Peter Alford Andrews,
Felt Tents and Pavilions: The Nomadic Tradition and
its Interaction with Princely Tentage. 2 vols. (=
Koelner Ethnologische Mitteilungen, Sonderband),
Melisende, London 1999, ISBN 1 901764 05 2,
1472 pages + 257
black and white illustrations + 16 colour plates.
£ 90.00.
These
two monumental volumes (largely sponsored by the Getty
Grant Program) seem at first glance "only"
to be a work on nomadic and princely tents of Central
Asia and beyond, but on closer inspection they amount
to a comprehensive encyclopaedia of the tentage of the
region, including Iran and the Mughals, dealing with
almost every historical and cultural aspect of a
fascinating topic. If we consider the relatively short
life of this type of dwelling, it becomes clear just
what a difficult task the author has taken upon
himself in providing a history of such tents, for to
achieve this he must refer to virtually all possible
sources.
The
reader learns in the General Introduction that
"the concept of the structure is more important
than the perishable material in which it is
realised" (p. XXX ). Nevertheless, a
normal nomad tent frame lasts "for up to 50
years" (p. 550), which, by the way, is 10-20
years longer than the life of a normal kerpiç
(mud brick) building, until recently the prevailing
house type in rural Anatolia. Princely tents seem to
have an even longer life-span, including, at least in
some cases, their vulnerable (but well-kept and
meticulously repaired) cover, as shown by the example
of a gigantic Mughal dal-bādal,
which dazzled spectators in 1745, more than a century
after it was first built (p. 984). A tent register we
saw in the Ottoman state archives in Istanbul some
years ago contains another example, the state tent of
Ahmed I, which had been made in 1021 (1612-13). It was
repaired in 1129 (1716-17), one hundred years after
this Sultan's death, and must therefore have been
(more or less regularly) in use for more than a
century (Istanbul Başbakanlık Arşivi, D.BŞM
1354, p. 9).
Peter
Andrews' book is built up strictly chronologically,
starting with the covered carts used as dwellings in
the Ukrainian Steppe in the fourth millennium B.C.,
going into the findings of several kurgans,
dealing with Scythians and Sarmatians, then with the
tentage of ethnic groups one might call proto-Turkic (Hsiung-nu,
Huns), that of the early Turks, the
Mongols (comprehensively), Timur and the Timurids.
Volume II is devoted to the Mughal tentage, finally
closing with the 19th century. Thus, the
sequence of chapters follows a historical order in
combination with ethnical or tribal correlations. All
sections can be read and used independently, which is
a big advantage, given the fact that even passionate
aficionados might not find the time and leisure needed
to read more than 1400 pages in one go from cover to
cover. This is, however, not the only convenience: the
reader finds in every chapter on the tentage of a
specific ethnic or political group not only a map (20
in total) of the geographical setting but also a
detailed discussion of all available literary (and
pictorial) sources, mostly with extensive quotes in
translation (often by the author himself, whose
tremendous command of languages is indeed
extraordinary). Extremely useful are 19 drawings (by Mügül
Andrews and A.J.P. Jansz), most of them illustrations
in the text, which thanks to their accuracy are a big
help in visualising certain features, as, for example,
the frame and the felts of a nomadic (Turkmen) trellis
tent (p. xl), where we find the relevant terminology
in English. The term "trellis tent" stands
for the type of tent, which in Western languages is
mostly (but wrongly) called yurt, a structure
in which frame and cover are independent of each other. For someone not familiar with the construction
principles of a trellis tent this is of pre-eminent
importance.
The
physical structure of this type of tentage is,
however, only one aspect. A whole cluster of
correlations with every facet of nomadic life is
analysed in this work as well. Hence, the book offers
essential insights for anyone interested in life
style, use of space and social practices of Central
Asian nomads. Although the author writes (p. xxxix)
that he "left aside a full discussion of the
symbolism of tents" (to be investigated in a
later book), this does not mean that this element
comes off badly. The main symbolic features, such as
the power and glory of a tent or the heavenly imagery
of its domed roof, become very clear.
The
approach of the first two chapters is rather broad,
due to the scarcity of source material. Nevertheless,
the reader will be amazed to learn about the existence
of any sources for the early groups treated there. In
this context it should be mentioned that no evidence
could be found that trellis tents were used before the
8th century AD (when it appears, for
instance, in the inscription of Bilge Qaghan of 735
AD), although the author suggests (p. 85) that the
"hundred-man tent" of the Hsiung-nu,
referred to in a Chinese source of the first century
BC might have been an early form of this type.
In
the following chapters of the work the treatment
becomes increasingly more specific, as sources flow
more bountifully and allow the author to interrelate
between tribal nomadic traditions and
"urban", princely practices. In the latter
dwellings, foreign influences could be highly
significant, such as Chinese elements at the court
tents of the Khitan (pp. 237-239).
A
substantial part of volume I is dedicated to diverse
aspects of Mongolian tentage and the available Mongol,
Chinese, European and Middle Eastern sources. One of
this chapter's focuses refers to the question of the
Mongolian trellis tent's origin. There is namely no
evidence for the existence of trellis tents under
Chinggiz Qan; it first appears in a Chinese report of
1236. Evaluating sources and linguistic clues, the
author suggests that the emergence of the Mongolian
trellis tent can be explained "by the fusion of a
pre-existing Mongolian felt tent [....] and the Turkic
form" (p. 459). Hence, and this is one of the
book's main propositions, the origin of the trellis
tent is Turkish.
The
splendour and extravagance of Tamerlane's tents was
impressive enough to leave detailed contemporary
descriptions, which give us a rather clear picture. As
Timur's and the Timurid's cultural charisma was to
have a great impact on developments and fashions of
Islamic art in the whole Middle East, the reader will
be especially grateful for many details in this
section, described with meticulous methodological
accuracy. The author makes clear that Donald Wilber's
reconstruction of Timur's Twelve Pole Pavilion, based
on Le Strange's misleading translation of Clavigo, is
wrong and offers his own new reconstruction presenting
a tent pavilion very close to Timurid or Timurid-inspired architectural kiosks (such as, for
example, the Çinili Köşk near the Topkapı
Palace in Istanbul). The plans and drawings of this
structure, which is, as P. Andrews states, closer to
architecture than to nomadic conventions, certainly
belong to the books highlights. Despite this, so to
speak, a-nomadic tendency the chapter contains
evidence for the continuity of other nomadic
traditions, such as the ordo (mobile palace)
principle (which enabled each of Timur's wives to
direct a specific ordo), already set up by the
Khitan and kept on by the Mongols.
In
volume II the main section (in total 439 pages) is
dedicated to the tent culture of the Mughals, which
seems to be not only the best documented, but
presumably also the most elaborate tentage of all
three contemporary great Muslim "gunpowder
empires". One might think that this was just a
perpetuation of a specific part of Timurid culture,
but there is evidence that "the contrasting
imagery of nomad and princely tents already existed
before the Mughals arrived" (p. 827). Thus, an
intense blend of different traditions can be noted in
India, where for a lengthy span of time the princely
trellis tent was in use at court for rites of passage.
This might have been a particularly distinctive
feature at the Mughals. If we look, on the other hand,
at contemporary Ottoman practices, trellis tents turn
out to be used not so much for rites of passage but
for highly ceremonial occasions. There are numerous
Ottoman miniatures of the 16th century with
throne scenes in trellis tents which were also used as
temporary structures for royal funerals. Since the
trellis tent was given up almost everywhere in the
Islamic Middle East approximately towards the end of
the 17th century, the Mughal use of this
form of tent for birth, marriage and death might have
a similar background as the Ottoman practice: the
old-fashioned aura of the tent implying particular
nobility.
Striking
in Mughal tent culture is the tendency for tentage to
be integrated into architecture, especially under
Shah-Jahan. It seems that here Timurid habits and the
long-established Indian tradition of portable wooden
pavilions merged. The eclecticism prevailing in other
branches of Mughal art is, of course, alive in tentage
as well: Central Asian and native forms, such as the bangla,
materials from the home market, from Europe, the
Ottoman Empire, China appear in varied combinations.
Furthermore, a conspicuous feature of the Mughal court
seems to be the changes in the order of the royal
camp, which were made by every new ruler. This is
indeed an indication for the vitality of a Turkic and
Central Asian nomadic tradition, a peculiarity of the
royal (including the ruling elite's) self-image.
The
two volumes of this work show clearly how eminently
rewarding the study of material culture and its
objects can be if carried out, as here, with
subtle methodology, sense for details and painstaking
accuracy. A book like Peter Andrews' Felt Tents and
Pavilions that answers questions of nomadic and
princely life-style, economy, aesthetics and political
self-representation by studying with a broad approach
one branch of "things" can only be welcomed
as an enormous gain for the world of learning.
Hedda
Reindl-Kiel
University
of Bonn
