CFP: Hierarchy and Power (Moscow 2000)

INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE

"HIERARCHY AND POWER IN THE HISTORY OF CIVILIZATIONS"
June 15 - 18, 2000, Moscow

THIRD ANNOUNCEMENT AND CALL FOR PAPERS


The Center for Civilizational and Regional Studies of the Russian
Academy of 
Sciences in co-operation with The Institute of Cultural Anthropology of
the 
Russian State University for the Humanities is organizing in June 2000 
International Conference "HIERARCHY AND POWER IN THE HISTORY 
OF CIVILIZATIONS".

The Conference objective is to discuss the processes of the
politogenesis in 
their regional and temporary variation. This discussion, in its turn,
could and 
should promote the advancement of the understanding of the general
trends 
and mechanisms of sociocultural evolution, the interrelation and
interaction of 
social, cultural and political dimensions in the society, and further 
development of general methodology for anthropology, cultural studies, 
sociology, political science &c.  

Until recently it was considered self-evident that just the formation of
the 
state marked the end of the primitive epoch and alternatives to the
state did 
not actually exist. All the stateless societies were considered
pre-state ones, 
standing on the single evolutionary staircase squarely below the states. 
Nowadays postulates about the state as the only possible form of
political and 
sociocultural organization of the post-primitive society, about a priori
higher 
level of development of a state society in comparison with any non-state
one 
do not seem so undeniable as a few years ago. It has become evident that 
the non-state societies are not necessarily less complex and efficient.
The 
problem of existence of non-state but not primitive (i.e. principally
non- and 
not prestate) societies, alternatives to the state as the allegedly
inevitable 
post-primitive form of the sociopolitical organization deserves
attention. 

The example of alternatives to the state reveals that it is possible to
achieve 
the same level of complexity allowing societies to solve similar
problems, on 
essentially differing pathways of evolution which appeared
simultaneously 
with human society and increased in quantity alongside with its
social-and-
cultural advancement. This fundamental alternativity of social evolution
could 
be observed throughout the whole length of human history from non-
egalitarian and egalitarian early primitive associations to the
totalitarian and 
democratic polities of the 20th century and is already found in
pre-human 
"egalitarian" or "despotic" primates groups.

The choice of an evolutionary direction which a society follows is to a 
considerable extent a result of its all-round adaptation to the
environment, not 
only the natural but sociohistorical one as well. The "type of
civilizational 
development" seems to be one of the key notions, capable to help to
reveal 
essential backgrounds of societies and systems of them, civilizations. 

The following two main sections will be held:
1) "Civilizational Models of the Complex Sociopolitical  Organization". 
Convenors: Dr. Dmitri M. Bondarenko, Prof. Andrey V. Korotayev.
2) "Ethological Basis of Hierarchy and Power in Human Society". 
Convenor: Prof. Marina L. Butovskaya.

In addition to the two main sections, the following panels will be
organized: 

TROPICAL AFRICAN ANTHROPOLOGY:
GENESIS AND EVOLUTION OF THE COMPLEX POLITICAL 
ORGANIZATION. PRE-COLONIAL, COLONIAL, CONPOST- TO  
Convenor: Dr Dmitri M. Bondarenko (Center for Civilizational and
Regional 
Studies, Russian Academy of Sciences, and Institute for African Studies, 
Russian Academy of Sciences, Moscow)

The panel’s activities are to promote better understanding of social,
political, 
and cultural processes the region underwent before the beginning of the 
colonial time which led to the trespassing of the primitive stage of 
development by a considerable part of Sub-Saharan societies with 
implications for more adequate revealing of the specificity of colonial
and 
contemporary African societies.
The main topics to be discussed are as follows: 
- concrete forms of the complex political organization genesis and
evolution in 
pre-colonial Tropical Africa; 
- regional varieties and pan-African traits in the complex political
organization 
genesis and evolution;
- state and non-state forms of complex societies in Africa;
- the community role and fortunes in the course of the process of the
supra-
communal social and political institution formation and evolution;
- age and sex associations, secret societies and other
social-and-political 
institutions’ role in the processes under consideration and in the set
of post-
primitive institutions and structures;
- the interrelation between the political organization and the spiritual
culture;
- the impact of the Arabs, the Europeans, and others on the evolution of
pre-
colonial African societies;
- the "early state", the "Asian" and the "African" modes of production, 
"feudalism", other concepts and the African data; 
- the complex political organization genesis and evolution in Africa and 
outside: specific and universal traits;
- the significance of pre-colonial Africa for the development of the
general 
theory of socio-poltical evolution; 
- the transformation of traditional institutions in colonial and
post-colonial 
Africa;
- European institutions' fortunes in colonial and post-colonial Africa;
- tribalism: the problem of "status in statu";
- forms of political organization in colonial and post-colonial Africa
vs. 
evolutionary schemes
Reports and presentations dealing with any other topics relevant to the 
panel’s problematique are also welcomed.


RELIGION, STATUS AND LEADERSHIP: PATTERNS OF INFLUENCE
Convenor: Dr Paul K. Wason (Bates College, Lewiston, ME)

Religion is important in the lives of most people of the world today. It
has also 
been important throughout history, and not just to private individuals
but also 
to culture and the social order. Anthropologists and archaeologists have 
always recognized that religion, economy, political life, indeed all
aspects of 
culture are deeply intertwined. We have quite successfully documented
the 
position that religion is of nearly universal importance in people's
lives, in 
cultures, and in the social order.
But we have not always taken full advantage of this fact in our study of
either 
local developments or the histories of civilizations. It is rather more
common 
for anthropologists to try explaining religion away than to see it as an 
explanation for something else. When has it ever been argued that the
real 
purpose of the economy is to help people live out their religion? Yet
when it 
seems that religion might itself be influential, anthropologists often
explain it 
as really something else.
Likewise, while archaeologists and culture historians have always
studied
religion, this dimension of social and cultural life rarely plays a
significant role 
in theories of complex society or of socio cultural evolution. I have
found that 
religion, if noticed at all in grand theories is most often cast as an
after-the-
fact justification for a social situation rather than a significant
causal variable 
in its own right. This is certainly in line with the prevalent view of
American 
popular and media culture that if religion has any impact on public
affairs, it is 
one of dissention and backwardness. But is this what our anthropology
and
archaeology are really telling us? Making special reference to the
monuments 
of Avebury, England, I have recently argued that, in contrast, religion
may well 
have played a formative role in the genesis of social complexity. This
may not 
be the whole story of Avebury, much less the standard pattern for
religion's 
place in history, but it is clear that this is an area that is worth
exploring 
afresh.
It is the purpose of this symposium to reconsider the patterns of
influence
among religion, status and leadership. Does religion in fact often play
the
merely supporting role it is typically given? Are model builders
essentially 
correct when they ignore religion as a causal factor in social change,
and in 
the development of complex societies? Or do we find that religion from
time 
to time -- perhaps even typically -- has had a greater influence on
local and 
world affairs?
Papers in this symposium might explore the relationship among religion,
status and leadership through the details of archaeological, historical
or
ethnographic examples. Theory building is also in order, and papers
developing (or refining) models for the nature of religion's influence
in
history or in different kinds of situations are also important. You
might
prefer instead to take a more methodological approach. It is often
difficult 
enough to infer aspects of status or aspects of religion from
archaeology, how 
might we go about uncovering the nature of their interaction? There are, 
indeed anthropological issues to consider more carefully in order to
properly 
address our theoretical concerns, some as basic as what religion is and
how 
its differing forms may influence, be influenced by, or simply correlate
with 
differing kinds of status and leadership systems.
The central concern of the symposium is to address the theoretical
questions 
of how religion, status and leadership influence each other. Therefore,
all 
other boundaries - chronological, geographic, disciplinary, or
theoretical 
perspective - are open. Work in this area may well draw on disciplines
beyond 
anthropology and archaeology, including religious studies, sociobiology, 
evolutionary psychology, theology, ethology, sociology, political
science, 
architecture and the visual arts.

POWER AND TABOO
Convenor: Prof Victor V. Bocharov Victor Vladimirovitch (Department of 
Cultural Anthropology, Faculty of Sociology, St. Petersburg State 
University)

The interdiction (or cultural norm taboo) is the most important factor
of 
organization of the power relations at all stages of social evolution.
The 
concept of power is closely connected with the concept of "behavioral
norm". 
Many scholars not without justification relate the origin of the "first
taboo" to 
the beginning of the human culture. The latter, as well as any
self-controlled 
system is always hierarchical. Thus, the occurrence of taboos is closely 
connected with the human hierarchy. The earliest taboos which
differentiated 
the behavior among the rulers and the ruled, were food and sexual 
interdictions. Taboos in many respects also determine the hierarchical 
principles of the modem society organization and, in particular, the
authority 
of the political leaders. It is suggested to discuss the following
problems:
1. Ethological aspect: a. Interdiction as a norm of behavior organizing 
hierarchy among animals. b. The role of the "first taboo" in the process
of 
power relations formation.
2. Psychological aspect: Psychophysiology of interdiction and power 
emotions. "Abnormality" of the leader as a factor of his psychological 
superiority. Algorithms of "abnormal" behavior of the subjects of power.
3. Anthropological aspect: The interdependence of types of taboos
organizing 
sociopolitical hierarchy and culture of the society.
4. Sociological aspect: The role of taboos in organizing social roles
and social 
stratification in traditional and modem societies. Interdictions in
behavior of a 
person as an indicator (symbol) of his social status.
5. Political aspect: Authority of interdicted political parties and
movements. 
Taboos in sexual behavior of a modem political leader. Charismatic
leader as 
an infringer of the "old" taboo. Revolution as a process of changing of
the 
taboo. Totalitarism as a "taboo culture".


The other Conference panels are: 
- "Socio-Cultural Evolution: Factors and Models";
- "Mental Backgrounds and Models of Politogenesis",
- "Power and Secrecy"; 
- "Hierarchy and Power among the Nomads"; 
- "Hierarchy and Power in the Highlands". 

Deadline for paper proposals (with abstracts [within 300 words]
enclosed): 
December 1, 1999.

If you would like to take part in the Conference, please, let us know
your full 
name, title, institutional affiliation, full mail and e-mail addresses,
and fax #. 

As soon as we receive your abstract, we will send you the list of
documents 
necessary for us in Moscow to support your visa application process in
the 
Russian Consulate or Embassy in your country.

The registration fee ($100 which includes the culture program,
Conference 
book of abstracts, reception, coffee-breaks, &c.) payment, is to be paid
on the 
spot. Accommodation (at the Russian State University for the Humanities
Hall 
of Residence) is $50/35 per night. Estimated meal and other daily
expences 
are c. $10.


Prof. Igor V. Sledzevski, the Conference Co-Convenor
Dr. Dmitri M. Bondarenko, the Conference Vice-Convenor
Mr. Dmitri D. Beliaev, Ms. Veronika V. Usachyova, Ms. Galina I.
Saprokhina, 
the Conference Secretaries
Center for Civilizational and Regional Studies of the Russian Academy of 
Sciences
30/1 Spiridonovka St.
Moscow 103001
RUSSIA
FAX: + 7 (095) 202 0786
EMAIL: dbondar@inafr.msk.su

Prof. Gregory A. Tkachenko, the Conference Co-Convenor
Prof. Andrey V. Korotayev, the Conference Vice-Convenor
Prof. Marina L. Butovskaya, the Conference Vice-Convenor
Institute of Cultural Anthropology of the Russian State University for
the 
Humanities
6 Miusskaya Ploshchad (Korpus 2, Etazh 2)
Moscow 125267
RUSSIA
FAX: +7 (095) 250 5109 (for Institute of Cultural Anthropology)
EMAIL: andrei@rsuh.ru