Quote Originally Posted by Yora View Post
As someone who read a lot of 19th and 21st century antropology and sociology books, I have considerable doubt of the accuracy of 19th century writers. Especially when the purpose of the book was to support their personal political agenda.
It's a valid hypothesis and a model that works. Meaning, it has no internal inconsistencies, no glaring logical fallacies, and it isn't based on wildly arbitrary assumptions (in stark contrast with, say, The White Goddess). The political affiliation is indisputable, but "agenda"? As far as I know, no one believes that it compromised his scientific integrity - he didn't fabricate evidence or anything. His anthropological model isn't a gospel (nothing is, in science), but it's a very useful paradigm to have in mind, IMO.
*shrug the second*

Quote Originally Posted by Yora View Post
I think a model in which the natural tendency of economical power agregating in a few selected families merely becomes codified in tradition over time will be sufficient. Though this could have come out of the pen of Engels himself.