The issue of the emergence of the first state on the territory of modern Ukraine is one of the main and most debatable in historical and legal science, since the issue of ethnogenesis and the origins of national state-building is fundamental and defining for every people. Ukraine is no exception, since the least developed are those stages of the formation of Ukrainian statehood that preceded the formation of the Kyivan state, that is, the end of the era of the primitive communal system among ancient Ukrainians and the time of transition to medieval society. Analyzing the patterns, essence and consequences of the initial stages of statehood among the Antes, we must establish whether it had the characteristics of a state and whether it was the heiress of Rus. Despite the fact that the study of the origins of Ukrainian statehood is interesting and informative, it is far from devoid of practical significance, because without knowledge of the origin, origin and further development of our statehood, the construction of a full-fledged, free and independent Ukrainian state is impossible. And given the current war unleashed by Russia against Ukraine and centuries-old encroachments on Ukrainian historical heritage, this issue is especially relevant.

The purpose of the article is a comprehensive analysis of the prerequisites for the formation and functioning of the state mechanism of the Ants, the definition of the legal status of the Ant ruler and other authorities, as well as the characteristics of the Ant social system.

The article analyzes the prerequisites for the formation of the Ant state, in particular the emergence of civilization here as a certain stage in the history of mankind, which is characterized, first of all, by the emergence of a state system. In particular, it is established that at the end of the2nd – beginning of the 3rd century. the Ants and the Sclavini formed proto-state associations: the Ant Union in the east and the Sclavini in the west, initiating the formation of statehood among ancient Ukrainians. In particular, it is highlighted that the Ant Union had such elements of statehood as territory, division of the population by territorial grounds, public power, a prototype of the apparatus for collecting tribute, a professional military squad, hereditary rule, a people’s assembly (council), and a primary hierarchy of deities.

The author analyzed the legal status of the ruler of the Antes – the king (rex), who had a certain political independence and could use coercive means. His functions can be conditionally divided into two categories: collecting taxes and ensuring governance in the administrative and economic sphere of relations; and organizing and personally leading military campaigns, defending the lands and borders of the state, conducting foreign and domestic policy, establishing foreign relations with other tribes, as well as conducting judicial proceedings and performing sacral and ritual functions. A feature of the social system of the Ante state was that with the collapse of the tribal system, there was a significant property stratification of the Ante society, as a result of which classes began to emerge.

Bibliography

Authored books

1. Havrylenko O, Istoriia derzhavy i prava Ukrainy. Starodavnia doba: navch. posib (KhNUVS 2011) (in Ukrainian).

2. Ukhach V, Istoriia derzhavy i prava Ukrainy: Navchalnyi posibnyk (konspekty lektsii) (Vektor 2011) (in Ukrainian).

Edited books

 3. Istoriia derzhavy i prava Ukrainy: pidruchnyk: u 2 t. T. 1 (V Tatsii, A Rohozhyn, In Yure 2000) (in Ukrainian).

Journal articles

4. Boiko I, ‘Stanovlennia derzhavnosti ta prava na terytorii suchasnoi Ukrainy v pradavniu dobu’ [2021] 73 Visnyk Lvivskoho universytetu. Seriia yurydychna 14–27 (in Ukrainian).

5. Braichevskyi M, ‘Antskyi period v istorii skhidnykh slov’ian’ [1952] VII Arkheolohiia 21–42 (in Ukrainian).

6. Kostenko V, Yurystovskyi O, Detsyk O, ‘Hromadskyi lad ta pershi uiavlennia pro polityku na ukrainskykh zemliakh rannoderzhavnoho periodu’ [2008] 10(37)5 Naukovyi visnyk Lvivskoho natsionalnoho universytetu veterynarnoi medytsyny ta biotekhnolohii im. S. Z. Hzhytskoho: zb. nauk. pr. 175–178 (in Ukrainian).

7. P’iankov O, ‘Sotsialnyi lad antiv’ [1965] 8 Ukrainskyi istorychnyi zhurnal 119–121 (in Ukrainian).

8. Palamarchuk N, Ihnatova L, ‘Protoderzhavni ob’iednannia slov’ian na tereni suchasnoi Ukrainy’ [2010] 31 Storinky istorii: zbirnyk naukovykh prats 5–13 (in Ukrainian).

9. Shevchuk L, ‘Z istorii stanovlennia ukrainskoi derzhavnosti: slov’ianski protoderzhavy’ [2015] 62 Visnyk Lvivskoho universytetu. Seriia yurydychna 72–79 (in Ukrainian).

10. Sukhonos V, ‘Demokratychnyi kontsept pervynnoi derzhavy v Ukraini: istoryko-pravovyi ta instytutsionalnyi vymiry’ [2024] 1 Yurydychnyi naukovyi elektronnyi zhurnal 66–69 (in Ukrainian).

11. Taranenko M, ‘Do pytannia vytokiv ukrainskoi derzhavnosti’ [2016] 3/4(31/32) Visnyk NTUU “KPI”. Politolohiia. Sotsiolohiia. Pravo 183–189 (in Ukrainian).

12. Zakharchenko P, Miroshnychenko M, ‘Vytoky ta stanovlennia ukrainskoi derzhavnosti (III st. do n. e. – IX st. n. e.): istoryko-pravova rekonstruktsiia’ [2022] 4(123) Visnyk Kyivskoho natsionalnoho universytetu imeni Tarasa Shevchenka. Yurydychni nauky 18–24 (in Ukrainian).

Newspaper articles

13. Ivanchenko R, ‘Chetverte voskresinnia Ukrainy’ (Uriadovyi kur’ier, 21 serpnia 1999) (in Ukrainian).