(12-05-2013, 01:07 AM)Knight Kat Wrote:(12-04-2013, 07:17 PM)Jomoru Wrote:(12-04-2013, 06:25 PM)C Wrote: It doesn't come out and say that they don't have tribes, but at the very least it strongly implies that they either a) don't have tribes or b) their tribes aren't very important to them.
Depends what you mean by tribe I read that as there's nothing above local clans/villages/bands while the Seekers have group equivalents to say the Cherokee or Apache
I believe you both have a point. They seem to imply that Keepers are more clan-like. And a Keeper clan is made of 2 to 3 families. I guess it could be possible to classify a few families as a tribe? I don't know. I am not familiar with the true definition of tribe.
I'm not an anthropologist, but I don't think there's a really good formal definition of "tribe", so I don't know if it makes sense to talk about the true definition of the word.
I personally like the idea of calling groups of Keeper families "clans" instead of "tribes", both because Keepers do seem more clannish than Seekers and because I like having a different word to refer to the (very distinctly different) Keeper social structure than the words used for Seeker social structures.
