origin.
These points explain why modern political science dismisses the Social
Contract Theory as an inaccurate explanation of how states actually
emerge.

5. The Evolutionary or Historical Theory of Origin of State :

. This is the most acceptable theory regarding the origin of state.
. The state is a growth not a product ,state is an evolution and not an
artificial product. The state is a natural, gradual and evolved institution.
. The origin of the state can be attributed to a number of factors.
These are
[Link]
[Link]
[Link]
[Link] Interests
[Link] Consciousness
According to Maclver' Kinship creates society and society at length
creates
the state'.
[Link] : Family is the basic unit of kinship. The blood relationship is
the
Bond that brought family together. Blood bond accepted authority as
legitimate.
[Link] : Religion was more powerful since it brought people together
on
the basis of common worship.
. It created a sense of solidarity and close relationship between religion
and
politics.
[Link] : War and coercive force facilitated the creation of state.
Individual
leadership was established and this leader had the power to use force.
[Link] Consciousness : The necessity of a common authority to settle
disputes, to establish law and order and the awareness of social and
political relations contributed to the organization of a state.
5. Economic Interests : Economic conditions determine the development
of
political institutions. State originated to regulate economic activities.