Home Region:  West Africa (Africa)

Whydah

1671 CE 1727 CE

G SC New WA  ni_whydah_k



Preceding Entity: Add one more here.
1100 CE 1724 CE Allada (ni_allada_k)    [None]

Succeeding Entity:
No Polity found. Add one here.

No General Descriptions provided.

General Variables
Social Complexity Variables
Warfare Variables (Military Technologies)
Fortifications
Military use of Metals
Projectiles
Handheld weapons
Animals used in warfare
Armor
Naval technology
Religion Tolerance Coding in Progress.
Human Sacrifice Coding in Progress.
Crisis Consequences Coding in Progress.
Power Transitions Coding in Progress.

NGA Settlements:

Year Range Whydah (ni_whydah_k) was in:
Home NGA: None

General Variables
Identity and Location
Utm Zone:
30 N

Original Name:
Whydah

“The Kingdom of Whydah (Hueda),1 situated on the "Slave Coast" of West Africa (in what is today the Republic of Benin), emerged as an independent power only in the late seventeenth century.” [1]

[1]: 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: 201. https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/collections/GWWIKDDM/items/8JKAH2V5/collection


Capital:
Savi

“The origins and early history of the Whydah kingdom are obscure, and their reconstruction is complicated by the fact that the two principal communities which comprised it, the capital city of Savi and the coastal port of Glehue, apparently had distinct origins.” [1]

[1]: 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: 203. https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/collections/GWWIKDDM/items/8JKAH2V5/collection


Alternative Name:
Hueda

“The Kingdom of Whydah (Hueda),1 situated on the "Slave Coast" of West Africa (in what is today the Republic of Benin), emerged as an independent power only in the late seventeenth century.” [1] “This circumscribed settlement isolated the European traders by separating them from their naval reinforcements at the coastal port of Ouidah.” [2] “The second letter of the third section of the 1688 Description comprises an extended description of the kingdom of "Juda" or Whydah (133-38). Barbot describes the natural resources of the country, the conduct of the European trade there, the local king and his court, the local religion (especially the veneration of snakes), the administration of justice (including a form of trial by ordeal, the accused being obliged to swim across a crocodile-infested river), burial customs (including human sacrifice), the ceremony of the blood pact, agriculture and crafts, weaponry, the local currency (of cowry shells), domestic slavery and polygamy, and much else besides.” [3]

[1]: 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: 201. https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/collections/GWWIKDDM/items/8JKAH2V5/collection

[2]: Norman, N. L., & Kelly, K. G. (2004). Landscape Politics: The Serpent Ditch and the Rainbow in West Africa. American Anthropologist, 106(1), 98–110: 101. https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/collections/GWWIKDDM/items/98WGJINI/collection

[3]: Law, Robin. “Jean Barbot as a Source for the Slave Coast of West Africa.” History in Africa, vol. 9, 1982, pp. 155–73: 159. https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/collections/GWWIKDDM/items/N4D6NU7J/collection

Alternative Name:
Ouidah

“The Kingdom of Whydah (Hueda),1 situated on the "Slave Coast" of West Africa (in what is today the Republic of Benin), emerged as an independent power only in the late seventeenth century.” [1] “This circumscribed settlement isolated the European traders by separating them from their naval reinforcements at the coastal port of Ouidah.” [2] “The second letter of the third section of the 1688 Description comprises an extended description of the kingdom of "Juda" or Whydah (133-38). Barbot describes the natural resources of the country, the conduct of the European trade there, the local king and his court, the local religion (especially the veneration of snakes), the administration of justice (including a form of trial by ordeal, the accused being obliged to swim across a crocodile-infested river), burial customs (including human sacrifice), the ceremony of the blood pact, agriculture and crafts, weaponry, the local currency (of cowry shells), domestic slavery and polygamy, and much else besides.” [3]

[1]: 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: 201. https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/collections/GWWIKDDM/items/8JKAH2V5/collection

[2]: Norman, N. L., & Kelly, K. G. (2004). Landscape Politics: The Serpent Ditch and the Rainbow in West Africa. American Anthropologist, 106(1), 98–110: 101. https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/collections/GWWIKDDM/items/98WGJINI/collection

[3]: Law, Robin. “Jean Barbot as a Source for the Slave Coast of West Africa.” History in Africa, vol. 9, 1982, pp. 155–73: 159. https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/collections/GWWIKDDM/items/N4D6NU7J/collection

Alternative Name:
Juda

“The Kingdom of Whydah (Hueda),1 situated on the "Slave Coast" of West Africa (in what is today the Republic of Benin), emerged as an independent power only in the late seventeenth century.” [1] “This circumscribed settlement isolated the European traders by separating them from their naval reinforcements at the coastal port of Ouidah.” [2] “The second letter of the third section of the 1688 Description comprises an extended description of the kingdom of "Juda" or Whydah (133-38). Barbot describes the natural resources of the country, the conduct of the European trade there, the local king and his court, the local religion (especially the veneration of snakes), the administration of justice (including a form of trial by ordeal, the accused being obliged to swim across a crocodile-infested river), burial customs (including human sacrifice), the ceremony of the blood pact, agriculture and crafts, weaponry, the local currency (of cowry shells), domestic slavery and polygamy, and much else besides.” [3]

[1]: 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: 201. https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/collections/GWWIKDDM/items/8JKAH2V5/collection

[2]: Norman, N. L., & Kelly, K. G. (2004). Landscape Politics: The Serpent Ditch and the Rainbow in West Africa. American Anthropologist, 106(1), 98–110: 101. https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/collections/GWWIKDDM/items/98WGJINI/collection

[3]: Law, Robin. “Jean Barbot as a Source for the Slave Coast of West Africa.” History in Africa, vol. 9, 1982, pp. 155–73: 159. https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/collections/GWWIKDDM/items/N4D6NU7J/collection


Temporal Bounds
Peak Years:
[1671 CE ➜ 1700 CE]
 

“From the 1670s, however, it developed into a major center of the Atlantic slave trade, rivalling and then eclipsing Allada as the principal supplier of slaves in the region. Its political and commercial florescence proved to be brief, falling before the expansion of the hinterland kingdom of Dahomey in the 1720s. The Dahomians, having already conquered Allada in 1724, invaded Whydah in 1727, inflicting devastating destruction upon the country and driving out its king and much of its population into exile to the west.2 In the years preceding this conquest in 1727, Whydah had suffered protracted and bitter internal disputes, degenerating on more than one occasion into actual civil war, and these domestic divisions clearly contributed to its failure to present any effective resistance to the Dahomian conquest.” [1] “By the early seventeenth century, Allada was the leading Aja polity. It first appeared on a map of the 1480s but was clearly more ancient. In the mid-seventeenth century, the coastal polity of Whydah, previously subject to Allada, gained its independence and from 1671 on, it dominated the external trade of the coast.” [2]

[1]: 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: 201. https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/collections/GWWIKDDM/items/8JKAH2V5/collection

[2]: Isichei, Elizabeth. A History of African Societies to 1870. Cambridge University Press, 1997: 348. https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/collections/GWWIKDDM/items/Z4GK27CI/collection


Duration:
[1671 CE ➜ 1727 CE]
 

“By the early seventeenth century, Allada was the leading Aja polity. It first appeared on a map of the 1480s but was clearly more ancient. In the mid-seventeenth century, the coastal polity of Whydah, previously subject to Allada, gained its independence and from 1671 on, it dominated the external trade of the coast. The total demographic impact of the Atlantic slave trade is a complex and much disputed question, but there can be little doubt that it caused regional depopulation in some areas. Seventeenth-century observers stressed the density of the population round Whydah, whereas in the nineteenth century they were struck by its absence, and elephants — once extinct in the area — had returned.” [1] “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.” [2] “The Kingdom of Whydah (Hueda),1 situated on the "Slave Coast" of West Africa (in what is today the Republic of Benin), emerged as an independent power only in the late seventeenth century. Earlier, it had apparently been an unimportant dependency of the larger kingdom of Allada, in the interior to the north-east. From the 1670s, however, it developed into a major center of the Atlantic slave trade, rivalling and then eclipsing Allada as the principal supplier of slaves in the region. Its political and commercial florescence proved to be brief, falling before the expansion of the hinterland kingdom of Dahomey in the 1720s. The Dahomians, having already conquered Allada in 1724, invaded Whydah in 1727, inflicting devastating destruction upon the country and driving out its king and much of its population into exile to the west.2 In the years preceding this conquest in 1727, Whydah had suffered protracted and bitter internal disputes, degenerating on more than one occasion into actual civil war, and these domestic divisions clearly contributed to its failure to present any effective resistance to the Dahomian conquest.” [3]

[1]: Isichei, Elizabeth. A History of African Societies to 1870. Cambridge University Press, 1997: 348–349. https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/collections/GWWIKDDM/items/Z4GK27CI/collection

[2]: 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

[3]: 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: 201. https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/collections/GWWIKDDM/items/8JKAH2V5/collection


Political and Cultural Relations
Suprapolity Relations:
vassalage to [---]

“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.” [1] “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.” [2] “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.” [3]

[1]: 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

[2]: 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

[3]: 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


Succeeding Entity:
Dahomey

“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.” [1]

[1]: 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


Preceding Entity:
1100 CE 1724 CE Allada (ni_allada_k)    [None]  
 

“The Kingdom of Whydah (Hueda),1 situated on the "Slave Coast" of West Africa (in what is today the Republic of Benin), emerged as an independent power only in the late seventeenth century. Earlier, it had apparently been an unimportant dependency of the larger kingdom of Allada, in the interior to the north-east.” [1] “The politics of Whydah were also profoundly influenced by its relations with its more powerful neighbor to the north-east, the kingdom of Allada. Several European sources of the late seventeenth and early eighteenth centuries report that Whydah had in early times been subject to Alladah. The origin of this relationship, according to one account, was that the territory had belonged to Allada prior to the settlement in it of the founders of the Whydah kingdom. At some point, however, Whydah had revolted, defeated Allada in battle, and made itself independent. […] 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.” [2]

[1]: 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: 201. https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/collections/GWWIKDDM/items/8JKAH2V5/collection

[2]: 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


Degree of Centralization:
confederated state

“What is clear is that those chiefs who served as governors of subordinate villages of the kingdom enjoyed a considerable degree of autonomy in their local administration: as was noted in the 1690s, ‘these in the King’s absence and in their Vice-royalties, command as arbitrarily and keep up as great state as the King himself.’ The governors exercised an independent local judicial authority in minor cases, acted as spokesmen before the king on behalf of those under their government, and transmitted their tribute to him. They also raised contingents of soldiers for the national army, and commanded them in battle. The king’s power in practice was clearly limited by that of these provincial governors, and its effectiveness dependent upon their cooperation.” [1]

[1]: 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: 208–209. https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/collections/GWWIKDDM/items/8JKAH2V5/collection


Language
Linguistic Family:
Niger-Congo

WALS classification.


Language:
Ajagbe

WALS classification is Ajabge; sometimes also called Aja. “In this paper, as elsewhere (see Law and Asiwaju forthcoming), the term Aja will be given a comprehensive interpretation and will be held to cover the groups whose original homesteads are found mostly in the region between the Weme and the Volta rivers and generally south of latitude 9? N, who speak what are more or less dialects of the same Kwa language and whose traditional ruling classes profess a common origin usually traced to Tado. Apart from the nucleus, referred to by Newbury as ’Aja Proper’, who occupy the Mono River valley along the present Togo-Benin boundary, other important sub-groups are the Ewe of today’s Togo and Ghana; the Fon of ancient Allada, Agbome (Abomey), and Whydah or Hueda and the Gun of Porto Novo (new Allada).” [1]

[1]: Asiwaju, A. I. “The Aja-Speaking Peoples of Nigeria: A Note on Their Origins, Settlement and Cultural Adaptation up to 1945.” Africa: Journal of the International African Institute, vol. 49, no. 1, 1979, pp. 15–28: 16. https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/collections/GWWIKDDM/items/2XUNFSVW/collection


Religion
Religious Tradition:
Vodun

Temple of Dangbe is, at least today, described as a Vodun temple, but no specific references to this in the literature. “The principal shrine of Dangbe at this period, however, was located at the Hueda capital Savi, rather than in Ouidah; its relocation in Oudah being a consequence of the destruction of Savi in the Dahomian conquest of the 1720s. In Ouidah itself in recent times, it is in fact Hu rather than Dangbe who has been regarded as first in status among local vodun”. [1] “When local people speak of Ouidah’s special religious status, however, they are generally referring to something rather different: the organized cults of the vodun. […] Rather than thinking of vodun as a single religion worshipping a pantheon of many gods, it is better conceptualized as comprising a number of distinct and separate ‘churches’. What distinguishes Ouidah above all is the sheer number of vodun worshipped in the town. A European visitor in 1784–5 reported that the town contained more than 30 ‘public fetish temples’, but this was certainly an underestimate; a survey in 1937 counted a total of 104 vodun ‘temples’, and the quarters of the town that already existed in the eighteenth century – Tové, Ahouandjigo, Sogbadji, Docomè and Fonsaramè – accounted for the great majority of these, no fewer than 79. The total of vodun worshipped is greater since, although some vodun have more than one temple, several different vodun are normally worshipped within each temple.” [2]

[1]: Law, Robin. Ouidah: The Social History of a West African Slaving “port” 1727-1892. Ohio State University Press, 2004: 22–23. https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/collections/GWWIKDDM/items/NQ5VFMUD/collection

[2]: Law, Robin. Ouidah: The Social History of a West African Slaving “port” 1727-1892. Ohio State University Press, 2004: 89. https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/collections/GWWIKDDM/items/NQ5VFMUD/collection


Religion Family:
Vodun

“Understanding of the distribution of political power in Whydah also requires consideration of the sphere of religion, which both legitimated and circumscribed the actions of the ruling elite. The most important national cult in Whydah was that of the god Dangbe (incarnated in the royal python), which was celebrated by annual public processions to the principal Dangbe shrine. Dangbe was primarily concerned with regulation of the weather and of agricultural fertility, but was also invoked for political purposes, "on all occasions relating to their government." Some European accounts imply that the worship of Dangbe was controlled by the king, the head of the cult being an official of the royal palace. It appears, however, that the Dangbe priesthood had rather more autonomy vis-a-vis the king than this suggests, since other evidence shows that King Agbangla in the 1690s expressed resentment at the scale of offerings which he was obliged to make to the cult and sought to reduce the expense which they involved. There was also a publicly celebrated cult of the deceased kings of the royal dynasty, with annual processions to offer sacrifices at their tombs. These did not, however, attain the elaboration of the comparable "Annual Customs" of the kingdom of Dahomey later, where these rather than the worship of any of the gods constituted the principal national religious ceremony. The "Annual Customs" in Whydah are mentioned only in a single contemporary account, and were clearly of much less political significance than the cult of the snake god Dangbe.” [1]

[1]: 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: 209. https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/collections/GWWIKDDM/items/8JKAH2V5/collection



Social Complexity Variables
Social Scale
Polity Territory:
1,000 km2

in squared kilometers. Area calculated using a sketch-map provided in the following reference for political boundaries of the various kingdoms in approximately 1700 CE: [1]

[1]: Norman, Neil L. “Hueda (Whydah) Country and Town: Archaeological Perspectives on the Rise and Collapse of an African Atlantic Kingdom.” The International Journal of African Historical Studies, vol. 42, no. 3, 2009, pp. 387–410: 388. https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/collections/GWWIKDDM/items/5UK64SQ5/collection


Hierarchical Complexity
Settlement Hierarchy:
3

1) Capital city (Savi); 2) Chief towns; 3) Villages/hamlets. “Astley, A New General Collection, 9, summarizing from the account of Des Marchais, reports that the residences of community leaders resembled towns, each of which was surrounded by radiating settlements: "Each of these twenty-six ... [chief towns] has fewer smaller villages, or hamlets, which are subordinate to it; and although the bounds of the kingdom are small, and consequently the provinces [proportionally] little, yet the country is so populous and full of hamlets, that the whole kingdom seems to be one town, divided into many quarters, and separated only by cultivated lands, which appear like gardens." The Astley account suggests that the king gave each of these twenty-six regional provinces to a prominent man of the kingdom who occupied a "Chief Town" within the provinces.” [1] “These architectural clusters are interpreted as sprawling house compounds and associated collections of smaller residential structures, administrative structures, and market facilities. Apparently, Huedans constructed these architectural clusters as accretional and evolving connections of architectural features; they added later building efforts to open zones adjacent to earlier structures. While accretional, this landscape appears to be a purposefully organized one, the negative spaces of the boundary ditches/borrow pits often abutted structures. When viewing the system in plan and in aggregate, interior structures are surrounded by non-contiguous yet radiating collections of structures and ditches. As this pattern repeated itself throughout the landscape, systems of the negative space created by ditches/borrow pits connected to larger structures checked terrestrial movement. During the Hueda era it was, as it is today, difficult to traverse the landscape without passing through or adjacent to a structure. Indeed, it is highly likely that Huedans created these enclosed architectural systems as a form of protection against foreign and domestic threats.” [2]

[1]: Norman, Neil L. “Hueda (Whydah) Country and Town: Archaeological Perspectives on the Rise and Collapse of an African Atlantic Kingdom.” The International Journal of African Historical Studies, vol. 42, no. 3, 2009, pp. 387–410: 395. https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/collections/GWWIKDDM/items/5UK64SQ5/collection

[2]: Norman, Neil L. “Hueda (Whydah) Country and Town: Archaeological Perspectives on the Rise and Collapse of an African Atlantic Kingdom.” The International Journal of African Historical Studies, vol. 42, no. 3, 2009, pp. 387–410: 394. https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/collections/GWWIKDDM/items/5UK64SQ5/collection


Religious Level:
3

1) King (Ahosu); 2) Aplogan (in charge of all cults); 3) Dangbe priesthood. It is likely there were further, finer, gradations of seniority in the priesthood and cults, but there are no clear descriptions available in the literature. “Understanding of the distribution of political power in Whydah also requires consideration of the sphere of religion, which both legitimated and circumscribed the actions of the ruling elite. The most important national cult in Whydah was that of the god Dangbe (incarnated in the royal python), which was celebrated by annual public processions to the principal Dangbe shrine. Dangbe was primarily concerned with regulation of the weather and of agricultural fertility, but was also invoked for political purposes, "on all occasions relating to their government." Some European accounts imply that the worship of Dangbe was controlled by the king, the head of the cult being an official of the royal palace. It appears, however, that the Dangbe priesthood had rather more autonomy vis-a-vis the king than this suggests, since other evidence shows that King Agbangla in the 1690s expressed resentment at the scale of offerings which he was obliged to make to the cult and sought to reduce the expense which they involved. There was also a publicly celebrated cult of the deceased kings of the royal dynasty, with annual processions to offer sacrifices at their tombs. These did not, however, attain the elaboration of the comparable "Annual Customs" of the kingdom of Dahomey later, where these rather than the worship of any of the gods constituted the principal national religious ceremony. The "Annual Customs" in Whydah are mentioned only in a single contemporary account, and were clearly of much less political significance than the cult of the snake god Dangbe.” [1] “The most important of the Whydah chiefs had the titles of Gogan and Aplogan, which were also those of the highest-ranking officials in the later kingdom of Porto-Novo. In Porto-Novo the Gogan was the head of the royal lineage (and as such, conducted the ceremony of the king’s own installation) and the Aplogan had general charge of the community’s religious cults, and these may well also have been the functions of their namesakes in Whydah. In addition to their specific individual functions, the more important chiefs also served as hereditary governors of the component villages of the Whydah kingdom: the Gogan and the Aplogan, for example, served as governors respectively of the important settlements of Paon and Gome, both in the north of the kingdom.” [2]

[1]: 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: 209. https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/collections/GWWIKDDM/items/8JKAH2V5/collection

[2]: 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: 207–208. https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/collections/GWWIKDDM/items/8JKAH2V5/collection


Military Level:
2

1) Chiefs/governors; 2) Soldiers. There is no clear description of the formation or size of the army in Whydah in the literature consulted, though clearly they had a military presence. “The governors exercised an independent local judicial authority in minor cases, acted as spokesmen before the king on behalf of those under their government, and transmitted their tribute to him. They also raised contingents of soldiers for the national army, and commanded them in battle.” [1] “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.” [2]

[1]: 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: 209. https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/collections/GWWIKDDM/items/8JKAH2V5/collection

[2]: 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


Administrative Level:
[6 to 7]
1671 CE 1710 CE

1) King (Ahosu); 2) Council of elders (possibly including the most important hereditary chiefs); 3) Palace officials; 4) King’s wives; 5) King’s servants, guards, and messengers (possibly only from 1710s); 6) the great men/grand captains (may be considered part of the caboceers level); 7) Caboceers (chiefs/captains/headmen); 8) Governors of villages/areas. “Whydah was a monarchy, whose ruler had the indigenous title of ahosu, generally (and reasonably) translated by Europeans as "king." The kingship was hereditary, in the sense that succession to it was restricted to a single patrilineally defined family. Some contemporary European sources assert that succession to the kingship was by primogeniture, the reigning king’s eldest son being the heir apparent, but this is an oversimplification. Rather, it appears that the reigning king could appoint one of his sons, normally but not necessarily the eldest, as his heir apparent; but this designated heir did not succeed automatically, since the leading men of the kingdom could set aside his claim in favor of another of his brothers. In practice, in any case, effective occupation of the royal palace was as important as seniority, designation, or election: as one European observer explicitly observed, a claimant to the succession sought primarily "to take possession of the late King’s court and wives," since ‘the commonalty will not easily consent that after that he shall be driven from the throne.’” [1] “Under the king, the affairs of the palace were administered by a number of male officials, who had responsibility for the management of the king’s wives and the supply of provisions: whether these officials were free men or (as analogy with other kingdoms would suggest) royal slaves is not made clear. The bulk of the palace staff consisted of women, legally regarded as the king’s "wives" although clearly including servants engaged in menial tasks as well as "wives" properly speaking, who are said to have numbered several hundreds. Besides ministering to the king’s needs within the palace, these women played an important role in enforcing his authority outside it. Their status as royal wives made them sacrosanct, merely touching them being a capital offence, so that they could not be effectively obstructed or resisted. The king in consequence was able to use them to execute his judicial decisions, sending them to destroy the houses of condemned offenders. They might also be employed to impose peace in disputes which threatened to lead to civil war, by literally interposing their bodies between the two factions to prevent them fighting. In addition to his wives, the king is also said to have had a group of 200-300 male servants, distinguished by having half of their heads shaved bare, who served as his guards and carried messages outside the palace: these are not, however, attested earlier than the 1710s, and may possibly have been then a recent innovation. In addition to the king and the officials of his palace, there were numerous other office-holders in the Whydah kingdom. In contemporary European sources, these are generally called "captains" or "caboceers" (from the Portuguese cabeceiro, "head man"), both of which terms appear to have been employed to translate the vernacular generic suffix -gan; the more familiar modern term "chiefs" is employed in this article as an equivalent. Some accounts distinguish, within the generality of chiefs, a smaller group of higher rank, termed the "grand [or great] captains," or simply "the great men," who are said to have shared political authority with the king. Most of these offices were evidently hereditary, passing like the monarchy normally from father to eldest son, it being explicitly noted that the king "cannot grant them to anyone else." The senior chiefs can thus be regarded as forming a sort of hereditary nobility or aristocracy. The most important of the Whydah chiefs had the titles of Gogan and Aplogan, which were also those of the highest-ranking officials in the later kingdom of Porto-Novo. In Porto-Novo the Gogan was the head of the royal lineage (and as such, conducted the ceremony of the king’s own installation) and the Aplogan had general charge of the community’s religious cults, and these may well also have been the functions of their namesakes in Whydah. In addition to their specific individual functions, the more important chiefs also served as hereditary governors of the component villages of the Whydah kingdom: the Gogan and the Aplogan, for example, served as governors respectively of the important settlements of Paon and Gome, both in the north of the kingdom.” [2] “It appears that the king was expected to act in conjunction with a council of "elders," who normally included the principal hereditary chiefs, but whether the membership of this council was fixed or variable according to the king’s choice is not clearly indicated.” [3] “What is clear is that those chiefs who served as governors of subordinate villages of the kingdom enjoyed a considerable degree of autonomy in their local administration: as was noted in the 1690s, "these in the King’s absence and in their Vice-royalties, command as arbitrarily and keep up as great state as the King himself.’ The governors exercised an independent local judicial authority in minor cases, acted as spokesmen before the king on behalf of those under their government, and transmitted their tribute to him. They also raised contingents of soldiers for the national army, and commanded them in battle. The king’s power in practice was clearly limited by that of these provincial governors, and its effectiveness dependent upon their cooperation.” [4]

[1]: 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: 205. https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/collections/GWWIKDDM/items/8JKAH2V5/collection

[2]: 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: 206-208. https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/collections/GWWIKDDM/items/8JKAH2V5/collection

[3]: 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: 208. https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/collections/GWWIKDDM/items/8JKAH2V5/collection

[4]: 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: 208-209. https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/collections/GWWIKDDM/items/8JKAH2V5/collection

Administrative Level:
[7 to 8]
1711 CE 1727 CE

1) King (Ahosu); 2) Council of elders (possibly including the most important hereditary chiefs); 3) Palace officials; 4) King’s wives; 5) King’s servants, guards, and messengers (possibly only from 1710s); 6) the great men/grand captains (may be considered part of the caboceers level); 7) Caboceers (chiefs/captains/headmen); 8) Governors of villages/areas. “Whydah was a monarchy, whose ruler had the indigenous title of ahosu, generally (and reasonably) translated by Europeans as "king." The kingship was hereditary, in the sense that succession to it was restricted to a single patrilineally defined family. Some contemporary European sources assert that succession to the kingship was by primogeniture, the reigning king’s eldest son being the heir apparent, but this is an oversimplification. Rather, it appears that the reigning king could appoint one of his sons, normally but not necessarily the eldest, as his heir apparent; but this designated heir did not succeed automatically, since the leading men of the kingdom could set aside his claim in favor of another of his brothers. In practice, in any case, effective occupation of the royal palace was as important as seniority, designation, or election: as one European observer explicitly observed, a claimant to the succession sought primarily "to take possession of the late King’s court and wives," since ‘the commonalty will not easily consent that after that he shall be driven from the throne.’” [1] “Under the king, the affairs of the palace were administered by a number of male officials, who had responsibility for the management of the king’s wives and the supply of provisions: whether these officials were free men or (as analogy with other kingdoms would suggest) royal slaves is not made clear. The bulk of the palace staff consisted of women, legally regarded as the king’s "wives" although clearly including servants engaged in menial tasks as well as "wives" properly speaking, who are said to have numbered several hundreds. Besides ministering to the king’s needs within the palace, these women played an important role in enforcing his authority outside it. Their status as royal wives made them sacrosanct, merely touching them being a capital offence, so that they could not be effectively obstructed or resisted. The king in consequence was able to use them to execute his judicial decisions, sending them to destroy the houses of condemned offenders. They might also be employed to impose peace in disputes which threatened to lead to civil war, by literally interposing their bodies between the two factions to prevent them fighting. In addition to his wives, the king is also said to have had a group of 200-300 male servants, distinguished by having half of their heads shaved bare, who served as his guards and carried messages outside the palace: these are not, however, attested earlier than the 1710s, and may possibly have been then a recent innovation. In addition to the king and the officials of his palace, there were numerous other office-holders in the Whydah kingdom. In contemporary European sources, these are generally called "captains" or "caboceers" (from the Portuguese cabeceiro, "head man"), both of which terms appear to have been employed to translate the vernacular generic suffix -gan; the more familiar modern term "chiefs" is employed in this article as an equivalent. Some accounts distinguish, within the generality of chiefs, a smaller group of higher rank, termed the "grand [or great] captains," or simply "the great men," who are said to have shared political authority with the king. Most of these offices were evidently hereditary, passing like the monarchy normally from father to eldest son, it being explicitly noted that the king "cannot grant them to anyone else." The senior chiefs can thus be regarded as forming a sort of hereditary nobility or aristocracy. The most important of the Whydah chiefs had the titles of Gogan and Aplogan, which were also those of the highest-ranking officials in the later kingdom of Porto-Novo. In Porto-Novo the Gogan was the head of the royal lineage (and as such, conducted the ceremony of the king’s own installation) and the Aplogan had general charge of the community’s religious cults, and these may well also have been the functions of their namesakes in Whydah. In addition to their specific individual functions, the more important chiefs also served as hereditary governors of the component villages of the Whydah kingdom: the Gogan and the Aplogan, for example, served as governors respectively of the important settlements of Paon and Gome, both in the north of the kingdom.” [2] “It appears that the king was expected to act in conjunction with a council of "elders," who normally included the principal hereditary chiefs, but whether the membership of this council was fixed or variable according to the king’s choice is not clearly indicated.” [3] “What is clear is that those chiefs who served as governors of subordinate villages of the kingdom enjoyed a considerable degree of autonomy in their local administration: as was noted in the 1690s, "these in the King’s absence and in their Vice-royalties, command as arbitrarily and keep up as great state as the King himself.’ The governors exercised an independent local judicial authority in minor cases, acted as spokesmen before the king on behalf of those under their government, and transmitted their tribute to him. They also raised contingents of soldiers for the national army, and commanded them in battle. The king’s power in practice was clearly limited by that of these provincial governors, and its effectiveness dependent upon their cooperation.” [4]

[1]: 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: 205. https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/collections/GWWIKDDM/items/8JKAH2V5/collection

[2]: 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: 206-208. https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/collections/GWWIKDDM/items/8JKAH2V5/collection

[3]: 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: 208. https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/collections/GWWIKDDM/items/8JKAH2V5/collection

[4]: 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: 208-209. https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/collections/GWWIKDDM/items/8JKAH2V5/collection


Professions
Professional Soldier:
present

Reference to a “national army”: “The governors exercised an independent local judicial authority in minor cases, acted as spokesmen before the king on behalf of those under their government, and transmitted their tribute to him. They also raised contingents of soldiers for the national army, and commanded them in battle.” [1] “Snelgrave’s explanation of the unexpected defeat of the Whydahs was essentially their cowardice, which he attributed to the enervating effects of their involvement in the Atlantic trade: ‘Trade having likewise flourished for a long time, had greatly enriched the People; which, with the Fertility of their Country, had unhappily made them so proud, effeminate, and luxurious, that tho’ they could have brought at least one hundred thousand Men into the Field, yet so great were their fears, that they were driven out of their Principal City, by two hundred of their Enemies...’” [2]

[1]: 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: 209. https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/collections/GWWIKDDM/items/8JKAH2V5/collection

[2]: Law, Robin. “A Neglected Account of the Dahomian Conquest of Whydah (1727): The ‘Relation de La Guerre de Juda’ of the Sieur Ringard of Nantes.” History in Africa, vol. 15, 1988, pp. 321–38: 322. https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/collections/GWWIKDDM/items/U957EGQV/collection


Professional Priesthood:
present

“Understanding of the distribution of political power in Whydah also requires consideration of the sphere of religion, which both legitimated and circumscribed the actions of the ruling elite. The most important national cult in Whydah was that of the god Dangbe (incarnated in the royal python), which was celebrated by annual public processions to the principal Dangbe shrine. Dangbe was primarily concerned with regulation of the weather and of agricultural fertility, but was also invoked for political purposes, "on all occasions relating to their government." Some European accounts imply that the worship of Dangbe was controlled by the king, the head of the cult being an official of the royal palace. It appears, however, that the Dangbe priesthood had rather more autonomy vis-a-vis the king than this suggests, since other evidence shows that King Agbangla in the 1690s expressed resentment at the scale of offerings which he was obliged to make to the cult and sought to reduce the expense which they involved. There was also a publicly celebrated cult of the deceased kings of the royal dynasty, with annual processions to offer sacrifices at their tombs. These did not, however, attain the elaboration of the comparable "Annual Customs" of the kingdom of Dahomey later, where these rather than the worship of any of the gods constituted the principal national religious ceremony. The "Annual Customs" in Whydah are mentioned only in a single contemporary account, and were clearly of much less political significance than the cult of the snake god Dangbe.” [1]

[1]: 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: 209. https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/collections/GWWIKDDM/items/8JKAH2V5/collection


Bureaucracy Characteristics
Law
Formal Legal Code:
present

“In local thought, the king’s primary function was the exercise of judicial authority and the maintenance of judicial order. This idea was given symbolic expression in the interval between the death of one king and the installation of his successor, when crimes could be committed with impunity, as one European observer explained, ‘as tho’ the death of the king put an end to all manner of reason and justice.’” [1] “A similar ambiguity of perception can be seen in European accounts of the administration of justice in Whydah. Although the king was clearly regarded as the supreme judicial authority in the kingdom (and in particular seems to have enjoyed the sole right to inflict capital punishment), he normally exercised his judicial functions in serious cases with the advice of a council of leading chiefs. But whereas one account asserts that he could only condemn offenders to death "on the advice of his great men," another claims that he was not obliged to follow the council’s advice but could act "according to his royal will and pleasure." This contradiction, as suggested earlier, may reflect dis- agreements about the legitimate extent of the royal prerogative within the Whydah ruling elite itself.” [2] “What is clear is that those chiefs who served as governors of subordinate villages of the kingdom enjoyed a considerable degree of autonomy in their local administration: as was noted in the 1690s, ‘these in the King’s absence and in their Vice-royalties, command as arbitrarily and keep up as great state as the King himself.’ The governors exercised an independent local judicial authority in minor cases, acted as spokesmen before the king on behalf of those under their government, and transmitted their tribute to him.” [3] “The second letter of the third section of the 1688 Description comprises an extended description of the kingdom of "Juda" or Whydah (133-38). Barbot describes the natural resources of the country, the conduct of the European trade there, the local king and his court, the local religion (especially the veneration of snakes), the administration of justice (including a form of trial by ordeal, the accused being obliged to swim across a crocodile-infested river), burial customs (including human sacrifice), the ceremony of the blood pact, agriculture and crafts, weaponry, the local currency (of cowry shells), domestic slavery and polygamy, and much else besides.” [4]

[1]: 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: 205. https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/collections/GWWIKDDM/items/8JKAH2V5/collection

[2]: 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: 208. https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/collections/GWWIKDDM/items/8JKAH2V5/collection

[3]: 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: 208–209. https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/collections/GWWIKDDM/items/8JKAH2V5/collection

[4]: Law, Robin. “Jean Barbot as a Source for the Slave Coast of West Africa.” History in Africa, vol. 9, 1982, pp. 155–73: 159. https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/collections/GWWIKDDM/items/N4D6NU7J/collection


Specialized Buildings: polity owned
Market:
present

“The king also enjoyed extensive rights of disposition over the property and persons of his subjects. He levied taxes on all goods sold in markets or carried along the roads of the kingdom, and on fish taken in the coastal lagoons, and received a share of his subjects’ agricultural crops.” [1] “If these architectural concentrations can be interpreted as the residences of regional community leaders, the spacing between these complexes is suggestive of the distance of political administration operating at the local level as well as the distance between mark smaller than the large regional market historically recorded at Savi.” [2]

[1]: 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: 205. https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/collections/GWWIKDDM/items/8JKAH2V5/collection

[2]: Norman, Neil L. “Hueda (Whydah) Country and Town: Archaeological Perspectives on the Rise and Collapse of an African Atlantic Kingdom.” The International Journal of African Historical Studies, vol. 42, no. 3, 2009, pp. 387–410: 395-396. https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/collections/GWWIKDDM/items/5UK64SQ5/collection


Utilitarian Public Building:
present

Markets: “The king also enjoyed extensive rights of disposition over the property and persons of his subjects. He levied taxes on all goods sold in markets or carried along the roads of the kingdom, and on fish taken in the coastal lagoons, and received a share of his subjects’ agricultural crops.” [1] “If these architectural concentrations can be interpreted as the residences of regional community leaders, the spacing between these complexes is suggestive of the distance of political administration operating at the local level as well as the distance between mark smaller than the large regional market historically recorded at Savi.” [2]

[1]: 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: 205. https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/collections/GWWIKDDM/items/8JKAH2V5/collection

[2]: Norman, Neil L. “Hueda (Whydah) Country and Town: Archaeological Perspectives on the Rise and Collapse of an African Atlantic Kingdom.” The International Journal of African Historical Studies, vol. 42, no. 3, 2009, pp. 387–410: 395-396. https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/collections/GWWIKDDM/items/5UK64SQ5/collection


Transport Infrastructure
Road:
present

“The king also enjoyed extensive rights of disposition over the property and persons of his subjects. He levied taxes on all goods sold in markets or carried along the roads of the kingdom, and on fish taken in the coastal lagoons, and received a share of his subjects’ agricultural crops.” [1]

[1]: 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: 205. https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/collections/GWWIKDDM/items/8JKAH2V5/collection


Port:
present

“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.” [1]

[1]: 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


Special-purpose Sites
Special Purpose Site:
present

Burial sites: “These references to embarkation in a canoe are usually understood to be purely metaphorical, the remains of the dead being in fact buried in the ground. A contemporary report of the funeral ceremonies for a king of Hueda in 1708, however, refers to the making of an actual model canoe (a foot and a half by two feet in size), which was carried with an image of the king, to be placed on the road to the ancestral homeland of the royal family.” [1] “The second letter of the third section of the 1688 Description comprises an extended description of the kingdom of "Juda" or Whydah (133-38). Barbot describes the natural resources of the country, the conduct of the European trade there, the local king and his court, the local religion (especially the veneration of snakes), the administration of justice (including a form of trial by ordeal, the accused being obliged to swim across a crocodile-infested river), burial customs (including human sacrifice), the ceremony of the blood pact, agriculture and crafts, weaponry, the local currency (of cowry shells), domestic slavery and polygamy, and much else besides.” [2] Enclosures: “Astley, in summarizing Desmarchais, supports such findings when he suggests that ditches/borrow pits were common in the area surrounding Savi, where: "As the ...[Huedans] build with Earth, which they dig-up as near as possible to their Habitations, their Houses are surrounded with such Holes, or Pits." Astley continues the description of the ditches to suggest that they were filled with all manner of trash and that the area surrounding Savi was so populated that the slopes of ditches were under cultivation, such that: “The Borders of the Hedges, the Sides of Ditches, and the Foot of their [enclosures, are planted with Melons of different Kinds, besides Pulse; so that not an inch of Ground lies unimproved, and that without Interruption”. Alongside their use as borrow pits, researchers argue for connections between ditches in the region of Abomey and the Savi palace zone and the Huedan python deity Dangbe, who Huedans considered to have the ability to check movement and create zones of inclusion and protection. Beyond their cosmological associations, Huedans placed structures and house compounds abutting ditches/borrow pits to maximize the defensive potential of various features. Thus, the contiguous architectural system of ditches/borrow pits together with the walls of house compounds presented an unbroken boundary between the interior of the compound and exterior spaces. As the opening paragraph suggests, these cosmological and physical attempts to bracket and buttress the Huedan countryside and palace were ultimately unsuccessful.” [3]

[1]: Law, Robin. “West Africa’s Discovery of the Atlantic.” The International Journal of African Historical Studies, vol. 44, no. 1, 2011, pp. 1–25: 12. https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/collections/GWWIKDDM/items/WA6SG9KW/collection

[2]: Law, Robin. “Jean Barbot as a Source for the Slave Coast of West Africa.” History in Africa, vol. 9, 1982, pp. 155–73: 159. https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/collections/GWWIKDDM/items/N4D6NU7J/collection

[3]: Norman, Neil L. “Hueda (Whydah) Country and Town: Archaeological Perspectives on the Rise and Collapse of an African Atlantic Kingdom.” The International Journal of African Historical Studies, vol. 42, no. 3, 2009, pp. 387–410: 397. https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/collections/GWWIKDDM/items/5UK64SQ5/collection


Enclosure:
present

“Astley, in summarizing Desmarchais, supports such findings when he suggests that ditches/borrow pits were common in the area surrounding Savi, where: "As the ...[Huedans] build with Earth, which they dig-up as near as possible to their Habitations, their Houses are surrounded with such Holes, or Pits." Astley continues the description of the ditches to suggest that they were filled with all manner of trash and that the area surrounding Savi was so populated that the slopes of ditches were under cultivation, such that: “The Borders of the Hedges, the Sides of Ditches, and the Foot of their [enclosures, are planted with Melons of different Kinds, besides Pulse; so that not an inch of Ground lies unimproved, and that without Interruption”. Alongside their use as borrow pits, researchers argue for connections between ditches in the region of Abomey and the Savi palace zone and the Huedan python deity Dangbe, who Huedans considered to have the ability to check movement and create zones of inclusion and protection. Beyond their cosmological associations, Huedans placed structures and house compounds abutting ditches/borrow pits to maximize the defensive potential of various features. Thus, the contiguous architectural system of ditches/borrow pits together with the walls of house compounds presented an unbroken boundary between the interior of the compound and exterior spaces. As the opening paragraph suggests, these cosmological and physical attempts to bracket and buttress the Huedan countryside and palace were ultimately unsuccessful.” [1]

[1]: Norman, Neil L. “Hueda (Whydah) Country and Town: Archaeological Perspectives on the Rise and Collapse of an African Atlantic Kingdom.” The International Journal of African Historical Studies, vol. 42, no. 3, 2009, pp. 387–410: 397. https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/collections/GWWIKDDM/items/5UK64SQ5/collection


Burial Site:
present

“These references to embarkation in a canoe are usually understood to be purely metaphorical, the remains of the dead being in fact buried in the ground. A contemporary report of the funeral ceremonies for a king of Hueda in 1708, however, refers to the making of an actual model canoe (a foot and a half by two feet in size), which was carried with an image of the king, to be placed on the road to the ancestral homeland of the royal family.” [1] “The second letter of the third section of the 1688 Description comprises an extended description of the kingdom of "Juda" or Whydah (133-38). Barbot describes the natural resources of the country, the conduct of the European trade there, the local king and his court, the local religion (especially the veneration of snakes), the administration of justice (including a form of trial by ordeal, the accused being obliged to swim across a crocodile-infested river), burial customs (including human sacrifice), the ceremony of the blood pact, agriculture and crafts, weaponry, the local currency (of cowry shells), domestic slavery and polygamy, and much else besides.” [2]

[1]: Law, Robin. “West Africa’s Discovery of the Atlantic.” The International Journal of African Historical Studies, vol. 44, no. 1, 2011, pp. 1–25: 12. https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/collections/GWWIKDDM/items/WA6SG9KW/collection

[2]: Law, Robin. “Jean Barbot as a Source for the Slave Coast of West Africa.” History in Africa, vol. 9, 1982, pp. 155–73: 159. https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/collections/GWWIKDDM/items/N4D6NU7J/collection


Information / Writing System
Written Record:
absent

No writing system in Allada the year before Whydah became independent, so likely the same in Whydah: “Another question arising from the incidence of credit in both the local economy and the overseas trade is the nature of the indigenous system of recordkeeping. In Allada the local people, it was noted in 1670, in the absence of writing used knotted strings to keep records of various matters, including commercial transactions (“the price of goods”). Several later accounts allude to other mechanical devices for keeping financial (and fiscal) records in Dahomey.” [1]

[1]: Austin, Gareth, et al. “Credit, Currencies, and Culture: African Financial Institutions in Historical Perspective.” The International Journal of African Historical Studies, vol. 34, no. 1, 2001, p. 144: 33. https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/collections/GWWIKDDM/items/SPXH2IUW/collection


Script:
absent

No writing system in Allada the year before Whydah became independent, so likely the same in Whydah: “Another question arising from the incidence of credit in both the local economy and the overseas trade is the nature of the indigenous system of recordkeeping. In Allada the local people, it was noted in 1670, in the absence of writing used knotted strings to keep records of various matters, including commercial transactions (“the price of goods”). Several later accounts allude to other mechanical devices for keeping financial (and fiscal) records in Dahomey.” [1]

[1]: Austin, Gareth, et al. “Credit, Currencies, and Culture: African Financial Institutions in Historical Perspective.” The International Journal of African Historical Studies, vol. 34, no. 1, 2001, p. 144: 33. https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/collections/GWWIKDDM/items/SPXH2IUW/collection


Phonetic Alphabetic Writing:
absent

No writing system in Allada the year before Whydah became independent, so likely the same in Whydah: “Another question arising from the incidence of credit in both the local economy and the overseas trade is the nature of the indigenous system of recordkeeping. In Allada the local people, it was noted in 1670, in the absence of writing used knotted strings to keep records of various matters, including commercial transactions (“the price of goods”). Several later accounts allude to other mechanical devices for keeping financial (and fiscal) records in Dahomey.” [1]

[1]: Austin, Gareth, et al. “Credit, Currencies, and Culture: African Financial Institutions in Historical Perspective.” The International Journal of African Historical Studies, vol. 34, no. 1, 2001, p. 144: 33. https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/collections/GWWIKDDM/items/SPXH2IUW/collection


Nonwritten Record:
present

Present in Allada and Dahomey, so very likely also in Whydah: “Another question arising from the incidence of credit in both the local economy and the overseas trade is the nature of the indigenous system of recordkeeping. In Allada the local people, it was noted in 1670, in the absence of writing used knotted strings to keep records of various matters, including commercial transactions (“the price of goods”). Several later accounts allude to other mechanical devices for keeping financial (and fiscal) records in Dahomey. After the conquest of Allada in 1724, the King’s officers counted the captives taken (over 8,000) by “giving a booge [cowrie] to every one.” An English trader visiting the Dahomean court in 1772 recorded that the royal gunner showed him a calabash containing fifteen pebbles to indicate the number of cannon fired in a salute in his honour.” [1]

[1]: Austin, Gareth, et al. “Credit, Currencies, and Culture: African Financial Institutions in Historical Perspective.” The International Journal of African Historical Studies, vol. 34, no. 1, 2001, p. 144: 33. https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/collections/GWWIKDDM/items/SPXH2IUW/collection


Non Phonetic Writing:
absent

No writing system in Allada the year before Whydah became independent, so likely the same in Whydah: “Another question arising from the incidence of credit in both the local economy and the overseas trade is the nature of the indigenous system of recordkeeping. In Allada the local people, it was noted in 1670, in the absence of writing used knotted strings to keep records of various matters, including commercial transactions (“the price of goods”). Several later accounts allude to other mechanical devices for keeping financial (and fiscal) records in Dahomey.” [1]

[1]: Austin, Gareth, et al. “Credit, Currencies, and Culture: African Financial Institutions in Historical Perspective.” The International Journal of African Historical Studies, vol. 34, no. 1, 2001, p. 144: 33. https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/collections/GWWIKDDM/items/SPXH2IUW/collection


Information / Kinds of Written Documents
Scientific Literature:
absent

No writing system in Allada the year before Whydah became independent, so likely the same in Whydah: “Another question arising from the incidence of credit in both the local economy and the overseas trade is the nature of the indigenous system of recordkeeping. In Allada the local people, it was noted in 1670, in the absence of writing used knotted strings to keep records of various matters, including commercial transactions (“the price of goods”). Several later accounts allude to other mechanical devices for keeping financial (and fiscal) records in Dahomey.” [1]

[1]: Austin, Gareth, et al. “Credit, Currencies, and Culture: African Financial Institutions in Historical Perspective.” The International Journal of African Historical Studies, vol. 34, no. 1, 2001, p. 144: 33. https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/collections/GWWIKDDM/items/SPXH2IUW/collection


Sacred Text:
absent

No writing system in Allada the year before Whydah became independent, so likely the same in Whydah: “Another question arising from the incidence of credit in both the local economy and the overseas trade is the nature of the indigenous system of recordkeeping. In Allada the local people, it was noted in 1670, in the absence of writing used knotted strings to keep records of various matters, including commercial transactions (“the price of goods”). Several later accounts allude to other mechanical devices for keeping financial (and fiscal) records in Dahomey.” [1]

[1]: Austin, Gareth, et al. “Credit, Currencies, and Culture: African Financial Institutions in Historical Perspective.” The International Journal of African Historical Studies, vol. 34, no. 1, 2001, p. 144: 33. https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/collections/GWWIKDDM/items/SPXH2IUW/collection


Religious Literature:
absent

No writing system in Allada the year before Whydah became independent, so likely the same in Whydah: “Another question arising from the incidence of credit in both the local economy and the overseas trade is the nature of the indigenous system of recordkeeping. In Allada the local people, it was noted in 1670, in the absence of writing used knotted strings to keep records of various matters, including commercial transactions (“the price of goods”). Several later accounts allude to other mechanical devices for keeping financial (and fiscal) records in Dahomey.” [1]

[1]: Austin, Gareth, et al. “Credit, Currencies, and Culture: African Financial Institutions in Historical Perspective.” The International Journal of African Historical Studies, vol. 34, no. 1, 2001, p. 144: 33. https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/collections/GWWIKDDM/items/SPXH2IUW/collection


Practical Literature:
absent

No writing system in Allada the year before Whydah became independent, so likely the same in Whydah: “Another question arising from the incidence of credit in both the local economy and the overseas trade is the nature of the indigenous system of recordkeeping. In Allada the local people, it was noted in 1670, in the absence of writing used knotted strings to keep records of various matters, including commercial transactions (“the price of goods”). Several later accounts allude to other mechanical devices for keeping financial (and fiscal) records in Dahomey.” [1]

[1]: Austin, Gareth, et al. “Credit, Currencies, and Culture: African Financial Institutions in Historical Perspective.” The International Journal of African Historical Studies, vol. 34, no. 1, 2001, p. 144: 33. https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/collections/GWWIKDDM/items/SPXH2IUW/collection


Philosophy:
absent

No writing system in Allada the year before Whydah became independent, so likely the same in Whydah: “Another question arising from the incidence of credit in both the local economy and the overseas trade is the nature of the indigenous system of recordkeeping. In Allada the local people, it was noted in 1670, in the absence of writing used knotted strings to keep records of various matters, including commercial transactions (“the price of goods”). Several later accounts allude to other mechanical devices for keeping financial (and fiscal) records in Dahomey.” [1]

[1]: Austin, Gareth, et al. “Credit, Currencies, and Culture: African Financial Institutions in Historical Perspective.” The International Journal of African Historical Studies, vol. 34, no. 1, 2001, p. 144: 33. https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/collections/GWWIKDDM/items/SPXH2IUW/collection


Lists Tables and Classification:
absent

No writing system in Allada the year before Whydah became independent, so likely the same in Whydah: “Another question arising from the incidence of credit in both the local economy and the overseas trade is the nature of the indigenous system of recordkeeping. In Allada the local people, it was noted in 1670, in the absence of writing used knotted strings to keep records of various matters, including commercial transactions (“the price of goods”). Several later accounts allude to other mechanical devices for keeping financial (and fiscal) records in Dahomey.” [1]

[1]: Austin, Gareth, et al. “Credit, Currencies, and Culture: African Financial Institutions in Historical Perspective.” The International Journal of African Historical Studies, vol. 34, no. 1, 2001, p. 144: 33. https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/collections/GWWIKDDM/items/SPXH2IUW/collection


History:
absent

No writing system in Allada the year before Whydah became independent, so likely the same in Whydah: “Another question arising from the incidence of credit in both the local economy and the overseas trade is the nature of the indigenous system of recordkeeping. In Allada the local people, it was noted in 1670, in the absence of writing used knotted strings to keep records of various matters, including commercial transactions (“the price of goods”). Several later accounts allude to other mechanical devices for keeping financial (and fiscal) records in Dahomey.” [1]

[1]: Austin, Gareth, et al. “Credit, Currencies, and Culture: African Financial Institutions in Historical Perspective.” The International Journal of African Historical Studies, vol. 34, no. 1, 2001, p. 144: 33. https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/collections/GWWIKDDM/items/SPXH2IUW/collection


Fiction:
absent

No writing system in Allada the year before Whydah became independent, so likely the same in Whydah: “Another question arising from the incidence of credit in both the local economy and the overseas trade is the nature of the indigenous system of recordkeeping. In Allada the local people, it was noted in 1670, in the absence of writing used knotted strings to keep records of various matters, including commercial transactions (“the price of goods”). Several later accounts allude to other mechanical devices for keeping financial (and fiscal) records in Dahomey.” [1]

[1]: Austin, Gareth, et al. “Credit, Currencies, and Culture: African Financial Institutions in Historical Perspective.” The International Journal of African Historical Studies, vol. 34, no. 1, 2001, p. 144: 33. https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/collections/GWWIKDDM/items/SPXH2IUW/collection


Calendar:
absent

No writing system in Allada the year before Whydah became independent, so likely the same in Whydah: “Another question arising from the incidence of credit in both the local economy and the overseas trade is the nature of the indigenous system of recordkeeping. In Allada the local people, it was noted in 1670, in the absence of writing used knotted strings to keep records of various matters, including commercial transactions (“the price of goods”). Several later accounts allude to other mechanical devices for keeping financial (and fiscal) records in Dahomey.” [1]

[1]: Austin, Gareth, et al. “Credit, Currencies, and Culture: African Financial Institutions in Historical Perspective.” The International Journal of African Historical Studies, vol. 34, no. 1, 2001, p. 144: 33. https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/collections/GWWIKDDM/items/SPXH2IUW/collection


Information / Money
Token:
present

Cowries: “The second letter of the third section of the 1688 Description comprises an extended description of the kingdom of "Juda" or Whydah (133-38). Barbot describes the natural resources of the country, the conduct of the European trade there, the local king and his court, the local religion (especially the veneration of snakes), the administration of justice (including a form of trial by ordeal, the accused being obliged to swim across a crocodile-infested river), burial customs (including human sacrifice), the ceremony of the blood pact, agriculture and crafts, weaponry, the local currency (of cowry shells), domestic slavery and polygamy, and much else besides.” [1] “These cowries, brought in the early sixteenth century by the Portuguese, and in the first place by way of Sao Tome, were in use on the coast in the sixteenth century, in both the Benin and Forcados areas; by the seventeenth century they were in use at Whydah and Ardra,"l and we have discussed above the possibility that cowries may have been already in use in these areas before the arrival of the Portuguese." In the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries Whydah was the main centre of cowrie imports, though cowries were in use as far west as Lay (a little west of modern Ada, west of the Volta) in the 1680s, and in Christiansborg by the early eighteenth century, and probably in the later seventeenth century.” [2]

[1]: Law, Robin. “Jean Barbot as a Source for the Slave Coast of West Africa.” History in Africa, vol. 9, 1982, pp. 155–73: 159. https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/collections/GWWIKDDM/items/N4D6NU7J/collection

[2]: Johnson, Marion. “The Cowrie Currencies of West Africa. Part I.” The Journal of African History, vol. 11, no. 1, 1970, pp. 17–49: 34-35. https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/collections/GWWIKDDM/items/XZMB8INB/collection


Article:
present

Iron bars: “Pre-colonial Dahomey (and Allada and Whydah before it) had a money economy, employing a currency of cowrie shells (called locally àkué). Many commercial transactions, most taxes, and to some extent social payments such as bride wealth were monetized. In particular, exchange in local markets was fully monetized, all transactions being normally for cash. This applied not only to local people but also to Europeans who wanted to purchase in the market. The European factories, for example, found that if they ran out of cowries they could not procure provisions by bartering other commodities, but had to sell goods such as iron bars or even slaves to obtain cowries for use in purchasing food.” [1]

[1]: Austin, Gareth, et al. “Credit, Currencies, and Culture: African Financial Institutions in Historical Perspective.” The International Journal of African Historical Studies, vol. 34, no. 1, 2001, p. 144: 21-22. https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/collections/GWWIKDDM/items/SPXH2IUW/collection


Store Of Wealth:
present

“One consequence of the introduction of the cowrie currency was to facilitate the storage of wealth, since the shells were relatively imperishable.” [1]

[1]: Austin, Gareth, et al. “Credit, Currencies, and Culture: African Financial Institutions in Historical Perspective.” The International Journal of African Historical Studies, vol. 34, no. 1, 2001, p. 144: 30-36. https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/collections/GWWIKDDM/items/SPXH2IUW/collection


Debt And Credit Structure:
present

“One feature of the operation of the Atlantic trade which is often overlooked is that credit was not extended only by Europeans to Africans, but often in the opposite direction as well. An English merchant who traded at Whydah in the early eighteenth century before its conquest by Dahomey in 1727, noted that the Whydah traders were happy to grant him credit “for ten days together” when the state of the sea prevented the landing of goods from his ship—though he found the King of Dahomey’s traders after the conquest much less tolerant of such delays.” [1] “These accounts seem to imply that such credit was essentially shortterm—being cleared within a few days, or at least at the end of a ship’s trading—but other evidence shows that it could be extended by Africans to Europeans over longer periods. In 1697 the Dutchman Bosman, having got his slaves on board his ship but unable to land the goods to pay for them due to a storm lasting for several days, mooted the idea of dispatching the ship without paying for its slaves. He found the King and “other Great Men” of Whydah quite happy to have him promise “that they receive payment at the arrival of other ships” (though in the event the weather improved, and Bosman was able to pay them in the normal way).” [2] “Although there is far less evidence in regard to the strictly domestic economy, clearly credit was extended in purely intra-African transactions, as well as in the trade with Europeans. The principal evidence for this relates to the practice of enslaving and selling insolvent debtors, referred to in contemporary European sources from the late seventeenth century onwards. Although generally cast in the language of slavery, such references should probably be interpreted as relating to the pawning of a debtor (or one or more of his household) as security for a debt; in principle, such pawns were distinct from slaves, and were protected from sale into the trans-Atlantic trade, though it is evident that this prohibition was often violated in practice.” [3]

[1]: Austin, Gareth, et al. “Credit, Currencies, and Culture: African Financial Institutions in Historical Perspective.” The International Journal of African Historical Studies, vol. 34, no. 1, 2001, p. 144: 27. https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/collections/GWWIKDDM/items/SPXH2IUW/collection

[2]: Austin, Gareth, et al. “Credit, Currencies, and Culture: African Financial Institutions in Historical Perspective.” The International Journal of African Historical Studies, vol. 34, no. 1, 2001, p. 144: 27-28. https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/collections/GWWIKDDM/items/SPXH2IUW/collection

[3]: Austin, Gareth, et al. “Credit, Currencies, and Culture: African Financial Institutions in Historical Perspective.” The International Journal of African Historical Studies, vol. 34, no. 1, 2001, p. 144: 30-31. https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/collections/GWWIKDDM/items/SPXH2IUW/collection


Information / Postal System
Information / Measurement System

Warfare Variables (Military Technologies)
Fortifications
Military use of Metals
Projectiles
Handheld weapons
Animals used in warfare
Armor
Naval technology

Human Sacrifice Data
Human Sacrifice is the deliberate and ritualized killing of a person to please or placate supernatural entities (including gods, spirits, and ancestors) or gain other supernatural benefits.
Coding in Progress.
Coding in Progress.
Power Transitions
Coding in Progress.