Classical Palmyra was a tribal community, but due to the lack of sources, an understanding of the nature of Palmyrene tribal structure is not possible.
Thirty clans have been documented; five of which were identified as tribes (Phylai Φυλαί; pl.
of Phyle Φυλή) comprising several sub-clans.
By the time of Nero Palmyra had four tribes, each residing in an area of the city bearing its name.
Three of the tribes were the Komare, Mattabol and Ma'zin; the fourth tribe is uncertain, but was probably the Mita.
In time, the four tribes became highly civic and tribal lines blurred; by the second century clan identity lost its importance, and it disappeared during the third century.
Even the four tribes ceased to be important by the third century as only one inscription mentions a tribe after the year 212; instead, aristocrats played the decisive role in the city's social organization.
Women seem to have been active in Palmyra's social and public life.
They commissioned inscriptions, buildings or tombs, and in certain cases, held administrative offices.
Offerings to gods in the names of women are documented.

The last Palmyrene inscription of 279/280 refers to the honouring of a citizen by the Maththabolians, which indicates that the tribal system still carried weight after the fall of Zenobia.
A noticeable change is the lack of development of aristocratic residences, and no important public buildings were constructed by locals, indicating that the elite diminished following the campaign of Aurelian.
The social change and the reduction of the aristocratic elite is hard to explain.
It could be a result of the aristocracy suffering many casualties in the war against Rome, or fleeing to the countryside.
According to the historians Emanuele Intagliata, the change can be ascribed to the Roman reorganization following Zenobia's fall, as Palmyra ceased to be a rich caravan city and became a frontier fortress, leading the inhabitants to focus on satisfying the needs of a garrison instead of providing the empire with luxurious oriental items.
Such a change in functions would have made the city less attractive for an aristocratic elite.
Palmyra benefited from the Umayyad rule since its role as a frontier city ended and the East-West trade route was restored, leading to the re-emergence of a merchant class.
Palmyra's loyalty to the Umayyads led to an aggressive military retaliation from their successors, the Abbassids, and the city diminished in size, losing its merchant class.
Following its destruction by Timur, Palmyra maintained the life of a small settlement until its relocation in 1932.
Classical Palmyra was a tribal community, but due to the lack of sources, an understanding of the nature of Palmyrene tribal structure is not possible. Thirty clans have been documented; five of which were identified as tribes (Phylai Φυλαί; pl. of Phyle Φυλή) comprising several sub-clans. By the time of Nero Palmyra had four tribes, each residing in an area of the city bearing its name. Three of the tribes were the Komare, Mattabol and Ma'zin; the fourth tribe is uncertain, but was probably the Mita. In time, the four tribes became highly civic and tribal lines blurred; by the second century clan identity lost its importance, and it disappeared during the third century. Even the four tribes ceased to be important by the third century as only one inscription mentions a tribe after the year 212; instead, aristocrats played the decisive role in the city's social organization. Women seem to have been active in Palmyra's social and public life. They commissioned inscriptions, buildings or tombs, and in certain cases, held administrative offices. Offerings to gods in the names of women are documented.
The last Palmyrene inscription of 279/280 refers to the honouring of a citizen by the Maththabolians, which indicates that the tribal system still carried weight after the fall of Zenobia. A noticeable change is the lack of development of aristocratic residences, and no important public buildings were constructed by locals, indicating that the elite diminished following the campaign of Aurelian. The social change and the reduction of the aristocratic elite is hard to explain. It could be a result of the aristocracy suffering many casualties in the war against Rome, or fleeing to the countryside. According to the historians Emanuele Intagliata, the change can be ascribed to the Roman reorganization following Zenobia's fall, as Palmyra ceased to be a rich caravan city and became a frontier fortress, leading the inhabitants to focus on satisfying the needs of a garrison instead of providing the empire with luxurious oriental items. Such a change in functions would have made the city less attractive for an aristocratic elite. Palmyra benefited from the Umayyad rule since its role as a frontier city ended and the East-West trade route was restored, leading to the re-emergence of a merchant class. Palmyra's loyalty to the Umayyads led to an aggressive military retaliation from their successors, the Abbassids, and the city diminished in size, losing its merchant class. Following its destruction by Timur, Palmyra maintained the life of a small settlement until its relocation in 1932.
Palmyra