Gov Res Prop Own For Rel Grp List
A viewset for viewing and editing Government Restrictions on Property Ownership for Adherents of and Religious Groups.
GET /api/rt/government-restrictions-on-property-ownership-for-adherents-of-and-religious-groups/?page=30
{ "count": 296, "next": null, "previous": "https://seshatdata.com/api/rt/government-restrictions-on-property-ownership-for-adherents-of-and-religious-groups/?page=29", "results": [ { "id": 215, "year_from": null, "year_to": null, "description": "“Many scholars have felt impelled to emphasise the toleration of different sects and denominations evinced by Indian rulers. [...] It seems fairly clear that, traditionally in India, people readily transferred or distributed their allegiance between different sects, seeing no logical inconsistency in approaching different gods for different purposes, and that this apparently syncretic style of religious behaviour encouraged a relaxed attitude to what others did as well; evidently, too, rulers generally extended their acceptance of this practice. [...] Much of the evidence, then, suggests that all the diverse religious sects were freely tolerated by a prevailing world view that was ready to acknowledge a certain common validity. Yet it is unlikely that such a view could rise to the status of cultural orthodoxy without friction. Although references to religious wars and persecutions are conspicuously absent from the historical record of ancient India, this does not rule out lesser types of conflict, and some scholars believe that there is indeed evidence of localised disagreement and resentment. [...] For example, the Arthaśāstra gratuitously advises the agents of a king to help themselves, on behalf of the ruler, to the property of groups on the fringes of society who might not have powerful friends. Moreover, there are hints in scattered sources that the followers of orthodox Brahman teachers at times ganged up against Buddhist or Jain establishments that had lost their former patronage. [...] Still, hard evidence of religious persecution in these ancient times is scattered and fragmentary. In the absence of more solid evidence, the view has gained ground that pre-modern India had a cultural unity that precluded communal conflict, but we think that this picture is not sufficiently nuanced. Doniger’s perception that there was widespread persecution of non-Brahmans during the first millennium may fairly represent the situation that arose at certain times, but we cannot be at all sure how widespread the phenomenon was, or at what times it was most marked.//\"Still, we should note that, simply as a matter of practical politics, there was at least one factor that would certainly have acted to limit the ferocity of any sectarian persecutions – the absence of a clear and powerful advantage at all times for kings in identifying themselves with the Brahman interest. No clear dividing line existed, in fact, between ruling families that were of ‘genuine’ ‘Aryan’ descent, and the rest; the ruling elite presided over heterogeneous populations within which Brahmanism, as an agent of Sanskritisation and as a common cultural denominator, was slowly feeling its way towards a new role, directed towards shaping an inclusive syncretism. Thus, the Brahmanical revival could not afford to go too far. Especially, it had to be very wary of attacking the prudent preference of kings for policies that had the capacity to attract wide support among the multiple disparate groups that constituted the citizenry. The Brahmans had to make do with whatever qualified honour they could find within the frame of an eclectic culture. Such structural constraints are likely to have kept them from striking at their enemies too wantonly.”§REF§(Copland, Mabbett, Roy, Brittlebank and Bowles 2012: 74-77) Seshat URL: <a href=\"https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/ATSZ6QBU\" target=\"_blank\" class=\"fw-bolder\"> <b> Zotero link: ATSZ6QBU </b></a>§REF§", "note": null, "finalized": false, "created_date": null, "modified_date": null, "tag": "IFR", "is_disputed": false, "is_uncertain": false, "expert_reviewed": false, "drb_reviewed": null, "name": "Government restrictions on property ownership for adherents of any religious group", "coded_value": "absent", "polity": { "id": 791, "name": "bd_khadga_dyn", "start_year": 650, "end_year": 700, "long_name": "Khadga Dynasty", "new_name": "bd_khadga_dyn", "polity_tag": "OTHER_TAG", "general_description": "", "shapefile_name": null, "private_comment": "", "created_date": "2023-12-07T16:13:34.676069Z", "modified_date": "2023-12-07T16:13:34.676082Z", "home_nga": null, "home_seshat_region": { "id": 37, "name": "Eastern India", "subregions_list": "Lower Ganges (Bangladesh) and eastern India (Assam)", "mac_region": { "id": 9, "name": "South Asia" } }, "private_comment_n": { "id": 1, "text": "NO_PRIVATE_COMMENTS" } }, "comment": null, "private_comment": { "id": 1, "text": "NO_PRIVATE_COMMENTS" }, "citations": [], "curator": [] }, { "id": 230, "year_from": null, "year_to": null, "description": "“Many scholars have felt impelled to emphasise the toleration of different sects and denominations evinced by Indian rulers. [...] It seems fairly clear that, traditionally in India, people readily transferred or distributed their allegiance between different sects, seeing no logical inconsistency in approaching different gods for different purposes, and that this apparently syncretic style of religious behaviour encouraged a relaxed attitude to what others did as well; evidently, too, rulers generally extended their acceptance of this practice. [...] Much of the evidence, then, suggests that all the diverse religious sects were freely tolerated by a prevailing world view that was ready to acknowledge a certain common validity. Yet it is unlikely that such a view could rise to the status of cultural orthodoxy without friction. Although references to religious wars and persecutions are conspicuously absent from the historical record of ancient India, this does not rule out lesser types of conflict, and some scholars believe that there is indeed evidence of localised disagreement and resentment. [...] For example, the Arthaśāstra gratuitously advises the agents of a king to help themselves, on behalf of the ruler, to the property of groups on the fringes of society who might not have powerful friends. Moreover, there are hints in scattered sources that the followers of orthodox Brahman teachers at times ganged up against Buddhist or Jain establishments that had lost their former patronage. [...] Still, hard evidence of religious persecution in these ancient times is scattered and fragmentary. In the absence of more solid evidence, the view has gained ground that pre-modern India had a cultural unity that precluded communal conflict, but we think that this picture is not sufficiently nuanced. Doniger’s perception that there was widespread persecution of non-Brahmans during the first millennium may fairly represent the situation that arose at certain times, but we cannot be at all sure how widespread the phenomenon was, or at what times it was most marked.//\"Still, we should note that, simply as a matter of practical politics, there was at least one factor that would certainly have acted to limit the ferocity of any sectarian persecutions – the absence of a clear and powerful advantage at all times for kings in identifying themselves with the Brahman interest. No clear dividing line existed, in fact, between ruling families that were of ‘genuine’ ‘Aryan’ descent, and the rest; the ruling elite presided over heterogeneous populations within which Brahmanism, as an agent of Sanskritisation and as a common cultural denominator, was slowly feeling its way towards a new role, directed towards shaping an inclusive syncretism. Thus, the Brahmanical revival could not afford to go too far. Especially, it had to be very wary of attacking the prudent preference of kings for policies that had the capacity to attract wide support among the multiple disparate groups that constituted the citizenry. The Brahmans had to make do with whatever qualified honour they could find within the frame of an eclectic culture. Such structural constraints are likely to have kept them from striking at their enemies too wantonly.”§REF§(Copland, Mabbett, Roy, Brittlebank and Bowles 2012: 74-77) Seshat URL: <a href=\"https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/ATSZ6QBU\" target=\"_blank\" class=\"fw-bolder\"> <b> Zotero link: ATSZ6QBU </b></a>§REF§", "note": null, "finalized": false, "created_date": null, "modified_date": null, "tag": "IFR", "is_disputed": false, "is_uncertain": false, "expert_reviewed": false, "drb_reviewed": null, "name": "Government restrictions on property ownership for adherents of any religious group", "coded_value": "absent", "polity": { "id": 779, "name": "BdDeva", "start_year": 1150, "end_year": 1300, "long_name": "Deva Dynasty", "new_name": "bd_deva_dyn", "polity_tag": "OTHER_TAG", "general_description": "", "shapefile_name": null, "private_comment": "", "created_date": null, "modified_date": "2024-06-05T11:26:17.521369Z", "home_nga": null, "home_seshat_region": { "id": 37, "name": "Eastern India", "subregions_list": "Lower Ganges (Bangladesh) and eastern India (Assam)", "mac_region": { "id": 9, "name": "South Asia" } }, "private_comment_n": { "id": 54, "text": "a new_private_comment_text new approach for polity" } }, "comment": null, "private_comment": { "id": 1, "text": "NO_PRIVATE_COMMENTS" }, "citations": [], "curator": [] }, { "id": 221, "year_from": null, "year_to": null, "description": "“Many scholars have felt impelled to emphasise the toleration of different sects and denominations evinced by Indian rulers. [...] It seems fairly clear that, traditionally in India, people readily transferred or distributed their allegiance between different sects, seeing no logical inconsistency in approaching different gods for different purposes, and that this apparently syncretic style of religious behaviour encouraged a relaxed attitude to what others did as well; evidently, too, rulers generally extended their acceptance of this practice. [...] Much of the evidence, then, suggests that all the diverse religious sects were freely tolerated by a prevailing world view that was ready to acknowledge a certain common validity. Yet it is unlikely that such a view could rise to the status of cultural orthodoxy without friction. Although references to religious wars and persecutions are conspicuously absent from the historical record of ancient India, this does not rule out lesser types of conflict, and some scholars believe that there is indeed evidence of localised disagreement and resentment. [...] For example, the Arthaśāstra gratuitously advises the agents of a king to help themselves, on behalf of the ruler, to the property of groups on the fringes of society who might not have powerful friends. Moreover, there are hints in scattered sources that the followers of orthodox Brahman teachers at times ganged up against Buddhist or Jain establishments that had lost their former patronage. [...] Still, hard evidence of religious persecution in these ancient times is scattered and fragmentary. In the absence of more solid evidence, the view has gained ground that pre-modern India had a cultural unity that precluded communal conflict, but we think that this picture is not sufficiently nuanced. Doniger’s perception that there was widespread persecution of non-Brahmans during the first millennium may fairly represent the situation that arose at certain times, but we cannot be at all sure how widespread the phenomenon was, or at what times it was most marked.//\"Still, we should note that, simply as a matter of practical politics, there was at least one factor that would certainly have acted to limit the ferocity of any sectarian persecutions – the absence of a clear and powerful advantage at all times for kings in identifying themselves with the Brahman interest. No clear dividing line existed, in fact, between ruling families that were of ‘genuine’ ‘Aryan’ descent, and the rest; the ruling elite presided over heterogeneous populations within which Brahmanism, as an agent of Sanskritisation and as a common cultural denominator, was slowly feeling its way towards a new role, directed towards shaping an inclusive syncretism. Thus, the Brahmanical revival could not afford to go too far. Especially, it had to be very wary of attacking the prudent preference of kings for policies that had the capacity to attract wide support among the multiple disparate groups that constituted the citizenry. The Brahmans had to make do with whatever qualified honour they could find within the frame of an eclectic culture. Such structural constraints are likely to have kept them from striking at their enemies too wantonly.”§REF§(Copland, Mabbett, Roy, Brittlebank and Bowles 2012: 74-77) Seshat URL: <a href=\"https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/ATSZ6QBU\" target=\"_blank\" class=\"fw-bolder\"> <b> Zotero link: ATSZ6QBU </b></a>§REF§", "note": null, "finalized": false, "created_date": null, "modified_date": null, "tag": "IFR", "is_disputed": false, "is_uncertain": false, "expert_reviewed": false, "drb_reviewed": null, "name": "Government restrictions on property ownership for adherents of any religious group", "coded_value": "absent", "polity": { "id": 794, "name": "in_vanga_k", "start_year": 550, "end_year": 600, "long_name": "Vanga Dynasty", "new_name": "in_vanga_k", "polity_tag": "OTHER_TAG", "general_description": "", "shapefile_name": null, "private_comment": "", "created_date": "2023-12-07T16:17:14.908726Z", "modified_date": "2024-05-30T13:49:08.075431Z", "home_nga": null, "home_seshat_region": { "id": 39, "name": "North India", "subregions_list": "North India", "mac_region": { "id": 9, "name": "South Asia" } }, "private_comment_n": { "id": 53, "text": "a new_private_comment_text new approach for polity" } }, "comment": null, "private_comment": { "id": 1, "text": "NO_PRIVATE_COMMENTS" }, "citations": [], "curator": [] }, { "id": 222, "year_from": null, "year_to": null, "description": "“Many scholars have felt impelled to emphasise the toleration of different sects and denominations evinced by Indian rulers. [...] It seems fairly clear that, traditionally in India, people readily transferred or distributed their allegiance between different sects, seeing no logical inconsistency in approaching different gods for different purposes, and that this apparently syncretic style of religious behaviour encouraged a relaxed attitude to what others did as well; evidently, too, rulers generally extended their acceptance of this practice. [...] Much of the evidence, then, suggests that all the diverse religious sects were freely tolerated by a prevailing world view that was ready to acknowledge a certain common validity. Yet it is unlikely that such a view could rise to the status of cultural orthodoxy without friction. Although references to religious wars and persecutions are conspicuously absent from the historical record of ancient India, this does not rule out lesser types of conflict, and some scholars believe that there is indeed evidence of localised disagreement and resentment. [...] For example, the Arthaśāstra gratuitously advises the agents of a king to help themselves, on behalf of the ruler, to the property of groups on the fringes of society who might not have powerful friends. Moreover, there are hints in scattered sources that the followers of orthodox Brahman teachers at times ganged up against Buddhist or Jain establishments that had lost their former patronage. [...] Still, hard evidence of religious persecution in these ancient times is scattered and fragmentary. In the absence of more solid evidence, the view has gained ground that pre-modern India had a cultural unity that precluded communal conflict, but we think that this picture is not sufficiently nuanced. Doniger’s perception that there was widespread persecution of non-Brahmans during the first millennium may fairly represent the situation that arose at certain times, but we cannot be at all sure how widespread the phenomenon was, or at what times it was most marked.//\"Still, we should note that, simply as a matter of practical politics, there was at least one factor that would certainly have acted to limit the ferocity of any sectarian persecutions – the absence of a clear and powerful advantage at all times for kings in identifying themselves with the Brahman interest. No clear dividing line existed, in fact, between ruling families that were of ‘genuine’ ‘Aryan’ descent, and the rest; the ruling elite presided over heterogeneous populations within which Brahmanism, as an agent of Sanskritisation and as a common cultural denominator, was slowly feeling its way towards a new role, directed towards shaping an inclusive syncretism. Thus, the Brahmanical revival could not afford to go too far. Especially, it had to be very wary of attacking the prudent preference of kings for policies that had the capacity to attract wide support among the multiple disparate groups that constituted the citizenry. The Brahmans had to make do with whatever qualified honour they could find within the frame of an eclectic culture. Such structural constraints are likely to have kept them from striking at their enemies too wantonly.” §REF§ (Copland, Mabbett, Roy, Brittlebank and Bowles 2012: 74-77) Seshat URL: <a href=\"https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/ATSZ6QBU\" target=\"_blank\" class=\"fw-bolder\"> <b> Zotero link: ATSZ6QBU </b></a> §REF§", "note": null, "finalized": false, "created_date": null, "modified_date": null, "tag": "IFR", "is_disputed": false, "is_uncertain": false, "expert_reviewed": false, "drb_reviewed": null, "name": "Government restrictions on property ownership for adherents of any religious group", "coded_value": "absent", "polity": { "id": 795, "name": "bd_yadava_varman_dyn", "start_year": 1080, "end_year": 1150, "long_name": "Yadava-Varman Dynasty", "new_name": "bd_yadava_varman_dyn", "polity_tag": "OTHER_TAG", "general_description": "", "shapefile_name": null, "private_comment": "", "created_date": "2023-12-07T16:18:00.875798Z", "modified_date": "2024-06-07T14:36:41.438836Z", "home_nga": null, "home_seshat_region": { "id": 37, "name": "Eastern India", "subregions_list": "Lower Ganges (Bangladesh) and eastern India (Assam)", "mac_region": { "id": 9, "name": "South Asia" } }, "private_comment_n": { "id": 60, "text": "a new_private_comment_text new approach for polity" } }, "comment": null, "private_comment": { "id": 1, "text": "NO_PRIVATE_COMMENTS" }, "citations": [], "curator": [] }, { "id": 246, "year_from": null, "year_to": null, "description": "Ancient Mesopotamian religion is recognised as being polytheistic, accommodating a broad range of local gods into an increasingly structured framework. Sources speculate that this allowed for a degree of syncretism and tolerance. “There may have been a political need to cooperate with other towns that had different gods but were viewed as friendly, and the interaction of the gods was assumed to have been benign. Polytheisms seem especially good at avoiding religious conflict, partly because they are open-ended and can admit any number of new names of gods. Syncretism allows them to simplify a burgeoning system and yet retain the names and panoply preferred in each locality […] The mechanism was available to create a pantheon that included the gods of various towns, but no one may have bothered when the early farming villages, dependent on irrigation, did not amalgamate into larger political entities. When they began to combine, the issue arose, however, and gods became identified with other gods, their qualities becoming homogenized. This is the earliest polytheism we know much about. Religious feelings may have been different in different towns as the objects of religion varied, but religion itself did not appear to be divisive.” §REF§(Snell, 2011, 12, 13) Daniel C. Snell. (2011). Religions of the Ancient Near East. Cambridge University Press. §REF§“Mesopotamian religion was primarily local in its character. Only through institutional efforts (such as the foundation of palaces and temples) and theological systematization did religion gain regional and supra-regional features. Notwithstanding the local character of religion in Mesopotamia, archaeological and textual evidence attests to a religious system that was intended to foster cultural cohesion.” §REF§ (Pongratz-Leisten, 2013, 33). Pongratz-Leisten, B. (2013). Mesopotamia. In B. Spaeth (Ed.), The Cambridge Companion to Ancient Mediterranean Religions (Cambridge Companions to Religion, pp. 33-54). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Seshat URL: <a href=\"https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/ZEG8QMQQ\" target=\"_blank\" class=\"fw-bolder\"> <b> Zotero link: ZEG8QMQQ </b></a> §REF§", "note": null, "finalized": false, "created_date": null, "modified_date": null, "tag": "IFR", "is_disputed": false, "is_uncertain": false, "expert_reviewed": false, "drb_reviewed": null, "name": "Government restrictions on property ownership for adherents of any religious group", "coded_value": "absent", "polity": { "id": 474, "name": "IqUruk*", "start_year": -4000, "end_year": -2900, "long_name": "Uruk", "new_name": "iq_uruk", "polity_tag": "LEGACY", "general_description": "The name of this polity derives from the site of Uruk (modern Warka) located c. 35 km east from the Euphrates River, in south Iraq. This period is perceived as a time of deep transformations and significant inventions (such as wheel, fast wheel, plough, using alloys - bronze, writing system, etc.). There is very little known about the people living in Mesopotamia during that time (so-called Sumerian problem). There are some voices suggesting that Uruk population might have been identified as Sumerians, however there is no direct evidence to support this hypothesis. On the contrary, there is a lack of traces of invasion or appearance of completely new group of people. There is rather highlighted undisturbed continuation between previous polities, such as Ubaid and Uruk, and endurance of some cultural patterns, which are especially visible in architecture (construction of temples at Eridu or Uruk). §REF§ Roux 1998, 75-78 §REF§ , §REF§ Crawford 2004, 16-18 §REF§ , §REF§ Kuhr 1997, 22-23 §REF§ The nature of relations between Mesopotamia and Susiana land in this period deserves the special attention. There are few main ideas regarding the relationships between these two geographical areas. According to Algaze, the Susiana was colonized by group of people from southern Mesopotamia in the Uruk period and he indicates cultural homogeneity these two lands in Uruk period. §REF§ Algaze 1993, 15-17 §REF§ The opposite opinion is presented by Amiet, who suggested that Susiana was inhabited by two different 'ethnic' group (so called - 'Elamite' and 'Mesopotamian' type). The culture of this land, hence, was seen as some kind of hybrid and the alternately appearance of 'Elamite' or 'Mesopotamian' cultural elements is related to some sort of 'fashion' or 'trends'. §REF§ Amiet 1979 §REF§ , §REF§ Amiet 1992: 80 §REF§ The Uruk polity is perceived by Algaze as some kind of proto-state organism and he describes it as “an early instance of an \"informal empire\" or \"world system\" based on asymmetrical exchange and a hierarchically organized international division of labour that differs from modern examples only in degree.” §REF§ Algaze 1989, 571 §REF§ He emphasizes very rapid and intense cultural growth of Uruk polity and he considers few types of Uruk expansions: “(1)new form of spatial distribution: the growth of cities and their dependencies; (2)new form of socio-political organization: the explosive growth of social differentiation, the emergence of encumbered labour, and the crystallization of the state; (3) new forms of economic arrangements and of record keeping: state control of a substantial portion of the means of production and of its surplus, craft and occupational specialization on an industrial scale; and, finally, (4)the new forms of symbolic representation needed to validate the changes taking place in the realm of social and political relationship-leading to the creation of an artistic tradition and iconographical repertoire that were to set the framework for pictorial representation in Mesopotamia for millennium to come.” §REF§ Algaze 1989, 590-91 §REF§ There are many hypotheses regarding the political system of Uruk polity. Most of the researchers (e. g. Frangipane, Rothman, Pollock, Wright) perceived the Uruk polity as some kind of united (in cultural sense) community which shares number of features (particularly in material culture) and they represent some early stage of city-state organization with dominant position of some cities and the group of elite. §REF§ Nissen 2001, 161 §REF§ , §REF§ Pollock 2001, 181-233 §REF§ However, other archaeologists believed (e. g. Algaze) that some cities have been already ruled by one person - ruler which collected all political, religious and military power. There are many images of this person on seals, sealing, vase, furniture inlays where he is showed as a warrior, bearded man in cap, hunter and master of animals. Algaze even writes: “comparison with inscribed statues of later Sumerian rulers in strikingly similar poses leaves no doubt that the analogous Uruk-period images are stylized and standardized representations of kings.” §REF§ Algaze 2001, 34 §REF§ ", "shapefile_name": null, "private_comment": null, "created_date": null, "modified_date": null, "home_nga": { "id": 8, "name": "Southern Mesopotamia", "subregion": "Levant-Mesopotamia", "longitude": "44.420000000000", "latitude": "32.470000000000", "capital_city": "Babylon (Hillah)", "nga_code": "IQ", "fao_country": "Iraq", "world_region": "Southwest Asia" }, "home_seshat_region": { "id": 62, "name": "Mesopotamia", "subregions_list": "Iraq, Kuwait", "mac_region": { "id": 11, "name": "Southwest Asia" } }, "private_comment_n": { "id": 1, "text": "NO_PRIVATE_COMMENTS" } }, "comment": null, "private_comment": { "id": 1, "text": "NO_PRIVATE_COMMENTS" }, "citations": [], "curator": [] }, { "id": 232, "year_from": null, "year_to": null, "description": "‘‘‘ In discussions with Yaniv Fox, he mentioned that there might be restrictions on ownership for Christian slaves, but one would have to follow this up. The following quote implies that all religious groups mostly had the same rights. “Jews had the same legal status as the Christian Roman population, and they were generally treated well by their Christian neighbours. Neither Merovingian kings nor Church councils tried to convert Jews to Catholic Christianity systematically or to deprive them of their rights. The massive forced conversion of Clermont in 576 remained an exception. The Church mainly attempted to avoid conversions of Christians to Judaism. In general, minorities testify to the cultural diversity and vitality of Merovingian society.”§REF§ (Drews 2020, 117) Drews, Wolfram. 2020. Migrants and Minorities in Merovingian Gaul. The Oxford Handbook of the Merovingian World. Pp.117 - 138. Seshat URL: <a href=\"https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/95Z99GVQ\" target=\"_blank\" class=\"fw-bolder\"> <b> Zotero link: 95Z99GVQ </b></a> §REF§", "note": null, "finalized": false, "created_date": null, "modified_date": null, "tag": "IFR", "is_disputed": false, "is_uncertain": false, "expert_reviewed": false, "drb_reviewed": null, "name": "Government restrictions on property ownership for adherents of any religious group", "coded_value": "absent", "polity": { "id": 306, "name": "FrMervM", "start_year": 543, "end_year": 687, "long_name": "Middle Merovingian", "new_name": "fr_merovingian_emp_2", "polity_tag": "LEGACY", "general_description": "During our second Merovingian period (543-687 CE), the kingdom was still a 'quasi-polity', consisting of numerous Frankish kingdoms under the nominal leadership of a king who had his primary residence in Paris. §REF§ (Wood 1994, 41) Wood, Ian. 1994. The Merovingian Kingdoms 450-751. London: Longman. Seshat URL: <a class=\"external free\" href=\"https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/ARUIRN35\" rel=\"nofollow\">https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/ARUIRN35</a>. §REF§ Under the kings Chlothar II (r. 584-629 CE) and Dagobert I (r. 629-639 CE), the Merovingian kingdom reached the height of its power both internally and externally. §REF§ (Wood 1994, 140) Wood, Ian. 1994. The Merovingian Kingdoms 450-751. London: Longman. Seshat URL: <a class=\"external free\" href=\"https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/ARUIRN35\" rel=\"nofollow\">https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/ARUIRN35</a>. §REF§ §REF§ (Morby and Rozier 2014) Morby, John E., and Charlie Rozier. 2014. Dynasties of the World. 2nd ed., online edition. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI: 10.1093/acref/9780191780073.001.0001. Seshat URL: <a class=\"external free\" href=\"https://www.zotero.org/groups/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/3C5IVS6E\" rel=\"nofollow\">https://www.zotero.org/groups/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/3C5IVS6E</a>. §REF§ <br><i>Population and political organization</i><br>Merovingian France was a largely decentralized kingdom based on the pre-existing Roman administrative system, in which cities were the basic units. §REF§ (Loseby 1998, 245-49) Loseby, S. T. 1998. “Gregory’s Cities: Urban Functions in Sixth-Century Gaul.” In Franks and Alamanni in the Merovingian Period: An Ethnographic Perspective, edited by I. N. Wood, 239-69. Woodbridge: Boydell Press. Seshat URL: <a class=\"external free\" href=\"https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/DT5E5GNS\" rel=\"nofollow\">https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/DT5E5GNS</a>. §REF§ The city rulers, known as counts or <i>grafio</i>, who sent the king his tax revenue and carried out judicial and administrative functions, had access to both administrative officials and city archives (<i>gesta municipalia</i>). §REF§ (Wood 1994, 204) Wood, Ian. 1994. The Merovingian Kingdoms 450-751. London: Longman. Seshat URL: <a class=\"external free\" href=\"https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/ARUIRN35\" rel=\"nofollow\">https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/ARUIRN35</a>. §REF§ §REF§ (Loseby 1998, 245-49) Loseby, S. T. 1998. “Gregory’s Cities: Urban Functions in Sixth-Century Gaul.” In Franks and Alamanni in the Merovingian Period: An Ethnographic Perspective, edited by I. N. Wood, 239-69. Woodbridge: Boydell Press. Seshat URL: <a class=\"external free\" href=\"https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/DT5E5GNS\" rel=\"nofollow\">https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/DT5E5GNS</a>. §REF§ Groups of cities and counts could be placed under a duke for military and administrative purposes. §REF§ (Bachrach 1972, 67) Bachrach, Bernard S. 1972. Merovingian Military Organization 481-751. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press. Seshat URL: <a class=\"external free\" href=\"https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/SG5XNFPG\" rel=\"nofollow\">https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/SG5XNFPG</a>. §REF§ <br>In contrast, there was no elaborate central administration, the highest non-royal official being a figure known as the mayor of the palace. §REF§ (Halsall 2003, 28) Halsall, Guy. 2003. Warfare and Society in the Barbarian West, 450-900. London: Routledge. Seshat URL: <a class=\"external free\" href=\"https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/Z5EZBP2R\" rel=\"nofollow\">https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/Z5EZBP2R</a>. §REF§ The king's capital and main residence was at Paris, where the population may have reached 30,000 by the 8th century CE, §REF§ (Clark and Henneman, Jr. 1995, 1316) Clark, William W., and John Bell Henneman, Jr. 1995. “Paris.” In Medieval France: An Encyclopedia, edited by William W. Kibler, Grover A. Zinn, Lawrence Earp, and John Bell Henneman, Jr., 1314-30. New York: Garland Publishing. Seshat URL: <a class=\"external free\" href=\"https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/HS8644XK\" rel=\"nofollow\">https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/HS8644XK</a>. §REF§ although the court was always a peripatetic institution. §REF§ (Wood 1994, 150-53) Wood, Ian. 1994. The Merovingian Kingdoms 450-751. London: Longman. Seshat URL: <a class=\"external free\" href=\"https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/ARUIRN35\" rel=\"nofollow\">https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/ARUIRN35</a>. §REF§ The king consulted a group of magnates (<i>obtimates</i>) at an annual gathering around 1 March. Written references to royal edicts are known from 614 CE onwards, but earlier royal legislation has not survived. §REF§ (Fouracre 1998, 286-89) Fouracre, P. J. 1998. “The Nature of Frankish Political Institutions in the Seventh Century.” In Franks and Alamanni in the Merovingian Period: An Ethnographic Perspective, edited by Ian Wood, 285-316. Woodbridge: Boydell Press. Seshat URL: <a class=\"external free\" href=\"https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/GT2AINW4\" rel=\"nofollow\">https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/GT2AINW4</a>. §REF§ Merovingian kings had the authority to appoint dukes and counts as well as bishops, who were often 'royal servants with no known connections with their sees'. §REF§ (Wood 1994, 78) Wood, Ian. 1994. The Merovingian Kingdoms 450-751. London: Longman. Seshat URL: <a class=\"external free\" href=\"https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/ARUIRN35\" rel=\"nofollow\">https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/ARUIRN35</a>. §REF§ <br>From 622 CE onwards the basic territorial divisions of the Merovingian Kingdom were Neustria (centred on the Seine and Oise rivers and associated with the <i>Pactus Legis Salicae</i> law code), §REF§ (Wood 1994, 112-15) Wood, Ian. 1994. The Merovingian Kingdoms 450-751. London: Longman. Seshat URL: <a class=\"external free\" href=\"https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/ARUIRN35\" rel=\"nofollow\">https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/ARUIRN35</a>. §REF§ Burgundy (where the <i>Liber Constitutionum</i> was developed), and Austrasia (by the Rhine and Meuse, which came to possess its own mayor of the palace §REF§ (Fanning 1995, 157) Fanning, Steven. 1995. “Austrasia.” In Medieval France: An Encyclopedia, edited by William W. Kibler, Grover A. Zinn, Lawrence Earp, and John Bell Henneman, Jr., 156-57. New York: Garland Publishing. Seshat URL: <a class=\"external free\" href=\"https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/GR2MKFDX\" rel=\"nofollow\">https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/GR2MKFDX</a>. §REF§ and followed the Lex Ribvaria). §REF§ (Wood 1994, 112-15) Wood, Ian. 1994. The Merovingian Kingdoms 450-751. London: Longman. Seshat URL: <a class=\"external free\" href=\"https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/ARUIRN35\" rel=\"nofollow\">https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/ARUIRN35</a>. §REF§ A fourth area, Aquitaine, had a special status due to its distance from the royal centres and was under less direct Merovingian control. §REF§ (Wood 1994, 100, 146) Wood, Ian. 1994. The Merovingian Kingdoms 450-751. London: Longman. Seshat URL: <a class=\"external free\" href=\"https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/ARUIRN35\" rel=\"nofollow\">https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/ARUIRN35</a>. §REF§ ", "shapefile_name": null, "private_comment": null, "created_date": null, "modified_date": null, "home_nga": { "id": 2, "name": "Paris Basin", "subregion": "Western Europe", "longitude": "2.312458000000", "latitude": "48.866111000000", "capital_city": "Paris", "nga_code": "FR", "fao_country": "France", "world_region": "Europe" }, "home_seshat_region": { "id": 20, "name": "Western Europe", "subregions_list": "British Isles, France, Low Countries", "mac_region": { "id": 5, "name": "Europe" } }, "private_comment_n": { "id": 1, "text": "NO_PRIVATE_COMMENTS" } }, "comment": null, "private_comment": { "id": 1, "text": "NO_PRIVATE_COMMENTS" }, "citations": [], "curator": [] } ] }