Search results

This paper aims to study sociopolitical practices and the territorial shapes of power in the early medieval Castilian counties. The emergence in recent decades of a robust social history of power in north-western Iberia has allowed to propose new interpretive frameworks stressing the role of aristocracy and county elite. However, the new archaeological records are challenging these assumptions providing some features of local societies and analyzing, from new perspectives, the social and political dynamics of the Castilian area. This work is focused on the case of Lantarón, one of the smaller territories at the head of which an count is attested in the 9th-10th centuries. Using a multi-scale and comparative analysis, it is argued that the strong identity of local societies, the existence of a high degree of political compartmentalization and the dispersion of different centers of authority allowed the construction of forms of a relational territorialization. This new territorialization has opened the horizons of political practices at different scales. Lantarón's case study allows us to propose an ideal type of relational state in which consensus and political networks are more relevant than the patrimonial bases of power. Keywords State, Power, Authority, Hierarchical heterarchy, Relational Territorialization, Patronage. ; El objetivo de este artículo es analizar los condados castellanos altomedievales a partir del estudio de las prácticas sociopolíticas y las formas de territorialización del poder. La emergencia en los últimos decenios de una historia social del poder en el noroeste peninsular ha permitido proponer algunos itinerarios interpretativos que inciden, principalmente, en la agencia de los personajes connotados con el título condal. No obstante, el incremento de las intervenciones arqueológicas disponibles permite identificar algunos rasgos de las sociedades locales y analizar, desde nuevas perspectivas, las dinámicas sociales y políticas del área castellana. Este trabajo se centra en el caso de Lantarón, uno de los territorios de menores dimensiones a cuya cabeza aparece un conde en los siglos IX-X. Recurriendo a un análisis multiescalar y comparativo se argumenta que la fuerte identidad de las sociedades locales, la existencia de un alto grado de compartimentación política y la dispersión funcional de los centros de autoridad permitió la construcción de formas de territorialización relacional. Esta nueva territorialización permitió que se ensanchasen los horizontes de las prácticas políticas a distintas escalas. El caso de estudio de Lantarón permite proponer un tipo ideal de estado relacional en el que los consensos y las redes políticas son más relevantes que las bases patrimoniales del poder. Este trabajo se centra en el caso de Lantarón, uno de los territorios de menores dimensiones a cuya cabeza aparece un conde en los siglos IX-X. Recurriendo a un análisis multiescalar y comparativo se argumenta que la fuerte identidad de las sociedades locales, la existencia de un alto grado de compartimentación política y la dispersión funcional de los centros de autoridad permitió la construcción de formas de territorialización relacional. Esta nueva territorialización permitió que se ensanchasen los horizontes de las prácticas políticas a distintas escalas. El caso de estudio de Lantarón permite proponer un tipo ideal de estado relacional en el que los consensos y las redes políticas son más relevantes que las bases patrimoniales del poder.

Political order in outer space has so far been perceived as an extension of the terrestrial political order. In contrast, I argue that the political order emerging in outer space defines international relations on Earth. Therefore, with a refreshed understanding of the political dynamics of outer space, we will be better equipped to grasp the contemporary world order. Moreover, deeper knowledge about the kind of order that is emerging in outer space opens up possibilities to influence its evolving direction, should we find this desirable. Consequently, the overarching research question of this thesis is how can we understand the kind of order that is emerging in outer space and the impact that this order has on the broader world order? Exploring this question, I visit everyday working environments and key sites for outer space ordering where I conduct multi-sited ethnography and elite interviews (2017-2020). This explorative inquiry shows that the kind of order emerging in outer space can best be conceptualized not as anarchical, nor as hierarchical but as heterarchical. I find that quantum-mind entangled professional orders are the principal units that define the outer space order's evolving direction. Using space as a crucial and illustrative example of the world order, I argue that these professional orders constitute the depoliticized fabric of the world setting its direction. I find that the prominent and defining professional orders are the scientific, commercial and military orders, which trajectories extend well into the future. Moreover, I theorize that the emerging outer space order foreshadows a transition into hypermodernity as the constellations of satellites for fast-speed-Internet that are being launched in outer space are creating a gigantic 'transmission belt'. In addition, this inquiry reveals an imminent cosmological shift, as the world is yet again extended. This time further and more permanently into outer space with consequences for our sense of responsibility for Earth. I conclude that the increasingly heterarchical world, the 'emboosted transmission belt' and prevailing visions of the extended world call for a different 'way of being political' – for reflective political reason at the individual level including reconsiderations of professional identities.

Los Sistemas Sociales Humanos (SSH) son sistemas complejos, una de las mejores maneras de organizarlos es la auto-organización, la cual ha mostrado ser una óptima productora de orden en este tipo de sistemas, independientemente de si se trata de sistemas físicos, biológicos o sociales. Esta idea surge a partir de los desarrollos recientes en ciencias de la complejidad, los cuales han enseñado que la vida es claramente elsistema más complejo que hay, emerge de mecanismos auto-organizados, es decir, no emplea ningún tipo de control central o externo para organizarse y, aun así, es uno de los sistemas más ordenados que existen. Ello es razón suficiente para cuestionar el uso de mecanismos de control centralizados al intentar organizar sistemas tan complejos como los SSH. A partir de este cuestionamiento, este artículo presenta una crítica a las estructuras piramidales con jerarquías de control de los regímenes políticos desde las ciencias de la complejidad. El artículo sostiene que dado que los SSH son sistemascomplejos, la mejor manera de organizarlos es la auto-organización, en lugar de tratar de imponerles orden desde arriba o desde afuera por medio de regímenes políticos con estructuras de control jerárquicas piramidales, verticales y descendentes. El artículo tiene un valor exploratorio o propositivo de cara a la teoría política. ; Human Social Systems (HSS) are complex systems. One of the best ways to organize complex systems is by means of their self-organization, since the latter has proven to be an optimal producer of order in this type of systems, regardless of their nature: physical, biological or social. This concept emerged due to developments in the sciences of complexity, in which life has been understood as the most complex system that exists, and that does not require central or external control in order to produce organized patterns. Life's order stems from the self-organization of its internal and external dynamics and interactions. This fact serves to question the use of centralized control mechanisms when organizing human social systems, and underwrites a critique of pyramidal structures and control hierarchies in classical political regimes from the standpoint of the sciences of complexity. The paper argues that human social systems are complex systems; hence, the best way of organizing them is by letting them self-organize, instead of imposingin a top-down manner, or from the outside - control by means of political regimes with hierarchical, pyramidal, or vertical structures. The paper explores this idea with a focus on political theory. ; Os sistemas sociais humanos (SSH) são sistemas complexos. Uma das melhores maneiras de organizar os sistemas complexos é a auto-organização, a qual tem mostrado ser uma óptima produtora de ordem neste tipo de sistemas, independentemente de se trata-se de sistemas físicos, biológicos ou sociais. Esta ideia surge a partir dos desenvolvimentos recentes em ciências da complexidade, os quais tem ensinado que a vida é claramente o sistema mais complexo que há, que emerge de mecanismos auto-organizados; é dizer, não emprega nenhum controle central ou externo para se organizar e, ainda assim, é dos sistemas mais ordenados que existem. Isto é motivo suficiente para questionar o uso de mecanismos de controle centralizados ao intentar organizar sistemas tão complexos como os SSH. A partir deste questionamento, este artigo apresenta uma crítica às estruturas piramidais com hierarquias de controle dos regimes políticos desde as ciências da complexidade. O artigo sustenta que dado que os SSH são sistemas complexos, a melhor maneira de organizá-las é deixando que se auto-organizem, em lugar de tratar de impor-lhes ordem desde o topo ou desde fora através de regimes políticas com estruturas de controle hierárquicas piramidais, verticais e descendentes. O artigo tem um valor exploratório ou propositivo de cara à teoria política.

Los Sistemas Sociales Humanos (SSH) son sistemas complejos, una de las mejores maneras de organizarlos es la auto-organización, la cual ha mostrado ser una óptima productora de orden en este tipo de sistemas, independientemente de si se trata de sistemas físicos, biológicos o sociales. Esta idea surge a partir de los desarrollos recientes en ciencias de la complejidad, los cuales han enseñado que la vida es claramente elsistema más complejo que hay, emerge de mecanismos auto-organizados, es decir, no emplea ningún tipo de control central o externo para organizarse y, aun así, es uno de los sistemas más ordenados que existen. Ello es razón suficiente para cuestionar el uso de mecanismos de control centralizados al intentar organizar sistemas tan complejos como los SSH. A partir de este cuestionamiento, este artículo presenta una crítica a las estructuras piramidales con jerarquías de control de los regímenes políticos desde las ciencias de la complejidad. El artículo sostiene que dado que los SSH son sistemascomplejos, la mejor manera de organizarlos es la auto-organización, en lugar de tratar de imponerles orden desde arriba o desde afuera por medio de regímenes políticos con estructuras de control jerárquicas piramidales, verticales y descendentes. El artículo tiene un valor exploratorio o propositivo de cara a la teoría política. ; Os sistemas sociais humanos (SSH) são sistemas complexos. Uma das melhores maneiras de organizar os sistemas complexos é a auto-organização, a qual tem mostrado ser uma óptima produtora de ordem neste tipo de sistemas, independentemente de se trata-se de sistemas físicos, biológicos ou sociais. Esta ideia surge a partir dos desenvolvimentos recentes em ciências da complexidade, os quais tem ensinado que a vida é claramente o sistema mais complexo que há, que emerge de mecanismos auto-organizados; é dizer, não emprega nenhum controle central ou externo para se organizar e, ainda assim, é dos sistemas mais ordenados que existem. Isto é motivo suficiente para questionar o uso de mecanismos de controle centralizados ao intentar organizar sistemas tão complexos como os SSH. A partir deste questionamento, este artigo apresenta uma crítica às estruturas piramidais com hierarquias de controle dos regimes políticos desde as ciências da complexidade. O artigo sustenta que dado que os SSH são sistemas complexos, a melhor maneira de organizá-las é deixando que se auto-organizem, em lugar de tratar de impor-lhes ordem desde o topo ou desde fora através de regimes políticas com estruturas de controle hierárquicas piramidais, verticais e descendentes. O artigo tem um valor exploratório ou propositivo de cara à teoria política. ; Human Social Systems (HSS) are complex systems. One of the best ways to organize complex systems is by means of their self-organization, since the latter has proven to be an optimal producer of order in this type of systems, regardless of their nature: physical, biological or social. This concept emerged due to developments in the sciences of complexity, in which life has been understood as the most complex system that exists, and that does not require central or external control in order to produce organized patterns. Life's order stems from the self-organization of its internal and external dynamics and interactions. This fact serves to question the use of centralized control mechanisms when organizing human social systems, and underwrites a critique of pyramidal structures and control hierarchies in classical political regimes from the standpoint of the sciences of complexity. The paper argues that human social systems are complex systems; hence, the best way of organizing them is by letting them self-organize, instead of imposingin a top-down manner, or from the outside - control by means of political regimes with hierarchical, pyramidal, or vertical structures. The paper explores this idea with a focus on political theory.

This study focuses on the Korean MERS epidemic and analyzes how governance structures were set up to respond to it. Compared to other countries` responses, which were built on both hierarchical and network structures, the Korean MERS response structure evolved over time. In the first period hierarchy characterized the relationship between the central government and hospitals. In the second period, heterarchy replaced hierarchy, and in the last period heterarchy evolved into a network governance structure. Furthermore, it was found that leadership, communication, information sharing and use of information technology affected the formation of the response structures. I conclude by exploring limitations in my research and suggesting paths and perspectives for further research.

This book examines property rights, settlement structure and social organization in Norway's Østlandet in the Iron age (500 BC–AD 1050). Inspired by ethnographical and anthropological studies, a model of a stateless, agrarian and hierarchical society with socially based rights to land is presented. In this model, where there are no territorially embedded rights, society is better represented as a heterarchy or anarchy than as a hierarchy. Power in society was shared between the honoured warrior, the powerless leader and perhaps also the productive farmer. This model differs from that presented by standard Norwegian research, where the retrogressive method is combined with a belief in the stability and continuity of the farm. A critical study of Norwegian research history is therefore an essential part of this book.

This study has also been able to make use of new and extensive settlement evidence gained from machine-stripping of topsoil from large areas in the past thirty years; this has shed new light on the issues discussed in the book related to building practices and the settlement pattern.

The settlement pattern studies should take into account that the spatial distributions of population are partly the result of inequality in political relations, but also the product of negotiation and/or denial of space in a multiplicity of relationships that cross the hierarchical and static ordering of archaeological sites in a specif ic region. This article addresses this issue from the reconstruction of settlement patterns and a regional study of Late Classic period (600-900 AD) territorial processes in the Northwest Maya Lowlands, particularly the region of Salto de Agua, a area adjacent to the west side of the immediate hinterland and civic-ceremonial center of Palenque, the site that impacted on the Pre-Hispanic population distributions in the Sierra Norte de Chiapas in Mexico and that during the Classic period was as head of señorío of B'aakal. ; Los estudios de patrones de asentamiento deben tomar en cuenta que las distribuciones espaciales de población son parcialmente el resultado de la inequidad en las relaciones políticas, pero también producto de la negociación y/o negación del espacio, dentro de una multiplicidad de relaciones que traspasan el ordenamiento jerárquico y estático de sitios en una región específ ica. El presente artículo aborda esta problemática a partir de la reconstrucción de patrones de asentamiento y un estudio regio- nal de los procesos territoriales del período Clásico Tardío (600-900 d.C.) en las Tierras Bajas Mayas Noroccidentales, en particular la región de Salto de Agua, un área adyacente a la parte poniente del área de sustento inmediata y al núcleo cívico-ceremonial de Palenque, el sitio que más impactó sobre las distribuciones de población prehispánica en la Sierra Norte de Chiapas en México, y que durante período el Clásico fuera cabecera del señorío de B´aakal.

ABSTRACT Until recently, cultural evolution has commonly been regarded as a permanent teleological move to a greater level of hierarchy, crowned with state formation. However, recent research based upon the principle of heterarchy '. the relation of elements to one another when they are unranked or when they possess the potential for being ranked in a number of different ways' (Crumley 1995: 3) changes the usual picture dramatically. The opposite of heterarchy, then, would be a condition in a society in which relationships in most contexts are ordered mainly according to one principal hierarchical relationship. This organizational principle may be called 'homoarchy'. Homoarchy and heterarchy represent the most universal 'ideal' principles and basic trajectories of socio-cultural (including political) organization and its transformations. There are no universal evolutionary stages band, tribe, chiefdom, state or otherwise inasmuch as cultures so characterized could be heterarchical or homoarchical: they could be organized differently, while having an equal level of overall social complexity. However, alternativity exists not only between heterarchic and homoarchic cultures but also within each of the respective types. In particular, the present article attempts at demonstrating that the Benin Kingdom of the 13th 19th centuries, being an explicitly homoarchic culture not inferior to early states in the level of complexity, nevertheless was not a state as it lacked administrative specialization and pronounced priority of the supra-kin ties. The Benin form of socio-political organization can be called 'megacommunity', and its structure can be depicted as four concentric circles forming an upset cone: the extended family, community, chiefdom, and megacommunity (kingdom). Thus, the homoarchic megacommunity turns out an alternative to the homoarchic by definition (Claessen and Skalnik 1978: 640) early state.

The Caranqui cultural area, located in the Northern Highlands of Ecuador, comprises a homogeneous whole in terms of material culture, mainly characterized by monumental complexes formed by mounds (referred to as tolas in the local terminology), which tends to have the shape of a truncated pyramid, occasionally accompanied by huge access ramps. The material culture associated with these monuments, in particular ceramics, is also fairly homogeneous and has two type forms, a large amphora and an asymmetric tripod pot. This cultural complex is present from late pre-Inca times and is dated approximately between 1250 and 1525 A.D. There have been several attempts to understand the political organization of these societies through hierarchical models such as Central Place Theory, seeking a capital city that had exercised power and control over other sites. Ethno-historical sources do not support such a hypothesis, and rather, they seem to favor a series of related but independent chiefdoms or manors. In this article we propose a different view of Caranqui's political organization, through a heterarchy model, postulating that the sites with mounds were not political but rather religious power centers. We support this idea through a diachronic study combining archaeological and ethnohistorical sources. ; El área cultural caranqui, localizada en la Sierra Norte del Ecuador, comprende un conjunto homogéneo en términos de cultura material caracterizado principalmente por la presencia de complejos monumentales conformados por montículos artificiales, que en la terminología local se denominan tolas, y que tienen la forma de pirámides truncadas, ocasionalmente acompañadas de enormes rampas de acceso. La cultura material mueble asociada a estos monumentos, en particular la cerámica, es también bastante homogénea y cuenta con dos formas tipo, un ánfora grande y una olla asimétrica trípode. Este conjunto cultural data de la época preincaica tardía, y está fechado aproximadamente entre 1250 y 1525 d.C. Se ha tratado de explicar la organización política de estas sociedades desde modelos jerárquicos como el de la Teoría del Lugar Central, buscando una capital que hubiera ejercido poder y control sobre los otros sitios. Las fuentes etnohistóricas no sustentan una hipótesis en ese sentido, y hablan más bien a favor de señoríos relacionados pero autónomos. En este artículo proponemos una visión distinta de la organización política caranqui, desde el modelo de heterarquía, postulando que los sitios con montículos no fueron centros de poder político sino religioso. Sustentamos esta idea a través de un estudio diacrónico que combina las fuentes arqueológicas y las etnohistóricas.

This article analyses Michael Burawoy's vision of public sociology in light of five distinct 'epistemic strategies', each of which generates substantially different expectations regarding the challenges and opportunities facing public sociologists. The five epistemic strategies range along a spectrum from methodological individualism at one end to holism at the other. Between these two poles, considerations of the social relativity of scientific knowledge arise. Constructionist theories highlight the performative dilemma entailed when science reveals itself to be one narrative among others. Hierarchical theories such as Marxism suggest that public sociology is torn by the irreconcilable contradiction between hegemony and counter-hegemony. Heterarchical theories address both of these two problems together. Heterarchy suggests that science's claim to universality may interfere with public sociology's social-transformative aspirations. However, the dynamic complexity of 'public' social struggles generates opportunities to rethink the place of difference in the production of scientific knowledge.

Since the beginning of the eighties Treaties were graded as «Constitutional Charter», the process of European integration has increased rapidly, and the emergence of European Constitutionalism has only demonstrated the complex relationship between the Union and its Member States, between Union law and the law of its Member States. Both the State Theory and the Theory of the Constitution are to be only partially effective in defining an appropriate conceptual model to the new phenomenon of European integration. It speaks well of a new concept, that of «European constitutional League», which provides a common terminological and introduced into the Europe Union's vision of constitutional law at different levels. It is increasingly difficult to differentiate when we are dealing with national issues and when community issues. Therefore, if we want to legitimize the role of the European Union, we will have to try to include the constitutional principles governing the Member States in this new level. Hence the ambitious concept of «European constitutional League». But nevertheless, the many theoretical problems with this model reflect the difficulty of speaking of a multilevel system in which there is no coexistence between different hierarchical levels, because ultimately it does show a incorrect connection between them. ; Desde que a partir de los años ochenta se calificara a los Tratados como «Carta constitucional», el proceso de integración europea se ha intensificado a pasos agigantados, y la aparición del Constitucionalismo europeo no ha hecho sino evidenciar la compleja relación existente ente la Unión y sus Estados miembros, entre el Derecho de la Unión y el Derecho de sus Estados miembros. Tanto la Teoría del Estado como la Teoría de la Constitución resultan ser sólo parcialmente eficaces para definir un modelo conceptual adecuado al nuevo fenómeno de integración europea. Se habla así de un nuevo concepto, el de «Liga constitucional europea», que terminológicamente proporciona un denominador común y que introduce en la Unión Europe la visión de un Derecho constitucional a diferentes niveles. Cada vez es más difícil diferenciar cuándo estamos ante asuntos nacionales y cuándo ante asuntos comunitarios. Por este motivo, si queremos legitimar la función de la Unión Europea habrá que intentar incluir los principios constitucionales que rigen en los Estados miembros en este nuevo nivel. De ahí el ambicioso concepto de «Liga constitucional europea». Pero no obstante, los numerosos problemas teóricos que presenta este modelo reflejan la dificultad de hablar de un sistema multinivel en el que exista una convivencia no jerárquica entre los distintos niveles, pues en último término lo que refleja es una conexión incorrecta entre ellos.Since the beginning of the eighties Treaties were graded as «Constitutional Charter», the process of European integration has increased rapidly, and the emergence of European Constitutionalism has only demonstrated the complex relationship between the Union and its Member States, between Union law and the law of its Member States. Both the State Theory and the Theory of the Constitution are to be only partially effective in defining an appropriate conceptual model to the new phenomenon of European integration. It speaks well of a new concept, that of «European constitutional League», which provides a common terminological and introduced into the Europe Union's vision of constitutional law at different levels. It is increasingly difficult to differentiate when we are dealing with national issues and when community issues. Therefore, if we want to legitimize the role of the European Union, we will have to try to include the constitutional principles governing the Member States in this new level. Hence the ambitious concept of «European constitutional League». But nevertheless, the many theoretical problems with this model reflect the difficulty of speaking of a multilevel system in which there is no coexistence between different hierarchical levels, because ultimately it does show a incorrect connection between them.

Structured social group (SSG) is highlighted as a particularobject of investigation due to the fact that they are themost vulnerable targets for the realization of negativeinformation-psychological impact. The SSG operates as apowerful amplifier for information-psychological impact,which took place on its senior management. A modeltakes into account the hierarchical structure for SSG'sactivity. In such SSG people are divided into twocategories: coordinators (who can create new informationfor SSG or adequately restore it) and replicator (whichcan pass the information, at best, without distortion). Thisleads to the fact that the quantity of people in each higherhierarchical level is about 6% from the quantity of peoplein the lower level. Methods for SSG protection fromnegative information-psychological impact, which takeinto account their specific features, are developed. Amongthese are: the economic activities of organizations,activities of public institutions, the heterarchy of SSGstructure, the time frame of human functioning as acoordinator in SSG, limiting for democracy etc. ; Структурированные социальные группы (ССГ) выделены в качестве специфического объекта исследова-ния вследствие того, что именно они являются важной мишенью для осуществления негативного ин-формационно-психологического влияния. При этомССГ функционирует как мощный усилитель для тогоинформационно-психологического воздействия, ко-торые осуществлялось на ее высшее руководство.Построена модель для осуществления деятельностиССГ с учетом ее иерархической структуры. Учтено,что в таких ССГ люди делятся на две категории: коор-динаторы (которые могут синтезировать новую дляССГ информацию или же адекватно восстанавливатьее) и тиражировщики (которые могут, в лучшем слу-чае, передать информацию далее без искажений). Врезультат количество людей на более высоком иерар-хическом уровне составляет порядка 6% от их коли-чества на более низком уровне. Разработаны методызащиты ССГ от негативного информационно-психологического влияния. Среди них такие: ...