Polity Degree Of Centralization List
A viewset for viewing and editing Polity Degrees of Centralization.
GET /api/general/polity-degree-of-centralizations/?format=api&page=8
{ "count": 499, "next": "https://seshat-db.com/api/general/polity-degree-of-centralizations/?format=api&page=9", "previous": "https://seshat-db.com/api/general/polity-degree-of-centralizations/?format=api&page=7", "results": [ { "id": 351, "polity": { "id": 521, "name": "eg_kushite", "long_name": "Egypt - Kushite Period", "start_year": -747, "end_year": -656 }, "year_from": null, "year_to": null, "tag": "TRS", "is_disputed": false, "is_uncertain": false, "name": "Polity_degree_of_centralization", "degree_of_centralization": "confederated state", "comment": null, "description": " §REF§(Taylor 2000, 353-354)§REF§<br>\"The Double Kingdom may therefore be credited with some form of 'nominal unity' across a considerable territory.\"§REF§(Pope 2014, 280) Pope, Jeremy. 2014. The Double Kingdom Under Taharqo. BRILL. Leiden.§REF§" }, { "id": 352, "polity": { "id": 131, "name": "sy_umayyad_cal", "long_name": "Umayyad Caliphate", "start_year": 661, "end_year": 750 }, "year_from": null, "year_to": null, "tag": "TRS", "is_disputed": false, "is_uncertain": false, "name": "Polity_degree_of_centralization", "degree_of_centralization": "unitary state", "comment": null, "description": " unitary state: 680 CE §REF§(Lapidus 2002, 45-56)§REF§" }, { "id": 353, "polity": { "id": 45, "name": "th_rattanakosin", "long_name": "Rattanakosin", "start_year": 1782, "end_year": 1873 }, "year_from": null, "year_to": null, "tag": "TRS", "is_disputed": false, "is_uncertain": false, "name": "Polity_degree_of_centralization", "degree_of_centralization": "confederated state", "comment": null, "description": " \"Working from the outer layers inward, we encounter first a circle of semi-independent rulers who did little more than pay tribute to Bangkok on a regular basis and who often paid tribute to other states as well. [...] A second tier of states, or perhaps more properly principalities, was relatively more integrated into the Siamese system. In addition to paying tribute, they often were required to provide Siam with manpower to warfare or public works, paid relatively larger amounts in tribute, sometimes were married into the Siamese royal family, and occasionally suffered Siamese interference in their internal affairs. [...] The next layer consisted of large regional centers around Siam's periphery, ruled by chaophraya and considered to be major, but quasi-independent, provinces. [...]\" A fourth tier were small polities with hereditary rulers, who paid 'nominal' and provided manpower when needed. \"Finally, the inner core of the kingdom consisted of provinces properly speaking, ruled by officials appointed from the capital [...] and subjected to the regulation of the central government through the chief ministries of state.\"§REF§(Wyatt 1984, pp. 159-160)§REF§" }, { "id": 354, "polity": { "id": 462, "name": "tj_sarasm", "long_name": "Sarazm", "start_year": -3500, "end_year": -2000 }, "year_from": null, "year_to": null, "tag": "TRS", "is_disputed": false, "is_uncertain": false, "name": "Polity_degree_of_centralization", "degree_of_centralization": "quasi-polity", "comment": null, "description": null }, { "id": 355, "polity": { "id": 221, "name": "tn_fatimid_cal", "long_name": "Fatimid Caliphate", "start_year": 909, "end_year": 1171 }, "year_from": null, "year_to": null, "tag": "TRS", "is_disputed": false, "is_uncertain": false, "name": "Polity_degree_of_centralization", "degree_of_centralization": "unitary state", "comment": null, "description": "\"The coming of Badr al-Jamali in 466/1074 altered permanently the structure of the Fatimid state.\"§REF§(Walker 2006, 88) Walker, Paul E. The Relationship Between Chief Qadi and Chief Da'i Under The Fatimids. Kramer, Gudrun. Schmidtke, Sabine. eds. 2006. Speaking for Islam: Religious Authorities in Muslim Societies. BRILL.§REF§" }, { "id": 356, "polity": { "id": 160, "name": "tr_konya_eba", "long_name": "Konya Plain - Early Bronze Age", "start_year": -3000, "end_year": -2000 }, "year_from": null, "year_to": null, "tag": "TRS", "is_disputed": false, "is_uncertain": false, "name": "Polity_degree_of_centralization", "degree_of_centralization": "quasi-polity", "comment": null, "description": null }, { "id": 357, "polity": { "id": 161, "name": "tr_central_anatolia_mba", "long_name": "Middle Bronze Age in Central Anatolia", "start_year": -2000, "end_year": -1700 }, "year_from": null, "year_to": null, "tag": "TRS", "is_disputed": false, "is_uncertain": false, "name": "Polity_degree_of_centralization", "degree_of_centralization": "loose", "comment": null, "description": null }, { "id": 358, "polity": { "id": 161, "name": "tr_central_anatolia_mba", "long_name": "Middle Bronze Age in Central Anatolia", "start_year": -2000, "end_year": -1700 }, "year_from": null, "year_to": null, "tag": "TRS", "is_disputed": false, "is_uncertain": false, "name": "Polity_degree_of_centralization", "degree_of_centralization": "quasi-polity", "comment": null, "description": null }, { "id": 359, "polity": { "id": 73, "name": "tr_byzantine_emp_1", "long_name": "Byzantine Empire I", "start_year": 632, "end_year": 866 }, "year_from": null, "year_to": null, "tag": "TRS", "is_disputed": false, "is_uncertain": false, "name": "Polity_degree_of_centralization", "degree_of_centralization": "unitary state", "comment": null, "description": null }, { "id": 360, "polity": { "id": 75, "name": "tr_byzantine_emp_2", "long_name": "Byzantine Empire II", "start_year": 867, "end_year": 1072 }, "year_from": null, "year_to": null, "tag": "TRS", "is_disputed": false, "is_uncertain": false, "name": "Polity_degree_of_centralization", "degree_of_centralization": "unitary state", "comment": null, "description": "<br>" }, { "id": 361, "polity": { "id": 76, "name": "tr_byzantine_emp_3", "long_name": "Byzantine Empire III", "start_year": 1073, "end_year": 1204 }, "year_from": null, "year_to": null, "tag": "TRS", "is_disputed": false, "is_uncertain": false, "name": "Polity_degree_of_centralization", "degree_of_centralization": "unitary state", "comment": null, "description": null }, { "id": 362, "polity": { "id": 170, "name": "tr_cappadocia_2", "long_name": "Late Cappadocia", "start_year": -330, "end_year": 16 }, "year_from": null, "year_to": null, "tag": "TRS", "is_disputed": false, "is_uncertain": false, "name": "Polity_degree_of_centralization", "degree_of_centralization": "nominal", "comment": null, "description": " 380-331 BCE: nominal; {331 BCE; 301 BCE}-96 BCE: unitary state; 99 BCE - 17 CE: loose <i>dates are not machine readable yet - ET</i><br>The Cappadocian rulers paid nominal allegiance to the Achaemenid Empire before it collapsed in 331 BCE §REF§Ansen, E. M. (1988) Antigonus, the Satrap of Phrygia. Historia: Zeitschrift für Alte Geschichte, Bd. 37, H. 4 (4th Qtr.), pp. 471-477, p472§REF§. After Alexander’s conquest of Asia Minor, Ariarathes I established himself as the first king of Cappadocia (a region largely left alone by Alexander) and ruled from 331 - 322 BCE. There was, however, some disagreement with Rome after Ariarathes I and the dynasty only continued when his son, Ariarathes II, regained the throne from the Roman Eumenes in 301 BCE. The Ariarathid dynasty then ruled until the 90s BCE, and ruled as the head of all state and religious affairs.<br>The last Ariarathes (IX Eusebes) was the son of the Pontic king Mithridates VI Eupator, who was ousted by the Roman Senate and eventually replaced by the elected Ariobarzanes I §REF§Sherwin-White, A. N. (1984) Roman Foreign Policy in the Near East, 168 BC to AD 1. London: Duckworth, p71-71; 106-107§REF§§REF§Rubinsohn, W. Z. (1993) Mithradates VI Eupator Dionysos and Rome's conquest of the Hellenistic East. Mediterranean Historical Review, 8(1), pp. 5-54. p18-19§REF§. Ariobarzanes I, II, III and Ariarathes X then ruled Cappadocia from 95 - 36 BCE and maintained friendship with Rome during that time, leading up to Cappadocia becoming a province of the Roman Empire in AD 17." }, { "id": 363, "polity": { "id": 170, "name": "tr_cappadocia_2", "long_name": "Late Cappadocia", "start_year": -330, "end_year": 16 }, "year_from": null, "year_to": null, "tag": "TRS", "is_disputed": false, "is_uncertain": false, "name": "Polity_degree_of_centralization", "degree_of_centralization": "unitary state", "comment": null, "description": " 380-331 BCE: nominal; {331 BCE; 301 BCE}-96 BCE: unitary state; 99 BCE - 17 CE: loose <i>dates are not machine readable yet - ET</i><br>The Cappadocian rulers paid nominal allegiance to the Achaemenid Empire before it collapsed in 331 BCE §REF§Ansen, E. M. (1988) Antigonus, the Satrap of Phrygia. Historia: Zeitschrift für Alte Geschichte, Bd. 37, H. 4 (4th Qtr.), pp. 471-477, p472§REF§. After Alexander’s conquest of Asia Minor, Ariarathes I established himself as the first king of Cappadocia (a region largely left alone by Alexander) and ruled from 331 - 322 BCE. There was, however, some disagreement with Rome after Ariarathes I and the dynasty only continued when his son, Ariarathes II, regained the throne from the Roman Eumenes in 301 BCE. The Ariarathid dynasty then ruled until the 90s BCE, and ruled as the head of all state and religious affairs.<br>The last Ariarathes (IX Eusebes) was the son of the Pontic king Mithridates VI Eupator, who was ousted by the Roman Senate and eventually replaced by the elected Ariobarzanes I §REF§Sherwin-White, A. N. (1984) Roman Foreign Policy in the Near East, 168 BC to AD 1. London: Duckworth, p71-71; 106-107§REF§§REF§Rubinsohn, W. Z. (1993) Mithradates VI Eupator Dionysos and Rome's conquest of the Hellenistic East. Mediterranean Historical Review, 8(1), pp. 5-54. p18-19§REF§. Ariobarzanes I, II, III and Ariarathes X then ruled Cappadocia from 95 - 36 BCE and maintained friendship with Rome during that time, leading up to Cappadocia becoming a province of the Roman Empire in AD 17." }, { "id": 364, "polity": { "id": 170, "name": "tr_cappadocia_2", "long_name": "Late Cappadocia", "start_year": -330, "end_year": 16 }, "year_from": null, "year_to": null, "tag": "TRS", "is_disputed": false, "is_uncertain": false, "name": "Polity_degree_of_centralization", "degree_of_centralization": "loose", "comment": null, "description": " 380-331 BCE: nominal; {331 BCE; 301 BCE}-96 BCE: unitary state; 99 BCE - 17 CE: loose <i>dates are not machine readable yet - ET</i><br>The Cappadocian rulers paid nominal allegiance to the Achaemenid Empire before it collapsed in 331 BCE §REF§Ansen, E. M. (1988) Antigonus, the Satrap of Phrygia. Historia: Zeitschrift für Alte Geschichte, Bd. 37, H. 4 (4th Qtr.), pp. 471-477, p472§REF§. After Alexander’s conquest of Asia Minor, Ariarathes I established himself as the first king of Cappadocia (a region largely left alone by Alexander) and ruled from 331 - 322 BCE. There was, however, some disagreement with Rome after Ariarathes I and the dynasty only continued when his son, Ariarathes II, regained the throne from the Roman Eumenes in 301 BCE. The Ariarathid dynasty then ruled until the 90s BCE, and ruled as the head of all state and religious affairs.<br>The last Ariarathes (IX Eusebes) was the son of the Pontic king Mithridates VI Eupator, who was ousted by the Roman Senate and eventually replaced by the elected Ariobarzanes I §REF§Sherwin-White, A. N. (1984) Roman Foreign Policy in the Near East, 168 BC to AD 1. London: Duckworth, p71-71; 106-107§REF§§REF§Rubinsohn, W. Z. (1993) Mithradates VI Eupator Dionysos and Rome's conquest of the Hellenistic East. Mediterranean Historical Review, 8(1), pp. 5-54. p18-19§REF§. Ariobarzanes I, II, III and Ariarathes X then ruled Cappadocia from 95 - 36 BCE and maintained friendship with Rome during that time, leading up to Cappadocia becoming a province of the Roman Empire in AD 17." }, { "id": 365, "polity": { "id": 158, "name": "tr_konya_eca", "long_name": "Konya Plain - Early Chalcolithic", "start_year": -6000, "end_year": -5500 }, "year_from": null, "year_to": null, "tag": "TRS", "is_disputed": false, "is_uncertain": false, "name": "Polity_degree_of_centralization", "degree_of_centralization": "quasi-polity", "comment": null, "description": null }, { "id": 366, "polity": { "id": 159, "name": "tr_konya_lca", "long_name": "Konya Plain - Late Chalcolithic", "start_year": -5500, "end_year": -3000 }, "year_from": null, "year_to": null, "tag": "TRS", "is_disputed": false, "is_uncertain": false, "name": "Polity_degree_of_centralization", "degree_of_centralization": "quasi-polity", "comment": null, "description": null }, { "id": 367, "polity": { "id": 72, "name": "tr_east_roman_emp", "long_name": "East Roman Empire", "start_year": 395, "end_year": 631 }, "year_from": null, "year_to": null, "tag": "TRS", "is_disputed": false, "is_uncertain": false, "name": "Polity_degree_of_centralization", "degree_of_centralization": "unitary state", "comment": null, "description": null }, { "id": 368, "polity": { "id": 164, "name": "tr_hatti_new_k", "long_name": "Hatti - New Kingdom", "start_year": -1400, "end_year": -1180 }, "year_from": null, "year_to": null, "tag": "TRS", "is_disputed": false, "is_uncertain": false, "name": "Polity_degree_of_centralization", "degree_of_centralization": "unitary state", "comment": null, "description": null }, { "id": 369, "polity": { "id": 162, "name": "tr_hatti_old_k", "long_name": "Hatti - Old Kingdom", "start_year": -1650, "end_year": -1500 }, "year_from": null, "year_to": null, "tag": "TRS", "is_disputed": false, "is_uncertain": false, "name": "Polity_degree_of_centralization", "degree_of_centralization": "unitary state", "comment": null, "description": null }, { "id": 370, "polity": { "id": 168, "name": "tr_lydia_k", "long_name": "Kingdom of Lydia", "start_year": -670, "end_year": -546 }, "year_from": null, "year_to": null, "tag": "TRS", "is_disputed": false, "is_uncertain": false, "name": "Polity_degree_of_centralization", "degree_of_centralization": "confederated state", "comment": null, "description": " The Kingdom of Lydia had mixed levels of centralization. In some areas control was strongly in the hands of the kings, for example, Alyattes appointed his son Croesus as governor of Adramyttetion, northwest of Lydia, when Cimmerians were causing trouble there. However, in the form of an Empire, much of Lydia's control was carried out throught the enforcement of annnual tribute. §REF§Roosevelt, C.H. 2012. Iron Age Western Anatolia. In Potts, D.T. (ed.) A Companion to the Archaeology of the Near East. London: Blackwell. p. 897-913§REF§" }, { "id": 371, "polity": { "id": 169, "name": "tr_lysimachus_k", "long_name": "Lysimachus Kingdom", "start_year": -323, "end_year": -281 }, "year_from": null, "year_to": null, "tag": "TRS", "is_disputed": false, "is_uncertain": false, "name": "Polity_degree_of_centralization", "degree_of_centralization": "loose", "comment": null, "description": " It is unclear how much influence Lysimachus had on all parts of Thrace, particularly as the role of the Thracian ruler Seuthes is unclear. However: “Some poleis were accorded internal autonomy and the right to form alliances, but under the supervision of a strategos of the King as attested by the Ionian League. Similar organizations may to some extent even have the freedom to follow a foreign policy of their own.”§REF§Dimitrov, K. (2011) Economic, Social and Political Structures on the Territory of the Odrysian Kingdom in Thrace (5th - first half of the 3rd century BC). ORPHEUS. Journal of IndoEuropean and Thracian Studies. 18, p. 4-24. p15§REF§" }, { "id": 372, "polity": { "id": 156, "name": "tr_konya_mnl", "long_name": "Konya Plain - Ceramic Neolithic", "start_year": -7000, "end_year": -6600 }, "year_from": null, "year_to": null, "tag": "TRS", "is_disputed": false, "is_uncertain": false, "name": "Polity_degree_of_centralization", "degree_of_centralization": "unknown", "comment": null, "description": null }, { "id": 373, "polity": { "id": 155, "name": "tr_konya_enl", "long_name": "Konya Plain - Early Neolithic", "start_year": -9600, "end_year": -7000 }, "year_from": null, "year_to": null, "tag": "TRS", "is_disputed": false, "is_uncertain": false, "name": "Polity_degree_of_centralization", "degree_of_centralization": "unknown", "comment": null, "description": null }, { "id": 374, "polity": { "id": 165, "name": "tr_neo_hittite_k", "long_name": "Neo-Hittite Kingdoms", "start_year": -1180, "end_year": -900 }, "year_from": null, "year_to": null, "tag": "TRS", "is_disputed": false, "is_uncertain": false, "name": "Polity_degree_of_centralization", "degree_of_centralization": "quasi-polity", "comment": null, "description": "Autonomous states:\"from the time written records begin for the individual states that lay within the land called Hatti in Iron Age texts, it is clear that there was no sense of these states constituting a single political entity, or any form of political federation. Each was entirely independent from the others, each had its own autonomous ruler.\"§REF§(Bryce 2012, 52)§REF§<br>" }, { "id": 375, "polity": { "id": 173, "name": "tr_ottoman_emirate", "long_name": "Ottoman Emirate", "start_year": 1299, "end_year": 1402 }, "year_from": null, "year_to": null, "tag": "TRS", "is_disputed": false, "is_uncertain": false, "name": "Polity_degree_of_centralization", "degree_of_centralization": "loose", "comment": null, "description": null }, { "id": 376, "polity": { "id": 173, "name": "tr_ottoman_emirate", "long_name": "Ottoman Emirate", "start_year": 1299, "end_year": 1402 }, "year_from": null, "year_to": null, "tag": "TRS", "is_disputed": false, "is_uncertain": false, "name": "Polity_degree_of_centralization", "degree_of_centralization": "unitary state", "comment": null, "description": null }, { "id": 377, "polity": { "id": 174, "name": "tr_ottoman_emp_1", "long_name": "Ottoman Empire I", "start_year": 1402, "end_year": 1517 }, "year_from": null, "year_to": null, "tag": "TRS", "is_disputed": false, "is_uncertain": false, "name": "Polity_degree_of_centralization", "degree_of_centralization": "unitary state", "comment": null, "description": null }, { "id": 378, "polity": { "id": 175, "name": "tr_ottoman_emp_2", "long_name": "Ottoman Empire II", "start_year": 1517, "end_year": 1683 }, "year_from": null, "year_to": null, "tag": "TRS", "is_disputed": false, "is_uncertain": false, "name": "Polity_degree_of_centralization", "degree_of_centralization": "unitary state", "comment": null, "description": null }, { "id": 379, "polity": { "id": 176, "name": "tr_ottoman_emp_3", "long_name": "Ottoman Empire III", "start_year": 1683, "end_year": 1839 }, "year_from": null, "year_to": null, "tag": "TRS", "is_disputed": false, "is_uncertain": false, "name": "Polity_degree_of_centralization", "degree_of_centralization": "unitary state", "comment": null, "description": null }, { "id": 380, "polity": { "id": 166, "name": "tr_phrygian_k", "long_name": "Phrygian Kingdom", "start_year": -900, "end_year": -695 }, "year_from": null, "year_to": null, "tag": "TRS", "is_disputed": false, "is_uncertain": false, "name": "Polity_degree_of_centralization", "degree_of_centralization": "loose", "comment": null, "description": " Cities had autonomy, however they stayed in Phrygian Kingdom§REF§Atasoy, E., S. Buluç, 1982, \"Metallurgical and Archaeological Examination of Phrygian Objects\", <i>Anatolian Studies</i>, Vol. 32, pg:158§REF§." }, { "id": 381, "polity": { "id": 71, "name": "tr_roman_dominate", "long_name": "Roman Empire - Dominate", "start_year": 285, "end_year": 394 }, "year_from": null, "year_to": null, "tag": "TRS", "is_disputed": false, "is_uncertain": false, "name": "Polity_degree_of_centralization", "degree_of_centralization": "unitary state", "comment": null, "description": null }, { "id": 382, "polity": { "id": 171, "name": "tr_rum_sultanate", "long_name": "Rum Sultanate", "start_year": 1077, "end_year": 1307 }, "year_from": null, "year_to": null, "tag": "TRS", "is_disputed": false, "is_uncertain": false, "name": "Polity_degree_of_centralization", "degree_of_centralization": "confederated state", "comment": null, "description": null }, { "id": 383, "polity": { "id": 167, "name": "tr_tabal_k", "long_name": "Tabal Kingdoms", "start_year": -900, "end_year": -730 }, "year_from": null, "year_to": null, "tag": "TRS", "is_disputed": false, "is_uncertain": false, "name": "Polity_degree_of_centralization", "degree_of_centralization": "quasi-polity", "comment": null, "description": "mid-9th century BCE Assyrian records suggest Tabal \"consisted of a number of small independent states (which may have evolved several centuries earlier) whose rulers became tributaries of Assyria. Shalmaneser claims to have received gifts from twenty-four kings of Tabal during a campaign which he conducted in the region in 837 ... However, by the middle of the following century, many of the states were apparently consolidated into a small number of larger kingdoms.\" §REF§(Bryce 2002, 43)§REF§<br>\"from the time written records begin for the individual states that lay within the land called Hatti in Iron Age texts, it is clear that there was no sense of these states constituting a single political entity, or any form of political federation. Each was entirely independent from the others, each had its own autonomous ruler.\"§REF§(Bryce 2012, 52)§REF§" }, { "id": 384, "polity": { "id": 32, "name": "us_cahokia_1", "long_name": "Cahokia - Lohman-Stirling", "start_year": 1050, "end_year": 1199 }, "year_from": null, "year_to": null, "tag": "TRS", "is_disputed": false, "is_uncertain": false, "name": "Polity_degree_of_centralization", "degree_of_centralization": "loose", "comment": null, "description": null }, { "id": 385, "polity": { "id": 33, "name": "us_cahokia_2", "long_name": "Cahokia - Moorehead", "start_year": 1200, "end_year": 1275 }, "year_from": null, "year_to": null, "tag": "TRS", "is_disputed": false, "is_uncertain": false, "name": "Polity_degree_of_centralization", "degree_of_centralization": "loose", "comment": null, "description": null }, { "id": 386, "polity": { "id": 30, "name": "us_early_illinois_confederation", "long_name": "Early Illinois Confederation", "start_year": 1640, "end_year": 1717 }, "year_from": null, "year_to": null, "tag": "TRS", "is_disputed": false, "is_uncertain": false, "name": "Polity_degree_of_centralization", "degree_of_centralization": "quasi-polity", "comment": null, "description": " \"Though they are often described as a confederacy [...] and sometimes assembled into very large settlements that incorporated several tribes, there is no evidence of any overall intertribal organization or political institutions like those found among the Creeks or the League of the Iroquois\" §REF§C. Callender, Illinois, in B. Trigger, Handbook of North American Indians, vol. 15: Northeast (1978), pp. 673-680§REF§." }, { "id": 387, "polity": { "id": 101, "name": "us_haudenosaunee_1", "long_name": "Haudenosaunee Confederacy - Early", "start_year": 1566, "end_year": 1713 }, "year_from": null, "year_to": null, "tag": "TRS", "is_disputed": false, "is_uncertain": false, "name": "Polity_degree_of_centralization", "degree_of_centralization": "loose", "comment": null, "description": " 'The League of the Iroquois was originally a confederacy of 5 North American Indian tribes: the Mohawk, Oneida, Onondaga, Cayuga, and Seneca. A sixth tribe, the Tuscarora, joined the League in 1722 after migrating north from the region of the Roanoke River in response to hostilities with White colonists. [...] On the eve of European contact the Iroquois territory extended from Lake Champlain and Lake George west to the Genesee River and Lake Ontario and from the St. Lawrence River south to the Susquehanna River. Within these boundaries each of the original 5 tribes occupied an north-south oblong strip of territory; from east to west, they were the Mohawk, Oneida, Onondaga, Cayuga, and Seneca. The region was primarily lake and hill country dissected by numerous rivers. Deciduous forests of birch, beech, maple and elm dominated the region, giving way to fir and spruce forests in the north and in the higher elevations of the Adirondack Mountains. In aboriginal times fish and animal species were diverse and abundant.' §REF§Reid, Gerald: eHRAF Cultural Summary for the Iroquois§REF§ The individual member nations were represented in a common leage council: 'The Seneca ([unknown] sen[unknown] ku, locally also[unknown] sen[unknown] k[unknown] ), westernmost of the Iroquois tribes, were the largest in the Confederacy. Their numbers were often reported to be almost equal to or to exceed those of the other four Iroquois tribes combined (“The League of the Iroquois: Its History, Politics, and Ritual,” table 1, this vol.). Nevertheless, of all the Iroquois tribes they had the fewest number of chiefs on the League council; they held eight such chieftainships.' §REF§Abler, Thomas S., and Elisabeth Tooker 1978. “Seneca”, 505§REF§ The Iroquois Confederacy was effective in dealing with external enemies until the American revolution, but individual nations also enjoyed considerable agency in handling their own affairs: 'The Iroquois Confederacy differed from other American Indian confederacies in the northeastern woodlands primarily in being better organized, more consciously defined, and more effective. The Iroquois used elaborately ritualized systems for choosing leaders and making important decisions. They persuaded colonial governments to use these rituals in their joint negotiations, and they fostered a tradition of political sagacity based on ceremonial sanction rather than on the occasional outstanding individual leader. Because the league lacked administrative control, the nations did not always act in unison; but spectacular successes in warfare compensated for this and were possible because of security at home.' §REF§<a class=\"external free\" href=\"http://www.britannica.com/topic/Iroquois-Confederacy\" rel=\"nofollow\">http://www.britannica.com/topic/Iroquois-Confederacy</a>§REF§ The Confederacy was therefore an alliance of independent nations rather than a confederate state: 'Thus the League of the Iroquois was an alliance conceived among aboriginal nations which, though culturally related and speaking languages fundamentally similar but differing in vocabulary and idiom, had recurrently been in conflict. The league brought them out of conflict into peace. Then came the French, the Dutch, and the English, and the doom of the league was sealed, its desired results nullified. Here was an alliance binding together five distinct nations, based upon an orally transmitted constitution. It had no inscribed statutes, no taxes or levies, no gendarmerie, no hireling politicians. We hear, however, of tribute exacted of subjugated tribes. Tribute, as the Iroquois took it, consisted of stipulated sums of wampum demanded of the Algonkian tribes on the Atlantic Coast who produced it; and wampum was not an item of money, cash, or currency in native economy before the coming of Europeans to the Hudson Valley. Its function was that of a symbol, valuable in a spiritual sense and capable of serving the purposes of mnemonic record making. Thus the wampum tribute we read so much about would seem to be a measure pressed upon subjugated smaller tribes in the shell-bearing coastal regions, requiring them to furnish the wampum the Iroquois needed in the score of ceremonial uses they had developed for it.' §REF§Speck, Frank Gouldsmith 1945. “Iroquois: A Study In Cultural Evolution”, 36p§REF§ 'During the 15th and early 16th centuries, warfare in the Northeast culture area fostered the creation of extensive political and military alliances. It is generally believed that this period of increasing conflict was instigated by internal events rather than by contact with Europeans; some scholars suggest that the region was nearing its carrying capacity. Two of the major alliances in the area were the Huron confederacy (which included the Wendat alliance) and the Five Tribes (later Six Tribes), or Iroquois Confederacy. The constituent tribes of both blocs spoke Iroquoian languages; the term “Iroquoian” is used to refer generally to the groups speaking such languages, while references to the “Iroquois” generally imply the tribes of the Iroquois Confederacy alone.' §REF§<a class=\"external free\" href=\"http://www.britannica.com/topic/Native-American/Native-American-history#ref968222\" rel=\"nofollow\">http://www.britannica.com/topic/Native-American/Native-American-history#ref968222</a>§REF§ 'The Five Tribes of the Iroquois Confederacy lived south of the St. Lawrence River and Lake Erie, for the most part in the present-day state of New York. The alliance comprised the Mohawk, Oneida, Onondaga, Cayuga, and Seneca peoples; the Tuscarora joined the confederacy later. Evenly matched with the Huron alliance in terms of aggregate size, the Iroquois were more loosely united and somewhat less densely settled across the landscape. While the Huron nations traded extensively for food, this was less the case for the Five Tribes, who relied more thoroughly upon agriculture. Before colonization they seem to have removed southward, perhaps in response to raids from the Huron to their north. The alliances among the Five Tribes were initiated not only for defense but also to regulate the blood feuds that were common in the region. By replacing retributory raids among themselves with a blood money payment system, each of the constituent nations was better able to engage in offensive and defensive action against outside enemies.' §REF§<a class=\"external free\" href=\"http://www.britannica.com/topic/Native-American/Native-American-history#ref968222\" rel=\"nofollow\">http://www.britannica.com/topic/Native-American/Native-American-history#ref968222</a>§REF§" }, { "id": 388, "polity": { "id": 102, "name": "us_haudenosaunee_2", "long_name": "Haudenosaunee Confederacy - Late", "start_year": 1714, "end_year": 1848 }, "year_from": null, "year_to": null, "tag": "TRS", "is_disputed": false, "is_uncertain": false, "name": "Polity_degree_of_centralization", "degree_of_centralization": "loose", "comment": null, "description": " 'The League of the Iroquois was originally a confederacy of 5 North American Indian tribes: the Mohawk, Oneida, Onondaga, Cayuga, and Seneca. A sixth tribe, the Tuscarora, joined the League in 1722 after migrating north from the region of the Roanoke River in response to hostilities with White colonists. [...] On the eve of European contact the Iroquois territory extended from Lake Champlain and Lake George west to the Genesee River and Lake Ontario and from the St. Lawrence River south to the Susquehanna River. Within these boundaries each of the original 5 tribes occupied an north-south oblong strip of territory; from east to west, they were the Mohawk, Oneida, Onondaga, Cayuga, and Seneca. The region was primarily lake and hill country dissected by numerous rivers. Deciduous forests of birch, beech, maple and elm dominated the region, giving way to fir and spruce forests in the north and in the higher elevations of the Adirondack Mountains. In aboriginal times fish and animal species were diverse and abundant.' §REF§Reid, Gerald: eHRAF Cultural Summary for the Iroquois§REF§ The individual member nations were represented in a common leage council: 'The Seneca ([unknown] sen[unknown] ku, locally also[unknown] sen[unknown] k[unknown] ), westernmost of the Iroquois tribes, were the largest in the Confederacy. Their numbers were often reported to be almost equal to or to exceed those of the other four Iroquois tribes combined (“The League of the Iroquois: Its History, Politics, and Ritual,” table 1, this vol.). Nevertheless, of all the Iroquois tribes they had the fewest number of chiefs on the League council; they held eight such chieftainships.' §REF§Abler, Thomas S., and Elisabeth Tooker 1978. “Seneca”, 505§REF§ The Iroquois Confederacy was effective in dealing with external enemies until the American revolution, but individual nations also enjoyed considerable agency in handling their own affairs: 'The Iroquois Confederacy differed from other American Indian confederacies in the northeastern woodlands primarily in being better organized, more consciously defined, and more effective. The Iroquois used elaborately ritualized systems for choosing leaders and making important decisions. They persuaded colonial governments to use these rituals in their joint negotiations, and they fostered a tradition of political sagacity based on ceremonial sanction rather than on the occasional outstanding individual leader. Because the league lacked administrative control, the nations did not always act in unison; but spectacular successes in warfare compensated for this and were possible because of security at home.' §REF§<a class=\"external free\" href=\"http://www.britannica.com/topic/Iroquois-Confederacy\" rel=\"nofollow\">http://www.britannica.com/topic/Iroquois-Confederacy</a>§REF§ The Confederacy was therefore an alliance of independent nations rather than a confederate state: 'Thus the League of the Iroquois was an alliance conceived among aboriginal nations which, though culturally related and speaking languages fundamentally similar but differing in vocabulary and idiom, had recurrently been in conflict. The league brought them out of conflict into peace. Then came the French, the Dutch, and the English, and the doom of the league was sealed, its desired results nullified. Here was an alliance binding together five distinct nations, based upon an orally transmitted constitution. It had no inscribed statutes, no taxes or levies, no gendarmerie, no hireling politicians. We hear, however, of tribute exacted of subjugated tribes. Tribute, as the Iroquois took it, consisted of stipulated sums of wampum demanded of the Algonkian tribes on the Atlantic Coast who produced it; and wampum was not an item of money, cash, or currency in native economy before the coming of Europeans to the Hudson Valley. Its function was that of a symbol, valuable in a spiritual sense and capable of serving the purposes of mnemonic record making. Thus the wampum tribute we read so much about would seem to be a measure pressed upon subjugated smaller tribes in the shell-bearing coastal regions, requiring them to furnish the wampum the Iroquois needed in the score of ceremonial uses they had developed for it.' §REF§Speck, Frank Gouldsmith 1945. “Iroquois: A Study In Cultural Evolution”, 36p§REF§" }, { "id": 389, "polity": { "id": 20, "name": "us_kamehameha_k", "long_name": "Kingdom of Hawaii - Kamehameha Period", "start_year": 1778, "end_year": 1819 }, "year_from": null, "year_to": null, "tag": "TRS", "is_disputed": false, "is_uncertain": false, "name": "Polity_degree_of_centralization", "degree_of_centralization": "unitary state", "comment": null, "description": " When Kamehameha I took power, “the government continued to be essentially a feudal autocracy. The king’s will was the supreme authority”§REF§Kuykendall, Ralph S. 1968[1938]. The Hawaiian Kingdom, Volume 1: 1778-1854, Foundation and Transformation. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press. Pg. 51.§REF§ Taxes were transmitted to the center§REF§Kuykendall, Ralph S. 1968[1938]. The Hawaiian Kingdom, Volume 1: 1778-1854, Foundation and Transformation. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press. Pg. 54.§REF§" }, { "id": 390, "polity": { "id": 22, "name": "us_woodland_1", "long_name": "Cahokia - Early Woodland", "start_year": -600, "end_year": -150 }, "year_from": null, "year_to": null, "tag": "TRS", "is_disputed": false, "is_uncertain": false, "name": "Polity_degree_of_centralization", "degree_of_centralization": "none", "comment": null, "description": null }, { "id": 391, "polity": { "id": 34, "name": "us_emergent_mississippian_2", "long_name": "Cahokia - Emergent Mississippian II", "start_year": 900, "end_year": 1049 }, "year_from": null, "year_to": null, "tag": "TRS", "is_disputed": false, "is_uncertain": false, "name": "Polity_degree_of_centralization", "degree_of_centralization": "loose", "comment": null, "description": null }, { "id": 392, "polity": { "id": 25, "name": "us_woodland_4", "long_name": "Cahokia - Late Woodland II", "start_year": 450, "end_year": 600 }, "year_from": null, "year_to": null, "tag": "TRS", "is_disputed": false, "is_uncertain": false, "name": "Polity_degree_of_centralization", "degree_of_centralization": "none", "comment": null, "description": null }, { "id": 393, "polity": { "id": 23, "name": "us_woodland_2", "long_name": "Cahokia - Middle Woodland", "start_year": -150, "end_year": 300 }, "year_from": null, "year_to": null, "tag": "TRS", "is_disputed": false, "is_uncertain": false, "name": "Polity_degree_of_centralization", "degree_of_centralization": "none", "comment": null, "description": null }, { "id": 394, "polity": { "id": 26, "name": "us_woodland_5", "long_name": "Cahokia - Late Woodland III", "start_year": 600, "end_year": 750 }, "year_from": null, "year_to": null, "tag": "TRS", "is_disputed": false, "is_uncertain": false, "name": "Polity_degree_of_centralization", "degree_of_centralization": "none", "comment": null, "description": null }, { "id": 395, "polity": { "id": 24, "name": "us_woodland_3", "long_name": "Cahokia - Late Woodland I", "start_year": 300, "end_year": 450 }, "year_from": null, "year_to": null, "tag": "TRS", "is_disputed": false, "is_uncertain": false, "name": "Polity_degree_of_centralization", "degree_of_centralization": "none", "comment": null, "description": null }, { "id": 396, "polity": { "id": 28, "name": "us_cahokia_3", "long_name": "Cahokia - Sand Prairie", "start_year": 1275, "end_year": 1400 }, "year_from": null, "year_to": null, "tag": "TRS", "is_disputed": false, "is_uncertain": false, "name": "Polity_degree_of_centralization", "degree_of_centralization": "loose", "comment": null, "description": "\"The people that were a part of Cahokia made a conscious decision not to continue after ca. A.D. 1250.\" §REF§(Peregrine/Kelly 2014, 24)§REF§ \"We know that by the mid-300s Cahokia was basically abandoned.\" §REF§(Iseminger 2010, 148)§REF§" }, { "id": 397, "polity": { "id": 27, "name": "us_emergent_mississippian_1", "long_name": "Cahokia - Emergent Mississippian I", "start_year": 750, "end_year": 900 }, "year_from": null, "year_to": null, "tag": "TRS", "is_disputed": false, "is_uncertain": false, "name": "Polity_degree_of_centralization", "degree_of_centralization": "none", "comment": null, "description": null }, { "id": 398, "polity": { "id": 29, "name": "us_oneota", "long_name": "Oneota", "start_year": 1400, "end_year": 1650 }, "year_from": null, "year_to": null, "tag": "TRS", "is_disputed": false, "is_uncertain": false, "name": "Polity_degree_of_centralization", "degree_of_centralization": "quasi-polity", "comment": null, "description": " §REF§G. Gibbon, Oneota, in P. Peregrine, M. Ember and Human Relations Area Files, Inc. (eds.) Encyclopedia of Prehistory: Volume 6: North America (2001), pp. 389-407§REF§" }, { "id": 399, "polity": { "id": 296, "name": "uz_chagatai_khanate", "long_name": "Chagatai Khanate", "start_year": 1227, "end_year": 1402 }, "year_from": null, "year_to": null, "tag": "TRS", "is_disputed": false, "is_uncertain": false, "name": "Polity_degree_of_centralization", "degree_of_centralization": "nominal", "comment": null, "description": " \"At the time of Temur's rise to power, politics in the Ulus Chaghatay was controlled by the tribes who made it up. With the decline of central leadership, control over the territory and wealth of the Ulus had fallen to them. They provided most of the military manpower of the Ulus, either from their own tribesmen or from the armies of the regions under their control. No one therefore could either become or remain leader of the Ulus wihout the backing of the tribal leaders. Tribal chiefs naturally were not eager to strengthen the position of a central leader; they were intolerant of claims to sovereignty over them,and if a leader displeased them, they were quick to switch their loyalties to a rival candidate. Under these circumstances, central leadership was often contested, sometimes even after a leader had been acclaimed by the tribes of the Ulus.\" §REF§(Forbes Manz 1983, 79-80)§REF§" }, { "id": 400, "polity": { "id": 469, "name": "uz_janid_dyn", "long_name": "Khanate of Bukhara", "start_year": 1599, "end_year": 1747 }, "year_from": null, "year_to": null, "tag": "TRS", "is_disputed": false, "is_uncertain": false, "name": "Polity_degree_of_centralization", "degree_of_centralization": "nominal", "comment": null, "description": " \"Under their rule the city and khanate crystallized into an almost classical pattern of a Muslim polity of its time, cherishing and even enhancing traditional values while ignoring or rejecting the vertiginous changes initiated by the Europeans but now reaching other parts of the world.\" §REF§(Soucek 2000, 177)§REF§ \"During his long reign (1611-41) Imam Quli maintained a fairly stable government at Bukhara. Generally, he let the Uzbek chiefs govern their appanages as they wished. His brother, Nadr Muhammad, enjoyed a semi-independent status at Balkh.\" §REF§(Mukminova 2003, 47)§REF§" } ] }