GbEmpr2

From Seshat Data Browser
Revision as of 18:40, 13 December 2021 by Admin (talk | contribs) (1 revision imported)
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Phase I Variables (polity-based)

General variables

♠ RA ♣ Edward A L Turner ♥

♠ Original name ♣ Second British Empire ♥

♠ Alternative names ♣ ♥

♠ Peak Date ♣ 1815 CE ♥ Following defeat of Napoleonic France. "What materially enhanced the security of Britain's scattered possessions after 1815 ... was the relative peacefulness which afflicted international relations and the absence of any European nation strong enough to challenge the global superiority of the Royal Navy. This exceptional interlude faded in the 1870s with the rise of Continental powers harbouring colonial ambitions."[1]


Temporal bounds

♠ Duration ♣ 1780-1840 CE ♥ From the loss of American colonies to the instability of the 1830s - 1840s (the Chartist Movement)

♠ Degree of centralization ♣ confederation; loose ♥

"Unlike the Spanish and the French, the British never attempted to rule colonies directly from the metropole ... At the core of Imperial administration .... a series of essentially bilateral relationships which entailed constant negotiation rather than the imposition of rule and the acceptance of subjection."[2]

"Rather than constituting one empire, this conglomeration of large land masses and territorial fragments comprised several empires ... as a political entity it was loosely held together".[3]

Imperial agents in the colonies "exercised considerable latitude of authority and were notoriously difficult to control ... Far from being subordinates, many masterful individuals had their own agendas and ambitions; often they acted independently, disregarding directives or exceeding instructions with cavalier exuberance and frequently with impunity."[4]

♠ Supra-polity relations ♣ none ♥

Supra-cultural relations

♠ preceding (quasi)polity ♣ First British Empire ♥
♠ relationship to preceding (quasi)polity ♣ continuity ♥
♠ succeeding (quasi)polity ♣ British Empire - Victorian Period ♥
♠ Supracultural entity ♣ Anglosphere ♥
♠ scale of supra-cultural interaction ♣ ♥ km squared.

♠ Capital ♣ London ♥

Language

♠ Language ♣ English ♥

General Description

Here, we are interested in the sixty years between the British Empire's loss of its American colonies in 1780s, to the Chartist Movement in the 1830s-1840s.

The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, which ruled over the rest of this polity, was a constitutional monarchy. Governors, Proconsuls, and Viceroys were tasked with translating directives from London into forms that were suited conditions in the colonies.[5]

No population estimates for the entire empire could be found specifically for this period, but according to contemporary sources it reached a population of 284,110,693 in the 1870s.[6]

Social Complexity variables

♠ RA ♣ Edward A L Turner; Jill Levine ♥

Social Scale

♠ Polity territory ♣ 22,700,000: 1800CE; 30,800,000: 1900CE ♥ in squared kilometers

1800 CE: Parliament approves legislation uniting Great Britain and Ireland as a single state."[7] 1900 CE: 30.8 million km2 in 1901 [8]

In 1877? CE according to contemporary literature: Area: 8,754,793 square miles. Population: 284,110,693.[9] 22,674,810 km2.

"Table of the British Possessions throughout the World, with their Population and Area in English Square Miles." Table has data for all of these locations: Europe (British Islands, Gibraltar, Heligoland, Malta and Gozo); Asia (India, including Depedent States, Celon, Andaman Islands, Straits Settlements, Aden, Hong Kong, Labuan Island, Perim Island); Africa (Gambia River, Sierra Leone, Gold Coast, Lagos, Cape Colony, Natal, Transvaal, Mauritius and Depedencies, Socotra, Ascension Island, St. Helena Island, Tristan d'Acunha); North America (Dominion of Canada, Newfoundland, British Honduras or Belize, West India Islands, Bermuda Islands); South America (British Guiana, Falkland Islands); Oceania (New South Wales, Victoria, Queensland, South Australia, Northern Territory, Western Australia, Tasmania, New Zealand and Chatham Islands, Fiji Islands).[10]

♠ Polity Population ♣ 107,500,000: 1814 CE ; 400,000,000: 1900 CE ♥ People. Maddison Project Estimates [11]

Alternate estimates: In 1877 CE? according to contemporary literature: Area: 8,754,793 square miles. Population: 284,110,693.[12]

According to statistician Patrick Colquhoun, the total population of the Empire in 1814 was 61.15 Million. A Treatise on the Wealth, Power and Resources of the British Empire [13]

398.4 million in 1901 [14]

♠ Population of the largest settlement ♣ 900,000: 1800 CE; 3,250,000: 1877 CE; [4,500,000-6,500,000]: 1900 CE ♥ Inhabitants.

"Table of the Towns of the British Isles, above 100,000 inhabitants, in 1871." London: 3,254,260[15]

Colquhoun says 900,000 in 1801. [16]

4.5 million in 1901 CE [17]

Hierarchical Complexity

♠ Settlement hierarchy ♣ [6-7] ♥ levels.

1. Capital (London)
2. Large Cities (ie. Delhi)
3. Cities
4. Large Towns
5. Towns
6. Villages
7. Hamlets

"England, it is to be observed from a civil point of view, is divided int counties or shires, hundreds, or as they are termed in some of the northern counties, wapentakes...cities, tithings, towns or vills, (the last three of which, in a legal sense are synonymous, boroughs, and parishes."[18]

♠ Administrative levels ♣ [8-10] ♥ levels.

Central Government

1. Monarch
1. Prime Minister
2. High Ranking Members of Parliament: Chancellor, Treasurer, President of the King's Council, Chief Justice, Chief Baron[19]
3. Members of the House of Lords[20][21]
3. Members of the House of Commons[22][23]
4-7. Masters, Secretaries, Clerks, other Minor Officials[24]

Colonial Office

2. Colonial Secretary (Colonial Office at Whitehall from 1811)[25]
3. Officials in the Colonial Office[26]
4-7. Masters, Secretaries, Clerks, other Minor Officials[27]

Judicial [28]

2. Lord High Chancellor (chief judge of the Court of Chancery, member of the House of Lords)
3. High-level judges
4. Local judges
5. Sheriff
6. Clerk of the Peace
7. Coroner
8. Magistrate
9. High Constable
10. Minor officers: Petty Constable, Gaoler, Bailiff, Executioner

Local Government (UK)

3. UK regional administrative units
4. High ranking local officials (inferred)
5. Minor Officials, Clerks, etc. (inferred)

Colonial Government

3. Governor (Proconsuls, and Viceroys)
3. East India Company[29]
3. Protectorates
4. Colonial bureaucracies (e.g. Indian Civil Service)
4. Colonial executive and Legislative Councils
4. Indigenous rulers
5-9. Masters, Secretaries, Clerks, other Minor Officials (inferred)
5-9. Internal/Indigenous ruling sub-divisions (in India likely to be fairly extensive to village level: seven levels inferred in the preceding Mughal Empire, nine levels inferred in the Delhi Sultanate.)
  • "Unlike the Spanish and the French, the British never attempted to rule colonies directly from the metropole ... At the core of Imperial administration .... a series of essentially bilateral relationships which entailed constant negotiation rather than the imposition of rule and the acceptance of subjection."[30]
  • "... governmental authority lagging behind, not leading, overseas expansion. ... the bureaucratic standard-bearers of British rule usually trailed in the wake of traders, missionaries, explorers, and settlers, and were charged, like firefighters or troubleshooters, with tidying up the chaos left by private entrepreneurs and trying to impose some order and regularity."[31]
  • Imperial agents: "Even when the flow of information was speeded by clipper ships, then steamships and telegraphs, the fundamental bureaucratic problem remained the continuous adjustment of Imperial preferences and local practice. The mediating role was necessarily delegated to the men on the spot, principally the Governors, Proconsuls, and Viceroys who operated at the key point of interaction between directives emanating from London and pressures generated by conditions on the periphery."[32] Initially military agents, then civilian: "Military men, favoured after the French wars, were gradually replaced by civilians".[33]
  • There was an Indian Civil Service containing about 2000 Europeans.[34] In Uganda in the 1890s CE there were 25 British officials.[35] "With Western ambitions as well as Western acculturation, some 4,000 Indians served in the uncovenanted Indian Civil Service by 1868, but their advancement to senior posts was slow and unwelcome."[36] Officials in India undertook "statistical surveys".[37]
  • Governor: "The executive heads of administration in the more important crown colonies, and in some protectorates". In less important places the top officials were called administrators or commissioners. "The governors were appointed by the monarch (particularly in the early days of the Empire), by proprietors (in the case of proprietary colonies), or by the government and their duties varied considerably, some ruling as autocrats, others (especially as colonies moved toward independence) leaving most decision making to legislative councils composed of local residents. The monarch's representative in those British Overseas Territories that have a permanent population also holds the title of 'governor' and carries out the duties of head of state. Moreover, the British monarch is also - and independently - head of state of Australia and of Canada, appointed representatives to each state in the former and to each province in the latter. In Australia, these individuals are known as governors and in Canada as lieutenant-governors"."[38]
  • 1784 CE: "Parliament approves the India Act, which gives the government direct control over the political activities of the East India Company."[39]
  • "colonial self-reliance operating through representative Assemblies had been adopted for Nova Scotia (1758), Prince Edward Island (1773), and New Brunswick (1784), and after 1791 the Canadas, though the powers of Governors and executives were nominally strengthened in the light of the American experience. In the conquered, ceded, and later settled colonies, however, more authoritarian regimes were established, involving Governors working initially with advisory Councils and then with nominated Executive and Legislative Councils, the latter pattern coming to be known as Crown Colony government."[40] After Canadian rebellion "political advance was sought through the Union of 1841 and a subsequent devolution of authority which facilitated local self-government operating under Cabinet conventions known as responsible government. Colonial politicians, enjoying the legitimacy of popular consent for their exercise of executive power, now provided acceptable collaborators who could be left to their own devices in matters of internal administration."[41] "maturing communities would normally pass, at different speeds according to different circumstances, from Crown Colony status to full self-government."[42] During 1830s CE "in Crown Colonies outside British North America, the Governor's advisory council was replaced by nominated Executive and Legislative Councils in Western Australia, the Cape, Trinidad, Mauritius, and Ceylon, thus bringing them in line with New South Wales and Van Diemen's Land (1825)."[43] "Once British North America had forced open the gateway to self-government, Australians and New Zealanders were able to make a final dash for local autonomy, securing both representative institutions and responsible government in virtually one leap between 1850 and 1856. They then set about making local sovereignty a reality by eroding residual Imperial authority - Crown lands, fiscal and commercial policy, and internal securtiy - and by forging the political frameworks of the nations they were in the process of building."[44] 1865 CE islands in the West Indies starting with Jamaica abandoned "legislative independence in exchange for the security of direct government by the British Crown."[45]
  • Late 19th century many Protectorates created.[46] "Protectorates came to be administered as if they were colonies - and some were indeed redesignated as such - trends symbolized by the transfer of the Foreign Office's responsibilities to the Colonial OFfice between 1898 and 1905."[47] "By the 1890s, without the formality of annexation, the British authorities and local agents were freely establishing in Protectorates rudimentary frameworks of government involving courts, taxation, military 'pacification', displacement of indigenous rulers, and the issue of certificates for land titles which paved the way for Crown land rights and appropriation by European settlers."[48]
  • 1783-1870 CE: British government largely non-interventionist due to "the physical difficulties of communicating" and "partly from a lack of a strong bureaucracy". "Authority in Britain was divided between different bodies. Effectively from about 1812, a Colonial Office in Whitehall was responsible for the colonies. This was headed by a minister who became Colonial Secretary. ... For the most part it saw its function as responding to developments overseas rather than initiating new policies. India was always a separate concern. Until 1858 the British government did not exercise direct authority over it. Detailed administration was left to the old East India Company, subject to the supervision of a government department on major issues of policy. The administration both of India and of the colonies was responsible to Parliament."[49]
  • "Early British rule was very Indian in character. Once the British had succeeded in taking over an Indian state, they had neither the capacity nor the inclination to introduce radical changes in the way that it was run."[50]
  • "An early administrative respect and tolerance for what were understood to be traditional Indian customs, laws, and religion were subsequently somewhat modified by calls from assorted utilitarians, liberal reformers, and evangelicals for the wholesale Anglicization of society. After the shock of the Indian Mutiny in 1857, however, enthusiasm for rapid Westernization was officially replaced by a deliberate distancing of British authority from the regenderation of Indian society and by a more pronounced insistence on Indian 'difference'."[51]
  • British administrators "pragmatically sought accommodation with indigenous and emigrant societies" and while there were some powerful personalities the execution of British rule "was pursued chiefly through mediation with indigenous elites or collaborating groups possessing local influence".[52]
  • After 1857 CE "India's princes, as rulers of quasi-independent states, were thus integrated into the Imperial order with a recognized status and special privileges.[53]

♠ Religious levels ♣ ♥ levels.

"In certain circumstances, commercial organizations and missionary societies could embody and uphold Imperial authority."[54]

♠ Military levels ♣ 11 ♥ levels.

1. Commander-in-Chief (revived 1793)[55]
2. Secretary at War (combined with Secretary of State for War in 1855, abolished in 1863)[56]
2. Secretary of State for War. ("In 1870 the Commander in Chief became a subordinate officer."[57])
3. Heads of specialist functions (inferred to be at similar levels)
4. High-ranking members of specialist functions (inferred to be at similar levels)
  • "Until 1855 a number of independent offices and individuals were responsible for various aspects of Army administration. The four most important were the Commander in Chief, the Ordnance Office, the Secretary-at-War and the Secretary of State for War. Others who performed specialist functions were the controller of army accounts, the Army Medical Board, the Commissariat Department, the Board of General Officers, the Judge Advocate General, the Commissary General of Muster, the Paymaster General and the Home Office (before 1782 the twin secretaries of state)."[58]

Infantry, Typical battalion establishment, 1808-1809. Levels generally inferred from pay scale information.[59]

4. Colonel
5. Lieutenant Colonel
5. Paymaster (inferred about equal to Lt. Colonel because pay level is appox. the same)
6. Major
7. Captain
7. Surgeon (inferred about equal or slightly higher than Captain because pay level is similar)
8. Adjutant (based on pay levels)
8. Assistant Surgeon (based on pay levels)
8. Lieutenant
8. Quartermaster (inferred equal to Lieutenant based on pay levels)
8-9. Quartermaster Sergeant, Sergeant Major, Paymaster Sergeant, Armourer as Sergeant, Schoolmaster Sergeant (new post as of Dec. 1811)
9. Sergeant
10. Corporal
11. Private
  • Colonial and Foreign Infantry battalions could include a Judge Advocate, Chaplain: four had a Judge Advocate and three had a Chaplain in this period.[60]
  • "The three regiments of Foot Guards (1st, Coldstream and 3rd) had an establishment structure unlike that of the rest of the British infantry."[61]. Included: Drum Major, Hautbois, Solicitor, Deputy Marshal, Provost Marshal in addition to regular battalion positions.

Royal Navy: 1700-1806: (Levels generally inferred from pay scale information)[62]

2. First Lord of the Admiralty
3. Heads of specialist functions (inferred to be at similar levels) (ie. Admiralty and Marine Affairs Office, Navy Board, Transport Board)
3. High-ranking members of specialist functions (inferred to be at similar levels)
4. Admiral
5. Vice-Admiral
6. Rear Admiral (also First Captain)
7. Captain
7-8. Secretaries to the different ranks of Admirals
7-8. Master (inferred similar to higher-ranking secretaries because of pay rate)
8. Lieutenant (inferred similar to higher-ranking secretaries because of pay rate)
8. Surgeon
9. Boatswain, Gunner, Carpenter, Purse, Second Masters and Pilot
10. Master's Mates, Surgeon's First Mates
10. Midshipmen, Master at Arms, Schoolmaster, Captain's Clerk, Carpenter's Mates
11. Ordinary Seamen

Professions

♠ Professional military officers ♣ present ♥

♠ Professional soldiers ♣ present ♥

♠ Professional priesthood ♣ present ♥

Bureaucracy characteristics

♠ Full-time bureaucrats ♣ present ♥ British Civil Service, colonial bureaucracies e.g. Indian Civil Service. In Britain, expanding system of full-time salaried bureaucrats; in India, a system of (mostly non-native) salaried officials known as the Indian Civil Service, introduced in 1858.

♠ Examination system ♣ ♥

♠ Merit promotion ♣ ♥

♠ Specialized government buildings ♣ present ♥

Law

♠ Formal legal code ♣ present ♥ Official regulations covered "private property rights, the rule of law, trial by jury".[63] "In the case of Britain and the states that obtained independence from it, the two important components are Parliament as supreme law-maker and the nature and jurisdiction of courts."[64]. English common and statutory law, amended with colonial statutes wherever deemed necessary.

♠ Judges ♣ present ♥

♠ Courts ♣ present ♥ Official regulations covered "private property rights, the rule of law, trial by jury".[65] "In the case of Britain and the states that obtained independence from it, the two important components are Parliament as supreme law-maker and the nature and jurisdiction of courts."[66]

♠ Professional Lawyers ♣ present ♥

Specialized Buildings: polity owned

♠ irrigation systems ♣ present ♥
♠ drinking water supply systems ♣ present ♥ “As a revolution in urban governance swept Britain from the 1840s onward, a revolution in water supply and drainage infrastructure followed. The apogee of that movement was a water supply system called the gravitation scheme that reforming municipalities aspired to build. It entailed drastically reshaping landscapes in the hinterlands of cities by damming rivers, raising lakes, or flooding valleys and then piping water under pressure to sometimes distant cities; it also, promoters hoped, would reform urban environments and societies at the same time. Between 1840 and the end of the century, engineers in Britain executed it approximately one hundred times, but the gravitation scheme had a life beyond the bounds of Britain. In the second half of the nineteenth century, engineers—usually the very same individuals who had carried them out in Britain— introduced the scheme to cities such as Bombay, Colombo, Hong Kong, and Singapore. There, the gravitation scheme also had a transformative influence; it was a project of environmental and technical change that helped to solidify the modernizing colonial state.” [67]
♠ markets ♣ present ♥
♠ food storage sites ♣ present ♥

Transport infrastructure

♠ Roads ♣ present ♥
♠ Bridges ♣ present ♥ Isambard Kingdom Brunel engineered many bridges.
♠ Canals ♣ present ♥
♠ Ports ♣ present ♥

Special purpose sites

♠ Mines or quarries ♣ present ♥

Information

Writing System

♠ Mnemonic devices ♣ ♥
♠ Nonwritten records ♣ ♥
♠ Written records ♣ present ♥
♠ Script ♣ present ♥
♠ Non-phonetic writing ♣ ♥
♠ Phonetic alphabetic writing ♣ present ♥

Kinds of Written Documents

♠ Lists, tables, and classifications ♣ present ♥
♠ Calendar ♣ present ♥
♠ Sacred Texts ♣ present ♥
♠ Religious literature ♣ present ♥
♠ Practical literature ♣ present ♥
♠ History ♣ present ♥
♠ Philosophy ♣ present ♥
♠ Scientific literature ♣ present ♥
♠ Fiction ♣ present ♥

Money

♠ Articles ♣ ♥
♠ Tokens ♣ ♥
♠ Precious metals ♣ ♥
♠ Foreign coins ♣ present ♥ "Before the early nineteenth century the Royal Mint's role was largely domestic. Britain's North American colonies had gained the right to issue their own coinage ... while in South Asia the East India Company had been allowed since the late seventeeth century to 'purchase' permission from local Indian rulers to reproduce coins that followed India as opposed to English conventions."[68] "domestic British coin became increasingly an 'imperial currency', circulating throughout much of the Empire. ... in the course of the nineteeth century, the Mint began producing a variety of dedicated colonial as well as other foreign coinages, designated 'private' by the Mint, and paid for by the overseas customers. From 1883 the Treasury encouraged all colonies to obtain their local currencies from the Mint."[69]
♠ Indigenous coins ♣ present ♥ "The Coinage of the British Empire from the Earliest Period to the Present Time" Henry Noel Humphreys (1861). "Before the early nineteenth century the Royal Mint's role was largely domestic. Britain's North American colonies had gained the right to issue their own coinage ... while in South Asia the East India Company had been allowed since the late seventeeth century to 'purchase' permission from local Indian rulers to reproduce coins that followed India as opposed to English conventions. For the Mint itself the eighteenth century was a period of relative stagnation: British silver and copper coinage was in a poor condition and was in short supply. ... The end of the Napoleonic wars, however, was followed by currency reform and in 1816-17 recoinage in Britain. In 1818 private coins were made illegal. ... The installation of Boulton's steam-powered machinery, coupled with a French invention, the 'reducing machine', which reproduced original coin designs by machine rather than by hand engraving, enabled for the first time the mass production of high-quality and homogenous copper coins and transformed the Mint itself into an 'industrial concern'. These changes coincided with the growth of a 'second' British Empire and the Mint began producing more coins for overseas dependenies."[70]
♠ Paper currency ♣ present ♥ "The fact is, that the paper currency of the country cannot be on a perfectly sound footing until the issue of notes, whether by joint stock banks or private individuals, be suppressed. ... A paper currency is not in a sound or wholesome state, unless, 1st, means be taken to insure that each particular note or parcel of such currency be paid immediately on demand; and unless, 2nd, the whole currency vary in amount and value exactly as a metallic currency would do were the paper currency withdrawn and coins substituted in its stead. The last condition is quite as indispensable to the existence of a well-established currency as the former; and it is one that cannot be fuilly realized otherwise than by confining the issue of paper to a single source. It is easy to see that were paper issued only by the Bank of England, or some one source in London, and then only in exchange for bullion, the currency would be in its most perfect state, and would fluctuate exactly as it would do were it wholly metallic. But at present the currency is supplied by hundreds of individuals and associations, all actuated by diferent and frequently conflicting views and interests."[71]

Postal System

♠ Couriers ♣ present ♥ This reference concerns possessions in South Africa: "...by horses and, in the 'twenties, by postcarts: a weekly postal service was set up in 1834. In 1852 there was a daily service from Cape Town to Paarl and Stellenbosh, thrice weekly to Grahamstown and twice weekly to the Karoo. The postcart also conveyed passengers. Following the issue of the famous three-cornered Capes in 1853, a penny post was established in limited areas in 1860 and four years later it was possible to extend it to the whole Colony. But, despite better roads, the ox-waggon remained the commercial vehicle and was still in use a century later."[72]
♠ Postal stations ♣ present ♥ This reference concerns possessions in South Africa: "...by horses and, in the 'twenties, by postcarts: a weekly postal service was set up in 1834. In 1852 there was a daily service from Cape Town to Paarl and Stellenbosh, thrice weekly to Grahamstown and twice weekly to the Karoo. The postcart also conveyed passengers. Following the issue of the famous three-cornered Capes in 1853, a penny post was established in limited areas in 1860 and four years later it was possible to extend it to the whole Colony. But, despite better roads, the ox-waggon remained the commercial vehicle and was still in use a century later."[73]
♠ General postal service ♣ present ♥ This reference concerns possessions in South Africa: "...by horses and, in the 'twenties, by postcarts: a weekly postal service was set up in 1834. In 1852 there was a daily service from Cape Town to Paarl and Stellenbosh, thrice weekly to Grahamstown and twice weekly to the Karoo. The postcart also conveyed passengers. Following the issue of the famous three-cornered Capes in 1853, a penny post was established in limited areas in 1860 and four years later it was possible to extend it to the whole Colony. But, despite better roads, the ox-waggon remained the commercial vehicle and was still in use a century later."[74]

Warfare variables

♠ RA ♣ Edward A L Turner ♥

Military Technologies

Military use of Metals

♠ Copper ♣ present ♥ Brass-hilted swords.[75]
♠ Bronze ♣ present ♥
♠ Iron ♣ present ♥
♠ Steel ♣ present ♥ Steel scabbard.[76]

Projectiles

♠ Javelins ♣ suspected unknown ♥
♠ Atlatl ♣ absent ♥
♠ Self bow ♣ inferred present ♥ Used by indigenous forces under British command?
♠ Composite bow ♣ present ♥ Present according to Donagh Davis (2019).[77]
♠ Crossbow ♣ inferred present ♥ Used by indigenous forces under British command?
♠ Tension siege engines ♣ present ♥ Coded present as they were used by indigenous forces under British command? Why would the British use tension siege engines when they have cannon? Ed.
♠ Sling siege engines ♣ present ♥ Coded present as they were used by indigenous forces under British command? Ed.
♠ Gunpowder siege artillery ♣ present ♥ The Royal Artillery.[78] The Indian Mutiny "was the last major campaign fought with smoothbore guns, with limited range and accuracy largely unchanged since the Napoleonic Wars. The field batteries sent to China in 1860 were equipped with Armstrong 12-pdr. rifled breech-loaders ... the same gun and a 6-pdr. version was also used against the Maoris. Firing elongated, instead of spherical projectiles of shell, shrapnel and case with greatly enhanced accuracy and range - more accurate at two miles than a smoothbore equivalent."[79] "From 1871 the 9-pdr. and 16-pdr. [rifled muzzle-loader] became the standard field guns for horse and field batteries; their ranges respectively were 2000-3,300 yards and 1,800-4,000, depending on elevation."[80]
♠ Handheld firearms ♣ present ♥ "The army profited, too, from an extensive rearmament during the last three decades of the nineteenth century. The introduction of breech-loading rifters (the snider and Martini-Henry) increased the rates of fire and enabled soldiers to fire from a prone position." Also introduced: "bolt mechanism and magazine, smaller calibre ammunition, and smokeless propellants (in the Lee-Enfield rifle)". "Finally, the army experimented with different machine-guns before adopting the relatively light and geniunely automatic Maxim machine-gun."[81] Illustration shows pistol.[82] 1860s, smoothbore muskets. 1880s, breach-loading rifles. Artillery: Muzzle-loading cannon; rifled & breach-loading artillery 1850s onwards; machine guns 1870s onwards [83]

Handheld weapons

♠ War clubs ♣ inferred present ♥ Coded inferred present as they could be used by indigenous forces under British command? Ed.
♠ Battle axes ♣ suspected unknown ♥
♠ Daggers ♣ inferred present ♥ Coded inferred present as they could be used by indigenous forces under British command? Ed.
♠ Swords ♣ present ♥ Sword used by cavalry.[84]
♠ Spears ♣ present ♥ Sword bayonets.[85]
♠ Polearms ♣ inferred present ♥ Coded inferred present as they could be used by indigenous forces under British command? Ed.

Animals used in warfare

♠ Dogs ♣ suspected unknown ♥
♠ Donkeys ♣ present ♥ "As these campaigns placed a premium upon careful logistical preparations, Victorian commanders and their staffs became adept at calculating their supply, transport, and support arrangements. They repeatedly had to cope with difficulties of transportation, especially the variable quality of animals procured and the poor standards of animal husbandry in the field. They often had to procure vast numbers of animals (in Zululand, Lord Chelmsford ultimately employed 27,000 oxen and 5,000 mules to haul over 2,5000 vehicles), and had to adapt their transport to local circumstances. They employed bullock carts, elephants, and camels in India, waggons drawn by oxen and mules in southern Africa, bearers in west Africa, boats in Perak, and pack-animals in mountains and across roadless country."[86] At the Battle of Omdurman of the Second Sudan War 1898 CE General Kitchener had "2,469 horses, 896 mules, 3,524 camels, and 229 donkeys."[87]
♠ Horses ♣ present ♥ Horses.[88] At the Battle of Omdurman of the Second Sudan War 1898 CE General Kitchener had "2,469 horses, 896 mules, 3,524 camels, and 229 donkeys."[89]
♠ Camels ♣ present ♥ "As these campaigns placed a premium upon careful logistical preparations, Victorian commanders and their staffs became adept at calculating their supply, transport, and support arrangements. They repeatedly had to cope with difficulties of transportation, especially the variable quality of animals procured and the poor standards of animal husbandry in the field. They often had to procure vast numbers of animals (in Zululand, Lord Chelmsford ultimately employed 27,000 oxen and 5,000 mules to haul over 2,5000 vehicles), and had to adapt their transport to local circumstances. They employed bullock carts, elephants, and camels in India, waggons drawn by oxen and mules in southern Africa, bearers in west Africa, boats in Perak, and pack-animals in mountains and across roadless country."[90] At the Battle of Omdurman of the Second Sudan War 1898 CE General Kitchener had "2,469 horses, 896 mules, 3,524 camels, and 229 donkeys."[91]
♠ Elephants ♣ present ♥ "As these campaigns placed a premium upon careful logistical preparations, Victorian commanders and their staffs became adept at calculating their supply, transport, and support arrangements. They repeatedly had to cope with difficulties of transportation, especially the variable quality of animals procured and the poor standards of animal husbandry in the field. They often had to procure vast numbers of animals (in Zululand, Lord Chelmsford ultimately employed 27,000 oxen and 5,000 mules to haul over 2,5000 vehicles), and had to adapt their transport to local circumstances. They employed bullock carts, elephants, and camels in India, waggons drawn by oxen and mules in southern Africa, bearers in west Africa, boats in Perak, and pack-animals in mountains and across roadless country."[92] Rifled-breech loaders "were soon transferred to elephants ... to form an improvised, and the first RA mountain battery".[93]

Armor

♠ Wood, bark, etc ♣ present ♥ "The foreign service helmet was introduced in 1877. Made of cork covered in khaki cloth, it was usually worn with the curtain or neck protector. The tunic was also of khaki cloth ... Trousers were of the same material and were worn with puttees."[94]
♠ Leather, cloth ♣ present ♥ "Practical considerations, however, prevailed during the South African campaigns and fighting men in the Boer War needed the large shady hat of soft felt with brim that could be lowered to shield eyes or nape ... The soft khaki felt hat of the Boer War proved acceptable and comfortable and its shape was retained for the the Civil Imperial Volunteers. ... At the outbreak of the First World War the peaked cap proved a light and practical form of headwear for all ranks, but under shellfire the metal helmet (or 'tin hat') protected the head against shrapnel."[95] "The foreign service helmet was introduced in 1877. Made of cork covered in khaki cloth, it was usually worn with the curtain or neck protector. The tunic was also of khaki cloth ... Trousers were of the same material and were worn with puttees."[96]
♠ Shields ♣ suspected unknown ♥
♠ Helmets ♣ present ♥ "Practical considerations, however, prevailed during the South African campaigns and fighting men in the Boer War needed the large shady hat of soft felt with brim that could be lowered to shield eyes or nape ... The soft khaki felt hat of the Boer War proved acceptable and comfortable and its shape was retained for the the Civil Imperial Volunteers. ... At the outbreak of the First World War the peaked cap proved a light and practical form of headwear for all ranks, but under shellfire the metal helmet (or 'tin hat') protected the head against shrapnel."[97] "The Home Service pattern helmet, generally known as the 'Blue Cloth' helmet, was introduced by General Order 40 of May 1878, and replaced the shako that had been worn since 1869. The fittings, spike, plate, rosettes and chinchain were all in brass."[98] "The foreign service helmet was introduced in 1877. Made of cork covered in khaki cloth, it was usually worn with the curtain or neck protector. The tunic was also of khaki cloth ... Trousers were of the same material and were worn with puttees."[99] "Crealock's sketches confirm this dress for the infantry and show the King's Dragoon Guards in brass, plume-less helmets with turbans, or probably later in the campaign, airpipe helmets, tunics and booted overalls or, for officers, long boots pulled on over their trousers."[100]
♠ Breastplates ♣ suspected unknown ♥
♠ Limb protection ♣ present ♥ Illustration "Officer, Bengal Horse Artillery" shows knee-high (leather?) boots.[101] "Whereas the 8th had worn their trousers loose, the 67th adopted puttees (from a Hindi word meaning bandages) to support and protect the leg, as worn by Indian troops and soon widespread among the British. Pictorial evidence suggests, however, that puttees were not necessarily worn at all times."[102] Steel cuirasses worn mainly for ceremonial purposes/use. [103]
♠ Chainmail ♣ absent ♥
♠ Scaled armor ♣ absent ♥
♠ Laminar armor ♣ absent ♥
♠ Plate armor ♣ absent ♥

Naval technology

♠ Small vessels (canoes, etc) ♣ present ♥ At the Battle of Omdurman of the Second Sudan War 1898 CE General Kitchener "had at his disposal 44 guns and 20 machine-guns on land, and another 36 guns and 24 machine-guns on gunboats".[104]
♠ Merchant ships pressed into service ♣ suspected unknown ♥
♠ Specialized military vessels ♣ present ♥ Royal Navy.[105]

Fortifications

♠ Settlements in a defensive position ♣ suspected unknown ♥
♠ Wooden palisades ♣ present ♥ More successful fighting Zulus standing behind barricades.[106]
♠ Earth ramparts ♣ suspected unknown ♥
♠ Ditch ♣ suspected unknown ♥
♠ Moat ♣ suspected unknown ♥
♠ Stone walls (non-mortared) ♣ suspected unknown ♥
♠ Stone walls (mortared) ♣ present ♥
♠ Fortified camps ♣ present ♥ "Engineers not only cut paths through forests, built fortified stations, and erected bridges, but they also provided telegraphic communications, aerial reconnaissance from balloons, and rail transportation in some operations."[107] 1856-1881 CE: Trenches used in warfare at this time.[108] Were more successful fighting Zulus standing behind barricades.[109]
♠ Complex fortifications ♣ suspected unknown ♥
♠ Long walls ♣ ♥ km.
♠ Modern fortifications ♣ present ♥


Phase II Variables (polity-based)

Institutional Variables

♠ RA ♣ ♥

Limits on Power of the Chief Executive

These codes refer to an explicit or defined right for some group to constrain the activity of the executive in some way, typically through a legal code, but other ways are imaginable (explain in paragraph if other mechanisms found). When coding ‘present’ for each of the below codes, provide explanation and give examples of the constraints being used, or note that the constraints were formalized but are no known instances of its use in practice.

Power distributed

♠ Constraint on executive by government ♣ ♥
♠ Constraint on executive by non-government ♣ ♥
♠ Impeachment ♣ ♥

Social Mobility

Status

Elite status

♠ elite status is hereditary ♣ ♥ absent/present/unknown. Members of the ‘elite’ inherit their status and positions. If the ruler position is inherited most of the time, then these are sufficient grounds to code this variable as present

Religion and Normative Ideology

Deification of Rulers

(‘gods’ is a shorthand for ‘supernatural agents’)

♠ Rulers are legitimated by gods ♣ present ♥ Coded for monarch. Most de facto legislative authority rested with Prime Minister, who was not seen as legitimated by God. Monarch inherited title by blood; members of parliament elected democratically, though throughout this period voting was restricted to relatively wealthy adult men. Constitutional Monarchy. Hereditary monarchy retains limited executive powers, majority executive powers placed in hands of democratically-elected PM and the Houses of Lords and Commons. Franchise slowly extended to universal male suffrage for the Commons by the end of the period, and the Lords' veto power curtailed shortly before the end of the period, leaving most power in the hands of a democratically-elected Commons and PM. Fine as general knowledge, Jill can follow up later


♠ Rulers are gods ♣ absent ♥

Normative Ideological Aspects of Equity and Prosociality

♠ Ideological reinforcement of equality ♣ present ♥ Jesus' message "envisages a universal society bound together by divine love in which the limited human ties of affection based on kinship, cultural identity, and self-interest give way to the unlimited love of God. It calls for an egalitarian kingdom of love without limits. Jesus likens it to a family in which all are brothers and sisters of one another and children of the one Father (‘Abba’, an informal word for father, is Jesus’ preferred name for God)." [110]

♠ Ideological thought equates rulers and commoners ♣ absent ♥ "According to a long-standing, and not infrequently contested ideal, European society was composed of a series of hierarchically arranged social groups (estates, orders, and corps), each with a prescribed function and corresponding degree of honour and privileges. In its simplest form, society consisted of three basic groups: the First Estate, the clergy, who prayed; the Second Estate, the nobility, who fought; and the Third Estate, the common people, who worked. This hierarchy of superiority and inferiority was, according to some theorists of the period, inscribed in the order of the universe, so that the terrestrial human hierarchy participated in a greater, divinely sanctioned celestial hierarchy." [111]
♠ Ideological thought equates elites and commoners ♣ absent ♥ "According to a long-standing, and not infrequently contested ideal, European society was composed of a series of hierarchically arranged social groups (estates, orders, and corps), each with a prescribed function and corresponding degree of honour and privileges. In its simplest form, society consisted of three basic groups: the First Estate, the clergy, who prayed; the Second Estate, the nobility, who fought; and the Third Estate, the common people, who worked. This hierarchy of superiority and inferiority was, according to some theorists of the period, inscribed in the order of the universe, so that the terrestrial human hierarchy participated in a greater, divinely sanctioned celestial hierarchy." [112]

♠ Ideology reinforces prosociality ♣ present ♥ “Almsgiving and other forms of charity have played a central role in Muslim and Christian societies, especially in the Mediterranean world. [...] The growth of charitable institutions in Italy is linked, then, to the urban revival of the eleventh and twelfth centuries, which saw the creation of hospices for pilgrims. [...] If during the early Middle Ages the aristocrat saw charity as penance, the urban merchant contended with the specter of avarice as an occupational hazard. Twelfth century preachers emphasized how much easier was the monk’s path to salvation, and how much more difficult and full pf temptation was the same path for urban merchants. This distance between monastic perfection and urban guilt could be covered only by generous and effective almsgiving.” [113]

♠ production of public goods ♣ ♥

Moralizing Supernatural Powers

♠ Moral concern is primary ♣ present ♥
♠ Moralizing enforcement is certain ♣ present ♥
♠ Moralizing norms are broad ♣ present ♥
♠ Moralizing enforcement is targeted ♣ present ♥
♠ Moralizing enforcement of rulers ♣ present ♥
♠ Moralizing religion adopted by elites ♣ present ♥
♠ Moralizing religion adopted by commoners ♣ present ♥
♠ Moralizing enforcement in afterlife ♣ present ♥
♠ Moralizing enforcement in this life ♣ present ♥
♠ Moralizing enforcement is agentic ♣ present ♥

These data were reviewed by expert advisors and consultants. For a detailed description of these data, refer to the relevant Analytic Narratives, reference tables, and acknowledgements page. [114] [115] [116]

References

  1. (Burroughs 1999) Peter Burroughs. Imperial institutions and the Government of Empire. Andrew Porter. ed. 1999. The Oxford History of the British Empire: Volume III: The Nineteenth Century. Oxford University Press. Oxford.
  2. (Burroughs 1999) Peter Burroughs. Imperial institutions and the Government of Empire. Andrew Porter. ed. 1999. The Oxford History of the British Empire: Volume III: The Nineteenth Century. Oxford University Press. Oxford.
  3. (Burroughs 1999) Peter Burroughs. Imperial institutions and the Government of Empire. Andrew Porter. ed. 1999. The Oxford History of the British Empire: Volume III: The Nineteenth Century. Oxford University Press. Oxford.
  4. (Burroughs 1999) Peter Burroughs. Imperial institutions and the Government of Empire. Andrew Porter. ed. 1999. The Oxford History of the British Empire: Volume III: The Nineteenth Century. Oxford University Press. Oxford.
  5. (Burroughs 1999) Peter Burroughs. Imperial institutions and the Government of Empire. Andrew Porter. ed. 1999. The Oxford History of the British Empire: Volume III: The Nineteenth Century. Oxford University Press. Oxford.
  6. (Bartholomew 1877, v) John Bartholomew. 1877. Atlas of the British empire throughout the world. George Philip and Son. London.
  7. Kenneth J Panton. 2015. Historical Dictionary of the British Empire. Rowman & Littlefield. Lanham.
  8. Census of the British Empire, 1901: Report with Summary and Detailed Tables for the Several Colonies, &c. London: His Majesty's Stationery Office, 1906.
  9. (Bartholomew 1877, v) John Bartholomew. 1877. Atlas of the British empire throughout the world. George Philip and Son. London.
  10. (Bartholomew 1877, vi) John Bartholomew. 1877. Atlas of the British empire throughout the world. George Philip and Son. London.
  11. https://www.rug.nl/ggdc/historicaldevelopment/maddison/releases/maddison-project-database-2018
  12. (Bartholomew 1877, v) John Bartholomew. 1877. Atlas of the British empire throughout the world. George Philip and Son. London.
  13. (London: Joseph Mawman, 1814), 7 Patrick Colquhoun, A Treatise on the Wealth, Power and Resources of the British Empire (London: Joseph Mawman), 1814.
  14. Census of the British Empire, 1901: Report with Summary and Detailed Tables for the Several Colonies, &c. London: His Majesty's Stationery Office, 1906.
  15. (Bartholomew 1877, vii) John Bartholomew. 1877. Atlas of the British empire throughout the world. George Philip and Son. London.
  16. Page 27. Patrick Colquhoun, A Treatise on the Wealth, Power and Resources of the British Empire (London: Joseph Mawman), 1814.
  17. Census of the British Empire, 1901: Report with Summary and Detailed Tables for the Several Colonies, &c. London: His Majesty's Stationery Office, 1906.
  18. (McCulloch 2011 [1837]: 263. Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/BCM2JGGW)
  19. (McCulloch 2011 [1837]: 264. Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/BCM2JGGW)
  20. (Burroughs 1999) Peter Burroughs. Imperial institutions and the Government of Empire. Andrew Porter. ed. 1999. The Oxford History of the British Empire: Volume III: The Nineteenth Century. Oxford University Press. Oxford.
  21. (McCulloch 2011 [1837]: 219. Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/BCM2JGGW)
  22. (Burroughs 1999) Peter Burroughs. Imperial institutions and the Government of Empire. Andrew Porter. ed. 1999. The Oxford History of the British Empire: Volume III: The Nineteenth Century. Oxford University Press. Oxford.
  23. (McCulloch 2011 [1837]: 219. Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/BCM2JGGW)
  24. (McCulloch 2011 [1837]: 249. Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/BCM2JGGW)
  25. (Marshall 2001: 24. Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/IT2S8JJ3)
  26. (Marshall 2001: 24. Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/IT2S8JJ3)
  27. (McCulloch 2011 [1837]: 249. Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/BCM2JGGW)
  28. (McCulloch 2011 [1837]: 263-70. Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/BCM2JGGW)
  29. (Marshall 2001: 24. Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/IT2S8JJ3)
  30. (Burroughs 1999) Peter Burroughs. Imperial institutions and the Government of Empire. Andrew Porter. ed. 1999. The Oxford History of the British Empire: Volume III: The Nineteenth Century. Oxford University Press. Oxford.
  31. (Burroughs 1999) Peter Burroughs. Imperial institutions and the Government of Empire. Andrew Porter. ed. 1999. The Oxford History of the British Empire: Volume III: The Nineteenth Century. Oxford University Press. Oxford.
  32. (Burroughs 1999) Peter Burroughs. Imperial institutions and the Government of Empire. Andrew Porter. ed. 1999. The Oxford History of the British Empire: Volume III: The Nineteenth Century. Oxford University Press. Oxford.
  33. (Burroughs 1999) Peter Burroughs. Imperial institutions and the Government of Empire. Andrew Porter. ed. 1999. The Oxford History of the British Empire: Volume III: The Nineteenth Century. Oxford University Press. Oxford.
  34. (Burroughs 1999) Peter Burroughs. Imperial institutions and the Government of Empire. Andrew Porter. ed. 1999. The Oxford History of the British Empire: Volume III: The Nineteenth Century. Oxford University Press. Oxford.
  35. (Burroughs 1999) Peter Burroughs. Imperial institutions and the Government of Empire. Andrew Porter. ed. 1999. The Oxford History of the British Empire: Volume III: The Nineteenth Century. Oxford University Press. Oxford.
  36. (Burroughs 1999) Peter Burroughs. Imperial institutions and the Government of Empire. Andrew Porter. ed. 1999. The Oxford History of the British Empire: Volume III: The Nineteenth Century. Oxford University Press. Oxford.
  37. (Burroughs 1999) Peter Burroughs. Imperial institutions and the Government of Empire. Andrew Porter. ed. 1999. The Oxford History of the British Empire: Volume III: The Nineteenth Century. Oxford University Press. Oxford.
  38. Kenneth J Panton. 2015. Historical Dictionary of the British Empire. Rowman & Littlefield. Lanham.
  39. Kenneth J Panton. 2015. Historical Dictionary of the British Empire. Rowman & Littlefield. Lanham.
  40. (Burroughs 1999) Peter Burroughs. Imperial institutions and the Government of Empire. Andrew Porter. ed. 1999. The Oxford History of the British Empire: Volume III: The Nineteenth Century. Oxford University Press. Oxford.
  41. (Burroughs 1999) Peter Burroughs. Imperial institutions and the Government of Empire. Andrew Porter. ed. 1999. The Oxford History of the British Empire: Volume III: The Nineteenth Century. Oxford University Press. Oxford.
  42. (Burroughs 1999) Peter Burroughs. Imperial institutions and the Government of Empire. Andrew Porter. ed. 1999. The Oxford History of the British Empire: Volume III: The Nineteenth Century. Oxford University Press. Oxford.
  43. (Burroughs 1999) Peter Burroughs. Imperial institutions and the Government of Empire. Andrew Porter. ed. 1999. The Oxford History of the British Empire: Volume III: The Nineteenth Century. Oxford University Press. Oxford.
  44. (Burroughs 1999) Peter Burroughs. Imperial institutions and the Government of Empire. Andrew Porter. ed. 1999. The Oxford History of the British Empire: Volume III: The Nineteenth Century. Oxford University Press. Oxford.
  45. (Burroughs 1999) Peter Burroughs. Imperial institutions and the Government of Empire. Andrew Porter. ed. 1999. The Oxford History of the British Empire: Volume III: The Nineteenth Century. Oxford University Press. Oxford.
  46. (Burroughs 1999) Peter Burroughs. Imperial institutions and the Government of Empire. Andrew Porter. ed. 1999. The Oxford History of the British Empire: Volume III: The Nineteenth Century. Oxford University Press. Oxford.
  47. (Burroughs 1999) Peter Burroughs. Imperial institutions and the Government of Empire. Andrew Porter. ed. 1999. The Oxford History of the British Empire: Volume III: The Nineteenth Century. Oxford University Press. Oxford.
  48. (Burroughs 1999) Peter Burroughs. Imperial institutions and the Government of Empire. Andrew Porter. ed. 1999. The Oxford History of the British Empire: Volume III: The Nineteenth Century. Oxford University Press. Oxford.
  49. (Marshall 1996, 24) P J Marshall. 1783-1870: An Expanding Empire. P J Marshall. ed. 1996. The Cambridge Illustrated History of the British Empire. Cambridge University Press. Cambridge.
  50. (Marshall 1996, 22) P J Marshall. The British Empire at the End of the Eighteenth Century. P J Marshall. ed. 1996. The Cambridge Illustrated History of the British Empire. Cambridge University Press. Cambridge.
  51. (Burroughs 1999) Peter Burroughs. Imperial institutions and the Government of Empire. Andrew Porter. ed. 1999. The Oxford History of the British Empire: Volume III: The Nineteenth Century. Oxford University Press. Oxford.
  52. (Burroughs 1999) Peter Burroughs. Imperial institutions and the Government of Empire. Andrew Porter. ed. 1999. The Oxford History of the British Empire: Volume III: The Nineteenth Century. Oxford University Press. Oxford.
  53. (Burroughs 1999) Peter Burroughs. Imperial institutions and the Government of Empire. Andrew Porter. ed. 1999. The Oxford History of the British Empire: Volume III: The Nineteenth Century. Oxford University Press. Oxford.
  54. (Burroughs 1999) Peter Burroughs. Imperial institutions and the Government of Empire. Andrew Porter. ed. 1999. The Oxford History of the British Empire: Volume III: The Nineteenth Century. Oxford University Press. Oxford.
  55. (National Archives of the UK 2007. Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/BW7Q7AXM)
  56. (National Archives of the UK 2007. Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/BW7Q7AXM)
  57. (National Archives of the UK 2007. Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/BW7Q7AXM)
  58. (National Archives of the UK 2007. Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/BW7Q7AXM)
  59. (MacArthur 2009: 154. Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/3NY37PHG)
  60. (MacArthur 2009: 165. Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/3NY37PHG)
  61. (MacArthur 2009: 169. Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/3NY37PHG)
  62. (Rodger 2005: 622-627. Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/CIJFYY9I)
  63. (Burroughs 1999) Peter Burroughs. Imperial institutions and the Government of Empire. Andrew Porter. ed. 1999. The Oxford History of the British Empire: Volume III: The Nineteenth Century. Oxford University Press. Oxford.
  64. (Taucar 2014) Christopher Edward Taucar. 2014. The British System of Government and Its Historical Development. McGill-Queen's University Press.
  65. (Burroughs 1999) Peter Burroughs. Imperial institutions and the Government of Empire. Andrew Porter. ed. 1999. The Oxford History of the British Empire: Volume III: The Nineteenth Century. Oxford University Press. Oxford.
  66. (Taucar 2014) Christopher Edward Taucar. 2014. The British System of Government and Its Historical Development. McGill-Queen's University Press.
  67. Broich, Joseph. 2007. “Engineering the Empire: British Water Supply Systems and Colonial Societies, 1850-1900” Journal of British Studies 46: 347-365.
  68. (Stockwell 2018, 45-46) Sarah Stockwell. 2018. The British End of the British Empire. Cambridge University PRess. Cambridge.
  69. (Stockwell 2018, 46) Sarah Stockwell. 2018. The British End of the British Empire. Cambridge University PRess. Cambridge.
  70. (Stockwell 2018, 45-46) Sarah Stockwell. 2018. The British End of the British Empire. Cambridge University PRess. Cambridge.
  71. (McCulloch 1847, 37) J R McCulloch. 1847. A Descriptive and Statistical Account of the British Empire. Third Edition. Volume II. Longman, Brown, Green, and Longmans. London.
  72. (? 1963, 795) ? in Eric A Walker. ed. 1963. The Cambridge History of the British Empire. Volume III. South Africa, Rhodesia and The High Commission Territories. Cambridge University Press. Cambridge.
  73. (? 1963, 795) ? in Eric A Walker. ed. 1963. The Cambridge History of the British Empire. Volume III. South Africa, Rhodesia and The High Commission Territories. Cambridge University Press. Cambridge.
  74. (? 1963, 795) ? in Eric A Walker. ed. 1963. The Cambridge History of the British Empire. Volume III. South Africa, Rhodesia and The High Commission Territories. Cambridge University Press. Cambridge.
  75. (Barthorp 1988, 21) Michael Barthorp. 1988. The British Army on Campaign. 1856-1881. Osprey Publishing Ltd.
  76. (Barthorp 1988, 21) Michael Barthorp. 1988. The British Army on Campaign. 1856-1881. Osprey Publishing Ltd.
  77. Donagh Davis. 2019. Personal Communication to Seshat Databank
  78. (Spiers 1996, 196) Edward Spiers. The Late Victorian Army 1868-1914. David G Chandler. Ian Beckett. eds. 1996. The Oxford History of the British Army. Oxford University Press. Oxford.
  79. (Barthorp 1988, 12) Michael Barthorp. 1988. The British Army on Campaign. 1856-1881. Osprey Publishing Ltd.
  80. (Barthorp 1988, 12) Michael Barthorp. 1988. The British Army on Campaign. 1856-1881. Osprey Publishing Ltd.
  81. (Spiers 1996, 196) Edward Spiers. The Late Victorian Army 1868-1914. David G Chandler. Ian Beckett. eds. 1996. The Oxford History of the British Army. Oxford University Press. Oxford.
  82. (Barthorp 1988, Plate G) Michael Barthorp. 1988. The British Army on Campaign. 1856-1881. Osprey Publishing Ltd.
  83. M.L. Wilkinson. "A Hundred Years of the British Army: Weapons and Equipment." Journal of the Royal United Service Institution, Vol. 76, 1931. 300-310.
  84. (Barthorp 1988, 21) Michael Barthorp. 1988. The British Army on Campaign. 1856-1881. Osprey Publishing Ltd.
  85. (Barthorp 1988, 23) Michael Barthorp. 1988. The British Army on Campaign. 1856-1881. Osprey Publishing Ltd.
  86. (Spiers 1996, 198) Edward Spiers. The Late Victorian Army 1868-1914. David G Chandler. Ian Beckett. eds. 1996. The Oxford History of the British Army. Oxford University Press. Oxford.
  87. (Spiers 1996, 206) Edward Spiers. The Late Victorian Army 1868-1914. David G Chandler. Ian Beckett. eds. 1996. The Oxford History of the British Army. Oxford University Press. Oxford.
  88. (Spiers 1996, 194) Edward Spiers. The Late Victorian Army 1868-1914. David G Chandler. Ian Beckett. eds. 1996. The Oxford History of the British Army. Oxford University Press. Oxford.
  89. (Spiers 1996, 206) Edward Spiers. The Late Victorian Army 1868-1914. David G Chandler. Ian Beckett. eds. 1996. The Oxford History of the British Army. Oxford University Press. Oxford.
  90. (Spiers 1996, 198) Edward Spiers. The Late Victorian Army 1868-1914. David G Chandler. Ian Beckett. eds. 1996. The Oxford History of the British Army. Oxford University Press. Oxford.
  91. (Spiers 1996, 206) Edward Spiers. The Late Victorian Army 1868-1914. David G Chandler. Ian Beckett. eds. 1996. The Oxford History of the British Army. Oxford University Press. Oxford.
  92. (Spiers 1996, 198) Edward Spiers. The Late Victorian Army 1868-1914. David G Chandler. Ian Beckett. eds. 1996. The Oxford History of the British Army. Oxford University Press. Oxford.
  93. (Barthorp 1988, 12) Michael Barthorp. 1988. The British Army on Campaign. 1856-1881. Osprey Publishing Ltd.
  94. Christopher Wilkinson-Latham. 1977. The Boar War. Osprey Publishing.
  95. Hilda Amphlett.1974 (2003). Hats: A History of Fashion in Headwear. Dover Publications, Inc. Mineola.
  96. Christopher Wilkinson-Latham. 1977. The Boar War. Osprey Publishing.
  97. Hilda Amphlett.1974 (2003). Hats: A History of Fashion in Headwear. Dover Publications, Inc. Mineola.
  98. Christopher Wilkinson-Latham. 1977. The Boar War. Osprey Publishing.
  99. Christopher Wilkinson-Latham. 1977. The Boar War. Osprey Publishing.
  100. (Barthorp 1988, 24, 33) Michael Barthorp. 1988. The British Army on Campaign. 1856-1881. Osprey Publishing Ltd.
  101. (Barthorp 1988, Plate B) Michael Barthorp. 1988. The British Army on Campaign. 1856-1881. Osprey Publishing Ltd.
  102. (Barthorp 1988, 37) Michael Barthorp. 1988. The British Army on Campaign. 1856-1881. Osprey Publishing Ltd.
  103. Richard Knotel, Herbert Knotel, Jr., & Herbert Sieg. Uniforms of the World: A Compendium of Army, Navy and Air Force Uniforms, 1700-1937. New York: Scribner’s, 1980.
  104. (Spiers 1996, 206) Edward Spiers. The Late Victorian Army 1868-1914. David G Chandler. Ian Beckett. eds. 1996. The Oxford History of the British Army. Oxford University Press. Oxford.
  105. (Burroughs 1999) Peter Burroughs. Imperial institutions and the Government of Empire. Andrew Porter. ed. 1999. The Oxford History of the British Empire: Volume III: The Nineteenth Century. Oxford University Press. Oxford.
  106. (Barthorp 1988, 14) Michael Barthorp. 1988. The British Army on Campaign. 1856-1881. Osprey Publishing Ltd.
  107. (Spiers 1996, 197) Edward Spiers. The Late Victorian Army 1868-1914. David G Chandler. Ian Beckett. eds. 1996. The Oxford History of the British Army. Oxford University Press. Oxford.
  108. (Barthorp 1988, 8) Michael Barthorp. 1988. The British Army on Campaign. 1856-1881. Osprey Publishing Ltd.
  109. (Barthorp 1988, 14) Michael Barthorp. 1988. The British Army on Campaign. 1856-1881. Osprey Publishing Ltd.
  110. Woodhead, L. 2014. Christianity: A Short introduction p. 9. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  111. Bossenga, G. 2011. Estates, Orders and Corps. In Doyle, W. (ed) The Oxford Handbook of the Ancien Regime pp. 141-161. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  112. Bossenga, G. 2011. Estates, Orders and Corps. In Doyle, W. (ed) The Oxford Handbook of the Ancien Regime pp. 141-161. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  113. Gavitt, P. 2004. Charitable Institutions. In Kleinhenz, C. (ed) ‘’Medieval Italy: An Encyclopedia’’ pp. 208-210. New York; London: Routledge.
  114. http://seshatdatabank.info/databrowser/moralizing-supernatural-punishment-acknowledgements.html
  115. http://seshatdatabank.info/databrowser/moralizing-supernatural-punishment-narratives.html
  116. http://seshatdatabank.info/databrowser/moralizing-supernatural-punishment-nga_tables.html