| 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 541 |
(Grand Principality of Moscow, Rurikid Dynasty) |
Full Year Range of Grand Principality of Moscow, Rurikid Dynasty is assumed. [1480, 1613] |
3 |
3 |
levels. 1. Capital Moscow 2. Towns Novgorod, Suzdal, Vologda, Ryazan 3. Villages |
|
| 542 |
(Classic Tana) |
Full Year Range of Classic Tana is assumed. [1000, 1498] |
4 |
6 |
levels. Inferred from research carried out on the Kenyan coast (outside of this NGA) and Pemba Island (which lies within the NGA). Adding the level of "capital" to schemes proposed by Wilson, Kusimba and Fleisher. 1. Capital 2. Large towns 3. Small towns4. Large villages5. Small villages6. Isolated hamlets "A number of archaeologists have devised village classifications based on their physical features. Wilson’s (1982) study of Kenyan coastal settlements is the most often-cited attempt to address settlement patterns and the relationship between town and country for the Swahili, based on a database of some 400 settlements. He defined five types based on site size and the presence and amounts of stone (coral rag or limestone) architecture; these range in size from one to 15+ hectares, and from dispersed homesteads and hamlets with a single mosque or tomb, to cities with dozens of stone domestic structures, mosques and tombs. "Kusimba (1999b: 119) has offered a four-part classification of villages: walled villages, closely built villages, dispersed villages and hamlets, focusing on differences in ‘availability of suitable land, space and security’. This typology draws on ethnographic understandings. My own research on Pemba Island used a typology that included fieldhouse, hamlet, village, small town and town (Fleisher 2003: 134–5). These distinctions were made based on both site size and the nature of the deposits, including field houses and hamlets of 1 ha or less, villages of up to 3 ha, and small and larger towns, greater than 5 ha in size. Only small and large towns included stone architecture." [Fleisher_Wynne-Jones_LaViolette 2017] "The rise of Tumbatu as its principal town in the twelfth and thirteenth centuries is reflected in the site’s extensive ruins (Map 3, p. xxiv; Horton in press). [...] The geographer Yaqut (writing c. 1220 ce) described Zanzibar as a centre of trade and Tumbatu as the new location of the people and seat of the king of the Zanj (Trimingham 1964)." [Fitton_Wynne-Jones_LaViolette 2017] |
|
| 543 |
(Bito Dynasty) |
Full Year Range of Bito Dynasty is assumed. [1700, 1894] |
4 |
4 |
levels. 1. Capital2. Seat of bakungu (great chiefs)3. Seat of bakongole (lesser chiefs)4. Lesser towns and/or villages "In the Nyoro state of the nineteenth century, as reconstructed by John Beattie (1971), all political authority was regarded as belonging to, and allocable by, the king (mukama) alone. Political authority was delegated by the mukama, usually in the form of grants of estates. There was a limited number of great chiefs (bakungu), who ruled over large areas subdivided amongst lesser chiefs (bakongole)." [Robertshaw 2010, p. 261] It seems reasonable to infer that this was the case in preceding centuries as well, given organisational continuity between the Babito dynasty and its predecessors: Uzoigwe [Uzoigwe 1972, p. 247] specifically notes that the Babito "do not seem to have introduced any fundamental economic changes" or "any revolutionary social reorganization". |
|
| 544 |
(Cwezi Dynasty) |
Full Year Range of Cwezi Dynasty is assumed. [1450, 1699] |
4 |
4 |
levels. 1. Capital2. Seat of bakungu (great chiefs)3. Seat of bakongole (lesser chiefs)4. Lesser towns and/or villages "In the Nyoro state of the nineteenth century, as reconstructed by John Beattie (1971), all political authority was regarded as belonging to, and allocable by, the king (mukama) alone. Political authority was delegated by the mukama, usually in the form of grants of estates. There was a limited number of great chiefs (bakungu), who ruled over large areas subdivided amongst lesser chiefs (bakongole)." [Robertshaw 2010, p. 261] It seems reasonable to infer that this was the case in preceding centuries as well, given organisational continuity between the Babito dynasty and its predecessors: Uzoigwe [Uzoigwe 1972, p. 247] specifically notes that the Babito "do not seem to have introduced any fundamental economic changes" or "any revolutionaty social reorganization". |
|
| 545 |
(Early Maravi) |
Full Year Range of Early Maravi is assumed. [1400, 1499] |
4 |
4 |
levels. Inferred from the following: "Mankhamba was more than a large village — it was a town, with its own satellite villages. It was both the capital of the Maravi and a major trading centre of local and imported products." [Juwayeyi 2020] QUOTE ABOUT SHRINES? 1. Mankhamba 2. Ritual centers3. Large villages4. Small villages |
|
| 546 |
(Maravi Empire) |
Full Year Range of Maravi Empire is assumed. [1622, 1870] |
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] On the likely existence of a secondary capital: "There is a simpler explanation for all this, and it is that the large size of the empire during the early seventeenth century made it necessary for Kalonga Muzura to operate from two centres. Mankhamba was simply too far away from the Zambezi River Valley trade route. The new centre cut the travel time to Tete in half. It did not, however, diminish Mankhamba’s status, which remained Muzura’s seat of government where he was so powerful that at least some of the Portuguese who were familiar with the area and its politics felt that the lake might as well have been named after him." [Juwayeyi 2020] QUOTE ABOUT RITUAL SHRINES 1. Capital (Mankhamba) 2. Secondary capital3. Ritual centers4. Large villages5. Small villages [implied by "large villages"] |
|
| 547 |
(Early East Africa Iron Age) |
Full Year Range of Early East Africa Iron Age is assumed. [200, 499] |
1 |
1 |
EMPTY_COMMENT | |
| 548 |
(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] | |
| 550 |
(Early Tana 1) |
Full Year Range of Early Tana 1 is assumed. [500, 749] |
2 |
3 |
levels. 1. Large settlement (e.g. Unguja Ukuu) 2. Mid-size settlement 3. Small-size settlement Referring to Unguja Ukuu: "The comparatively large area, about 16 ha, occupied by the site as early as the second half of the first millennium ce, with its population having been estimated to be about 1,600 (Juma 2004: 65), reflects the high status of the site within the region." [Juma_Wynne-Jones_LaViolette 2017] |