The majority of interpretations of social authority is based upon its definition by M. Weber as an opportunity to exercise one’s will even against the will of other persons. In this context the authority constitutes a capacity of an individual or a community of people to force others (own members) to a certain type of conduct. In the primitive society the authority was natural, direct and detached neither from anindividual nor from a team, in general. The appropriation and xercise of authority was “interwoven” in daily activities of people and the observance (collective subordination to) of certain rules of conduct was ultimately essential for survival and thus natural and indisputable. The development of production activities of an individual and its sociality, in broad terms, led to the division of labor, inter alia, to segregation of the ruling and managerial activities and the consequent isolation of private and public areas of activity of an individual, attribution of the degree of publicity to social authority. Public authority is institutionalized authority; it is appropriated by artificial ways developed by the society and exercised through specially designated persons for these purposes (established entities) within the framework of the set procedures based on the territorial principle. Public authority is universal; it extends to all society members and to the entire area of their public activities. Once emerged in a socially stratified society, public authority inevitably acquires political nature – it is aimed at streamlining relationships between various groups and layers of the society and alignment (delineation, suppression) of their interests. This particular comprehension of public political authority underpins various definitions of the state which basically come down to the most efficient (sovereign) as well as (in a set of conceptions) proper (fair, legitimate, legal etc.) form of its organization.