Polity Suprapolity Relations List
A viewset for viewing and editing Polity Suprapolity Relations.
GET /api/general/polity-suprapolities/?format=api&page=7
{ "count": 382, "next": "https://seshat-db.com/api/general/polity-suprapolities/?format=api&page=8", "previous": "https://seshat-db.com/api/general/polity-suprapolities/?format=api&page=6", "results": [ { "id": 331, "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_suprapolity_relations", "supra_polity_relations": "alliance", "other_polity": null, "comment": null, "description": "\"groups ensured access to needed resources through maintenance of alliance-exchange relationships\" §REF§(Blitz and Porth 2013, 89-95)§REF§" }, { "id": 332, "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_suprapolity_relations", "supra_polity_relations": "none", "other_polity": null, "comment": null, "description": null }, { "id": 333, "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_suprapolity_relations", "supra_polity_relations": "none", "other_polity": null, "comment": null, "description": "Collapse of the Hopewell system lead to the abandonment of mound centers and alliance-exchange relationships. §REF§(Blitz and Porth 2013, 89-95)§REF§" }, { "id": 334, "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_suprapolity_relations", "supra_polity_relations": "none", "other_polity": null, "comment": null, "description": null }, { "id": 335, "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_suprapolity_relations", "supra_polity_relations": "none", "other_polity": null, "comment": null, "description": null }, { "id": 336, "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_suprapolity_relations", "supra_polity_relations": "none", "other_polity": null, "comment": null, "description": null }, { "id": 337, "polity": { "id": 287, "name": "uz_samanid_emp", "long_name": "Samanid Empire", "start_year": 819, "end_year": 999 }, "year_from": null, "year_to": null, "tag": "TRS", "is_disputed": false, "is_uncertain": false, "name": "Polity_suprapolity_relations", "supra_polity_relations": "alliance", "other_polity": { "id": 359, "name": "ye_ziyad_dyn", "long_name": "Yemen Ziyadid Dynasty", "start_year": 822, "end_year": 1037 }, "comment": null, "description": "Nominal<br>\"The Samanid brothers, while initially subject to the Tahirids, were largely autonomous<br>rulers in their own territories, minted bronze coins in their own names, and mustered mili-tias and mounted campaigns against surrounding provinces.\"§REF§(Negmatov 1997, 84) Negmatov, N N. in Asimov, M S and Bosworth, C E eds. 1997. History of Civilizations of Central Asia. Volume IV. Part I. UNESCO.§REF§<br>Nominal<br>\"As was almost universal in the Islamic world at this time, society was hierarchical, with the caliph-imams being, in theory at least, the delegators of all authority, so that the Samanid amirs were their lieutenants. In practice, the amirs enjoyed virtual independence, but were careful to pay lip-service to the caliphal ideal.\"§REF§(Negmatov 1997, 87) Negmatov, N N. in Asimov, M S and Bosworth, C E eds. 1997. History of Civilizations of Central Asia. Volume IV. Part I. UNESCO.§REF§<br>Alliance<br>Allied with Ziyarids of Tabaristan. §REF§(Frye 1975, 151) Frye, Richard Nelson. 1975. The Cambridge History of Iran, Volume 4. Cambridge University Press. Cambridge.§REF§" }, { "id": 338, "polity": { "id": 287, "name": "uz_samanid_emp", "long_name": "Samanid Empire", "start_year": 819, "end_year": 999 }, "year_from": null, "year_to": null, "tag": "TRS", "is_disputed": false, "is_uncertain": false, "name": "Polity_suprapolity_relations", "supra_polity_relations": "nominal allegiance", "other_polity": null, "comment": null, "description": "Nominal<br>\"The Samanid brothers, while initially subject to the Tahirids, were largely autonomous<br>rulers in their own territories, minted bronze coins in their own names, and mustered mili-tias and mounted campaigns against surrounding provinces.\"§REF§(Negmatov 1997, 84) Negmatov, N N. in Asimov, M S and Bosworth, C E eds. 1997. History of Civilizations of Central Asia. Volume IV. Part I. UNESCO.§REF§<br>Nominal<br>\"As was almost universal in the Islamic world at this time, society was hierarchical, with the caliph-imams being, in theory at least, the delegators of all authority, so that the Samanid amirs were their lieutenants. In practice, the amirs enjoyed virtual independence, but were careful to pay lip-service to the caliphal ideal.\"§REF§(Negmatov 1997, 87) Negmatov, N N. in Asimov, M S and Bosworth, C E eds. 1997. History of Civilizations of Central Asia. Volume IV. Part I. UNESCO.§REF§<br>Alliance<br>Allied with Ziyarids of Tabaristan. §REF§(Frye 1975, 151) Frye, Richard Nelson. 1975. The Cambridge History of Iran, Volume 4. Cambridge University Press. Cambridge.§REF§" }, { "id": 339, "polity": { "id": 468, "name": "uz_sogdiana_city_states", "long_name": "Sogdiana - City-States Period", "start_year": 604, "end_year": 711 }, "year_from": null, "year_to": null, "tag": "TRS", "is_disputed": false, "is_uncertain": false, "name": "Polity_suprapolity_relations", "supra_polity_relations": "alliance", "other_polity": null, "comment": null, "description": "In response to the Islamic threat Samarkand \"managed to form an alliance with some principalities in the Fergana valley\".§REF§(Hanks 2010, 3) Hanks, R R. 2010. Global Security Watch-Central Asia. ABC-CLIO.§REF§<br>“These city-states, often at odds with one another, had been under Hephthalite, Türk and Arab rule at varions times.\" §REF§(Golden 1992, 190)§REF§<br>\"In the middle of the seventh century, after the fall of the Western Kaghanate, the Sogdian states gained de facto independence, although formally recognizing the sovereignty of the T’ang dynasty. In the eighth century, this sovereignty proved to be purely nominal, because China gave no real support against the Arab invaders.\" §REF§(Marshak 1996, 242)§REF§<br>" }, { "id": 340, "polity": { "id": 468, "name": "uz_sogdiana_city_states", "long_name": "Sogdiana - City-States Period", "start_year": 604, "end_year": 711 }, "year_from": null, "year_to": null, "tag": "TRS", "is_disputed": false, "is_uncertain": false, "name": "Polity_suprapolity_relations", "supra_polity_relations": "nominal allegiance", "other_polity": null, "comment": null, "description": "In response to the Islamic threat Samarkand \"managed to form an alliance with some principalities in the Fergana valley\".§REF§(Hanks 2010, 3) Hanks, R R. 2010. Global Security Watch-Central Asia. ABC-CLIO.§REF§<br>“These city-states, often at odds with one another, had been under Hephthalite, Türk and Arab rule at varions times.\" §REF§(Golden 1992, 190)§REF§<br>\"In the middle of the seventh century, after the fall of the Western Kaghanate, the Sogdian states gained de facto independence, although formally recognizing the sovereignty of the T’ang dynasty. In the eighth century, this sovereignty proved to be purely nominal, because China gave no real support against the Arab invaders.\" §REF§(Marshak 1996, 242)§REF§<br>" }, { "id": 342, "polity": { "id": 353, "name": "ye_himyar_1", "long_name": "Himyar I", "start_year": 270, "end_year": 340 }, "year_from": 298, "year_to": 298, "tag": "TRS", "is_disputed": false, "is_uncertain": false, "name": "Polity_suprapolity_relations", "supra_polity_relations": "vassalage", "other_polity": { "id": 208, "name": "et_aksum_emp_1", "long_name": "Axum I", "start_year": -149, "end_year": 349 }, "comment": null, "description": "Abyssinians, from Ethiopia, who had occupied the Tihama (Red Sea coast) region since the 2nd century CE, \"marched on the Himyarite capital, Zafar, and conquered it around 240 CE, compelling the Himyarites to enter into an alliance with them.\"§REF§(Caton 2013, 45-46) Steven C Caton ed. 2013. Yemen. ABC-Clio. Santa Barbara§REF§<br>\"At least from about 270 onwards to about 328 the Aksumites were enemies of Rome. The Himyarites appear to have been clients of the Aksumites at least until about 298 and therefore enemies of Rome but they appear to have thrown off the Aksumite yoke at least temporarily after that, or at least their independent embassy to Persia, in about AD 300 would seem to suggest this, but ... the alliances were unstable\".§REF§(Syvanne 2015, 134) Ilkka Syvanne. 2015. Military History of Late Rome 284-361. Pen and Sword. Barnsley.§REF§<br>\"the Himyarites seem to have recognized the Aksumites as their overlords by at least about 296-298, which suggests a defeat, but the situation fluctuated.\"§REF§(Syvanne 2015, 133) Ilkka Syvanne. 2015. Military History of Late Rome 284-361. Pen and Sword. Barnsley.§REF§" }, { "id": 344, "polity": { "id": 354, "name": "ye_himyar_2", "long_name": "Himyar II", "start_year": 378, "end_year": 525 }, "year_from": null, "year_to": null, "tag": "TRS", "is_disputed": false, "is_uncertain": false, "name": "Polity_suprapolity_relations", "supra_polity_relations": "alliance", "other_polity": null, "comment": null, "description": " Abyssinians, from Ethiopia, who had occupied the Tihama (Red Sea coast) region since the 2nd century CE, \"marched on the Himyarite capital, Zafar, and conquered it around 240 CE, compelling the Himyarites to enter into an alliance with them.\"§REF§(Caton 2013, 45-46) Steven C Caton ed. 2013. Yemen. ABC-Clio. Santa Barbara§REF§<br>\"At least from about 270 onwards to about 328 the Aksumites were enemies of Rome. The Himyarites appear to have been clients of the Aksumites at least until about 298 and therefore enemies of Rome but they appear to have thrown off the Aksumite yoke at least temporarily after that, or at least their independent embassy to Persia, in about AD 300 would seem to suggest this, but ... the alliances were unstable\".§REF§(Syvanne 2015, 134) Ilkka Syvanne. 2015. Military History of Late Rome 284-361. Pen and Sword. Barnsley.§REF§ \"the Himyarites seem to have recognized the Aksumites as their overlords by at least about 296-298, which suggests a defeat, but the situation fluctuated.\"§REF§(Syvanne 2015, 133) Ilkka Syvanne. 2015. Military History of Late Rome 284-361. Pen and Sword. Barnsley.§REF§" }, { "id": 345, "polity": { "id": 541, "name": "ye_qasimid_dyn", "long_name": "Yemen - Qasimid Dynasty", "start_year": 1637, "end_year": 1805 }, "year_from": null, "year_to": null, "tag": "TRS", "is_disputed": false, "is_uncertain": false, "name": "Polity_suprapolity_relations", "supra_polity_relations": "none", "other_polity": null, "comment": null, "description": " Zaydi imams expelled Ottoman forces with tribal support: 'In response to growing Portuguese strength in the Indian <?cean, a Circassian Mameluke army was sent to Yemen from Egypt In 15I 5· The Mamelukes destroyed the Tahirid state that ruled Lower Yemen at the time but were prevented from tackling the Zaydi Imam in his turn by the Ottoman invasion of Egypt (1517), and, when they withdrew, the Imam Sharaf al-Din extended his own influence down to Aden; but in 1538 the Ottomans themselves dispatched an army and within ten years conquered ~pper Ye~~n, beginning a century of often fiercely resisted occupation.' §REF§Dresch, Paul 1989. \"Tribes, Government and History in Yemen\", 198§REF§" }, { "id": 346, "polity": { "id": 368, "name": "ye_rasulid_dyn", "long_name": "Rasulid Dynasty", "start_year": 1229, "end_year": 1453 }, "year_from": null, "year_to": null, "tag": "TRS", "is_disputed": false, "is_uncertain": false, "name": "Polity_suprapolity_relations", "supra_polity_relations": "nominal allegiance", "other_polity": null, "comment": null, "description": "The Rasulids \"began to rule independently in Tihama and the southern highlands, acknowledging the Ayyubids and the 'Abbasid caliphs as their overlords\".§REF§(Bosworth 2014) Clifford Edmund Bosworth. 2014. The New Islamic Dynasties. Edinburgh University Press. Edinburgh.§REF§<br>" }, { "id": 347, "polity": { "id": 368, "name": "ye_rasulid_dyn", "long_name": "Rasulid Dynasty", "start_year": 1229, "end_year": 1453 }, "year_from": null, "year_to": null, "tag": "TRS", "is_disputed": false, "is_uncertain": false, "name": "Polity_suprapolity_relations", "supra_polity_relations": "none", "other_polity": null, "comment": null, "description": "The Rasulids \"began to rule independently in Tihama and the southern highlands, acknowledging the Ayyubids and the 'Abbasid caliphs as their overlords\".§REF§(Bosworth 2014) Clifford Edmund Bosworth. 2014. The New Islamic Dynasties. Edinburgh University Press. Edinburgh.§REF§<br>" }, { "id": 348, "polity": { "id": 365, "name": "ye_warlords", "long_name": "Yemen - Era of Warlords", "start_year": 1038, "end_year": 1174 }, "year_from": null, "year_to": null, "tag": "TRS", "is_disputed": false, "is_uncertain": false, "name": "Polity_suprapolity_relations", "supra_polity_relations": "nominal allegiance", "other_polity": null, "comment": null, "description": "Sulayhids: In 1110 CE the Fatimids in Egypt \"sent an Armenian commander, Ibn Najib al-Dawla, as a da'i to reign in the chaotic situation in Yemen. Soon the local tribes revolted against him and the authority of the queen was much constrained by him.\"§REF§(Hamdani 2006, 777) Hamdani, Abbas. Sulayhids. Josef W Meri ed. 2006. Medieval Islamic Civilization: An Encyclopedia. Volume 1, A - K, Index. Routledge. Abingdon.§REF§<br>\"The Sulayhids ruled in Yemen as adherents of Ismailism and as nominal vassals of the Fatimids.\"§REF§(Bosworth 2014) Clifford Edmund Bosworth. 2014. The New Islamic Dynasties. Edinburgh University Press. Edinburgh.§REF§" }, { "id": 349, "polity": { "id": 359, "name": "ye_ziyad_dyn", "long_name": "Yemen Ziyadid Dynasty", "start_year": 822, "end_year": 1037 }, "year_from": null, "year_to": null, "tag": "TRS", "is_disputed": false, "is_uncertain": false, "name": "Polity_suprapolity_relations", "supra_polity_relations": "nominal allegiance", "other_polity": { "id": 132, "name": "iq_abbasid_cal_1", "long_name": "Abbasid Caliphate I", "start_year": 750, "end_year": 946 }, "comment": null, "description": "\"The Abbasid court continued to send governors to Sanaa. By 845 the Abbasid's authority was effectively disputed by Yu'fir bin 'Abd al-Rahman al-Huwali, a descendant of the pre-Islamic Himyarite kings. He expelled the Abbasid governor, Himyar ibn al-Harith, in 861, and ruled an area from Sanaa south to Janad, while acknowledging Abbasid symbolic sovereighty and paying tribute to the Ziyadi state. Yu'fir's son Mhuammad, whose influence extended over Hadramaut, was formally invested with the rule of Sanaa by the Abbasid caliph al Mu'tamid about 872.\"§REF§(Stookey 1978, 54) Robert W Stookey. 1978. Yemen: The Politics of the Yemen Arab Republic. Westview Press. Boulder.§REF§<br>\"In 1007 a Yu'firid prince of the Ismaili persuasion, 'Abdullah ibn Qahtan, suceeded to the rule of Sanaa, and even made a successful foray against that stronghold of Sunnism, the Ziyad state in the Tihama, now in its decline.\"§REF§(Stookey 1978, 57) Robert W Stookey. 1978. Yemen: The Politics of the Yemen Arab Republic. Westview Press. Boulder.§REF§<br>\"For a century and a half no central power of consequence existed in the Yemen inland from the Tihama. Most of the local rulers invoked the Abbasid caliph in the Friday prayers; they repressed overt manifestations of Ismaili sentiment, but offered no persuaive ideological alternative.\"§REF§(Stookey 1978, 57) Robert W Stookey. 1978. Yemen: The Politics of the Yemen Arab Republic. Westview Press. Boulder.§REF§" }, { "id": 351, "polity": { "id": 634, "name": "sl_jaffa_k", "long_name": "Jaffna", "start_year": 1310, "end_year": 1591 }, "year_from": 1385, "year_to": 1500, "tag": "TRS", "is_disputed": false, "is_uncertain": false, "name": "Polity_suprapolity_relations", "supra_polity_relations": "vassalage", "other_polity": { "id": 97, "name": "in_vijayanagara_emp", "long_name": "Vijayanagara Empire", "start_year": 1336, "end_year": 1646 }, "comment": null, "description": "\"[T]he founding of the Hindu kingdom in Vijayanagara in India in 1336 launched a new era for south India and Sri Lanka, By 1385 they claimed sovereignty over the Aryachakravartis [of Jaffna] and may have assisted them to invade the Sinhalese kingdom while Bhuvanekabāhu V was still at Gampola. [...] The Jaffna Kingdom under Pararājasēkaran (1478-1519) was independent after the decline of Vijayanagar, but was much reduced in size and strength.\"" }, { "id": 353, "polity": { "id": 613, "name": "bf_west_burkina_faso_yellow_5", "long_name": "West Burkina Faso Yellow I", "start_year": 100, "end_year": 500 }, "year_from": null, "year_to": null, "tag": "TRS", "is_disputed": false, "is_uncertain": false, "name": "Polity_suprapolity_relations", "supra_polity_relations": "none", "other_polity": null, "comment": null, "description": "Quasipolity.”For the first 400 years of the settlement's history, Kirikongo was a single economically generalized social group (Figure 6). The occupants were self-sufficient farmers who cultivated grains and herded livestock, smelted and forged iron, opportunistically hunted, lived in puddled earthen structures with pounded clay floors, and fished in the seasonal drainages. [...] Since Kirikongo did not grow (at least not significantly) for over 400 years, it is likely that extra-community fissioning continually occurred to contribute to regional population growth, and it is also likely that Kirikongo itself was the result of budding from a previous homestead. However, with the small scale of settlement, the inhabitants of individual homesteads must have interacted with a wider community for social and demographic reasons. [...] It may be that generalized single-kin homesteads like Kirikongo were the societal model for a post-LSA expansion of farming peoples along the Nakambe (White Volta) and Mouhoun (Black Volta) River basins. A homestead settlement pattern would fit well with the transitional nature of early sedentary life, where societies are shifting from generalized reciprocity to more restricted and formalized group membership, and single-kin communities like Kirikongo's house (Mound 4) would be roughly the size of a band.”§REF§(Dueppen 2012: 27, 32)§REF§" }, { "id": 354, "polity": { "id": 617, "name": "bf_west_burkina_faso_red_2", "long_name": "West Burkina Faso Red II and III", "start_year": 1100, "end_year": 1400 }, "year_from": null, "year_to": null, "tag": "TRS", "is_disputed": false, "is_uncertain": false, "name": "Polity_suprapolity_relations", "supra_polity_relations": "none", "other_polity": null, "comment": null, "description": "" }, { "id": 355, "polity": { "id": 618, "name": "bf_west_burkina_faso_red_4", "long_name": "West Burkina Faso Red IV", "start_year": 1401, "end_year": 1500 }, "year_from": null, "year_to": null, "tag": "TRS", "is_disputed": false, "is_uncertain": false, "name": "Polity_suprapolity_relations", "supra_polity_relations": "none", "other_polity": null, "comment": null, "description": "" }, { "id": 356, "polity": { "id": 637, "name": "so_adal_sultanate", "long_name": "Adal Sultanate", "start_year": 1375, "end_year": 1543 }, "year_from": null, "year_to": null, "tag": "TRS", "is_disputed": false, "is_uncertain": false, "name": "Polity_suprapolity_relations", "supra_polity_relations": "none", "other_polity": null, "comment": null, "description": "" }, { "id": 357, "polity": { "id": 638, "name": "so_tunni_sultanate", "long_name": "Tunni Sultanate", "start_year": 800, "end_year": 1200 }, "year_from": null, "year_to": null, "tag": "TRS", "is_disputed": false, "is_uncertain": false, "name": "Polity_suprapolity_relations", "supra_polity_relations": "none", "other_polity": null, "comment": null, "description": "" }, { "id": 358, "polity": { "id": 639, "name": "so_ajuran_sultanate", "long_name": "Ajuran Sultanate", "start_year": 1250, "end_year": 1700 }, "year_from": null, "year_to": null, "tag": "TRS", "is_disputed": false, "is_uncertain": false, "name": "Polity_suprapolity_relations", "supra_polity_relations": "none", "other_polity": null, "comment": null, "description": "" }, { "id": 359, "polity": { "id": 643, "name": "et_showa_sultanate", "long_name": "Shoa Sultanate", "start_year": 1108, "end_year": 1285 }, "year_from": null, "year_to": null, "tag": "TRS", "is_disputed": false, "is_uncertain": false, "name": "Polity_suprapolity_relations", "supra_polity_relations": "none", "other_polity": null, "comment": null, "description": "" }, { "id": 360, "polity": { "id": 646, "name": "so_ifat_sultanate", "long_name": "Ifat Sultanate", "start_year": 1280, "end_year": 1375 }, "year_from": null, "year_to": null, "tag": "TRS", "is_disputed": false, "is_uncertain": false, "name": "Polity_suprapolity_relations", "supra_polity_relations": "none", "other_polity": null, "comment": null, "description": "" }, { "id": 361, "polity": { "id": 648, "name": "so_majeerteen_sultanate", "long_name": "Majeerteen Sultanate", "start_year": 1750, "end_year": 1926 }, "year_from": null, "year_to": null, "tag": "TRS", "is_disputed": false, "is_uncertain": false, "name": "Polity_suprapolity_relations", "supra_polity_relations": "none", "other_polity": null, "comment": null, "description": "" }, { "id": 362, "polity": { "id": 658, "name": "ni_kwararafa", "long_name": "Kwararafa", "start_year": 596, "end_year": 1820 }, "year_from": null, "year_to": null, "tag": "TRS", "is_disputed": false, "is_uncertain": false, "name": "Polity_suprapolity_relations", "supra_polity_relations": "nominal allegiance", "other_polity": null, "comment": null, "description": "“Around the seventeenth century one major change did occur, and that was the contracting of a peace pact between Kwararafa and the Mais of Borno. It followed the most massive incursion to date of Kwararafa into Hausaland and an equally resounding defeat of the insurgent invaders by Mai Ali of Borno with Tuareg assistance in 1668. There were probably a peace agreement immediately after this. Mr. John Lavers, quoting Vatican documents, identifies a peace agreement (renewed or re-establishment?) in 1701. The pact made with Borno was confirmed by an exchange of ambassadors and the Borno ambassador, the Zanna, remained in Wukari until the twentieth century.” §REF§Gavin, R. J. (1979). Some Perspectives on Nigerian History. Journal of the Historical Society of Nigeria, 9(4), 15–38: 34. https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/collections/GWWIKDDM/items/BPED9ADF/collection§REF§" }, { "id": 363, "polity": { "id": 659, "name": "ni_allada_k", "long_name": "Allada", "start_year": 1100, "end_year": 1724 }, "year_from": null, "year_to": null, "tag": "TRS", "is_disputed": false, "is_uncertain": false, "name": "Polity_suprapolity_relations", "supra_polity_relations": "nominal allegiance", "other_polity": null, "comment": null, "description": "Depends on how we define the relationship between Allada and Oyo. Seems that Allada was a largely independent vassal state of Oyo, and certainly a separate polity. “Dahomey attempted on more than one occasion in the eighteenth century to avert the hostility of Oyo by sending 'great presents', and Allada, threatened by Dahomey, retained the support of Oyo by directing a stream of presents to the Alafin.” §REF§Smith, Robert. “Peace and Palaver: International Relations in Pre-Colonial West Africa.” The Journal of African History, vol. 14, no. 4, 1973, pp. 599–621: 610. https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/collections/GWWIKDDM/items/WIFJS3HN/collection§REF§ “Moreover, because Allada was a tributary state to Oyo, the latter's interests were directly involved.” §REF§ Akinjogbin, I. A. (1963). Agaja and the Conquest of the Coastal Aja States 1724–30. Journal of the Historical Society of Nigeria, 2(4), 545–566: 555. https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/collections/GWWIKDDM/items/88W62WF3/collection§REF§ “It does not appear that these attacks on Weme, Dahomey, and Allada succeeded in bringing any of these western kingdoms under Oyo rule. It has sometimes been suggested that Allada became tributary to Oyo, either before or as a result of the invasion of 1698. On this view, the tribute later paid to Oyo by Dahomey is seen as a continuation of the tribute paid earlier by Allada. The basis for this suggestion appears to be, first, the Alafin's claim in 1698 to be the protector of the king of Allada's subjects against his misgovernment, and second, the fact that later, in the 1720s, the king of Allada appealed to Oyo for assistance when attacked by Dahomey. But these incidents hardly constitute decisive, or even strong, -evidence for an Oyo overlordship over Allada. The Alafin's right to interfere in Allada was clearly not accepted by its king in 1698, and the Alafin's intervention should be seen merely as an attempt to exploit disaffection within the declining Allada kingdom. Bosman's account can reasonably be interpreted as recording the beginning of an Oyo attempt to establish control over Allada, but even the invasion of 1698 did not represent an Oyo conquest of Allada: on Bosman's account, it was no more than a punitive raid, which the Alafin himself judged to be a failure. As for the appeal of Allada (and similar appeals from Weme and Hueda) for Oyo aid in the 1720s, there is no need to invoke an Oyo overlordship to explain these, since the victims of Dahomian aggression would naturally turn to Oyo, as a major power capable, as the invasion of 1698 had demonstrated, of effective intervention in the area. There is, in fact, no compelling evidence that Oyo rule was established on any formal basis over any part of the 'Popo' country before the eighteenthcentury.” §REF§Law, R. (1977). The Oyo Empire c. 1600 – c. 1836: A West African Imperialism in the Era of the Atlantic Slave Trade. Oxford University Press: 156–157. https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/collections/GWWIKDDM/items/SB32ZPCF/collection§REF§" }, { "id": 364, "polity": { "id": 661, "name": "ni_oyo_emp_2", "long_name": "Ilú-ọba Ọ̀yọ́", "start_year": 1601, "end_year": 1835 }, "year_from": null, "year_to": null, "tag": "TRS", "is_disputed": false, "is_uncertain": false, "name": "Polity_suprapolity_relations", "supra_polity_relations": "nominal allegiance", "other_polity": null, "comment": null, "description": "Depends on whether we think of eg Dahomey as a separate polity. “The extent of the Old Oyo Kingdom had been a subject of debate among the professional and non-professional historians. […] Among the states incorporated into the Kingdom was Benin on the east, and Dahomey on the west. […] It was able to incorporate into the imperial power such sub-Yoruba states like Ajase-Ipo, Igbomina, Ekiti, Egba and Egbado (Atanda, 1973:5); and non-Yoruba groups like Dahomey.” §REF§Akinwumi, O. D. (1992). The Oyo-Borgu Military Alliance of 1835: A Case Study in the Pre-Colonial Military History. Transafrican Journal of History, 21, 159–170: 160. https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/collections/GWWIKDDM/items/J42GPW63/collection§REF§ Law suggests that the Kingdom of Dahomey and others were separate polities with a large degree of independence, but which still paid tribute to Oyo. Law outlines three categories of Oyo subjects, counting Dahomey and others as part of the third category, so it’s up for debate whether this counts as supra-polity relations or not. Categories are: “1. The area that, to use Araji’s phrase, ‘owed direct allegiance to the Alafin’, and was subject to a relatively centralized administration from the capital. […] 2. Those kingdoms whose dynasties were traditionally supposed to be descended from Oduduwa, the legendary king of Ile Ife, and over whom the Alafin claimed authority as the legitimate successor to Oduduwa’s kingship. Of these perhaps only the Egba were in any real sense subject to Oyo, but others (such as the Ijesa) were prepared to acknowledge loosely the suzerainty (or at least the senior status) of the Alafin. 3. States outside the Ife dynastic system which paid tribute to Oyo, such as Dahomey.” §REF§Law, R. (1977). The Oyo Empire c. 1600 – c. 1836: A West African Imperialism in the Era of the Atlantic Slave Trade. Oxford University Press: 84–85. https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/collections/GWWIKDDM/items/SB32ZPCF/collection§REF§" }, { "id": 365, "polity": { "id": 662, "name": "ni_whydah_k", "long_name": "Whydah", "start_year": 1671, "end_year": 1727 }, "year_from": null, "year_to": null, "tag": "TRS", "is_disputed": false, "is_uncertain": false, "name": "Polity_suprapolity_relations", "supra_polity_relations": "vassalage", "other_polity": null, "comment": null, "description": "“Originally tributary to Allada, it expanded dramatically under Wegbaja (c. 1680-1716), whom tradition remembers as the first king, and still more so under his successor Agaja (c. 1716-40), who conquered Allada and Whydah, in 1724 and 1727 respectively.” §REF§Isichei, Elizabeth. A History of African Societies to 1870. Cambridge University Press, 1997: 349. https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/collections/GWWIKDDM/items/Z4GK27CI/collection§REF§ “Huffon's authority was compromised not only by his age, but also by the fact that he did not, at least for the greater part of his reign, complete the traditional ceremonies of installation, so that he was never acknowledged as possessing fully legitimate authority; in particular, his accession did not receive the sanction of Whydah's traditional overlord, the king of Allada.” §REF§Law, Robin. “‘The Common People Were Divided’: Monarchy, Aristocracy and Political Factionalism in the Kingdom of Whydah, 1671-1727.” The International Journal of African Historical Studies, vol. 23, no. 2, 1990, pp. 201–29: 202. https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/collections/GWWIKDDM/items/8JKAH2V5/collection§REF§ “Whydah was probably already in rebellion against Allada by the mid- seventeenth century, when a contemporary source reports that the coastal village of \"Foulaen\" (as noted earlier, probably Glehue, the port of Whydah), although subject to the king of Allada, defied his authority, and even sent brigands by night to raid the coastal villages of his kingdom. Whydah was certainly understood by European observers to be independent of Allada by the 1680s. // “Although effectively independent, however, Whydah continued in some sense to acknowledge the sovereignty or suzerainty of Allada. Even after its rebellion the kings of Whydah continued to make occasional payments to those of Allada, which it is said the latter regarded as tribute but the former merely as gifts.” §REF§Law, Robin. “‘The Common People Were Divided’: Monarchy, Aristocracy and Political Factionalism in the Kingdom of Whydah, 1671-1727.” The International Journal of African Historical Studies, vol. 23, no. 2, 1990, pp. 201–29: 213. https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/collections/GWWIKDDM/items/8JKAH2V5/collection§REF§" }, { "id": 366, "polity": { "id": 668, "name": "ni_nri_k", "long_name": "Ọ̀ràézè Ǹrì", "start_year": 1043, "end_year": 1911 }, "year_from": null, "year_to": null, "tag": "TRS", "is_disputed": false, "is_uncertain": false, "name": "Polity_suprapolity_relations", "supra_polity_relations": "nominal allegiance", "other_polity": null, "comment": null, "description": "“The Kingdom of Nri (1043–1911) was the West African medieval state of the NriIgbo, a subgroup of the Igbo people, and is the oldest kingdom in Nigeria. The Kingdom of Nri was unusual in the history of world government in that its leader exercised no military power over his subjects. The kingdom existed as a sphere of religious and political influence over much of Igboland, and was administered by a priest-king called the eze Nri. The eze Nri managed trade and diplomacy on behalf of the Igbo people, and was the possessor of divine authority in religious matters.” §REF§Ngara, C. A. (n.d.). An Ethnohistorical Account Of Pre-Colonial Africa, African Kingdoms And African Historical States. 25:11. https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/collections/GWWIKDDM/items/UJG3ED8W/collection§REF§ “It has been argued that the \"pervasive ritual\" icons in the Igbo-Ukwu material served \"to project aspects of the pivotal role of the priest-king within Nri Igbo life and thought\" (Ray, 1987, p. 77). The \"combination of fear, belief, supernatural sanctions, and fines that typically accompany ritual\" seem to have been an integral part of \"securing compliant behavior and resolving disputes\" in the foundations of sociopolitical development in Igboland (Mclntosh, 1999, p. 12).” §REF§Ogundiran, A. (2005). Four Millennia of Cultural History in Nigeria (ca. 2000 B.C.—A.D. 1900): Archaeological Perspectives. Journal of World Prehistory, 19(2), 133–168: 148. https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/collections/GWWIKDDM/items/PK7F26DP/collection§REF§" }, { "id": 367, "polity": { "id": 671, "name": "ni_dahomey_k", "long_name": "Foys", "start_year": 1715, "end_year": 1894 }, "year_from": null, "year_to": null, "tag": "TRS", "is_disputed": false, "is_uncertain": false, "name": "Polity_suprapolity_relations", "supra_polity_relations": "nominal allegiance", "other_polity": { "id": 661, "name": "ni_oyo_emp_2", "long_name": "Ilú-ọba Ọ̀yọ́", "start_year": 1601, "end_year": 1835 }, "comment": null, "description": "Certainly early in the history of the Dahomey, it appears they were subordinate to the Oyos, a tributary state. Tributary status ended under Dahomean king Gezo (or Gezu), who reigned 1823–1858. “It is, first of all, well established that from 1708 (Dalzel 1793:14) to 1827, Dahomey was under continuous pressure from the Oyos, the Yoruba-speakers who lay to the northeast. Through the use of cavalry and firearms, the Oyos were able to defeat the Dahomean footsoldiers, and for almost a century held Dahomey in tribute, without occupying the area in force. It is even likely that the Oyos considered Dahomey just another conquered province (Burton 1864:11:197ff). Dalzel claims that the Oyos had besieged Allada as early as 1698 (Dalzel 1793:14). It is quite probable, therefore, that they had made frequent incursions into the Allada-Kano-Abomey area prior to Tacoodonou's assault on Abomey. If their purpose had been tribute, as it was in later years, then the sudden expansion of the Foys under Tacoodonou may have been inspired by the need to set up a territorial buffer against the horsemen from the northeast. Such a buffer would also have served as a centralized tribute-collecting agency. Once the game of tribute had been learned, Tacoodonou and his followers would certainly have attempted to appropriate as much as possible for themselves. And the long struggle between Dahomey and the Oyos, not terminated until the reign of Gezu, eighth in the line of ten Dahomean \"kings,\" would have resulted. It should be noted that even Gezu, at the height of Dahomean power, was not capable of defeating the traditional enemy directly. By 1827, certain Hausa-speaking groups fleeing before the Fulani, had overrun portions of Yoruba territory and so weakened the Oyo Yorubas in a protracted war that Gezu's victory was merely a coup-de-grace (Ellis 1890:309-310).” §REF§Diamond, S. (1996). DAHOMEY: THE DEVELOPMENT OF A PROTO-STATE: An Essay in Historical Reconstruction. Dialectical Anthropology, 21(2), 121–216: 131. https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/collections/GWWIKDDM/items/MW2G58RP/collection§REF§ “The extent of the Old Oyo Kingdom had been a subject of debate among the professional and non-professional historians. […] Among the states incorporated into the Kingdom was Benin on the east, and Dahomey on the west. […] It was able to incorporate into the imperial power such sub-Yoruba states like Ajase-Ipo, Igbomina, Ekiti, Egba and Egbado (Atanda, 1973:5); and non-Yoruba groups like Dahomey.” §REF§Akinwumi, O. D. (1992). The Oyo-Borgu Military Alliance of 1835: A Case Study in the Pre-Colonial Military History. Transafrican Journal of History, 21, 159–170: 160. https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/collections/GWWIKDDM/items/J42GPW63/collection§REF§ Law suggests that the Kingdom of Dahomey and others were separate polities with a large degree of independence, but which still paid tribute to Oyo. Law outlines three categories of Oyo subjects, counting Dahomey and others as part of the third category, so it’s up for debate whether this counts as supra-polity relations or not. Categories are: “1. The area that, to use Araji’s phrase, ‘owed direct allegiance to the Alafin’, and was subject to a relatively centralized administration from the capital. […] 2. Those kingdoms whose dynasties were traditionally supposed to be descended from Oduduwa, the legendary king of Ile Ife, and over whom the Alafin claimed authority as the legitimate successor to Oduduwa’s kingship. Of these perhaps only the Egba were in any real sense subject to Oyo, but others (such as the Ijesa) were prepared to acknowledge loosely the suzerainty (or at least the senior status) of the Alafin. 3. States outside the Ife dynastic system which paid tribute to Oyo, such as Dahomey.” §REF§Law, R. (1977). The Oyo Empire c. 1600 – c. 1836: A West African Imperialism in the Era of the Atlantic Slave Trade. Oxford University Press: 84–85. https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/collections/GWWIKDDM/items/SB32ZPCF/collection§REF§ “In 1818 Gezo, the king who was to become the most revered in Dahomean history, came to the throne. He early proved himself a consummate politician and a skilful warrior and also established a close control over the whole kingdom by organizing a highly specialized administration. He managed to wrest independence from his Oyo suzerains, who were by now weakened by the Fulani invasions.” §REF§Lombard, J. (1976). The Kingdom of Dahomey. In West African Kingdoms in the Nineteenth Century (Repr, pp. 70–92). Published for the International African Institute by Oxford University Press: 73. https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/collections/GWWIKDDM/items/T6WTVSHZ/collection§REF§" }, { "id": 368, "polity": { "id": 673, "name": "ni_wukari_fed", "long_name": "Wukari Federation", "start_year": 1820, "end_year": 1899 }, "year_from": null, "year_to": null, "tag": "TRS", "is_disputed": false, "is_uncertain": false, "name": "Polity_suprapolity_relations", "supra_polity_relations": "vassalage", "other_polity": null, "comment": null, "description": "Seems that while others paid tribute to Wukari/Aku, Wukari also paid some form of tribute to other states. “Around the seventeenth century one major change did occur, and that was the contracting of a peace pact between Kwararafa and the Mais of Borno. It followed the most massive incursion to date of Kwararafa into Hausaland and an equally resounding defeat of the insurgent invaders by Mai Ali of Borno with Tuareg assistance in 1668. There were probably a peace agreement immediately after this. Mr. John Lavers, quoting Vatican documents, identifies a peace agreement (renewed or re-establishment?) in 1701. The pact made with Borno was confirmed by an exchange of ambassadors and the Borno ambassador, the Zanna, remained in Wukari until the twentieth century.” §REF§Gavin, R. J. (1979). Some Perspectives on Nigerian History. Journal of the Historical Society of Nigeria, 9(4), 15–38: 34. https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/collections/GWWIKDDM/items/BPED9ADF/collection§REF§ “About 1840, Haman Sali of Missau, Burba of Bakundi, and Madaiki Hassan of Wase, laid siege to Wukari. Large numbers of Munshis who were \"amana kasua\" (tributaries) are said to have helped in the defence. Both sides being tired out, Wukari gave in and supplied the starving Fulani army with food. It is very uncertain whether they ever paid tribute, though Bishop Crowther, who accompanied the Pleiad expedition of 1854, mentions Wukari as independent, but paying tribute to Bauchi. Doubtless, recognising that the Fulani were paramount, they were wont to send occasional presents of slaves to the Emirs of Bauchi, Zaria, and Muri.” §REF§Ruxton, F. H. (1908). Notes on the Tribes of the Muri Province. Journal of the Royal African Society, 7(28), 374–386: 379. https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/collections/GWWIKDDM/items/2AXUQGFB/collection§REF§" }, { "id": 369, "polity": { "id": 684, "name": "ug_toro_k", "long_name": "Toro", "start_year": 1830, "end_year": 1896 }, "year_from": null, "year_to": null, "tag": "TRS", "is_disputed": false, "is_uncertain": false, "name": "Polity_suprapolity_relations", "supra_polity_relations": "none", "other_polity": null, "comment": null, "description": "" }, { "id": 370, "polity": { "id": 689, "name": "rw_ndorwa_k", "long_name": "Ndorwa", "start_year": 1700, "end_year": 1800 }, "year_from": null, "year_to": null, "tag": "TRS", "is_disputed": false, "is_uncertain": false, "name": "Polity_suprapolity_relations", "supra_polity_relations": "none", "other_polity": null, "comment": null, "description": "\"At the dawn of the eighteenth century the kingdoms surrounding central Rwanda in a half-circle from the northeast to the southwest that maintained direct contact with the Nyiginya state were Ndorwa or Mpororo, Mubari, Karagwe, Gisaka, Bugesera, and, a little later, Burundi. [...] Most of the time hostile relations prevailed among all these kingdoms. They usually fought each other in order to rustle cattle, but sometimes also to increase their territory. They welcomed fugitives from the neighboring kingdoms and sometimes gave shelter to foreign princes or kings from these kingdoms, especially during succession struggles. Sometimes two kingdoms allied themselves against a third one. But one does not find any systematic pattern of alliance among the kingdoms, not even on the order of my neighbor is my enemy and my neighbor’s-neighbor is my friend.\" §REF§(Vansina 2004: 110-111) Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/collections/GWWIKDDM/items/5J4MRHUB/collection.§REF§" }, { "id": 371, "polity": { "id": 691, "name": "rw_mubari_k", "long_name": "Mubari", "start_year": 1700, "end_year": 1896 }, "year_from": null, "year_to": null, "tag": "TRS", "is_disputed": false, "is_uncertain": false, "name": "Polity_suprapolity_relations", "supra_polity_relations": "none", "other_polity": null, "comment": null, "description": "\"At the dawn of the eighteenth century the kingdoms surrounding central Rwanda in a half-circle from the northeast to the southwest that maintained direct contact with the Nyiginya state were Ndorwa or Mpororo, Mubari, Karagwe, Gisaka, Bugesera, and, a little later, Burundi. [...] Most of the time hostile relations prevailed among all these kingdoms. They usually fought each other in order to rustle cattle, but sometimes also to increase their territory. They welcomed fugitives from the neighboring kingdoms and sometimes gave shelter to foreign princes or kings from these kingdoms, especially during succession struggles. Sometimes two kingdoms allied themselves against a third one. But one does not find any systematic pattern of alliance among the kingdoms, not even on the order of my neighbor is my enemy and my neighbor’s-neighbor is my friend.\" §REF§(Vansina 2004: 110-111) Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/collections/GWWIKDDM/items/5J4MRHUB/collection.§REF§" }, { "id": 372, "polity": { "id": 692, "name": "rw_gisaka_k", "long_name": "Gisaka", "start_year": 1700, "end_year": 1867 }, "year_from": null, "year_to": null, "tag": "TRS", "is_disputed": false, "is_uncertain": false, "name": "Polity_suprapolity_relations", "supra_polity_relations": "none", "other_polity": null, "comment": null, "description": "\"At the dawn of the eighteenth century the kingdoms surrounding central Rwanda in a half-circle from the northeast to the southwest that maintained direct contact with the Nyiginya state were Ndorwa or Mpororo, Mubari, Karagwe, Gisaka, Bugesera, and, a little later, Burundi. [...] Most of the time hostile relations prevailed among all these kingdoms. They usually fought each other in order to rustle cattle, but sometimes also to increase their territory. They welcomed fugitives from the neighboring kingdoms and sometimes gave shelter to foreign princes or kings from these kingdoms, especially during succession struggles. Sometimes two kingdoms allied themselves against a third one. But one does not find any systematic pattern of alliance among the kingdoms, not even on the order of my neighbor is my enemy and my neighbor’s-neighbor is my friend.\" §REF§(Vansina 2004: 110-111) Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/collections/GWWIKDDM/items/5J4MRHUB/collection.§REF§" }, { "id": 373, "polity": { "id": 694, "name": "rw_bugesera_k", "long_name": "Bugesera", "start_year": 1700, "end_year": 1799 }, "year_from": null, "year_to": null, "tag": "TRS", "is_disputed": false, "is_uncertain": false, "name": "Polity_suprapolity_relations", "supra_polity_relations": "none", "other_polity": null, "comment": null, "description": "\"At the dawn of the eighteenth century the kingdoms surrounding central Rwanda in a half-circle from the northeast to the southwest that maintained direct contact with the Nyiginya state were Ndorwa or Mpororo, Mubari, Karagwe, Gisaka, Bugesera, and, a little later, Burundi. [...] Most of the time hostile relations prevailed among all these kingdoms. They usually fought each other in order to rustle cattle, but sometimes also to increase their territory. They welcomed fugitives from the neighboring kingdoms and sometimes gave shelter to foreign princes or kings from these kingdoms, especially during succession struggles. Sometimes two kingdoms allied themselves against a third one. But one does not find any systematic pattern of alliance among the kingdoms, not even on the order of my neighbor is my enemy and my neighbor’s-neighbor is my friend.\" §REF§(Vansina 2004: 110-111) Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/collections/GWWIKDDM/items/5J4MRHUB/collection.§REF§" }, { "id": 375, "polity": { "id": 814, "name": "es_aragon_crown", "long_name": "Crown of Aragon", "start_year": 1164, "end_year": 1515 }, "year_from": 1469, "year_to": 1515, "tag": "TRS", "is_disputed": false, "is_uncertain": false, "name": "Polity_suprapolity_relations", "supra_polity_relations": "personal union", "other_polity": { "id": 815, "name": "es_castile_crown", "long_name": "Crown of Castile", "start_year": 1231, "end_year": 1515 }, "comment": null, "description": "" }, { "id": 378, "polity": { "id": 598, "name": "cz_bohemian_k_1", "long_name": "Kingdom of Bohemia - Přemyslid Dynasty", "start_year": 1198, "end_year": 1309 }, "year_from": 1296, "year_to": 1306, "tag": "TRS", "is_disputed": false, "is_uncertain": false, "name": "Polity_suprapolity_relations", "supra_polity_relations": "personal union", "other_polity": { "id": 809, "name": "pl_piast_dyn_2", "long_name": "Polish Kingdom - Piast Dynasty Fragmented Period", "start_year": 1139, "end_year": 1382 }, "comment": null, "description": "Wenceslaus II and his son Wenceslaus III ruled Poland in personal union.§REF§Rosamond McKitterick, ed., The New Cambridge Medieval History (Cambridge [England] ; New York, NY, USA: Cambridge University Press, 1995).<a href=\"https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/SQR4J7RI\" target=\"_blank\" class=\"fw-bolder\"> <b> Zotero link: SQR4J7RI</b></a>§REF§" }, { "id": 380, "polity": { "id": 811, "name": "hu_later_dyn", "long_name": "Hungary Kingdom - Anjou and Later Dynasties", "start_year": 1302, "end_year": 1526 }, "year_from": 1419, "year_to": 1437, "tag": "TRS", "is_disputed": false, "is_uncertain": false, "name": "Polity_suprapolity_relations", "supra_polity_relations": "personal union", "other_polity": { "id": 568, "name": "cz_bohemian_k_2", "long_name": "Kingdom of Bohemia - Luxembourgian and Jagiellonian Dynasty", "start_year": 1310, "end_year": 1526 }, "comment": null, "description": "Sigismund of Luxembourg held the Kingdom of Bohemia in personal union from 1419 to 1437.§REF§Pál Engel, The Realm of St. Stephen: A History of Medieval Hungary, 895-1526 (London ; New York, NY: I.B. Tauris, 2005).<a href=\"https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/9BBKM3AR\" target=\"_blank\" class=\"fw-bolder\"> <b> Zotero link: 9BBKM3AR</b></a>§REF§" }, { "id": 381, "polity": { "id": 334, "name": "pl_jagiellonian_dyn", "long_name": "Poland-Lithuania Kingdom", "start_year": 1386, "end_year": 1569 }, "year_from": 1440, "year_to": 1444, "tag": "TRS", "is_disputed": false, "is_uncertain": false, "name": "Polity_suprapolity_relations", "supra_polity_relations": "personal union", "other_polity": { "id": 811, "name": "hu_later_dyn", "long_name": "Hungary Kingdom - Anjou and Later Dynasties", "start_year": 1302, "end_year": 1526 }, "comment": null, "description": "Vladislaus I (Władysław III of Poland / Vladislaus I of Hungary) held the Kingdom of Hungary in personal union from 1440 to 1444.§REF§Pál Engel, The Realm of St. Stephen: A History of Medieval Hungary, 895-1526 (London ; New York, NY: I.B. Tauris, 2005).<a href=\"https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/9BBKM3AR\" target=\"_blank\" class=\"fw-bolder\"> <b> Zotero link: 9BBKM3AR</b></a>§REF§" }, { "id": 384, "polity": { "id": 568, "name": "cz_bohemian_k_2", "long_name": "Kingdom of Bohemia - Luxembourgian and Jagiellonian Dynasty", "start_year": 1310, "end_year": 1526 }, "year_from": 1490, "year_to": 1516, "tag": "TRS", "is_disputed": false, "is_uncertain": false, "name": "Polity_suprapolity_relations", "supra_polity_relations": "personal union", "other_polity": { "id": 811, "name": "hu_later_dyn", "long_name": "Hungary Kingdom - Anjou and Later Dynasties", "start_year": 1302, "end_year": 1526 }, "comment": null, "description": "Vladislaus II controlled the Kingdom of Hungary in personal union from 1490–1516.§REF§Jaroslav Pánek and Oldřich Tůma, A History of the Czech Lands (Prague: Karolinum Press, 2009).<a href=\"https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/5MFK58ZP\" target=\"_blank\" class=\"fw-bolder\"> <b> Zotero link: 5MFK58ZP</b></a>§REF§" }, { "id": 385, "polity": { "id": 811, "name": "hu_later_dyn", "long_name": "Hungary Kingdom - Anjou and Later Dynasties", "start_year": 1302, "end_year": 1526 }, "year_from": 1516, "year_to": 1526, "tag": "TRS", "is_disputed": false, "is_uncertain": false, "name": "Polity_suprapolity_relations", "supra_polity_relations": "personal union", "other_polity": { "id": 568, "name": "cz_bohemian_k_2", "long_name": "Kingdom of Bohemia - Luxembourgian and Jagiellonian Dynasty", "start_year": 1310, "end_year": 1526 }, "comment": null, "description": "Louis II of Hungary (Louis the Jagiellonian) ruled both Bohemia and Hungary from 1516–1526.§REF§Pál Engel, The Realm of St. Stephen: A History of Medieval Hungary, 895-1526 (London ; New York, NY: I.B. Tauris, 2005).<a href=\"https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/9BBKM3AR\" target=\"_blank\" class=\"fw-bolder\"> <b> Zotero link: 9BBKM3AR</b></a>§REF§" }, { "id": 386, "polity": { "id": 84, "name": "es_spanish_emp_1", "long_name": "Spanish Empire I", "start_year": 1516, "end_year": 1715 }, "year_from": 1519, "year_to": 1556, "tag": "TRS", "is_disputed": false, "is_uncertain": false, "name": "Polity_suprapolity_relations", "supra_polity_relations": "personal union", "other_polity": { "id": 565, "name": "at_habsburg_1", "long_name": "Austria - Habsburg Dynasty I", "start_year": 1454, "end_year": 1648 }, "comment": null, "description": "Charles I (Charles V) held the Archduchy of Austria from 1519 to 1521 before he abdicated as Duke of Austria in favour of his brother, Ferdinand I, who had also been made King of the Romans in 1531. Ferdinand continued to rule in his name as Imperial Lieutenant until Charles I's abdication in 1556.§REF§Martyn C. Rady, The Emperor Charles V, Seminar studies in history (London ; New York: Longman, 1988).<a href=\"https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/Y6MXWNC7\" target=\"_blank\" class=\"fw-bolder\"> <b> Zotero link: Y6MXWNC7</b></a>§REF§§REF§Fichtner, Paula. 2017. The Habsburg Monarchy, 1490-1848: Attributes of Empire. Macmillan International Higher Education. 116, 123, 124–5, 130.§REF§ §REF§Whaley, Joachim. 2018. \"The early modern empire (1): from Maximilian I to the Thirty Years Wars\" in The Holy Roman Empire: A Very Short Introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press.§REF§" }, { "id": 387, "polity": { "id": 798, "name": "de_east_francia", "long_name": "East Francia", "start_year": 842, "end_year": 919 }, "year_from": null, "year_to": null, "tag": "TRS", "is_disputed": false, "is_uncertain": false, "name": "Polity_suprapolity_relations", "supra_polity_relations": "nominal allegiance", "other_polity": { "id": 311, "name": "fr_carolingian_emp_2", "long_name": "Carolingian Empire II", "start_year": 840, "end_year": 987 }, "comment": null, "description": "" }, { "id": 389, "polity": { "id": 568, "name": "cz_bohemian_k_2", "long_name": "Kingdom of Bohemia - Luxembourgian and Jagiellonian Dynasty", "start_year": 1310, "end_year": 1526 }, "year_from": null, "year_to": null, "tag": "TRS", "is_disputed": false, "is_uncertain": false, "name": "Polity_suprapolity_relations", "supra_polity_relations": "vassalage", "other_polity": { "id": 800, "name": "de_empire_3", "long_name": "Holy Roman Empire - Fragmented Period", "start_year": 1255, "end_year": 1453 }, "comment": "The King of Bohemia was an immediate vassal within the HRE structure. Even though Bohemia was more autonomous than many other principalities, it remained within the Empire’s feudal hierarchy. <a class=\"fw-bold\" href=\"https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/6LBQ5ARI\">[Agnew_Internet_Archive 2004]</a>", "description": "" }, { "id": 390, "polity": { "id": 598, "name": "cz_bohemian_k_1", "long_name": "Kingdom of Bohemia - Přemyslid Dynasty", "start_year": 1198, "end_year": 1309 }, "year_from": null, "year_to": null, "tag": "TRS", "is_disputed": false, "is_uncertain": false, "name": "Polity_suprapolity_relations", "supra_polity_relations": "vassalage", "other_polity": { "id": 799, "name": "de_empire_2", "long_name": "Holy Roman Empire - Hohenstaufen and Welf Dynasties", "start_year": 1126, "end_year": 1254 }, "comment": null, "description": "Bohemia acknowledged the Emperor's suzerainty and participated actively in the affairs of the Empire, fulfilling duties that are typical of a vassal state, while also maintaining a significant degree of autonomy in internal governance.§REF§Jörg K. Hoensch, Geschichte Böhmens: von der slavischen Landnahme bis zur Gegenwart.<a href=\"https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/APL977ZI\" target=\"_blank\" class=\"fw-bolder\"> <b> Zotero link: APL977ZI</b></a>§REF§" }, { "id": 391, "polity": { "id": 853, "name": "ch_swiss_conf_1", "long_name": "Old Swiss Confederacy", "start_year": 1315, "end_year": 1515 }, "year_from": null, "year_to": null, "tag": "TRS", "is_disputed": false, "is_uncertain": false, "name": "Polity_suprapolity_relations", "supra_polity_relations": "nominal allegiance", "other_polity": { "id": 800, "name": "de_empire_3", "long_name": "Holy Roman Empire - Fragmented Period", "start_year": 1255, "end_year": 1453 }, "comment": "By the 14th and especially the 15th century, Swiss obligations to the Emperor had become largely symbolic, with little practical subordination. They continued to acknowledge (at least on paper) that they were part of the Empire—imperial immediacy was still the formal legal status of many Swiss cantons—but the Emperor had virtually no direct influence there. <a class=\"fw-bold\" href=\"https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/XQB5373V\">[Gasser_Keller 1932]</a>", "description": "" } ] }