Is this legitimate? I've heard many people say this and I'd like a real, not meme-based, analysis. They usually cite this based on super "reliable" accounts from Greeks and Romans, but the logic is that the more mobile the men are, the more autonomy their women will have. Could someone give an academic and as un-meme-based an answer as possible?
>>18653389I've never been a big fan of that guy. People fawn over him because he makes some accurate maps, basically. Anyway, the Yamnaya case is hardly true. We have linguistic and genetic evidence of clear patriarchal structures, and using examples of female kurgans isn't a good argument in my view either. I believe the argument is that if a society is pastoral, it necessarily has less social stratification and therefore less hierarchy.
>>18653394>I believe the argument is that if a society is pastoral, it necessarily has less social stratification and therefore less hierarchy.And why would that be the case? The academy is feminist, and I don't think it deals with this issue.
>>18653389Egalitarian"—how does this worm even define that? Egalitarian in relation to what?
>>18653394Are those two points mutually exclusive? I don’t think he’s saying the mongols Turks and Sythians were anything but patriarchal just that they were also Egalitarian
>>18653394Although many do not have a centralized state, this does not mean an absence of hierarchies. Cattle, camels, horses, or whatever animals are movable assets that can be accumulated indefinitely. droughts, epidemics, or livestock theft quickly create stratification. So I never understood this argument. Super weak. Those who lose their herd fall into extreme poverty. And if I'm not mistaken, we have a reconstructed word in PIE for slave.
>>18653389>Yamnaya would not likely be very differentWhat is the point in making such a lazy armchair hypothesis? We have plenty of literature talking about what sort of culture is reconstructible for Proto-Indo-Europeans. Consult that first.>>18653394Proto-Indo-Europeans must have had some degree of social stratification seeing that they had a word for king.
>>18653415Also clientelism was very common in IE societies.
>Mongols>Egalitarianeh? In what sense? They were hard line patriarchal. There was no such thing as a mongol female running a tribe, or a family. Women didn't have "autonomy" they had responsibilities.
>>18653452>>18653389This historical fallacy that "mobile peoples are more egalitarian" also fails significantly with its use of terms like "autonomy" and "egalitarian" for women. which are totally anachronistic in the context of the ancient and prehistoric world. Unfortunately, I couldn't think of another option besides a certain bias
>>18653417>Proto-Indo-Europeans must have had some degree of social stratification seeing that they had a word for kingWell said
>>18653412He (you) is wrong to say they were more egalitarian. And your maps are rubbish, by the way. You cling to theories from the 70s that centralized state = stratification = hierarchy.
>>18653452I didn't understand either. Regarding the Scythians and Sarmatians, we must be extremely cautious due to the lies, exaggerations, and fantastical stories surrounding them, since the primary sources we have about them are from Greek travelers who sometimes weren't even in contact with them. Something similar occurs with the Celts. If someone is willing to blindly believe the Greek accounts, then they shouldn't have a problem believing in giant ants and women who break men's pelvises to prevent them from rebelling against their Amazonian society...
>theMännerbundprobably drove people not protected by the Indo-European social umbrella, to move under it, in order to obtain safety or restitution from thieving and raiding. They could therefore have served as an incentive for the recruitment of outsiders into social positions that offered vertical mobility, horizontal reciprocity, and the possibility of immortality through praise poetry, made more attractive by generosity at patron-sponsored public feastsIt doesn't seem to me to be a society without social stratification.
>>18653417>>18653415explain more
Yamnaya culture population was at a pre-polity stage of social developmeI don't know how this would be different or impossible for other pastoral societies.https://uavestnik.ru/en/arxiv-nomerov/2026/volume-26,-no.-2/rubrika-2/the-phenomenon-of-big-burial-mounds-of-the-yamnaya-culture-in-the-volga-ural-interfluve-region.html
>>18653452Mongols allowed their women more sexual liberty including with non-Mongol men Mongol men even made jokes about Mongolian women having sexual relations with Chinese merchants and Russians in the 19th and early 20th centuries.https://x.com/GildedCoprolite/status/2041310513762619848https://www.google.mn/search?q=%22chinese+merchants%22+%22Mongolian+women%22https://books.google.mn/books?id=I_dblqiG8kkC&pg=PA113&dq=%22chinese+merchants%22+%22Mongolian+women%22https://books.google.mn/books?id=eGmLEQAAQBAJ&pg=PT69&dq=%22chinese+merchants%22+%22Mongolian+women%22https://books.google.mn/books?id=1uifAAAAMAAJ&q=%22chinese+merchants%22+%22Mongolian+women%22&dq=%22chinese+merchants%22+%22Mongolian+women%22https://books.google.mn/books?id=oUGDBAAAQBAJ&pg=PA168&dq=%22chinese+merchants%22+%22Mongolian+women%22https://books.google.mn/books?id=yUb5AAAAIAAJ&q=%22chinese+merchants%22+%22Mongolian+women%22&dq=%22chinese+merchants%22+%22Mongolian+women%22https://books.google.mn/books?id=G9dwAAAAMAAJ&q=%22chinese+merchants%22+%22Mongolian+women%22&dq=%22chinese+merchants%22+%22Mongolian+women%22https://books.google.mn/books?id=aSbuVbeMVyMC&pg=RA1-PA7&dq=%22chinese+merchants%22+%22Mongolian+women%22https://books.google.mn/books?id=8VJxAAAAMAAJ&q=%22chinese+merchants%22+%22Mongolian+women%22&dq=%22chinese+merchants%22+%22Mongolian+women%22Kublai Khan married one of his own daughters to Han Chinese Zhao Xian (emperor Gong of Southern Song) Han general Shi Tianze's son Shi Gang was married to a Mongol Kerait woman and another son of his was married to a daughter of Mongol official Menggu Baer.This was during the Mongol empire. Mongols never banned intermarriage of non-Mongol men with Mongol women.
>>18653452>>18653644Post Genghis Mongols didn't live in tribes.Tumens are not tribes, neither are designations like Khalkha or Chahar.In Mongol society under Northern Yuan and Qing, Mongols were divided into classes of Borjigin nobility, Lamas, commoners.Mongol commoners did not live in tribes like the pre-Genghis Merkit or Naiman.They could only trave their paternal ancestors for a few generations and did not have big clans, only the Borjigins could trace their ancestry to medieval times.
>>18653478This
>>18653389No
>>18653417>Proto-Indo-Europeans must have had some degree of social stratification seeing that they had a word for king.We are not sure about that
>>18653389The Greek generally judged other people from what they considered the societal optimum.Which was a lot less egalitarian than almost all societies surrounding them.
>>18654645I didn't understand your point. Could you explain?
>>18653389Doesn't Proto-Indo-European have a readily reconstructible word for "bride-price"?
>>18653389Well for what it's worth the Saharan Berbers tend to have very strong taboos against hitting women, while their sedentary neighbors in the Sahel think it's basically required and not beating your wife makes you a bad husband.
>>18654779No
>>18654779>>18653524>>18653417‘master of the house’ (déms pótis)
>>18654772I was joking
>>18653452Ögedei's widow and Möngke's widow ruled as interim khans. But yeah no woman could rule in her own right
>>18655374Or maybe it was Güyük's widow. Anyway two of the three
>>18653452>Mongol women had responsibilities>women in agrarian societies didn'tthey weren't on like modern industrial gender equality level but pastoralist women generally had more authority/expectations than agrarian onesdifference between riding a horse and having your feet bound (China) or being forbidden to leave the house (Afghanistan) or own property (England)
>>18655379>pastoralist women generally had more authority/expectationsThey don't, you retard
>>18655470They spend more time outdoors doing stuff and wearing normal clothing. To the farmcel mind this was a sign of female empowerment and emancipation. To the Steppechad it was just daily life.
Evidence from elites as always. Of course monarchical systems where power resides in the family afford royal women greater power. That is why old timey democracies affording greater power to sub elite and even working class men always led to the disappearance of women from politics other than as alliance building tools through marriage.Or to put it another way economic egalitarianism (the typical meaning assumed when one mentions egalitarianism in modern parlance) is not the same thing as, and may run counter to, gender egalitarianism.
>>18655846>Evidence from elites as alwaysSuch as? Where's the evidence?
>>18655747It's a fact that steppe women had more sexual freedom on regards to sleeping with outsider males.Genghis accepted Jochi as his son when he wasn't even his biological son.
>>18656697What does a woman being kidnapped and raped have to do with female sexual freedom?Why are you treating "steppe" as an ethnicity? There is no such thing.Are you brain damaged?
