(no subject)

[teddywolf]

Today I was in my Imperialism class. The discussion went around the pre-modern empires and the notion of tribe. Historical tribe, by my professor's definition, is bound by bonds of blood. He brought up the Jews as the first historical pre-modern empire and, among other things, said that this was based on Jewish tribal notions which had no conversions until the modern era.

I decided I had to speak up at this point. I mentioned we had a strong history of conversions, even though they were less common before the modern era. I brought up Ruth, I brought up the Khazars, and mentioned that a number of converts were notable in our history. He then said, "Then why are you a tribe? You can't be G-d's Chosen People by blood while allowing others to join your tribe, it's not logical." I mentioned the distinction between religiously Jewish and Jewish by birth; he said the notions were still incompatible.

Do bear in mind I like my professor. He makes me think and is academically rigorous.

His definition of tribe is as something immutable, you are born to it or not, or might get forced into it by conflict.

I want to present to him examples of tribes that accepted in outsiders to become "of the tribe". I will be doing some research into this because I want to present it to him - yes, I have been looking. If any of you know of an historical example, off the top of your head, something not involving a marriage or slavery, I would appreciate a pointer. It could be somebody joining a Native American tribe, or brought into a particular African tribe, or a Chinese family, a Germanic village, what-have-you - in fact, the more diverse the better. I want to show that a tribe may have been primarily about blood but also could be something a person chose and, under exceptional circumstances, be accepted into.

Please feel free to signal boost this.

Comments

[teddywolf.livejournal.com]

Thank you. I am not sure how he would consider the Haudenosaunee League. It is more than a single tribe, which puts it in a different category. He had his own discussion about confederations of tribes that did not fit the definition of empire, but the League looks to have had a few points that would qualify as colonization.

And this is why I need to bounce discussion back to him :-)

[smillaraaq.livejournal.com]

Hi, stumbled in here from a little idle perusal of friends-of-friends, hope you don't mind me jumping in...

The Tuscarora are something of a unique case in Haudenosaunee history; they were a large group fleeing war (with both white colonists and rival North Carolina nations) in their own homeland, and culturally and linguistically Iroquoian kinfolk, so upon reaching Five Nations lands they were accepted as the sixth member nation, albeit one of somewhat lesser status -- for a rough comparison perhaps think of a U.S. Territory versus a state. They became part of the political entity of the Iroquois Confederacy, but they maintained their own separate national/cultural identity within it. More typical Haudenosaunee adoptions, be they of individuals (captives, escaped slaves, etc.) or groups (subjugated enemy nations, non-Iroquoian refugee tribes) actually absorbed the adoptees into a specific family, clan, and nation; they'd not be considered, say, a Haudnosaunee-adoptee Nanticoke, but a Turtle Clan Mohawk whose family line was now that of a particular clan mother. These adoptions tended to fade out of memory unless there was a particularly notable person involved, like famed captive Mary Jemison (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mary_Jemison), because they and their descendants were absorbed into their adoptive family's culture.

[gingicat]

There's a wonderful Lois Lenski novel about Mary Jemison. I think I read it over a dozen times when I was ten years old. :)