It takes more than a Tent to make a Nomad

[Barry]

Periodically I will see on Oriental Rug discussion sites (one in particular) a reference to the Turkmen as nomads. Unless I am greatly mistaken this is using precise terms in a sloppy and imprecise way. I cannot find any serious support for the idea that the Turkmen were Nomads.

A nomad is a person who moves from place to place without a fixed physical address. We may even stretch Nomad to cover those people such as the Bakhtiari, Qashai, and formerly the Shahsavan who migrate from a winter camp to a summer camp and back each year. The Turkmen of Turmenistan, Iran, and Afghanistan fit neither of these models.

Rather than nomads the Turkmen of Turkmenistan practiced Transhumence. This is where a family has a fixed address in a village and the sheep are moved by shepherds according to the time of year and the availability of forage. In practice it is not terribly different than how sheep are raised in parts of France and Switzerland.

What confuses some people is that Turkmen traditionally live in tents. Here in the west we have the idea that houses are more comfortable than tents. Therefore if someone is living in a tent they must be doing it because they are there for a very short time or else they would build a house. At the time when the Russians pushed into Turkestan, Turkmen lived in tent based permanent villages. Particularly on the Kopet Dagh ridge the villagers lived in tents but had stone and wood fortifications as a defense against the raiding parties of Persian Kurds. O'Donovan in the Merv Oasis makes it very clear that an Ev which is what the Tekke Turkmen called a yurt was extremely comfortable for that climate. So I conclude that they lived in tents because they liked tents rather than an indication that they moved around frequently.



Isaiah 40:1

[antoscara]

Hello Barry,
this is an interesting and well tenable theory, but we, with a western forma mentis, often think that a nomad is a nomad because like to wander without a goal.
Surely some turkmen babies have born, grown up and dead in the same place, but probably they didn't feel the place where they were as their fixed home, so, if the conditions changed (invasion, famine, lack of pastures, etc.), they were ready to migrate elsewhere with their tents, rugs, herds.
It's possible that they lived in tents because they need to be ready for dislodging and this occurence might have been more frequent than for other people. It's difficult, I think, to trace out the boundaries between nomadism and occasional migration, but in both cases people seek a place to stay, not another place to leave.
IMHO nomadism is the consciousness to be in the need of leaving the place where I am, migration is the consequence of an unusual and unforeseeable event. In the first sense the turkmen were nomads (or semi-nomads, if we prefer).
Sorry for my bad exposition.

[Barry]

Hello Antonio,
The key is the intent to return on a normal basis to a fixed place. The Turkmen did until as you point out circumstances changed. A Turkman woman would weave rugs in one place for long periods of time, sometimes her whole life. This is very different than the Kuchi of Afghanistan who move constantly in search of grazing land and water. Turkmen raised crops and had permanent structures until the time the Russians invaded. This show in the quality and structure of their rugs. We can also see that weaving groups such as the ones who have a semi annual migration weave different types of bags than the Turkmen who moved infrequently. For instance Qashqai, Shahsavan, and Bahktiari wove "box" mafrash while the Turkmen wove "envelope" mafrash. thanks for the good points you make.
As for tents O'Donovan who lived with the Tekke points out that the ventilation options made the tent (ev or yurt) was far more comfortable in that climat.
Don't apologize for your wording. I tried to participate in some Italian discussion boards and I found it a challenge.
Best wishes,
Barry

[Martin Erik Andersen]

Interesting distinction. One could speculate that the Turkmens even settled where remaining in a sense cultural nomadic. And that could somehow explain a part of the bags symbolic and rather non-utallitarian character. They simply continued to refine their weaving beyond purpose.
best Martin

[Michael Raysson]

Dear Martin and Barry,

It is my understanding that that the Turkmen were Nomads in the Nomad sense. That is, that they were herders of animals and when the grazing was eaten up, they moved. When winter came, they moved. Etc. It is my understanding that some few still are Nomads. It is possible that the some that still are, are Nomads, in your sense (or, not Nomads, in your sense).

It is my understanding that this is pretty cut and dried, so I am astounded to hear you claim otherwise.

Michael

[Michael Raysson]

I might add that (to my understanding) their fixed address is Kazakhstan, 3,000 miles worth.

Michael

[Barry]

Hi Martin,
I think that is the point exactly. Even after most Turkmen were farmers that clung to a culture that they didn't practice. It may be that they were more focused on a herding life style before their success in the 19th century.
Best wishes,
Barry

[Barry]

Hi Michael,
Maybe you are right. I spend a fair amount of time studying the oldest sources I can and what I see does not bear out your understanding. As best I can tell the Turkmen were village based while shepherds took the flocks to graze. In the Kopet Dagh the shepherds moved the flocks in the high country and in the winter into the lowland. But I see no sign that this involved moving home and family. Women stayed in the villages and the men farmed. Younger men and sons were the shepherds. I also don't see support for the long held belief that the men did nothing but rape and pillage. In the Merv Oasis Sarik and Salor were more likely to live in houses while the Tekke lived in their evs. But all worked on farming and maintaining the dams and canals to irrigate their fields. This also holds true for the Ersari and the Middle Amu Darya region. I don't have a lot to go on in the north where the Yomud and Chodor lived (Khiva area) but I see no indication that home and family followed the flocks in search of grass..
By the way it is common even in the solid sources to call tent dwellers nomads but I fail to see facts that support either true nomadism or even bi-annual migratory herding. I also point to the weaving, rugs woven on portable looms rarely reach the technical excellence that we expect in 19th century Turkmen rugs.
I am not married to this concept so if anyone can offer solid sources that show other wise I am very open to it.
Best wishes,
Barry

[Barry]

Hi Michael,
I may be too focused on the Tekke, Sarik, Salor, and Ersari. You may be closer to the truth on the Yomud, Yomut, and Gocklin. I will give this some thought.
Best wishes,
Barry

[Barry]

Today the Turkmen of Turkmenistan and Afghanistan are not nomads or semi-nomadic. in Iran some Gocklin and Yomut are semi-nomadic. This means that they travel twice a year between a summer location and a winter camp. No Turkmen are nomads today. Persian Gocklin are not thought of as top weavers and the Yomut are not the equal of the Yomud. Over the years I have been inconsistant in my spelling and I have at times called Yomud rugs Yomut. I think the Yomut are a much smaller group.
Best wishes,
Barry