BETA

CrisisDB Explorer

Exploring power transitions and elite dynamics using the Crisis Database

3,447Transitions
264Polities
38%Violent

What is this?

This is an interactive exploration of the CrisisDB Power Transitions dataset, testing predictions from Peter Turchin's Structural Demographic Theory (SDT).

SDT predicts that institutional complexity (measured by administrative levels) leads to elite overproduction—more elite positions mean more competition, which manifests as intra-elite conflict during power transitions.

Data: 3,447 power transitions from 264 polities, merged with Seshat complexity metrics. This is a subset of the full CrisisDB.

Explore the Patterns

What do polities at different complexity levels typically experience? Configure parameters and explore historical patterns from 3,447 observed transitions.

Configure Polity Profile

SimpleComplex

Using observed Markov transition rates

Compare to Real Polity

Historical Patterns at Complexity 5

Based on 25 polities, 352 transitions

Conflict Rate
30%
Median Tenure
8 yrs
Equilibrium Violence
36%
Next Transition
22% violent

Simulation

Click "Simulate" to see one possible trajectory based on historical rates

Detailed Findings

1. Elite Overproduction

Does administrative complexity predict intra-elite conflict? Testing Turchin's core hypothesis.

Elite Overproduction: Complexity → Conflict

Administrative levels vs intra-elite conflict rate

n = 87 polities
Administrative Levels (Seshat)2468Intra-Elite Conflict Rate0%25%50%75%100%r = 0.362p < 0.001+5.6 pp / level
Finding: Positive correlation (r = 0.362, p < 0.001). Each additional administrative level associates with +5.6 percentage points higher intra-elite conflict rate. Consistent with elite overproduction theory.

2. Violence Contagion

Is violence "sticky"? Does a violent transition increase the probability of subsequent violence?

Violence Contagion

Markov transition dynamics: violence is "sticky"

Transition Matrix

→ Peaceful→ Violent
Peaceful78%22%
Violent40%60%
Key insight: After a violent transition, the next transition is 2.7x more likely to also be violent (60% vs 22% baseline).

Convergence to Equilibrium

Step 0/20
Peaceful
100.0%
Violent
0.0%
Stationary distribution: 64% peaceful, 36% violent
The system spends ~36% of time in violent states at equilibrium.
Finding: Violence is self-reinforcing. P(violent | previous violent) = 60% vs P(violent | previous peaceful) = 22%. The system converges to 36% violent at equilibrium.

3. Ruler Tenure

Do violent usurpers reign shorter? Testing instability cascades at the individual level.

Ruler Tenure: Survival by Accession Type

Does violent accession predict shorter reigns?

Violent Accession8 yrsmedian reign (n=1,303)
Peaceful Accession10 yrsmedian reign (n=1,586)
Difference-2 yrsp < 0.0001 (Mann-Whitney)
50%8yr10yr01020304050Years Since Accession0%25%50%75%100%PeacefulViolent

Which Violence Types Shorten Reigns Most?

Military Revolt
10yr
6yr
-4yr
Intra Elite
10yr
7yr
-3yr
Contested
10yr
7yr
-3yr
Predecessor Assassination
9yr
8yr
-1yr

Military revolts have the strongest effect: usurpers who seize power via coup reign 4 years shorter on average.

Violence Begets Violence

Peaceful Exit
Violent Exit
Peaceful Entry
91%
9%
Violent Entry
77.5%
22.5%

Rulers who seized power violently are 2.5x more likely to be removed violently. Chi-square p < 0.0001.

Finding: Violent accession → 2 years shorter median reign (8 vs 10 years, p < 0.0001). Military coups show strongest effect (-4 years). Violence cascades: usurpers are 2.5x more likely to be removed violently themselves.

4. Transitions Over Time

When and where do power transitions cluster? Explore the temporal distribution.

Power Transitions Over Time

1,862 transitions from -500 to 1500

44.5% violent828 / 1,862
500 BCE0 BCE500 CE1000 CE1500 CETotalViolent
Pattern: Transition density peaks around 1050 CE (late medieval). Ottoman and Roman empires dominate the dataset with the most recorded transitions.

5. Notable Patterns

Outliers and trajectories that complicate—or illuminate—the complexity-conflict relationship.

Complexity Without Conflict

Venice (admin=6, conflict=0-5%), Egypt Old Kingdom (admin=6, conflict=0%), and Northern Song (admin=7, conflict=11%) maintained complex bureaucracies with remarkably low intra-elite violence during transitions.

Suggests strong succession institutions can buffer elite competition.

The Aztec Paradox

Aztec Empire (admin=6, conflict=0%, n=7) shows zero intra-elite conflict despite their reputation for ritualized violence and warfare.

Key distinction: "intra-elite conflict" here measures violence during power transitions, not general societal violence. Aztec succession was highly ritualized—external violence (sacrifice, warfare) didn't translate to contested successions.

Byzantine Degradation

Conflict rates escalate across Byzantine phases: I (56%) → II (50%) → III (100%). The late Byzantine Empire saw every single power transition turn violent.

Consistent with SDT: declining resources + persistent elite expectations = intensified competition.

Mamluk Escalation

Similar pattern in Mamluk Egypt: I (68%) → II (73%) → III (80%). Military slave systems may have structural instability in succession.

Highest sustained conflict rates in the dataset.

Methodology & Limitations

Data Sources

  • CrisisDB: Power transitions with mechanism coding (P/IP/A/IA)
  • Seshat Equinox 2022: Administrative levels and complexity metrics
  • Merged on polity name (n = 87 with ≥5 transitions)

Limitations

  • Partial CrisisDB subset (power_transitions.csv only)
  • Correlation does not imply causation
  • Selection bias toward well-documented polities
  • Merging introduces data loss

Source Quality

Some polities (Aztec Empire, Egyptian Old Kingdom) have sparse documentary records. Apparent low conflict may reflect data gaps rather than actual peaceful transitions. Use the filter above to exclude these polities and verify that findings hold.

Feedback from CSH Vienna confirms that filtering does not change core findings.

Acknowledgments

This work builds on data and theory from Peter Turchin and the Complexity Science Hub Vienna. CrisisDB and Seshat are maintained by the Seshat: Global History Databank team.

Special thanks to the Seshat team for making historical data accessible for quantitative analysis.