ABSTRACT
I n the absence o f appropr ia te conceptua l and analy t ic f rameworks , the theore t ica l s tudy o f p o l i t i c a l change remains undeveloped despite cur ren t interests i n the processes and cond i t ions o f ' p o l i t i c a l deve lopment ' and ' m o d e r n i z a t i o n ' . T o excuse this def ic iency, we cannot plead lack o f data. Indeed, the range, v o l u m e and var ie ty o f h i s tor ica l records o f p o l i t i c a l change present social science w i t h materials o f unequal led richness and impor t ance . Ne i the r is i t t rue t o say tha t these questions have h i t h e r t o escaped a t t e n t i o n . F r o m Plato and A r i s t o t l e to the present, we can trace a l o n g l ine o f i l lus t r ious th inkers whose preoccupat ions w i t h the cond i t ions and forms o f c o n t i n u i t y and change i n p o l i t i c a l regimes have inspired the i r w o r k i n g lives. Social an th ropo logy , sociology, h i s t o ry and p o l i t i c a l science al l derive f r o m these analyt ic interests; b u t to date historians have p r o b a b l y done mos t to advance our unders tanding b y furn ish ing those descriptive accounts o f p o l i t i c a l un i t s and sequences w h i c h are indispensable for any comprehensive, theore t ica l s tudy o f p o l i t i c a l change.
