3 ms·

The research cited here seems to follow previous conclusions concerning the fact that the largest groups could go up to 2000 individuals. In fact, this is ment

• wahnfrieden 5y ago
  Thank you for discussing the actual research (on one side at least). My understanding is that Graeber and Wengrow are saying that the "band" grouping is inaccurate nonsense, that "band" relations can extend to several thousand people without "tribal society" necessarily emerging >The “Personal Social Group” = 150 people (bands of common lineage — what Dunbar believed to be the biggest group of people one person can have close relationships with). The “Clan” = 450-500 people (cohesive sub tribal unit). The “Tribal Group” = 1500 — 2000 people (tribe). Many people use Dunbar's number to justify why larger societies of humans must necessarily require bureaucracy, coercion under threat of violence, etc. to scale beyond a couple hundred people and that any alternative to the power structures we have today is unrealistic fantasy. It's one key to capitalist realism