Nevertheless, they prevented conflict between communities. At the same time, there were places, sometimes just the next village, where different ethnicities did mix in friendship, work, marriage and other bonds. When the state began to influence people more directly, its authority conflicted with traditional mechanisms. Some of the latter were prohibited. In some cases yes, but others should have been transformed or kept insofar as they promoted cooperation.
Conflicts are a normal state of affairs in every pluralistic society.
It is their escalation which prevents normal functioning and becomes dangerous. Traditional mechanisms prevented escalation, and the state did not replace them. They were people of high repute within a community, often formal office-holders, such as priests or the wealthy. The state called these mechanisms undemocratic and abolished them. Direct intervention occurred when traditional mechanisms were perceived as parallel to administrative ones.