just not as extremely free

The idea was

That once

There were the tribes

And among them rose the elite

They were the best, and were respected

or the most effective with violence

But one day, one among them said: Why dont I become the only elite one

The only legitimate elite one, monopolize the eliteness

One way or another as humans progressed

but how linear was this supposed progression?

A particular elite or not

would take monopolistic control

Of arbitration

Because in the old times people would go to these best among them to settle disputes

But the 1 elitist who wanted it a barred anyone else from taking that role

i think you should incorporate changes in material conditions

such as the rise of agriculture

It doesnt inherently cause it

you'll probably have a much more realistic understanding that way

yes it does

No

There will be more elites with increased population

but you speak of progress

Its just a question of, will the elites allow that 1 elitist to monopolize their rights

implying change

not just cycles

its an evolution

the "progress" or "evolution" would mostly occur due to technological change

Sometimes it was reverted

and perhaps genetic change

though it's harder to know about that

As during the collapse of the Western Roman Empire

You had this halfway rollback

culture does not exist in a vacuum

nor, obviously, does ideology

but i wanted to be more broad

Culture lives in the genes

The state is not necessary to maintain it

but the big changes we saw were obviously due to changes in technology

it's just stupid to ignore them