Wednesday, January 11, 2012

Pastoralism and Herding

Camels helped Arabian nomads cross the harsh deserts of the Middle East and northern Africa: their rich trade caravans spread silk, spices, language and religion throughout much of the world. Horses changed the face of agriculture, transport and especially warfare: mounted cavalry played an important role in campaigns from the earliest days of history to the advent of the petroleum age. Yaks provided transport over rugged Himalayan passes: herders throughout the cold, inaccessible Tibetan plateau rely on their meat and milk for sustenance, their wool and skins for warmth, and their dung for fuel. Many lands which offer only marginal farming opportunities can be home to large herds of grazing animals, and to those who domesticate them.

Pastoral social units tend to be considerably smaller than those found in an agricultural state and are closer in size to a typical hunter-gatherer clan. Settling into permanent villages is difficult when your life revolves around following the herd animals to various grazing grounds. Part of all of the population lives a nomadic or semi-nomadic existence, traveling with the flocks and watching over them as the seasons change. They must protect their livestock from predators, including raiders from other clans. Feuds over grazing areas and rustling are not uncommon: despite the idyllic picture painted in pastoral poetry and art, violence is an ever-present threat in the lives of most herders.

Many pastoralists have used their skill at arms not only to protect their herds but also to garner tribute from their neighbors. While their land may not be suitable for extensive farming, they can always acquire tools, vegetables and other valuable items. This may be taken in raids or it may be given in exchange for protection against other herding clans. For centuries the Xiongnu rode out of the steppes of north Central Asia to raid Chinese settlements: in 370 a branch of the Xiongnu crossed the Volga River and entered Europe, where they would become legendary as the Huns. 800 years later a Mongolian herder named Temujin would unite the feuding tribes and make himself known to the world as Genghis Khan. Coming to Kiev in 1246, six years after the Mongols had sacked it, Papal envoy and Franciscan friar Giovanni de Plano Carpini wrote:
They attacked Russia, where they made great havoc, destroying cities and fortresses and slaughtering men; and they laid siege to Kiev, the capital of Russia; after they had besieged the city for a long time, they took it and put the inhabitants to death. When we were journeying through that land we came across countless skulls and bones of dead men lying about on the ground. Kiev had been a very large and thickly populated town, but now it has been reduced almost to nothing, for there are at the present time scarce two hundred houses there and the inhabitants are kept in complete slavery.
In a pastoral society, the more land you control, the larger the herd you can raise and the greater your wealth. Those who would steal your lambs or take your cattle to their fields must be driven away. Those who would take away your grazing rights must be stopped: those who are not strong enough to defend their own rights will lose them. Your herds are your property and your responsibility and you have absolute control over their lives and their deaths. And at least some of the Gods who have inspired pastoral societies have taken a similar view toward their followers.

Many of the patriarchs of Judaism were shepherds, most notably Abraham, Moses and David. The Jewish G-d demanded that His people worship only Him and forbade them to wander into pastures controlled by other Gods. Later Christians identified Jesus as the "Good Shepherd:" bishops in many denominations still carry a shepherd's crook as a sign of their rulership over their flock. And in the Arabian Desert a herdsman named Muhammad received a vision and a message which he was to carry to the world. Many Deities have demanded tribute: these Gods stand out for their stern insistence that They and They alone be worshipped.

The Gods of these religions care greatly for the sheep they have earmarked: while the God of the Jews is content to look over the affairs of His tribe, the others work aggressively to expand Their holdings and build up wealth in followers and worshippers. This is not to say They are evil, although many would blithely dismiss them as such. While there has been a great deal of evil done in the names of Christ and Allah we should not forget that there have been many good deeds done as well. But if we are to understand Their motivations, we may wish to look to the fields, deserts and mangers where They first reached out to humanity.

These Monotheist religions incorporated many different societies and cultures. Their missionaries spread their message by word and by sword, through compassion and through conquest. The Huns and Mongols, who showed little interest in the religions of their foes and who were more interested in plunder than proselytizing, were able to create large empires but had much less success in keeping them for more than a few generations. The followers of the One God, by contrast, showed a remarkable staying power. The Christianization of Europe and the Islamization of much of Asia and Africa took place over centuries, but once those lands were claimed they stayed under their pastoral yoke: churches and mosques stand like watchtowers in their streets to this day. Not until over 1,000 years after the conversion of Constantine and Muhammad's meeting with Jiv'reel would they find themselves faced with a real threat – a Scientific Revolution which shook the very underpinnings of their faith.

3 comments:

Raven said...

"The Huns and Mongols, who showed little interest in the religions of their foes and who were more interested in plunder than proselytizing, were able to create large empires but had much less success in keeping them for more than a few generations."

Leaving aside the Huns: the history of the Mongol conquests would almost certainly have been quite different had Temujin not encountered, early in his expansions, a tall long-bearded scholar -- descendant of the royal family of the vanished Khitan Empire -- named Yeliu Chutsai, who persuaded him not to just loot (and often destroy), but to rule, tax, and protect (with a settled presence) the cities he conquered.

"An empire can be conquered from the saddle,
but it cannot be ruled from the saddle." [*]

The Mongols would approach a town and make this offer: "If you submit to our rule and pay taxes, you will be protected as our own people. If you refuse, Mighty Heaven alone knows what will happen to you." And that offer was honest. A town that surrendered without resistance survived. A town that fought -- or worse yet, killed the Mongol ambassadors -- was destroyed.

As for religion, Temujin himself worshiped Mighty Heaven, but made no restriction other than monotheism on others' religions. Christians, Jews, and Muslims were all welcome to travel within his empire, and even send their own proselytizers about.

Simply put, the Mongol Empire was secular; its rule was of this world. Considering its reputation for brutality, and by comparison with other medieval realms, it had remarkable religious freedom.
____________________________________________________________

[*] CIVILISATION AND ITS DISCONTENTS
        by C.M. Joserlin, "Raven"

"An empire can be conquered from the saddle,
but it cannot be ruled from the saddle."
     — Yeliu Chutsai.

"Others may live between stone walls,
but not I."
     — Temujin the Chinggis-Khan.

(tune: Ghost Riders in the Sky)

A wise man, Yeliu Chutsai, the advisor to our Khan,
Has told us that an empire can't be ruled the way it's won:
"You conquer it on horseback, swift and ruthless as the sword;
But rule it from the cities." This he tells the Mongol Horde!

     Do-ora Tengri-de, anda-nar, chilugetai unu!

You cannot tame a Mongol who was raised with sky for roof,
Was cradled in a saddlebag to beat of horse's hoof,
And all his life has ridden free and fast and far and wide,
His sword and bow and kinfolk as companions at his side!

     Do-ora Tengri-de, anda-nar, chilugetai unu!

To see my sons go walking down paved streets between stone walls,
Go meekly, slowly, quietly, to live in crowded stalls;
To put a yoke around their necks and those of all their young,
And let them all be "civilised" — I'd rather drown in dung!

     Do-ora Tengri-de, anda-nar, chilugetai unu!

But loyalty is paramount: a Mongol must obey
The Khan in every order — who would dare to tell him nay?
Though victory turns bitter for a free man who's penned in,
I go to live in cities (pfah!)... together with my kin!

     Do-ora Tengri-de, anda-nar, chilugetai unu!
     ( Ride freely, my brothers, under the clear blue sky! )

Raven said...

"Pastoral social units tend to be considerably smaller than those found in an agricultural state and are closer in size to a typical hunter-gatherer clan. Settling into permanent villages is difficult when your life revolves around following the herd animals to various grazing grounds."

My nod of agreement is hedged with hesitation only because of transitional states and border conditions (which, as the saying goes, "make bad law").

Perfectly familar, long-settled areas of Western Europe have "permanent villages" -- and herds or flocks that still must be moved from one grazing area to another, not adjacent, not a simple matter of opening a gate in a fence and waving them through. Typically the herders commute, or exchange herds, between permanent residences. This is called (fixed, as opposed to nomadic) transhumance.

Or, as recently as the 18th century, some Welsh herding summer villages used what could be called semi-disposable houses: some of the basic structure might survive the winter to be used upon your return, and the ruined flimsier parts could simply be thrown away and replaced -- as you would for rotted tent canvas. (The winter village homes were likelier to survive long-term, being built to withstand winter cold in the first place.)

And the "pastoral social units" may be quite large, actually, even though you may not often see them all in one place at one time.

It's just that agricultural peoples tend to be organized by land-areas, naturally enough -- identify by land (Matthew of Kent), and rule by land (Sheriff of Nottingham)... while pastoral peoples (less tied down to land) tend to be organized by kinship -- identify by kinship (Duncan MacLeod of the Clan MacLeod), and rule by kinship (Chief of Tribe or Clan).

The fact that you cannot see all the kinship ties in one place, the way you can see a piece of land all in one place, doesn't mean the kinship ties aren't there.

Raven said...

P.S. If you have access to JSTOR publications through your library, then you may find this (1919!) article of interest: Transhumance and Its Survival in Great Britain.

Post a Comment