Legal-tolerance-from-the-official-view was experienced as persecution by the oppressed

Evidence

The text, it will be observed, despite being well disposed toward the archbishop, conveys very clearly why the revolt took place. The archbishop was exerting pressure on the renegades, he was conducting a determined campaign, which included the use of bribes and moderate force, to get Muslims to convert. He considered that what he did was inside the law, but the Muslims saw his actions as outside it, and so they lost confidence in the regime under which they had hitherto lived in peace and in their desperation took up arms in a cause that they must have known was doomed. — L. P. Harvey, Muslims in Spain, 1500 to 1614, 199

Categorization

• DEEPTHINKING: The gap between a regime’s legal self-representation and its subjects’ lived perception — where the same acts are ‘legal pressure’ to one party and existential violation to the other — is a dense, generalizable structure about legitimacy, coercion, and the point where the governed stop believing.
• XREF: Connects to the law-merchant material: institutions work only while the governed accept them as legitimate; the moment one party’s ‘legal’ acts are read as outside the compact, the whole regime forfeits trust.
• SEED: Essay angle: ‘The legality gap’ — do regimes maintain peace by lawful conduct or by subjects’ perception that conduct is lawful? Case studies of the moment trust breaks.