| Variable | Definition |
|---|---|
| Polity | The Seshat Polity ID |
| Year(s) | The years for which we have the data. [negative = BCE] |
| Tag | [Evidenced, Disputed, Suspected, Inferred, Unknown] |
| Verified | A Seshat Expert has approved this piece of data. |
| Variable | Definition |
|---|---|
| settlement_hierarchy_from | The lower range of settlement hierarchy for a polity. |
| settlement_hierarchy_to | The upper range of settlement hierarchy for a polity. |
| # | Polity | Year(s) | Settlement Hierarchy from | Settlement Hierarchy to | Description | Edit |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 104 |
(West Burkina Faso Yellow II) |
Full Year Range of West Burkina Faso Yellow II is assumed. [501, 700] |
1 |
1 |
None | |
| 106 |
(Early East Africa Iron Age) |
Full Year Range of Early East Africa Iron Age is assumed. [200, 499] |
1 |
1 |
levels. Autonomous homesteads. "The ubiquity of Urewe [ceramics], coupled with its relatively small size, suggests that these vessels were produced and used by family-groups, and on a regular, domestic level. However, it is evident that Urewe-related activities also transcend the purely utilitarian realm, with the remarkable emphasis placed on quality of production. On the domestic level, this investment in commonplace objects may be an example of ceramics being used as tools of social cohesion or as the 'channels through which society implants its values in the individual—every day at mealtimes' (David et al. 1988: 379). As such, the importance of family and the home is emphasised through investment in key domestic goods—ceramics. This picture of small-scale, familial units fits well with the wider evidence from archaeology, which suggests these early communities probably consisted of dispersed networks of homesteads, rather than centralised societies (Reid 1994/5; Van Grunderbeek et al. 1983)." [Ashley 2010, p. 146] | |
| 107 |
(Northern Maravi Kingdom) |
Full Year Range of Northern Maravi Kingdom is assumed. [1500, 1621] |
3 |
5 |
levels. "In March 1616, Bocarro began a journey from Tete to Kilwa. He passed through the Maravi kingdom where he visited Kalonga Muzura, who will be discussed in detail in the next chapter. At the time, Muzura was not at Mankhamba, but at a settlement he had established along the Wankurumadzi River in the Mwanza-Neno area Bocarro described settlements of some of Muzura’s tributary chiefs, such as Bunga, as large villages. When he arrived at Muzura’s settlement, however, he described it as a town. As demonstrated below, this town was established not only later than Mankhamba, but it was also secondary to Mankhamba in terms of political influence. Mankhamba was the capital of the Maravi state. It was also a major trading centre and was at a crossroads for long-distance trade. Maravi leaders distributed imported goods from there and exports, particularly elephant ivory, originated from this location too. Bocarro did not reach Mankhamba, but considering that people had settled there continuously for more than two centuries before the founding of the town in Mwanza-Neno, Mankhamba was most likely the larger of the two." [Juwayeyi 2020] QUOTE ABOUT RITUAL SHRINES 1. Capital (Mankhamba) 2. Secondary capital3. Ritual centers4. Large villages5. Small villages [implied by "large villages"] |
|
| 108 |
(Khadga Dynasty) |
Full Year Range of Khadga Dynasty is assumed. [650, 700] |
None |
None |
levels. (1) Capital city (2) Town Towns were often emporiums of trade as well as political centres. What distinguished them from villages, according to Majumdar, was that while they may also have had some agricultural activity, they served a “wide variety of functions, commercial, industrial, political, judicial and military.” But the greatest distinction was the luxury and wealth of the towns and it’s citizens.” [Majumdar 1943] And van Schendel confirms that “the archaeological record indicates that urban centres came up as early as the fifth century bce. During the following centuries large towns would develop along major rivers rather than on the exposed sea coast.” [van_Schendel 2009] (3) VillagesMajumdar writes that since the beginning of historical record for Bengal, there have been well-established villages, in which the fields, meadows and woodlands have been organised to serve the population’s needs. They varied in size but people tended to live in compact groups within them They would all generally include livestock. The villages also contained “pits and canals (garta and nala) which might have served the purpose of drainage, barren tracts (ushara), tanks, reservoirs and temples, besides cattle-tracks and ordinary roads and paths.” [Majumdar 1943] |
|
| 109 |
(Middle Roman Republic) |
Full Year Range of Middle Roman Republic is assumed. [-264, -133] |
5 |
5 |
None | |
| 110 |
(Eastern Zhou) |
Full Year Range of Eastern Zhou is assumed. [-475, -256] |
4 |
5 |
Inferred from contemporary polities. pre-reforms (fifth c bce): 1. Capital city 2. town 3. feudal estates (?) 4. village post-reforms (fifth c bce): 1. Capital city 2. Commandery capital 3. County 4. town 5. village |