A year ago on Round and Square (20 July 2012)—Fieldnotes From History: Provincial Elections (p)
Two years ago on Round and Square (20 July 2011)—Seinfeld Ethnography: Motor Oil
 |
| [a] Gobi RF |
Click below for other items in this essay:
III
Northern and Central Asia (a)
The three large bioenvironmental
zones of central and northeastern Asia are the tundra, the taiga, and
the steppe. These constitute a large
portion of the region, with the mountainous areas and strings of desert-oases
making up a much smaller—although culturally more important—portion of central
and northeastern Asia. The region is heavily landlocked, and even the coastal
regions do not have ready access to the outside world. Scarcity—of resources,
opportunities, and even people—is a determinate common factor throughout the
region. Peoples settling here faced great difficulties if they wished to
survive, and archaeological research tells us that a number of them, beyond the
more than 120 distinct ethnie
surviving to this day, did not meet this challenge. They needed great
inventiveness and readiness to adapt to their material circumstances. An
entirely unique (one might say revolutionary) lifestyle, that of pastoral nomadism, is perhaps the best
example of such widespread and historically successful innovation.
 |
| [b] Open RF |
What we can learn from
this is that potentially nation-creating ethnic identity in central and northeastern
Asia was based less on shared language and common history (often one of the
most frequently cited factors of ethnicity), and more on circumstances and
things tied to basic survival. On one level, this can be narrowed down to a few
items provided by nature.
For most of the inland regions, the crucial enablers
in the struggle to survive were the horse and the various livestock (primarily
camel and sheep) that provided livelihood for their cultivators. In the coastal
or riverine areas, fish or sea mammals are similarly requisite sources of
survival. In this sense, our search for primary distinction (“identity”) may
justifiably lead us to refer to “fish people” along the maritime coasts, “horse
people” on the vast grasslands, and “reindeer people” on the tundra. It may be
tempting to say, therefore, that development of ethnic identity in Central and
North-Eastern Asia was primarily based on environmental factors that determine
lifestyle. After all, we know that Chinggis Khan claimed to rule not merely
over the Mongols or the various Mongol ethnie,
but rather “all of the people living under the felt tent.
 |
| [c] Flow RF |
Nonmaterial aspects of
traditional life in central and northeastern Asia exhibit similar broadly
applicable elements. Nature’s power, in all of its manifestations, was
ever-present and ever-felt. The incessant struggle for survival provided little
opportunity for peoples of the region to indulge in contemplation about this
harsh reality. Superhuman forces—wind, cold, rain, thunder, and frost—had to be
feared, respected, and pacified. Their aid had to be sought and purchased for
every undertaking. At the very least, every effort had to be made to avoid the
supernatural “anger.” This is something that histories of more temperate
climates do not usually consider—at least in their life-taking ferocity. It is
one of the key differences between the worlds of central and northern Asia, on
the one hand, and the more southerly climates that prevailed in much of China,
Japan, Taiwan, the Philippines, and southern stretches in Korea. For guidance,
one had to turn to the world beyond the living, the spirit-world. Gifted and
practiced men and women, the shaman,
performed the crucial tasks of guiding and mediating the communication with
this other world—the world that could bring great benefits or utter disaster.
Rituals and practices aimed at achieving the requisite state of ecstasy bear
considerable similarity among the region’s peoples.
 |
| [d] Common RF |
In looking for the roots
of ethnic identity in central and northeastern Asia, we must turn to kinship,
lineage, and, in the end, the notion of belonging. A common utterance that
speaks to both kinship, fictive kinship, and identification with locality
addresses this.
Me against my brother; me
and my brother against the
neighbor; me and my brother
and our neighbor against
the
next village; me and my brother
and our neighboring villages
against
outsiders.
The daily task of
survival—from landing a sea mammal to tending a large flock of sheep—called for
coordinated group effort. It was natural for every member of a family to
participate, but greater tasks called for larger teams. This resulted in blood
ties being extended through fictive kinship networks to work-and
habitat-related connections, with eventual development of shared habits,
customs, and language. The formation of clans and tribes was formalized by the
(self-) naming and (self-) identification of these human communities—a major
cultural development that would influence the history of Asia in profound ways.
 |
| [e] Organized RF |
Small groups tended to
organize themselves along the lines of extended families. However, clans and
tribes needed to be controlled, organized, and administered in new ways.
Rulership in central and northeastern Asia tended to reflect the inhabitants’
views of transcendental authority. Although there existed a concept of a
supreme divinity (e.g. the sky-god Tengri), a number of other divine forces were
also recognized and celebrated. Similarly, earthly rulership often included a
modicum of specialization. A military leader was tasked with bringing success
in wars, while another leader was often empowered with the administration of
daily life in peacetime—with perhaps another to provide spiritual guidance.
Although this particular
configuration of rulership was eliminated by the power gained by monotheist
Islamic rulers after the sixteenth century, it is still indicative of the
multi-dimensional nature of central and northeastern Asian rule during much of
the last three thousand years. It would parallel the history of Chinese
civilization (which it bordered—from the central and northeastern
perspective—to the east and the south) in some ways and diverge profoundly from
it in others. Yet one stark reality should be noted. In the last thousand years
of Chinese history, northern groups from outside of China “proper” have ruled
large swaths of the Middle Kingdom for more than half of that time. In short,
it is not an option to pretend that Chinese civilization can be viewed in
isolation from its northern and central neighbors, no matter how often popular
textbooks seem to imply that very notion.
Click below for other items in this essay:
Click below for other items in this essay:
This reminds me of Dersu Uzala... a very good thing.
ReplyDeleteI absolutely must see that now...
ReplyDelete