1. Defining ‘the political’
IB Anthropology
UWC Costa Rica

2. Defining Political Organisation
‘Political organization comprises those portions of social organization that specifically relate to the individuals or groups that manage the affairs of public policy or seek to control the appointment or activities of those individuals or groups’ (Fried 1967, pp. 20–21)

3. How does this definition apply to states today?
Is it as applicable to non-states as states?
Is it easier to speak of ‘socio-political’ organisation

4. Elman Service (1962) 4 types (levels) of political organisation Band
Tribe
Chiefdom
State
Notice any problems?
Band, tribe and chiefdom cannot be studied as self-contained political systems

5. Yet some more definitions…
Band - refers to a small kin-based group (all its members are related by kinship or marriage) found among foragers

6. Yet some more definitions…
Tribe - economies based on non-intensive food production (horticulture and pastoralism).
Living in villages and organized into kin groups based on common descent (clans and lineage —see the next chapter), tribes lacked a formal government and had no reliable means of enforcing political decisions

7. Yet some more definitions…
Chiefdom- a form of sociopolitical organization intermediate between the tribe and the state. In chiefdoms, social relations were based mainly on kinship, marriage, descent, age, generation, and gender—just as they were in bands and tribes.
Although chiefdoms were kin-based, they featured differential access to resources (some people had more wealth, prestige, and power than others did) and a permanent political structure.

8. Yet some more definitions…
State- a form of sociopolitical organization based on a formal government structure and socioeconomic stratification

9. What is a major problem with Service’s fourfold typography?
The four labels in Service’s typology are much too simple to account for the full range of political diversity and complexity known to archaeology and ethnography. We’ll see, for instance, that tribes have varied widely in their political systems and institutions.
Nevertheless, Service’s typology does highlight some significant contrasts in political organization, especially those between states and non-states. For example, in bands and tribes—unlike states, which have clearly visible governments—political organization did not stand out as separate and distinct from the total social order. In bands and tribes, it was difficult to characterize an act or event as political rather than merely social.
Direct quote from Kottak (p.116)