On the other hand, the representation of the state, as an aggregate of the above characteristics, also does not provide a holistic view of It does not determine its true nature and origin. Defining the state as a territory with a total population, language, culture, governance, etc. not delimits it from the notions of a country or nation. For example, vm Gribovsky recalls that "the history of the state known to the state of the nomadic peoples who had no definite constant territory" 6. Therefore, when determining the nature of government attention should be pay for its essential characteristics that define the very foundation of this institution. "Behold the root" – says Kozma bars. So, first of all, the state – is an artificial organization. as Alekseev clearly observed that the state is a unity in virtue of the artificial legal organization that was given to him by people 7. Solidarity with him and other scientists. For example, oa Novikov said that "church and state was originally are inoprirodnymi phenomena "8. In this case, the state that the church, being seemingly institutions inherently contradictory (defining the behavior of people on different spheres of life: respectively secular and spiritual worlds), however, represent a common mechanism of social control. How about that remarked M. Bakunin, "to maintain order is necessary that both power: church and state, both of fear: terrestrial and celestial – complement each other. That is why in all states, since there is a story palochnoe management and religious administration were inseparable friends and brothers "9.