The previously mentioned zadrugas combined to form clans, called rodu. A clan was the usual unit which controlled certain forests or pastures. Their members pledged blood vengeance in defense of one another. Clans were combined into tribes, called pleme, the territory of whom was called a zupa. The leader of a zupa was a zupan or starsina (depending on the location). The leaders actually had little personal power, they were rather dependent on their council (the druzina) as was typical of the Indo-europeans. The society contains kings (knez, knjaz, or vladika), nobles, the free-born, freedmen, and slaves (xolpu or orbu). Polabian and Pomeranian Slavs had a class of military aristocracy called vitiezi, who were always seen on horseback. The status of being on horseback was an admiration picked up during Scythian times. Property distinctions carried the terms bogatu (wealthy), ubogu (poor), and nebogu (unfortunate). When a chieftain showed enough strength and efficiency to subdue a number of other tribes, his territory became a state called a zemlja (land) and he became a 'grand duke'. Slaves were fairly well treated and considered as part of the family. Unfortunately, as is the wife, slaves were sometimes cremated with the deceased father of the family.

The blood vengeance mentioned in the 3rd sentence puzzles me. Elsewhere in the book, she mentioned blood vengeance as a traditional right of a man after the death of his son, his brother's son, or his sister's son. These rights sound 'fixed' in tradition and don't extend to other family members. Why then is the same term used with reference to an alliance agreement with other clan members? Perhaps with reference to the family, it is understood rather than an agreement. I'm also puzzled by the status of 'grand duke'. It sounds like a grand duke might be superior to a king. If anyone understands these last 2 'puzzlements' better than I, please jump in.