The marriages within these seven paternal generations were strictly prohibited to avoid interbreeding. Why seven? Since we’ve learned about genes in 20—21st centuries, some calculated that the chances of genetic mutations due to interbreeding decrease every passing generation, as shown in a table below. Back down seven generations, and the risk of it becomes as low as between 0 to 1%. How did my ancestors figured out the exact amount of generations of Y-chromosome needed to weed out the risk of genetic mutations? I don’t know exactly. But this explains why the nomads had superior genes and were famous for their health and endurance.
Table showing the distribution of Y-chromosome within seven generations
The extended families of seven-generation relatives could be as large as a few dozens, hundreds, or even thousands of members, because of the added polygynic families. A few of such extended families, formed a clan (Ru). A few dozens or hundreds of clans, still considered related, would belong to a single tribe (Taipa), usually all stemming from the same ancestor. Sometimes new Rus could be added either through marriage or war, or for political reasons.
Most of possessions and wealth within EN families were shared, including livestock, yurts, equipment, weapons, and etc. The notion of private property was weak. A friend or relative could ask for pretty much anything, and it was considered impolite to refuse. Even to this day some of the post-EN nations are known for their generosity and selflessness.
At the same time, the families, clans, and tribes were sensitive about matters of honor, therefore, insulting, injuring, or killing a member of another tribe, even not a very important one, would be considered an assault on the entire clan or even a tribe, and the revenge would follow. Sometimes it led to lengthy bloody vendettas that lasted for generations. But this was a good crime preventing policy in a nearly-stateless society, for one had to think twice before doing something bad.
A simplified structure of Eurasian Nomadic Tribalism
The relationships within families, clans, and tribes were warm, trustful, and cooperative. Every member of the tribe could travel within all of its Auls and receive the same treatment in every yurt. If a family had to adopt children of a diseased of killed relative, these children would be equaled to own children and treated with the same level of respect and attention. Growing up, adopted children would consider themselves as part of an adoptee family/clan, and view adoptive parents as their own.
Aul members would gather together and provide collective help if someone needed it; for example, in a process of shearing sheep wool or making felt. In times of sorrow, if someone died, which happened too often, the whole clan would come to help and be around at all times for a few weeks, a tradition still called Kóńil Aitu (expressing sympathy) among the Kazakhs. This was and still is a great family therapy, which much more efficient and affordable that hiring a therapist for money.
Today, in a Post-Industrial world, the tribalism is often viewed negatively as something archaic and outdated. It is considered that it leads to suppression of individual freedoms (arranged marriages), women rights (polygyny), as well as nepotism, clan wars and revenge, and sometimes even bloody vendettas. Indeed, when put in a foreign urban environment, with overcrowded population and nowhere else to go, the nomadic tribalism might manifest itself that way. But when it exists in its natural element, such as pastoral nomadic society living in the open Steppe, it makes most sense.
For example, the seemingly cruel and bloody tradition of revenge in practice is meant to combat crimes when there is no police or centralized governments. The arranged marriages yielded low rate of divorces and spouses living together till death parted them. Polygyny gives some single women a chance to start a family with father, when there are no free men available. The «nepotism» in nomadic pastoral economy means common interests, trust, and quality cooperation. The Jety Ata principle means that the risk of interbreeding and resulting mutations is almost zero. Added to this the emotional stability and comfort from knowing that you are never along when you need help or support, and that the entire clan or tribe is behind you at all times.
All together this system, which evolved naturally over the millennia, produced resilient social fabric, capable to resist the harsh life conditions and endless wars that the Eurasian Nomads were forced to lead.
Nomadic military
The EN developed efficient military machine by constantly fighting each other and the SC nations. So good it was at the peak of the ENC’s evolutional development that a few in numbers nomads routinely defeated the vast SC nations.
A Xiongnu (Hun) nation of just a couple hundred thousand conquered and terrorized a multi-million strong China, and this success was repeated by many succeeding nomadic nations. The 20—40 thousands strong Mongol army conquered almost all of the inhabited Eurasia in 13th century, defeating most of the states that it encountered in China, Central Asia, Russia, Eastern Europe, Middle East, and India. The SC nations with all of their economic might and human resources simply couldn’t stop the nomads, who went through them like a hot knife goes through butter.
So how did the nomads achieve such impressive victories with such low numbers and scares resources? The standard SC answer would be that they were so evil and barbaric that war was all they knew and could do well. A more educated SC answer would mention tough lifestyle that formed a strong fighting nation, where every men was a soldier and was trained to ride horses and use weapons since early childhood, perfected their martial arts and military cooperation in collective hunts, used a few horses per warrior to march long distances, had an iron discipline and a decimal army structure. Again, that is only a formal listing of the features without understanding the essence.
But what really made the nomads such effective warriors and their armies to be victorious military machines? I think it is hard for a SC representatives to admit that in the pre-Industrial Era the ENC have developed a far superior economic and social system that brought up the best in all of its people, and allowed the most efficient use of human and material resources.
The increased sense of belonging, honor, human spirit, self-respect and responsibility made one average Eurasian Nomad be worth dozens of average SC persons. The nomads were able to overcome incredible difficulties, survive on little available resources, and make insufferable sacrifices in order to achieve their victories. To put it simply, the ENC created conditions in which the majority of its members reached such heights of human condition that only a few best representatives of the CS could match them.
And even in Industrial Era it wasn’t the increased efficiency or improved quality of the SC armies that defeated the ENC initially, but a shear increased volume of cheap soldiers that simply overwhelmed the nomads by vast difference in numbers. It was a case of millions of mosquitos killing a lion.
Of course, later on the SC guns and military technology became so efficient that even a few SC soldiers could withstand attacks by large units of nomads, but that came a few centuries later. And even with these improved weapons the SC had a hard time fighting the nomads in open fields, and preferred using tactics of building forts and fortifications.
THE CONCEPT: NOMADISM VS SARTISM
What is Sartism?
Technically, the term «Sart» was applied to a settled Muslim ethnicity in Central Asia. I write more on this in the Appendixes. But for our purposes I will be using the second meaning of this term referring to representatives of any Settled Civilization. The Eurasian Nomads, particularly Kazakhs, used the term «Sart» to distinguish any «settled peoples living of agriculture and commerce trade».
In today’s