Social historians and historians of jurisprudence have, on occasion, drawn attention to the close resemblances between Anglo-Saxon society at the time when it is said to have been dominated by kinship relationships and the large kingdom states in Africa. The truth of the matter is not so easily come by, however, since the content of pre-medieval social relationships linking persons of different station was inadequately recorded by early writers. The faulty character of early records becomes evident in the area of jurisprudence, especially whenever attempts are made to assess the extent to which kinbased social relationships invaded the legal principles in Anglo-Saxon society in matters of dispute and settlement. This notwithstanding, it seems an instructive sociological task to reconsider comparatively with African state societies, wherever possible, certain of those legal ideas that allegedly formed the basis for judicial decision-making in early English courts before the introduction of trial by jury. The interpretation of these early ideas, set against the background of rights, duties, and obligations that obtained between persons of set status, should define more clearly than before whatever general agreement exists between these legal principles and those that obtain in African state societies. A more ambitious treatment of the subject than is attempted in this essay would extend beyond Anglo-Saxon society. But, because of the faulty character of early records, I limit this literary exercise to the period before William the Conqueror crossed the Channel.

In every stratified society there are groups of people, mainly from the lower strata, who aspire to rise in social status. In order to realize their aspirations they adopt various means: some change their occupation for one carrying more prestige; some give their children a good education and try to place them in positions superior to their own; some emulate the behaviour and style of life of those whose higher status they aspire to reach; some try to gain admittance to the social circles mostly frequented by high-status people; some change their residence and some surround themselves with status symbols hoping that they will influence the ‘raters’ appraising them. For this process which goes on among various low-caste groups in India, Srinivas, an Indian sociologist, coined a separate term, ‘sanskritization’. With the opening of the doors by many under-developed societies for the introduction of modern technology and industrialization, status seeking has become one of the preoccupations of millions of people.

Class structure in Italian society presents some important specific characteristics in relation to other ‘advanced’ capitalist countries. I shall deal with these specific characteristics especially, using statistical and descriptive material which has only recently become available, following on new research and studies in this field. Then, as a conclusion to this paper, I shall deal with the problem of interpreting these specific characteristics, asking particularly whether they should be put down to the ‘backwardness’ (or insufficient development) of Italian capitalism, or, whether we should rather see them as the expression of the Italian economy's ‘peripheral’ position inside the Western capitalist system.

The power and prestige of the Persian religious élite, the ‘ulamā’, during the Qājār period (1795–1926), and their political importance, in contrast to the relative political feebleness of the ‘ulamā’ of Sunni Islam in modern times, has attracted the attention of students of Persian history and politics.