2019/10/22
Essay 2
History of Nomads
Introduction
A nomad refers to a community member who has no fixed habitation and regularly moves from one place to another. Nomads are usually pastoralists, hunters and gatherers, traders and tinkers. As of the year 1995, there were about 40 million nomads across the world. Nomadic gathering and hunting are among the oldest methods of human subsistence. In this way, pastoralists would raise herds, and drive them in patterns which avoid depleting pastures above their recovery ability (van Geel 1736).[footnoteRef:1] Nomadism as a lifestyle is usually adopted in infertile regions like tundra, steppe, sand and ice. In such areas, mobility is often the most efficient strategy used to exploit scarce resources. For instance, many people in the tundra are semi-nomads following their animals' forage. There are also times where the iterant populations are described as nomads who move in the highly populated regions to offer services like trade and craft to the natives. Such groups are referred to as peripatetic nomads. Based on this understanding, the paper presents a discussion on how nomads have integrated power internally and exerted it externally. [1: van Geel, Bas, et al. "Climate change and the expansion of the Scythian culture after 850 BC: a
hypothesis." Journal of Archaeological Science 31.12 (2004): 1735-1742.]
How nomads have integrated power internally and exerted it externally
In understanding the power relations among the nomads, it is essential to consider the nomad societies' evolution as compared to their settled neighbors. In the settled community, power rested upon the administration, resources control and redistribution. However, such factors could not provide a stable power foundation in steppe society (Parzinger 7).[footnoteRef:2] It was difficult to accumulate the products among the pastoral households in sufficient amounts. One of the reasons this difficulty is that as nomads concentrated large herds under one place, there was danger of contacting infectious diseases while at the same time, trampling down the grass. Secondly, it was impossible to accumulate the livestock forever, given the fact that the pasture's level of productivity limits the animal's ceiling amount (Golden 87).[footnoteRef:3] There was a constant concern of production among the sheep, which do not happen on material welfare. Another thing, all the herds stood a chance of being destroyed by natural stress like drought, snowstorm among many others. Therefore, both the rich and poor nomads were harshly punished by nature (van Geel, 1741).[footnoteRef:4] Lastly, the high level of oppression of the pastoralists from the chief side resulted to mass migration and thus causing the nomads household to become fully autonomous. [2: Parzinger, Hermann. "The ‘Silk Roads’ concept reconsidered: about transfers, transportation and transcontinental interactions in prehistory." The Silk Road 5.2 (2008): 7-15.] [3: Golden, Peter B. Central Asia in world history. Oxford University Press, 2011.] [4: van Geel, Bas, et al. "Climate change and the expansion of the Scythian culture after 850 BC: a
hypothesis." Journal of Archaeological Science 31.12 (2004): 1735-1742.]
Nomads would perform all their economic activities within the family. The labor operations would only be required at the tribe and sub-tribe groups. Due to this reason, the leading powers of the nomads' societies could hardly develop towards the formal level in terms of redistribution and regular taxation. Most of the pastoralists were personally free and economically independent (Parzinger 14).[footnoteRef:5] As such, there were low influential powers from the chiefs and tribal leaders. The nomadic societies had no agricultural territories and hence causing the pastoralists to compensate the directors for the cost incurred in executing various public functions. [5: Parzinger, Hermann. "The ‘Silk Roads’ concept reconsidered: about transfers, transportation and transcontinental interactions in prehistory." The Silk Road 5.2 (2008): 7-15.]
Further research reveals that the stable structural power of the nomadic societies has appeared only within the course of establishing nomadic empires (Barfield 467).[footnoteRef:6] As such, a nomadic empire can be defined as a society that is organized based on the hierarchical military principles that occupy an ample space by external exploitation. [6: Barfield, Thomas Jefferson. The nomadic alternative. Englewood Cliffs, Nj.: Prentice Hall,
1993.]
As stated by Golden, there was so much need for handicraft and agricultural products among the nomads. However, such products could only be found from the South, which was behind the great wall. As a result, the nomads were incited to engage in political and ethnic mobilization. Nomad leaders could, therefore, aim at personal power where they attempted to bring unity between the chiefdoms and tribes into an imperial confederation. Towards the end, the leaders would use monopoly and the charisma in prestigious external goods.
The history of nomadic power
As explained by Barfield, nomadic powers formation started in four various ways. First was the classic internal integration of the tribal nomads into a centralized empire. The process could relate to the talented military and political figures appearance that succeed in consolidating the various chiefdoms and tribes into a single state. After the nomads' consolidation process, the rulers are required to arrange and organize the coming of the surplus products in supporting empire unity. It is important to note that failure to do this would lead to the collapse of the empire and hence a crucial step in the rise of nomadic powers.
Secondly was the formation stage that happened at the already developed nomadic empire peripheries. At this level, the union would overthrow the exploiter and occupy its place in the regional political and economic infrastructure. This phase of the nomadic power history demonstrates the interrelations between the Uighurs and Turks, Turks and Jou-Jans and, Khitans and Jurchens. The third phase was connected to the subsequent submission and nomadic migration of the farmers. Research reveals that this phase was typical in the rise of nomadic empires. Further, agriculture civilization was taking place, and there were more achievements made during this time by the already established and developed empires.
Nomads have united into massive political formations in many times and established grate empires which have then been disintegrated. Nomadic empires are a representation of the complexity upper limits that are reached by the pastoral societies. However, nomads from central Asia never evolve independently above this integration stage. Instead, the nomads faced some insuperable barrier that was determined by the rigid ecological conditions from the steppe environment (Parzinger15).[footnoteRef:7] Most of the nomadologists share in this nomadic societies view concerning the various countries. However, further research reveals three different levels of cultural integration of the pastoral nomads concerning the general evolution. These levels are; the tribal and segmentary clan formation, chiefdoms and tribe, and lastly, the quasi imperial and nomadic empires (Golden 265). Changes from one level to the other could happen in different directions[footnoteRef:8]. [7: Parzinger, Hermann. "The ‘Silk Roads’ concept reconsidered: about transfers, transportation and transcontinental interactions in prehistory." The Silk Road 5.2 (2008): 7-15.] [8: Barfield, Thomas Jefferson. The nomadic alternative. Englewood Cliffs, Nj.: Prentice Hall,
1993.]
According to Barfield, the nomadic social evolution critical peculiarity led to correlation failure of the political systems with other social complexity criteria. Nomadic political systems could evolve quickly from the level of acephalous to highly complex organizations. Despite that, the formal indicators did not take place. The transformation process from tribal pastoral systems to the nomadic empires only caused some level of pollution growth. This, as a result, led to a rise in the system's complexity and hence increasing the number of hierarchical levels.
Therefore, nomadic powers were as a result of many factors. First, it was the disagreements with other empires that caused the nomads to rise for themselves for the need to protect their people. This is because the leadership received other empires could not reach feet all their needs perfectly (Martin 365).[footnoteRef:9] Human beings are selfish. Even the suggestions and recommendations made to them were from selfish ambitions and thus making it difficult for the nomads to prosper in their various areas. Therefore, the solution was for the leaders to rise and take up their leadership positions. [9: Martin, Thomas R. Herodotus and Sima Qian: the first great historians of Greece and China: a
brief history with documents. Macmillan Higher Education, 2009.]
Another thing, the differences between pastoral and agriculturalists caused many conflicts among the people. As the agriculturalists were working towards preserving the environment for the successful growth of their crops, pastoralists would destroy the environment when findings food for their cattle and doing overgrazing. Some cattle would even sneak into the agriculturalist's farms and thus increasing the level of conflicts among them. Because of such rising conflicts, it was essential to improve the leading powers among the nomadic people and hence the increasing power of nomads (Grousset 279).[footnoteRef:10] [10: Grousset, René. The empire of the steppes: a history of Central Asia. Rutgers University Press,
1970.
]
Conclusion
According to the above discussions, nomads have truly integrated power internally through various ways and later exerted that power externally. It has been learnt that the rise of nomadic power were the various forms of conflicts that arose among multiple empires. As pastoralists and agriculturalists, nomadic behavior and activities would cause conflicts with the different groups. Because these people would not have a permanent habitation and thus moving from one place to another, their activities would negatively affect the other people's land and environment and therefore a massive source of conflict. However, in ensuring that these people successfully conduct all their activities, there was a need to have their own leaders rising in power to protect them and thus the beginning of nomadic powers.
Works Cited
Barfield, Thomas Jefferson. The nomadic alternative. Englewood Cliffs, Nj.: Prentice Hall,
1993.
Golden, Peter B. Central Asia in world history. Oxford University Press, 2011.
Grousset, René. The empire of the steppes: a history of Central Asia. Rutgers University Press,
1970.
Martin, Thomas R. Herodotus and Sima Qian: the first great historians of Greece and China: a
brief history with documents. Macmillan Higher Education, 2009.
Parzinger, Hermann. "The ‘Silk Roads’ concept reconsidered: about transfers, transportation and
transcontinental interactions in prehistory." The Silk Road 5.2 (2008): 7-15.
van Geel, Bas, et al. "Climate change and the expansion of the Scythian culture after 850 BC: a
hypothesis." Journal of Archaeological Science 31.12 (2004): 1735-1742.
Ljx
paper.docx
0
