Introducing the Nomads and Empires podcast. Here, we talk about the structure, major themes, and important considerations of this show.
Introducing the Nomads and Empires podcast. Here, we talk about the structure, major themes, and important considerations of this show.
The steppes once stretched for an unimaginably long distance. For thousands of kilometers, this band of grass went beyond the horizon, nestling gently with the Eternal Blue Sky. For thousands of years, wolves, gazelles, and foxes roamed these lands freely, moving from one part of the steppes to another in search of grazing lands and prey. In some parts of this vast, unascertainable wilderness, one could find the stoic camel. In other parts, the majestic falcon soared into the air. And yet, king of all of these beasts and animals was the swift and mighty horse. Wild stallions and mares raced through the land, finding refuge in the areas between modern Ukraine to Mongolia. This place, this belt of grasses, shrubs, and small trees, was their home.
And yet, that isn’t the complete story.
At some point, a new being found themselves in these grasses. Perhaps this being was, like the other animals, searching for food. Perhaps they wandered here to escape the burdens of home. Perhaps they simply wanted to discover, to see the world. Whatever the case, this being crossed through forests, mountains, and deserts, arriving finally at the steppes.
Such a being would give rise to a new element. If the horse was king, then this being was the emperor. In due time, this human would subjugate the land, just as it did in other parts of the world. It was, of course, slightly different. Where in other places humans ploughed the land and tilled the soil, here there was a key divergence. The Abrahamic God once told Adam that he was master of all beasts, and perhaps here on the wild plains would this prophecy be mostly fulfilled.
Humanity domesticated the sheep, the cow, the yak. They embraced the wolf, the donkey, and the ephemeral falcon. But most importantly, here on the windy grasslands, humanity found the horse, and that single decision changed the course of history.
With animals in tow, humans were able to construct better tools than they once had. Crude items made of stone gave way to more elegant designs. Animal products like sheep’s wool and horsehair enabled these individuals to create felt tents and musical instruments. These include the yurt, the ger, and the morin khuur. In time, such peoples on the steppes developed stronger weapons. Once the bow and arrow had been mastered, the world shrieked in fear.
The humans of the steppe were, however, mostly disunited. Many tribes and clans emerged and war between one another could be common. For those living in faraway places, those farmers and city-dwellers, the politics of the steppe tribes was distant and barbaric. But sometimes, things changed. A clever or particularly charismatic leader one day emerged. Such a leader began to unite the different tribes, either through diplomacy, intrigue, or force. And then, when the tribes of the everlasting steppe had finally united, they would march outward, crossing through the forests, mountains, and deserts.
To some, this was the nature of humanity, the cyclical emergence of the steppe nomad, their disunity, their reunion, their wars. Civilizations would fall. New ones would emerge. Tribes would become kingdoms. Clans became dynasties. The riders of the steppe would form empires of the steppe.
An Arab historian from North Africa named Ibn Khaldun once wrote about the nature of history. In his work al-Muqqadimah, he considered the rise and fall of dynasties, of the emergence of new polities, and the many aspects of their rule. One key concept he discusses is the idea of social cohesion, or asabiyyah. Although the discussion on asabiyyah is complicated and detailed, in essence, the idea is that a society is as strong as its societal cohesion. Nomadic groups were said to have the strongest cohesion and as such, their ability to expand and conquer was unparalleled.
“These savage peoples, furthermore, have no homelands that they might use as a fertile (pasture), and no fixed place to which they might repair. All regions and places are the same to them. Therefore, they do not restrict themselves to possession of their own and neighboring regions. They do not stop at the borders of their horizon. They swarm across distant zones and achieve superiority over faraway nations.”
And so, what Ibn Khaldun touches on is this phenomenon of history in which sedentary societies would expand and grow. They would come to interact with the peoples of the periphery, whether they be the deserts of Arabia or the steppes of Central Asia. In time, the sedentary lands became weak. Political institutions declined. Dynastic legitimacy collapsed. Physical walls crumbled. This would allow the great riders of the steppe to break through the periphery, raid farms, and pillage sedentary society. In many cases, these nomads conquered and became rulers over these lands, but in due time, these nomads would become conquered themselves. The trappings of settled society became literal traps, and soon the steppe heritage disappeared from this ruling elite. Soon, they would act like their sedentary predecessors. And then the cycle repeats.
This is the story that the Nomads and Empires podcast will be examining. This phenomenon of history that I just described is, of course, a broad and incomplete generalization. In fact, this conception of nomadic armies conquering territories and becoming sedentarized is a rather popular model espoused by many, including academics. While such a description is enticing for its prophetic messaging, it is also teleological and imparts present understandings into a situation far in the past. In fact, much of what we can see in this concept derives from the experiences of the Mongol Empire, and many will cite the sedentarization of Kublai Khan’s Yuan Dynasty as a key example. The loss of the steppe heritage in Kublai’s empire meant that it was doomed to fall. The trappings of civilization had stripped the empire of its martial and political prowess.
However, that is simplistic and highlights a key problem about most popular media about the steppes. Many ideas about the steppe derive from the Mongolian story. We know about Temujin’s rise, the emergence of the figure of Genghis Khan, and of the mighty empire that was forged. The Mongols were the exception, as a popular Youtube series likes to reiterate. As such, the lessons and narratives derived from other steppe empires are, by all means, forgotten. We should know that the Oghuz Turks eventually embraced sedentary lifestyles, and their ancestors would go on to form great empires like that of the Seljuks, the state of Aq Qonyulu, and of course the Ottomans. We should know that groups like the Gokturks and Rouran created great tribal confederations that long proceeded the Mongols. We should know that this cyclical destiny of the steppe is by no means cyclical and by no means a destiny. It is instead simply a story of many different people groups across many different time periods.
And this, this, my friends, is what the Nomads and Empires podcast seeks to examine. In this podcast, we are going to construct a semi-linear narrative of the peoples of the Eurasian steppe. From Ukraine to Mongolia, we will trace down the different groups that made up this vast region. We will track their origins, their historical trajectories, and their falls. We will examine the emergence of the legendary Scythians who terrified the denizens of the Hellenistic world. We will trace the emergence of the many Turkic tribes, seeing how they spread from the Altai to the wider world. We will visit the Mongols, certainly, but we will examine their origins in the Rouran and Khitan Empires, and their later histories during the Northern Yuan and Qing dynasties.
What I aspire to do in this podcast is to construct this narrative to highlight the areas of continuity and change on the steppe. Instead of examining groups like the Mongols as an exception, as a solitary unit in the confines of a single historical period, we will examine their predecessors, their backgrounds, and their historical context. We will trace causal relationships between one group and another. We will explore the ramifications of sedentary and nomadic groups on steppe politics. By the end of this, we will, hopefully, explore the entire history of this unique region from its prehistoric origins to the Communist era.
The reason why I want to do this is to show that there is more to this history than stereotypes and long-conceived notions. There were more groups than just the Mongols, and while there are some similarities between these groups, there are also a ton of differences. Consider some of the non-Mongol groups. I personally feel like there is less discussion on say the Cumans, who had a radically significant influence on Russian history. We often hear talk about the Huns, but this is mostly in the framing of a nomadic barbarian invading the western European world. We don’t really hear about the Hunnic influence on the Byzantine Empire or on other nomadic groups like the Bulgars. As such, I want to highlight this history and showcase how influential this area of grass and shrub has been on world history.
In fact, an important thing to consider is that the history of the steppe is not just relegated to the strip of land between Ukraine and Mongolia. Rather, the movements of these peoples throughout history has led to titanic ripples across the world. In the wake of the Huns, we would see the dominoes that toppled Rome. The rise of the Oghuz Turks led to the decline of the Abbasids. The Mongols… well, you already know. However, the reverberations of these peoples went well beyond the battlefields. The migrations and mass movements of steppe peoples led to a proliferation of trade goods. The steppe routes were a vital component of the mighty Silk Road. Kublai Khan’s court was a fantastical place, so romanticized that the European Age of Discovery began in large part because of the Mongols' wealth. We can see from this short glance at how the history of the steppe is the history of the world.
So, how is this going to work? To explore the grasslands of the steppe, I am going to mostly follow a chronological order. We will start from the Scythians and move our way forward. I will only cover one group at a time, following their historical path. We will examine their interactions with both the sedentary and nomadic worlds. Once we have finished exploring that group, we will shift to another steppe society that follows the chronology. For instance, we will move from the Scythians to the Sarmatians to the Huns. Of course, in instances where there are several contemporary groups, instead of moving forward in time, we will move longitudinally. This means that if we’re starting with the Scythians and Sarmatians, we will also cover the Xiongnu after them and before the Huns. This is the structure I’m planning on using moving forward, and this should help us track the steppe chronologically while also enabling us to see the various connections and overlaps between these societies.
Of course, before we get into those specific details, we must first start by laying important background details. In the next few episodes, I’ll be charting key geographical and historiographical contexts. We will explore the divisions of the steppe, which I breakdown into eastern, central, and western triads. In episode 2, we will dive into the eastern Eurasian steppe, which mainly consists of modern Mongolia and southeastern Siberia. In episode 3, we will cover the central and western steppes, which stretch from modern day Ukraine to Kazakhstan. Then, in episode 4, we will dive into a brief discussion on the historiography of this region, assessing the history of scholarship on the steppes. And then? Then the narrative begins.
As a final point, I want to consider some broad points that are important to consider. Steppe history, particularly in popular history, often faces severe problems with stereotyping and generalizing. As I’ve hinted, the long-standing narrative of the Mongols as both a barbaric peoples and as an exception in world history have equally contributed to problematic trends. As such, I want to take a brief moment to address these issues. I’m going to take this directly from the work of professor Christopher Beckwith, who although certainly has some problematic claims, is astute here in his observations on the popular misconceptions of steppe nomads.
One. There is an idea that these nomads were, by nature, a militaristic or martial people. In Beckwith’s own words, “warlike-fierce and cruel natural warriors-due to their harsh environment and difficult way of life.” Many works have overemphasized the physical nature of the steppe and older academics have projected a seemingly teleological set of characteristics that emerge in such an environment. This has led to the conception of steppe nomads as hordes of barbarians. We can see such a conception in works like that of Peter Freddet, a professor of History at Saint Mary’s College. In his 1874 work Modern History, Freddet uses this type of language when describing the Huns, who in his own words says: “The Huns, having broken the gates, were beginning to enter and plunder the city, when Aetius, coming from the opposite direction, suddenly appeared with his army, and immediately charged the barbarians. Their surprise and terror were equal to the suddenness and violence of the attack. Those who had already lost themselves in the streets, were slain or compelled to fly, whilst Atilla, foaming with rage, endeavored to rally the fugitives without a city.”
Two. There is an idea that the lifestyle of the steppe nomads “left them poor, because their production was insufficient for their needs. They therefore robbed the rich peripheral agricultural peoples to get what they needed or wanted.” This principle has been very pervasive. Many have used this idea to explain the institution of raiding and of the emergence of steppe empires. While in some cases, this certainly was accurate, and plundering was an opportunity for greater riches, this was not unique to the steppe nomads, and such a perspective leads to the idea that nomadic society lacked institutions like commerce, trade, and wealth. In fact, this is far from the truth. Throughout history, nomadic groups were able to produce a number of valuable goods from domesticated animals and often conducted trade with others in order to secure goods that they did lack. This history of trade extends across the Eurasian steppes, with silks and precious metals being key commodities. The works of Professor Nicholas di Cosmo are enlightening on the sophistication of nomadic trade, and I want to read this passage from him to refute any misconceptions:
“The Mongol conquest took place at a time when the nomads had already mastered several means of wealth extraction, including exaction of tribute, profits from trade, and taxation of agricultural and other peoples who came under the nomads’ domination...There was no need for European merchants to educate the Mongols to the benefits of trade, or to persuade them to make special concessions, because the Mongols were perfectly attuned to commercial partnerships, and were surely aware of the advantages that an outlet toward the rich Mediterranean markets could mean for the development of commercial activities not only in the Pontic region but across Asia.”
Finally, the last misconception Beckwith notes is that because nomads were poor and were natural warriors, they were thus a permanent menace to the sedentary world. This is of course completely misleading. Eurasian nomads have historically had a number of different relations between other steppe tribes and sedentary societies. Entities like the Byzantine Empire or Song China would have bilateral relations with one group and hostile ties with another. Trade and commerce connected the nomads of the central steppe with the markets of Samarkand and Khiva. The groups of the Siberian taiga shared cultural practices and made alliances and waged wars with their steppe counterparts. It is clear that there are a myriad of different interactions between the steppe and the world, and to reduce it to a permanent state of conflict would be misleading and ahistoric.
And so, to finally repeat myself, this podcast is intended to refute these misconceptions and to explore the steppe and its interconnectedness. We will examine each of the groups in key details, from their political history to what we can ascertain about their culture and society. In doing so, we will see just how dynamic and influential these groups truly were in shaping world history. From Europe to China, the grasses of the steppes seem almost endless, but to us, they are simply the beginning of a greater story.
And with that, I want to say thank you so much for listening to this introduction. Next time, we’re going to examine the geography of the eastern Eurasian steppe. If you’re interested in following this series as it progresses, feel free to give me a follow on Twitter at @NomadEmpiresPod or you can reach out to my email nomadsandempires@gmail.com. For episode scripts, sources, book reviews, and other articles on historical topics that I may not cover on the podcast, I’d suggest you follow my Substack, NomadsandEmpires.substack.com. And that’s pretty much all of it. Thank you again for listening, and see you next time on the windy plains of the steppe.
Music:
Shab Ayum - Turku (Free Music Archive)
The Eternal Plains - Frenic (Free Music Archive)
Outro - Personal Work