January 2026

Linguistically speaking what is the order of groups of humans? E.g. Tribe, clan, group, faction, etc.

Linguistically and anthropologically, the terms used for human social groups form several overlapping hierarchies rather than one single strict order. The most common ones depend on the context:

1. Evolutionary/political organization scale (Elman Service’s classic typology) — from smallest/simplest to largest/most complex societies
2. Kinship/descent group hierarchy — especially common in tribal/segmentary societies

1. Political/Evolutionary Scale of Social Organization

This is the most widely taught hierarchy in anthropology (often called band → tribe → chiefdom → state):

Level	Typical size	Leadership	Key characteristics	Examples (historical/ethnographic)
Band	15–50 people	Informal, consensus, no fixed leader	Smallest unit, usually hunter-gatherers, egalitarian	!Kung San, Hadza, many Australian Aboriginal groups
Tribe	Few hundred – few thousand	“Big man”, elders, situational leaders	Kin-based, segmentary, fluid alliances, mostly egalitarian	Many pastoralist/horticultural groups (Nuer, Maasai, many Native American groups)
Chiefdom	Thousands – tens of thousands	Hereditary chief with real authority	Ranked society, some centralization, redistribution	Pre-contact Polynesia, many Mississippian cultures, some African kingdoms
State	Tens/hundreds of thousands+	Centralized government, bureaucracy, monopoly on force	Social classes, taxation, laws, standing armies	Ancient Egypt, modern nations

This sequence is roughly correlated with increasing population size, economic complexity, and political centralization.

2. Kin-based Hierarchy (inside tribes / segmentary societies)

This is the most common “inside-a-tribe” order of descent/kinship groups (from smallest to largest):

Individual → Nuclear family → Extended family → Lineage → Clan → Phratry → Moiety → Tribe / Sub-tribe

Typical order and rough sizes (very approximate — varies enormously by culture):

Level	Typical size	Definition / characteristics	Exogamy?*	Common examples
Nuclear family	4–10 people	Parents + children	—	Universal
Extended family	10–30	Multiple generations living/acting together	—	Most societies
Lineage	30–200	Descent group tracing from a known (usually recent) common ancestor	Usually	Nuer (minimal → maximal lineages)
Clan	200–5,000+	Descent group from a (often mythical/distant) common ancestor; usually has a name/totem	Almost always	Scottish clans, many African & Native American groups
Phratry	Several clans (thousands)	Group of related clans that act together (like “brother clans”)	Often	Many North American & Northeast Indian tribes
Moiety	Roughly half the tribe	The tribe divided into two complementary halves	Usually	Many Australian Aboriginal, Amazonian, and Native American groups
Tribe	Few hundred – 50,000+	Largest named kin/political unit, often containing the above	—	Maasai, Yanomami, many others

* Exogamy = rule that you must marry outside this group

Quick Summary — Most Common “Ladder” People Usually Mean

When people ask for an “order” like tribe > clan > group > faction, the most standard anthropological answer is:

family/lineage < clan < phratry/moiety < tribe < chiefdom < state

Or, more simply and most frequently used in casual/academic conversation:

family → lineage → clan → tribe → chiefdom → state

(With band as the smallest pre-tribal level, and phratry/moiety as optional mid-level divisions inside some tribes.)

Note: Real societies are far messier than any of these neat schemes — anthropologists have largely moved away from rigid evolutionary stages since the 1980s, but these terms remain very useful as descriptive tools.

are there other terms?

Yes, there are many additional terms used in anthropology, sociology, and ethnography to describe human social groups, especially in kinship-based, tribal, or traditional societies. These terms often fill in gaps between the core levels (family → lineage → clan → tribe → chiefdom → state) or describe alternative/parallel structures.

Here are some of the most common and important additional terms, organized roughly from smaller/more specific to larger or alternative divisions:

Kinship/Descent Group Terms (Mostly Inside Tribes)

• Horde — An older, somewhat outdated term for the smallest mobile group (similar to a band or camp), often used for hunter-gatherers; implies a temporary, fluid gathering (e.g., Australian Aboriginal contexts).
• Sib — Sometimes used interchangeably with clan (especially in older literature); a unilineal descent group (patrilineal or matrilineal) with a shared (often mythical) ancestor.
• Sept — A subdivision of a clan (common in Scottish/Irish clan systems); a smaller branch or segment within a larger clan.
• Phratry — A group of several related clans that recognize a “brotherhood” relationship (often sharing a mythical ancestor or ritual functions); acts as an intermediate level between clan and tribe. Common in many Native American, Melanesian, and some Indian tribal societies.
• Moiety — A division of the entire tribe/society into two complementary halves (e.g., “Earth” vs. “Sky,” or “Upper” vs. “Lower”); often exogamous (must marry into the other half) and creates balanced opposition/reciprocity. Found in many Australian Aboriginal, Amazonian, and some North American groups.

Other Political/Social Organization Terms

• Band / Camp — The smallest stable unit (15–50 people), usually egalitarian hunter-gatherers; sometimes called “horde” in older texts.
• Ethnic group — A larger cultural/identity-based unit (beyond kinship), often overlapping with or larger than a tribe; used when kinship is less central.
• Conical clan — A ranked or hierarchical clan structure (common in some chiefdoms), where descent lines are ordered by seniority.
• Kindred — An individual’s personal network of relatives (bilateral, not a fixed group); overlaps with others’ kindreds and isn’t a corporate descent group.

Modern/Sociological Scales of Group Size

Beyond traditional anthropology, some researchers propose more universal layers based on cognitive/social limits (e.g., Dunbar’s number ~150 for stable personal relationships), leading to approximate nested layers like:

• Intimate support clique (~5 people)
• Sympathy group (~15)
• Band (~30–50)
• Cognitive group / stable relationships (~150)
• Clan/tribe level (~500–1,500+)
• Larger linguistic/ethnic/political units

Quick Comparative Table of Additional Terms

Term	Typical Level/Size	Key Feature	Common In
Horde	Very small (~10–30)	Temporary/mobile camp	Hunter-gatherers, older ethnographies
Sept	Small subdivision	Branch within a clan	Scottish clans, some Celtic groups
Sib	Clan-sized	Often synonymous with clan	Older anthropological texts
Phratry	Medium (several clans)	“Brother clans”; alliance/ritual grouping	Native American, Melanesian tribes
Moiety	Large (half the society)	Dual division of whole group; reciprocity	Australian Aboriginal, many dual-organization societies

These terms aren’t part of one universal hierarchy — different cultures emphasize different ones (e.g., moieties are rare in Africa but common in Australia). Modern anthropology often avoids rigid evolutionary schemes and focuses on how groups function in specific contexts, but these labels remain useful descriptive tools. If you’re interested in examples from a particular region (e.g., Native American, African, or Indian tribal systems), let me know!

Kindred — An individual’s personal network of relatives (bilateral, not a fixed group); overlaps with others’ kindreds and isn’t a corporate descent group… etymology and usage over time

Etymology of “Kindred”

The word kindred originates from Old English (pre-1150), appearing as forms like cynrǣden or kinrǣden. It is a compound of:

• cynn (or kin): meaning “family, race, kind, sort, lineage” (from Proto-Germanic *kunja-, ultimately from the PIE root *gene- “give birth, beget”).
• -rǣden (or -red/-rede): a suffix meaning “condition, state” (from Old English rǣden, related to “ready” or “conditioned/disposed”).

Thus, it literally meant “condition of kin” or “kinship/state of being related by blood.” An epenthetic (inserted) -d- appeared in the spelling around the 15th–17th centuries (as in words like “thunder” or “sound”), leading to the modern form kindred.

• Early meanings (Middle English, c. 1200–1400): Primarily “family, lineage, blood relations, kinsfolk, race, nation, or tribe.”
• It functioned as both a noun (one’s relatives collectively) and later an adjective (of similar nature, related by blood or affinity).
• By the 14th century, it also gained figurative senses like “similar in kind” or “kindred spirits” (people with shared attitudes/beliefs).

The term has remained remarkably stable, with core meanings of blood ties and relatedness persisting into modern English, though everyday use often emphasizes emotional or spiritual similarity today.

Usage in Anthropology Over Time

In anthropological kinship studies, kindred has a more precise, technical meaning: an ego-centered (or egocentric) network of relatives traced bilaterally (through both mother and father), without forming a fixed, corporate descent group. It contrasts sharply with unilineal structures like lineage (traced through one line to a known ancestor, forming a corporate unit) or clan (a larger, often dispersed group claiming mythical/shared descent, usually exogamous and with social functions like identity or alliance).

Key historical developments:

• Pre-20th century/early roots: The general sense of “kinsfolk” or “blood relations” appeared in historical/legal contexts (e.g., medieval English law on inheritance). Early comparative kinship studies by Lewis Henry Morgan (1871, Systems of Consanguinity and Affinity) laid groundwork by mapping global patterns, including bilateral/cognatic systems where kindred-like networks dominate.
• Early–mid-20th century (rise in technical usage): British structural-functionalists like A.R. Radcliffe-Brown (e.g., in works on Australian Aboriginal and Andaman societies, 1922–1950) emphasized kinship as interlocking social roles and networks. Kindred described fluid, personal bilateral ties in societies lacking strong unilineal groups. Meyer Fortes and others contrasted it with African unilineal descent groups (lineages/clans). George Peter Murdock (1949, Social Structure) popularized it in American anthropology, classifying kindred as typical of bilateral/Eskimo kinship systems (e.g., Inuit, Yupik, and most Western societies), where the nuclear family is emphasized and relatives fan out bilaterally without corporate boundaries.
• Mid-20th century onward: The term became standard for describing ego-centered groups in bilateral societies. Anthropologists like Jack Goody, Freeman (1961, on the concept of kindred), and later David M. Schneider (1984 critique) highlighted its fluidity — no two people (except full siblings) have identical kindreds, and it changes over time/life stages. It is not ancestor-focused (unlike lineages/clans) but ego-focused, ephemeral, and useful for personal support, marriage choices, or inheritance in non-unilineal contexts.
• Modern/post-1980s: With shifts away from rigid typologies (e.g., critiques by Schneider and others), kindred is still widely used descriptively, especially in studies of Western, Southeast Asian (e.g., Iban), or hunter-gatherer societies. It underscores individual networks rather than group corporateness, reflecting broader moves toward processual and cultural understandings of kinship.

In summary, while the word’s everyday etymology has ancient Germanic roots tied to “kin-condition,” its specialized anthropological usage crystallized in the 20th century as a key contrast to unilineal descent groups — emphasizing personal, bilateral, and non-corporate ties in many societies, including our own.

Kindred Spirits… deep dive

“Kindred Spirits” — A Deep Dive

The phrase “kindred spirits” evokes a profound, almost magical sense of connection — that rare feeling of meeting someone who truly “gets” you on a deep level, as if your souls recognize each other instantly. It’s not always romantic; it often describes unbreakable friendships, creative partnerships, or even fleeting but meaningful encounters. The term bridges the anthropological concept of kindred (personal networks of relatives, as we discussed earlier) with a more poetic, spiritual dimension of shared essence or “spirit.”

Etymology and Historical Origins

• “Kindred” comes from Old English cynrǣden (“kin-condition” or “state of being related”), combining cynn (“kin, family”) and -rǣden (“condition”). It originally referred to blood relatives or family ties.
• “Spirit” derives from Old French espirit (meaning “soul, courage, vigor, breath”), rooted in Latin spiritus (“breath, soul”).
• The compound “kindred spirit” first appeared in print around 1706, in the poetry of Isaac Watts (a hymn writer and theologian), who used it to describe people sharing similar qualities or inner nature.
• By the mid-19th century (around the 1840s–1850s), it gained idiomatic popularity in English literature and letters, often as “kindred soul.” George Eliot referenced it in an 1849 letter: “You won’t find any kindred spirits at Plongeon.”

The phrase expanded from literal kinship to metaphorical “like-minded souls” during the Romantic era, when ideas of deep emotional and intellectual affinity flourished.

Popularization in Literature: Anne of Green Gables

The term owes much of its modern cultural resonance to L.M. Montgomery‘s 1908 classic Anne of Green Gables. The imaginative orphan Anne Shirley frequently uses “kindred spirits” to describe people who resonate with her vibrant inner world — starting with the shy Matthew Cuthbert, then her best friend Diana Barry, and even unexpected figures like the stern Aunt Josephine Barry.

One of the most beloved quotes captures the optimism it inspires:

“Kindred spirits are not so scarce as I used to think. It’s splendid to find out there are so many of them in the world.”
— Anne Shirley (L.M. Montgomery, Anne of Green Gables)

This line reflects Anne’s growing realization that deep connections aren’t rare — they’re everywhere if you’re open to them. Montgomery herself drew from real-life friendships (like her “bosom friends” in youth) and possibly from earlier works she read, such as Elizabeth von Arnim’s Elizabeth and Her German Garden (1898). The phrase became synonymous with heartfelt, platonic bonds that feel fated.

Here are a few classic illustrations of Anne and Diana as kindred spirits — the ultimate bosom friends whose connection defines the term:

These artistic depictions capture the joy, loyalty, and instant understanding that make Anne and Diana iconic kindred spirits.

Modern Usage and Psychological Significance

Today, “kindred spirits” describes anyone with whom you share core values, humor, worldview, or an effortless flow of conversation — often feeling like “no time has passed” even after years apart. It’s commonly used for:

• Platonic friendships — the deepest, most supportive kind.
• Creative or intellectual partners — artists, writers, or thinkers who “vibe” instantly.
• Romantic connections — though not always; many distinguish it from soulmates (more intense, growth-oriented, sometimes karmic) or twin flames (mirroring for transformation).

Psychologically, these bonds provide companionship, emotional support, and a sense of belonging — boosting well-being and reducing isolation. Signs you’ve met one include:

• Instant familiarity (“I feel like I’ve known you forever”).
• Shared wavelength — finishing sentences, similar reactions, effortless understanding.
• Comfort in vulnerability — no need to explain yourself.
• Calm presence — being around them feels like “home.”

Here are some evocative modern artistic representations of that deep, soul-level connection:

In essence, “kindred spirits” reminds us that profound understanding isn’t reserved for romance or family — it’s a human gift that can appear anywhere, enriching life with lightness, recognition, and joy. As Anne would say, it’s splendid indeed. Have you ever met someone who felt like a kindred spirit?