introduction 7
or general behavior in public. Such aspects of alterity are very impor-
tant, under the assumption that alterity in the Middle Ages was mani-
fested in highly stable forms, especially those linked to cultural and
religious practices.
Within the vast region of Eurasia considered in this book, the period
between the sixth and the ninth century was one of dramatic changes.
We therefore adopt Yurii Lotman’s idea that every semiotic system
needs to be analyzed from two fundamental points of view: its relation
to the out-system, that is to the world beyond its limits, and the way
in which a system can develop while maintaining its internal charac-
teristics.^10 It is beyond any doubt that the world of “Pax Nomadica”
was a specific system and that it played the role of the Other in rela-
tion to the world of the sedentary civilizations. As William Rubruck
put it, “when we entered the world of those barbarians [nomads], as
I mentioned above, I had the impression of entering another (sic!, Ts.
St.) world”.^11
Yurii Lotman’s other idea, concerning the ratio between statics and
dynamics is particularly important for this study, as it applies to the
highly variable boundaries between the Self and the Other attested
in the sources pertaining to the region and time span considered in
this book. In certain areas, especially in areas of intense contact, such
as parts of Central Asia, Crimea, or the ninth-century Balkans, the
nomads abandoned their previous ways of life, albeit still regarding
themselves as different in relation to the Other in the same way they
had constructed that difference before sedentization.
Another point about dynamics deserves special emphasis. The steppe
lands of Eurasia represent a vast territory of considerable ecological
variability. The western parts are by far more fertile and rich than the
eastern steppe lands, which is why most migrations of nomads took
place from east to west, often under circumstances defined by warfare
and short-term political strife.^12
Who or what the Other is can therefore never be a homogeneous
category, which requires the use of a ‘synthetic’ methodology, combin-
ing different approaches such as the history of mentalities, traditional
positivist history, anthropology, hermeneutics, and semiotics. Herme-
neutics here implies not only a deeper understanding of particular
(^10) Lotman 1992, 7.
(^11) Puteshestviia 1957, 103.
(^12) Khazanov 1994b, 172–173.