Timeline for How Would A Tribal Chiefdom Govern a Colossal Land Area?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
29 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jul 21, 2020 at 16:59 | comment | added | JBH | @ZioByte I'm not sure that matters. Conquest is how the empire was formed, but not how it was governed. I still maintain that there was a lot to learn from early empires that the OP didn't bother researching (and it's the lack of research that's my principle issue). | |
| Jul 21, 2020 at 16:34 | comment | added | ZioByte | @JBH: I read OP a bit differently (perhaps by mistake): it seemed there was no "warlord", in the Gengis Khan way, but a fisherman, son of fishermen who become (maybe by "trial") chieftain of other fishermen. Your scheme needs two distinct populations (at least), one conquering (and stealing from) the other. I'm unsure this is what OP had in mind. | |
| Jul 21, 2020 at 15:42 | vote | accept | The Weasel Sagas | ||
| Jul 21, 2020 at 13:51 | answer | added | ZioByte | timeline score: 2 | |
| Jul 21, 2020 at 6:42 | comment | added | vsz | 5 and a half million is not at all "very sparse" for the technology level and the available landmass. | |
| Jul 21, 2020 at 4:46 | comment | added | jamesqf | @TitaniumTurtle: Yes, though I think your point about the British calling them "tribes" so they didn't have to treat them as legimitate nations is rather off base. It's more that kings (in the contemporary European sense) were usually hereditary monarchs ruling by divine right. But AFAIK most of the leaders of the eastern tribes were elected, at least to some extent, so they couldn't be considered legitimate "kings". (I've written this rather poorly, but I hope you see what I'm getting at.) | |
| Jul 21, 2020 at 4:34 | comment | added | Li Jun | oh yeah also tribal council | |
| Jul 21, 2020 at 4:17 | comment | added | Li Jun | maybe try check shaka zulu and other african tribal kingdoms/empire, or south america empire/kingdoms, or east asian kingdoms/empire outside of the "always exception" mongol empire. heck even just straight up scandinavian viking "chiefdom" is quite tribalistic anyway and fit well for islander region enough. | |
| Jul 21, 2020 at 3:48 | history | became hot network question | |||
| Jul 20, 2020 at 23:07 | comment | added | TitaniumTurtle | @jamesqf Thank you for correcting me, I for some reason was under the belief that the Algonquin were part of the Iroquois League. Quick google search obviously proved me wrong, but if anything I think that further supports my point as the Algonquin peoples, as far as my understanding goes, might be described as even more tribal than the Iroquois. | |
| Jul 20, 2020 at 22:40 | comment | added | jamesqf | @TitaniumTurtle: Pocahontas was not Iroquois, but a member of the Powhattan tribes, which were Algonquin-speaking. Entirely different language family, with quite a bit of cultural difference. | |
| Jul 20, 2020 at 22:17 | comment | added | JBH | @TitaniumTurtle The Mongol empire lasted for 40 years and Nosajimiki points out correctly that world history is replete with examples of empires massively larger than what the OP is talking about - all of which (including the Mongols) governed. | |
| Jul 20, 2020 at 22:02 | comment | added | TitaniumTurtle | @JBH Conquest and governance are two separate issues though. Anybody conquer anything with enough force. The question specifically asks about governing, and the Mongol empire would have next to nothing in common with this. | |
| Jul 20, 2020 at 21:59 | comment | added | Nosajimiki | You may want to look at some of the Ancient Empires of the Middle East like the Assyrians, Babylonians, and Persians. They were about the tech level you are describing and formed HUGE empires | |
| Jul 20, 2020 at 21:50 | comment | added | JBH | @TitaniumTurtle you missed my point. If the islands and narrow strips of land are accessible in any way (e.g., trade exists), then they're conquerable using the tech available for that access. So, if you can only reach an island with a canoe, it's just a question of how many canoes you need. If Ghengis Khan could take 18% of the world's landmass (including areas with nearly insurmountable mountains and massive rivers...), it's an example of what Weasle needs to solve his problem. Basic research is expected on Stack Exchange. | |
| Jul 20, 2020 at 21:49 | answer | added | DWKraus | timeline score: 4 | |
| Jul 20, 2020 at 21:42 | comment | added | TitaniumTurtle | @JBH How do you expect horsemen to conquer islands and narrow strips of land? | |
| Jul 20, 2020 at 21:38 | comment | added | JBH | -1 for lack of research because there's already an answer. How did Ghengis Khan do it? He founded what would become the largest contiguous empire in human history eventually encompassing nearly 18% of the world's landmass. He and his ruling descendants used 11th century tech: horses and fear. | |
| Jul 20, 2020 at 21:33 | comment | added | TitaniumTurtle | @AlexP The Iroquois League is considered tribal and the leader titled a Chief, but Pocahontas was still regarded as a princess. The term Chief was used solely so that Britain could continue ignoring them as a legitimate nation. After all, they can't be a Kingdom if he isn't called a King. Although they lagged behind technologically at first, they had a very sophisticated and structured culture and government that itself was used as a base framework for the establishment of the United States. Even today, the Native American "Tribes" still have entirely valid, sophisticated government structures | |
| Jul 20, 2020 at 21:18 | answer | added | TitaniumTurtle | timeline score: 10 | |
| Jul 20, 2020 at 21:05 | comment | added | AlexP | @TitaniumTurtle: Then what's the difference between a tribe and a state? Why do we have two different words? Why does the question specify a "tribal" chief? (And it's quite obviously not a difference in size. Most Greek city-states had very much fewer people than the Gaulish tribes of the Arverni, or the Haedui, for example.) (And they actually were much less civilized than the Romans; after all, that why the Romans were able to subdue them, and that's why the subdued Gauls became Romans quite enthusiastically.) | |
| Jul 20, 2020 at 20:57 | answer | added | Willk | timeline score: 8 | |
| Jul 20, 2020 at 20:56 | comment | added | TitaniumTurtle | @AlexP I think you have a bit of a specific image in your mind for what these terms represent that is not technically correct. A tribe is a form government, it is simply much smaller than the modern notion of government. It is a semantic difference much like your example of barbarians being related to savages, which simply originated from the Ancient Greeks using it to refer to anyone who didn't speak Greek. It is simply an "us vs them" argument from the Greek perspective, similar in a sense to Jews and Gentiles. The Romans then carried it to mean all that weren't as "civilized" as Rome. | |
| Jul 20, 2020 at 20:46 | comment | added | DKNguyen | Do what Emperor Palpatine did after abolishing the senate. Give direct control to the regional governors. | |
| Jul 20, 2020 at 20:37 | comment | added | AlexP | Ah, and being pedantic: you cannot have only one tribal chief. The very fundamental idea of tribes is that there are more than one. The word comes from Latin, and it originally referred to the tripartite division of the Roman people into electoral constituencies. (Eventually the number of electoral constituencies expanded to 35, but they continued to be called tribes.) | |
| Jul 20, 2020 at 20:32 | comment | added | AlexP | "How Would A Tribal Chiefdom Govern a Colossal Land Area?": It wouldn't. "Tribal" and "governing" are incompatible notions: "governing" implies and advanced state, and "tribal" implies the absence of a state. Barbarians don't have governments; that's why they are called barbarians. For an instructive introduction of the difference between tribal organization and statal organization, consider the well-documented conquest of Gaul by one C. Julius Caesar. | |
| Jul 20, 2020 at 20:31 | answer | added | Andrew Brēza | timeline score: 5 | |
| Jul 20, 2020 at 20:05 | history | edited | The Weasel Sagas | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 114 characters in body
|
| Jul 20, 2020 at 19:46 | history | asked | The Weasel Sagas | CC BY-SA 4.0 |