The Complexity of Nomadic Empires

The culture and organization of human societies encompasses differing levels of complexity. Generally, there are two types of complexity that are most recognizable: first, those represented by the social interactions and cultural practices of everyday life, periodic ceremonial practices as part of religion, and cultural traditions. A second type of complexity is recognizable through social institutions, especially control hierarchies, bureaucratic functions, and networks of interactions across social and political boundaries. Among the pastoralist/nomadic polities of Central and Inner Asia we know many aspects of complexity in general outline, but seldom in detail. Through the use of social theory, document analysis, ethnography, and archaeology new details and interpretations continue to emerge. Taken together, these new forms of information are beginning to allow the kinds of research I propose below. The articles in this volume contribute numerous new details and ways of interpretation within the context of several different theories. In this article I will selectively highlight a few of these ideas by focusing on specific themes that I think will help place our collective work within a global context and in relation to emerging theories and methodologies. The themes I focus on include the concepts of complexity, theories that account for dynamic processes, forms of political power, and comparative analysis concerning how the pastoralist polities fit within general theories of culture change.