Re-writing Monumental Landscapes as Inner Asian Political Process

Inner Asian States and Empires: Theories and Synthesis

“…While Simukov's typology of herder movement has resonance with other sources of information, there is significant variation and change over time hidden within his formulation of spatial relationships. Given emerging systematic archaeological information on monumentality, subsistence practices, and settlement patterning, it seems clear that variation in mobility has always been part of pastoralism in Inner Asia (Frachetti 2008, p. 17;Frohlich et al 2010;Honeychurch et al 2009).…”

“…The potential offered by mobility greatly influenced how the social and political landscape was structured in terms ranging from localized sacred places to entire regions to where and how settlements and other aspects of the built environment were positioned (Ashmore and Knapp 1999;Charleux 2006;Honeychurch et al 2009;Ucko and Layton 1999). The pastoralist polities often built, although sometimes reluctantly, places that qualify as urban centers.…”

“…A growing number of archaeologists, historians, and cultural anthropologists have not only questioned the dependency perspective but provide convincing evidence that the resource base, trade connections, and native social systems for the steppe pastoralists are diverse and self-sustaining (Anthony and Brown 2007;Frachetti 2008;Honeychurch et al 2009;Houle 2009). The dependency model assumes that the steppe pastoralists were not normally organized in hierarchical ways beyond tribal kinship affiliations and simple hierarchies.…”

Taphonomic analysis of Bronze Age burials in Mongolian khirigsuurs

“…Given this focus on the group any association with between the site and the identity of the person buried is discounted. This interpretation with its focus on collective activity is supported by Honeychurch (Honeychurch and Amartuvshin, 2007;Honeychurch et al, 2009) who argues that khirigsuurs are neither consistently nor universally burials but primarily evidence of symbolic group activity. Allard and Erdenebaatar (2005), on the other hand, argue that the khirigsuurs may have a dual purpose, ceremonially as altars and functionally as burial places.…”

Landscapes of Inequality?: A Critique of Monumental Hierarchy in the Mongolian Bronze Age

“…Data for this article are drawn from the central portion of Eastern Inner Asia, specifically from the lower Egiin Gol valley in Bulgan Aimag, Mongolia (Honeychurch and Amartuvshin 2006;Honeychurch et al 2009;Wright et al forthcoming) and Baga Gazaryn Chuluu in Dorngov Aimag, Mongolia (Wright et al 2007). Other archaeological evidence comes from the Hovsgol region (Frohlich et al 2009), the Middle Ider valley and Khanny valley in the Khangai Mountains (Houle 2009;Houle and Erdenebaatar 2009), the Southern Altai of Mongolia, South Siberia (Tsybiktarov 1995), and Qinghe County, Xinjiang, China (Fig.…”