Community hub
Recent from talks
Contribute something
Nothing was collected or created yet.
Yomut
View on Wikipedia | This article may need to be rewritten to comply with Wikipedia's quality standards. (October 2024) |
 | This article may incorporate text from a large language model. (November 2025) |
The Yomut (Turkmen: Ýomut, Persian: یَمود/یُمود ) is a large ethnographic group within the Turkmen people and historically one of the five major tribes of Turkmenistan.[1][2] The Yomut have maintained a distinct cultural identity and continue to live primarily in Turkmenistan, Iran, and Uzbekistan.[3][4]
Key Information
The earliest depictions and descriptions of the Yomut date back to the 16th century. The first official guidebook about the Yomut and the neighboring ethnic groups was written by Clement Augustus de Bode, titled On the Yamud and Goklan Tribes of Turkomania.
Social divisions
[edit]The Yomut Turkmen were traditionally organised not as a unified tribal confederation under a single centralised authority, but rather as a loose coalition of autonomous clans and lineages, each often led by its own local khan or chieftain. While all were identified under the broader Yomut name, these groups operated semi-independently, forming alliances as needed for mutual defense or political interest. Because of this decentralised structure, scholars such as Richard Tapper consider the Yomut not a formal confederation, but a "coalition"—a distinction used to differentiate tribal groups lacking centralised leadership. This flexible political organisation allowed the Yomut to remain resilient and independent in the face of external control, but also made them prone to internal rivalry unless unified by external threats or charismatic leadership.[5]
The Yomut are divided into two primary geographical categories:[6]
- Gurgan (Turkmen: Balkan Yomutlary; Also called Gorgan or Gutlytemir): The Gurgan Yomut live in the Gorgan Plain of Iran and the southern bank of the Caspian Sea in Turkmenistan.
- Khiva (Turkmen: Dashoguz Yomutlary; Also called Bayramsly): The Khiva Yomut live to the immediate west of the city of Khiva, across the border in Turkmenistan.
Additionally, the Yomut are traditionally divided into three main tribes:
- Jafarbay/Jafarbai: : One of the major Yomut tribes with deep historical roots.
- Atabay/Atabai: : Another prominent and sizable tribe within the Yomut community.
- Bayramshali: : A smaller, yet culturally significant tribal group among the Yomut.
While the tribes within the Yomut do not show significant differences, there are noticeable variations in dialect and minor cultural practices between the groups.
The Yomut have historically been categorised as one of two social classes, with some considering sedentary fishers to be a separate third class:[6][7]
- Chomur: The chomur are agricultural, historically using rainfed agriculture to cultivate wheat and barley. Historically they practiced a form of semi-nomadism, living year-round in yurts, and migrating for short, periodic times.
- Charwa (Also called Chorva) The charwa are fully-nomadic pastoralists, herding sheep and goats to sell in regional markets.
- Aouchi (Also called Seyad): The aouchi are fishers who live on the south-eastern coast of the Caspian Sea. They fish for the entire year, and seasonally hunt waterfowl.
-
Khiva and Gurgan Yomut tribes, divisions, and noble houses in 1925 -
Khiva and Gurgan Yomut tribes, divisions, and noble houses -
Tribes, divisions, and noble houses of the Khiva Yomut -
Divisions of the Ak-Atabay tribe and the Bayramsaly.
Culture
[edit]
Yomut culture is unique from other Turkmen tribes, especially in its traditions, rituals, and customs.
The Kusht Depdi dance, a defining element of Yomut culture, is regarded as the only traditional dance among Turkmen tribes. Its origins trace back to a Sufi ritual performed by wandering dervishes (divana) as a form of spiritual healing. Over time, it was adopted as a pre-war knife dance known as Zekr-e Khanjar ("Remembrance of the Dagger"), symbolizing strength and unity before battle. In later centuries, the ritual gradually transformed into a communal celebratory dance, today recognized as Kusht Depdi.
Among Gurgan Yomut who live on the shore of the Caspian Sea, fishing is an extremely significant part of life. Based on local estimates, there are at maximum 40 fishers in every village.[7] Historically, the Eurasian carp was the most commonly caught fish, however due to environmental loss and overfishing, their population has significantly declined since 1992. Today, almost no Eurasian carp are caught.[8] In recent years, Yomut have adopted modern fishing tools such as galvanized fishing nets and motorboats, though these have also been blamed by locals for a decline in the quantity and quality of fish. Galvanized nets are known locally as "Namardi nets", Narmardi literally meaning invisible, but colloquially used to refer to something considered unmanly.[8]
The khasava (also called khasaba) was a traditional Yomut Turkmen women’s wedding headdress, reaching 30 cm or more in height. It was constructed on a widening frame, originally from wheat stalks and later cardboard, draped with fabric and covered with a purenjek (shawl) or don (robe). The headdress was richly decorated with gilded silver plaques, pendants, beads, and chains with bells, whose jingling was compared to the rattle of a snake. Similar in form to the Russian kokoshnik, but much taller, it was considered to preserve features of ancient ritual headgear associated with fertility cults.
Traditionally, the khasava was worn by young brides on their wedding day, removed during the gaytarma period (the temporary return of the bride to her family’s home after the wedding before fully settling into her husband’s house), and then worn again until the birth of the first or second child. By the early 20th century, variants of the khasava were widespread among young and middle-aged women regardless of childbirth status, though the tall type became rare and was gradually replaced by a shorter form known as alym dany (or beruk, a style borrowed from Iranian women). Different Turkmen tribes used various local names for similar headdresses, including borik (Teke), topby/topba (Sarakhs), bagmak (Ersari), chanie (Nokhur), uramak (northern Yomut), aladaŋy (western Yomut), kars (Khatab and Mukry), dastar (Salyr and Geoklen), and pechek (Lebap).[9]
History
[edit]Early history
[edit]The Yomut are one of the major Turkmen tribes, traditionally divided into two groups: the western (Shagadam) Yomuts and the northern (Dashhowuz) Yomuts. A significant portion of the Yomut population lives in the Turkmen region of Iran (Turkmensahran, Etrek and Gurgen districts), while smaller subgroups can also be found in Afghanistan and Karakalpakstan.
Although the name Yomut is very ancient, the tribe appears to have reached formal tribal status only in the late Middle Ages, after the Mongol invasions (12th century onwards). In earlier sources, such as Abylgazy’s Genealogy of the Turkmens (16th century), the term "Yomut" is not used to refer to the tribe, but rather to a smaller lineage or clan. According to Abylgazy, the Yomuts descend from Ögürjik Alp, a grandson of Salyr Ghazan: Ögürjik Alp → Berdi → Gulmy → Yomut (Gulmy’s second son, Gultak, is considered a sibling lineage).
It is possible that the Yomuts consolidated into a full tribe by gathering people from different branches of the Salyr tribe in the Balkan and Mangyshlak regions, because:
· Abylgazy counts the Yomut as direct descendants of Salyr.
· In the 16th century, Yomuts, together with the Ersary, Saryk, and Teke tribes, belonged to the tribal union known as the outer Salyr.
· The name Gultag, considered a sibling lineage to the Yomut, is preserved as a clan name among the Salyr and Ersary tribes.
Other Yomut sub-clan names also correspond closely to ethnonyms found among these tribes.[10]
An alternative perspective on the origins of the Yomut comes from the research of T. P. Vasilyeva, as cited by Shokhrat Kadyrov. Vasilyeva argues that the ancestors of modern Turkmens were Iranian-speaking Europoid populations inhabiting the Aral–Caspian steppes and the oases of southern and northern Turkmenistan. She traces a cultural continuity from these ancient Iranian-speaking groups in western Central Asia, spanning the Hunnic and Parthian–Kangju periods, and emphasizes that the ancient Scythians formed a foundational element in Turkmen ethnogenesis.
In her studies of female ornaments, G. P. Vasilyeva identified a distinctive Sarmatian–Alan group, showing similarities with jewelry from peoples of the Volga and North Caucasus regions. The presence of Alans on the Ustyurt Plateau is attested in the 11th century. Similarities are observed between Yomut jewelry and North Caucasian Alan ornaments from the 6th–8th centuries in Ossetia, as well as finds from medieval burial grounds in mountainous Ingushetia dating to the 15th–16th centuries.[11]
Genetic studies provide further insight into Turkmen origins. Despite speaking a Turko-Mongol language and sharing cultural practices with other Turko-Mongol ethnic groups, Turkmens are genetically closer to Indo-Iranian populations than to Turko-Mongols. This suggests a recent language and culture shift, possibly driven by elite dominance and linguistic replacement rather than large-scale population movement.[12]
Etymology
[edit]According to Soltansha Atanyyazov in Şejere (Türkmeniň nesil daragty) (Ashgabat: Turan-1, 1994, p. 148, in Turkmen), several interpretations of the origin of the ethnonym Yomut have been proposed.[13]
The Turkmen scholar Nazar Yomudskii suggested that it derives from the name of a progenitor, Söýünhan, a descendant of Salyr Ghazan, whose son Ýomut is said to have lived at the end of the 12th and beginning of the 13th century.[13]
The ethnographer Ata Jykyýew recorded two folk legends about the meaning of the name.[13] According to the first, the word comes from ýowm it, meaning "dog’s lair." The story goes that a woman gave birth to a child while on the move, wrapped the baby, and placed it in a dog’s den. The people who descended from this child came to be called ýowmit–ýowmut–ýomut. According to the second legend, the word comes from ýow ("enemy") and mut ("defeated, subdued"), meaning "one who defeats the enemy."
Another explanation, proposed by the Hungarian scholar Ármin Vámbéry in the mid-19th century, links the ethnonym to the Old Turkic word yom, meaning “people,” “tribe,” or “clan,” combined with the pluralising suffix –ut. Although yom in this sense has not survived in modern Turkmen, it appears in words such as ýumak (“bundle of wool”), ýumruk (“fist”), ýumalak (“round object”), and ýumurtga (“egg”). In Uyghur, ýumut meant “group” or “assembly,” while in Old Turkic languages, words like ýumgy and ýumgylyg meant “gathering” or “collection.”[13]
Clement Augustus de Bode (1848) observed that the Yomut and Goklan tribes regarded themselves as descendants of a free woman.[14] This social distinction aligns with the first folk legend recorded by Ata Jykyýew, in which the Yomut are said to descend from a child placed in a dog’s den, emphasizing noble or free ancestry.[15]
The exact meaning of the name Yomut remains uncertain.[13]
Khiva Khanate
[edit]It is said that at the end of the reign of Shahgazi Khan (c. 1181 x. - 1767) the Yomuts and Choudors captured Khiva. As a result of attempts at resistance, the khan was overthrown from the throne.
In the same year, some of the dignitaries, hostile towards Muhammad Emin-inak, began to fight against him. For this reason, the inak went to the yomuts, (but) after 18 days Abd-us-Sattar-bai was brought from there. At this time, the dominance of the Yomuts already crossed all borders, and their cruelty and oppression burdened the population to the extreme (fukara).
As a result, Muhammad Emin-inak, Abd-us-Sattar-bai and Abd-ur-Ra-khim-mekhter opposed the Yomuts, but were defeated in the battle of Arab-khane. Pursuing them, the Yomuts stopped at Kara-Tepe and began to prepare for a siege. Some (from the Khivans) began to talk about peace; when the dignitaries (umara) came out and met with the chiefs of the yomuts, they were seized, and at the same time, the yomuts, taking advantage of the fact that the city dwellers were persecuting the teke and the salyrs, seized the city of Khiva .
The Yomuts, with the help of the Aral people, conquered Kungrad, (after which) the power was in their hands.
They put Khan Geldy-inak at the head of the power, who was an adherent and well-wisher of this (Turkmen) tribe, and they did not reckon with other dignitaries, starting with Muhammad Emin, and even treated them with contempt. Themselves at this time began to rob the people, stealing their property and women and insulting him in every possible way.
In 1770, Muhammad Amin-biy, the leader of the Uzbek tribe of Kungrats, defeated the Yomuts and established his power in the khanate.
In 1779, by order of Mohammed Emin-inak, an army of Yomuts, who belonged to the Khorasan and Gurgan Turkmens, came to the outskirts of Khiva. Let it be known that these Yomuts belonged to two different clans (taif): some were called bairam-shahli, and others - choni-sheref, also known under the nickname kara-choka. Mohammed Emin-inak accepted them for service. After that, both of these troops went to war with his enemies.
During the reign of the son and successor of the inak Evez-biy (died March 13, 1804), the Yomuts, apparently, were not in openly hostile relations with him, judging by the fact that he fled to their territory in 1206. (1791 | 92) Pahlavan Quli Bai was extradited by them to the Inak, due to the fact that they "were afraid of his anger and severity."
After the death of Evez-biy in 1219 h. (1804/05) power in Khiva passed to his son Eltuzer, who soon declared himself Khan. From all over the country, the tribes of Turkmens, Kara-Kalpaks and Uzbeks came in whole detachments to congratulate him, but the Yomuts, who, having lived in Urgench for 60 years, did not obey the Khiva khans, laughed at Eltuzer Khan and showed disobedience.
Eltuzer Khan, after ascending to the khan's throne, gave out support to the troops and went to pogrom the Yomuts who lived on the edge of the desert towards Astrabad - the territory of Iran and Gürgen, located south of the city of Khiva. Some of them lived sedentary, while most were nomads. There were approximately 12 thousand families (at the beginning of the 19th century). Each family has two riders, they have thoroughbred horses and are good at pike and saber. So, this tribe was divided into two parts. Some decided to obey, saying: "We cannot leave the homeland of our ancestors and how can we live in a foreign country!" Some of them refused to obey because Eltuzer Khan suggested to them: "If you give up your raids, disobedience and robberies and live like other subjects, paying taxes from sheep, camels and agriculture, then it's good, otherwise, leave our state. " After some time Eltuzer Khan sent a messenger to the yomuts in Astrabad with oaths and assurances to say: "Together with your families and kin, return to the homeland of your ancestors, we will show you affection and love, you will participate in the use of our wealth." Yomuts joyful and cheerful began to return. Eltuzer Khan again handed them their former possessions, so that they could start farming.
After Eltuzer Khan in 1221, H. (1806) power passed into the hands of Mohammed Rahim Khan (1806-1825), to whom the Yomuts also obeyed.[16]
The Yomuts raided the Astrabad and Mazandaran provinces of Persia and Khorasan to kidnap local residents, whom they then sold into slavery, mainly to the Khiva Khanate.[17]
Russian conquest and rule
[edit]During the middle of the 19th century, the Yomut had relatively amicable relations with the Russian Empire, though issues persisted. Russia used this relationship to build the port Krasnovodsk in Türkmenbaşy Gulf during the early 1870s, as part of a larger campaign to counter the United Kingdom in the Great Game.[18] However, Russian troops would exploit the Yomut to further their military goals. Atabai Yomut were raided for their camels and livestock by Russian troops during a failed attack on Khiva, breaking a treaty. Several months later, Russians attempted to barter for Atabai Yomut camels for the Khivan campaign of 1873. When rejected, they once again raided the area.[19]
From 1880 to 1884 the Russian Empire began a land invasion of Turkmenistan, rapidly acquiring major towns and cities. Some Yomut tribes accepted Russian rule, such as those living in the Merv Oasis.[20] However, Russian General Mikhail Skobelev used threats to gain the loyalty of several Yomut tribes, and carried out punitive military actions against dissenters. These actions, combined with significant Yomut casualties in the Battle of Geok Tepe, damaged Russian-Yomut relations.[21]
In the 1910s, the city of Khorezm was significantly weakened by ethnic tension between Turkmens and Uzbeks. The ruling dynasty and much of the urban population was Uzbek, while the rural population was primarily composed of nomadic Yomut. In 1913, a local Yomut leader named Junaid Khan exploited this weakness and attacked the city, though Russian artillery forces prevented him from succeeding. The outbreak of World War I drew Russian troops away from garrisoning the region, and so in 1915 Junaid Khan led a successful attack against Khorezm. He was eventually forced to retreat to the Persian border due to Russian counterattacks. The outbreak of the Russian Civil War in 1917 once again weakened local Russian forces, and Junaid Khan reoccupied Khorezm. The Khan of Khiva, Isfandiyar Khan was executed, and Sayid Abdullah was installed as a puppet ruler.[22]
In July 1918 the Transcaspian Government was established in Turkmenistan, a provisional government led by Mensheviks and Social Revolutionaries against Bolshevik forces. Local Turkmen, especially Yomut proved to be uncooperative with the Transcapsian government. In response, they were mobilized against the Red Army to prevent them from clashing with the government.[23] By December most Turkmen had begun cooperating with the Transcaspian government and British forces in the region to stabilize the region, but Yomut Turkmen were revolting against the government. In response, the government began to militarily suppress the tribe.[24]
In January 1924 Junaid Khan regrouped his forces and led an unsuccessful three-week siege against the city of Khiva. In July he was driven into exile.[25]
References
[edit]- ^ Bosworth, C.E. "Turkmen." In Encyclopaedia of Islam, 2nd ed., edited by P. Bearman et al. Leiden: Brill, 2012.
- ^ Ataniyazov, Sh. "The Turkmen Tribes." Central Asian Studies Journal, vol. 14, no. 2, 1997, pp. 45–68.
- ^ Library of Congress. Turkmenistan: A Country Study. Washington, DC: GPO, 1996.
- ^ Clement, Victoria. The Peoples of Central Asia. London: Routledge, 2013.
- ^ Richard Tapper, "Confederations, Tribal," in *Encyclopaedia Iranica*, Vol. VI, Fasc. 1, pp. 96–102, available online at [1](http://www.iranicaonline.org/articles/confederations-tribal)
- ^ a b Irons 1971, p. 144.
- ^ a b Rasekhi et al. 2023, p. 633.
- ^ a b Rasekhi et al. 2023, p. 642.
- ^ Шохрат Кадыров. Туркмен-нама. Кто такие туркмены. Упсала–Москва: IFECAS, 2013. — С. 386. ISBN 978-91-977144-4-2.
- ^ Soltanşa Atanyýazow, Şejere: Türkmeniň nesil daragty, Aşgabat: Turan-1, 1994.
- ^ Шохрат Кадыров. Туркмен‑Нама. Кто такие туркмены. Упсала–Москва: IFECAS, 2013. — 453 с.
- ^ Damgaard, P. B., et al. “The genetic structure of Turkmen populations reveals an Indo-Iranian connection despite a Turko-Mongol cultural identity.” Scientific Reports, 11, 8107 (2021). https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-021-04144-4
- ^ a b c d e Atanyýazow, Soltanşa (1994). Şejere (Türkmeniň nesil daragty). Aşgabat: Turan-1. p. 148. (in Turkmen).
- ^ de Bode, Clement Augustus (1848). "On the Yamud and Goklan Tribes of Turkomania." *Journal of the Ethnological Society of London*, Vol. 1, p. 71.
- ^ Atanyýazow, Soltanşa (1994). Şejere (Türkmeniň nesil daragty). Aşgabat: Turan-1. p. 148. (in Turkmen).
- ^ МИР АБДУЛЬ-КЕРИМ БУХАРСКИЙ ИСТОРИЯ СРЕДНЕЙ АЗИИ
- ^ ТУРКМЕНЫ ИОМУДСКОГО ПЛЕМЕНИ
- ^ Horák 2015, p. 151.
- ^ Morrison 2021, p. 341-342.
- ^ Valerevich 2005, p. 31.
- ^ Horák 2015, p. 154-156.
- ^ Keller 2003, p. 285.
- ^ Thomas 2023, p. 143.
- ^ Thomas 2023, p. 144.
- ^ Keller 2003, p. 292.
Bibliography
[edit]- Edgar, Adrienne Lynn (2006). Tribal Nation: The Making of Soviet Turkmenistan. Princeton: Princeton University Press. ISBN 978-0-691-12799-6.
- Horák, Slavomír (2015). "The Battle of Gökdepe in the Turkmen post-Soviet historical discourse". Central Asian Survey. 34 (2): 149–161. doi:10.1080/02634937.2014.964940. ISSN 0263-4937.
- Irons, William (1971). "Variation in Political Stratification among the Yomut Turkmen". Anthropological Quarterly. 44 (3): 143–156. doi:10.2307/3316935. ISSN 0003-5491. JSTOR 3316935.
- ——— (1975). The Yomut Turkmen: A Study of Social Organization among a Central Asian Turkic-Speaking Population. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press. doi:10.3998/mpub.11394884. ISBN 978-1-951519-13-1.
- Keller, Shoshana (2003). "The Central Asian Bureau, an Essential Tool in Governing Soviet Turkestan". Central Asian Survey. 22 (2–3): 281–297. doi:10.1080/0263493032000157771. ISSN 0263-4937.
- Morrison, Alexander (2021). The Russian Conquest of Central Asia: A Study in Imperial Expansion, 1814-1914. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. ISBN 978-1-107-03030-5.
- Rasekhi, Sare; Sharifian, Abolfazl; Shahraki, Mohammadreza; Silvano, Renato A. M. (2023). "Indigenous fishers' knowledge on fish behavior, fishing practices and climatic conditions in a conservation priority coastal ecosystem in the Caspian Sea". Reviews in Fish Biology and Fisheries. 33 (3): 629–648. Bibcode:2023RFBF...33..629R. doi:10.1007/s11160-022-09746-3. ISSN 0960-3166.
- Thomas, Alun (2023). "Revisiting the 'Transcaspian Episode': British Intervention and Turkmen Statehood, 1918–1919". Europe-Asia Studies. 75 (1): 131–153. doi:10.1080/09668136.2021.1962250. ISSN 0966-8136.
- Valerevich, Boronin Oleg (2005). "К вопросу о периодизации политики России в Средней Азии во второй половине 60-х – первой половине 80-х гг. XIX в." [On the question of the periodization of Russian policy in Central Asia in the second half of the 1860s to the first half of the 1880s] (PDF). Izvestia Altai State University (4): 28–32.
| National | |
|---|---|
| Other | |
Yomut
View on GrokipediaEtymology and Origins
Historical Emergence and Name Derivation
The etymology of the name Yomut remains unclear, lacking a definitive connection to pre-Mongol Turkic linguistic elements or other verifiable antecedents. The group is absent from the roster of Türkmen tribes cataloged by Mahmud al-Kashgari in his Dīwān lughāt al-Turk (completed ca. 1074 CE), as well as from Rashid al-Din's Jāmiʿ al-tawārīkh (early 14th century), underscoring that the Yomut identity did not crystallize in written records prior to the post-Mongol period.[6] The Yomut consolidated as a distinct Turkmen subgroup during the post-Mongol era, with the earliest indications of their organized pastoral nomadism appearing in the 16th century across territories spanning the Mangyshlak Peninsula to the Balkhan Mountains. This emergence aligned with broader Turkmen tribal reorganizations following the Mongol disruptions, where semi-nomadic groups adapted to steppe ecological dynamics, prioritizing mobility for livestock herding over sedentary agriculture. Traditional genealogical accounts, preserved in Abu'l-Ghazi Bahadur Khan's Shajara-yi Tarākima (written 1659 CE), posit descent from Salur—a putative Oghuz progenitor shared with tribes like the Teke, Ersari, Saryk, and Salor—though such narratives reflect retrospective consolidation rather than empirical lineage proof.[6] By the early 18th century, explicit historical references to the Yomut surface in sources like the Firdaws al-iqbāl, depicting them as formidable rivals to the Khiva khans, including successful sieges and occupations of Khiva in 1764–1765 CE and 1770–1771 CE. Subsequent migrations, such as to the Gurgan plain (late 17th century) and Khwarezm oases (early 18th century), were propelled by resource scarcities and pressures from northern confederations, facilitating the absorption of peripheral nomadic elements and establishing the Yomut as one of Turkmenistan's five principal tribes alongside the Teke, Ersari, Saryk, and Chowdur.[6][7]Geographic Distribution
Traditional Territories
The traditional territories of the Yomut Turkmen encompassed the arid-steppe regions east of the Caspian Sea, where the borders of southern Turkmenistan, northern Iran, and fringes of Uzbekistan and Afghanistan converged. These lands, characterized by semi-desert plains and limited water sources such as the Atrek River and seasonal oases, dictated nomadic ranges focused on access to pastures for sheep, goats, and horses. Primary habitations consisted of portable tent villages, relocated seasonally to exploit sparse vegetation growth amid the harsh ecology of the region.[8] Yomut subgroups occupied distinct yet overlapping zones: the Gurgan Yomut inhabited the Gorgan Plain and northern Golestan province in Iran, along the southern Caspian shores, while the Khiva Yomut settled southwest of Khorezm in present-day Uzbekistan, maintaining pastoral circuits tied to riverine fringes. In southwestern Turkmenistan, around the Balkan region and Caspian coast near modern Turkmenbashi, additional Yomut bands pursued migratory paths influenced by proximity to the sea for fishing supplements and coastal grazing. Migration patterns followed ecological imperatives, with summer movements to higher pastures and winter retreats to sheltered lowlands, ensuring livestock survival in an environment where fixed settlements were untenable without irrigation.[9][4][10] Territorial boundaries remained fluid due to pragmatic competition over scarce resources with neighboring tribes, notably the Teke to the southeast, leading to intermittent conflicts rather than stable demarcations. Such interactions, prevalent in the 18th and 19th centuries, arose from overlapping claims to grazing lands and water, reflecting adaptive strategies in a resource-poor landscape rather than cooperative ethnic affiliations. Historical records from the period indicate Yomut expansions and retreats calibrated to herd viability and external pressures, underscoring the causal primacy of environmental constraints over political impositions.[11][8]Modern Demographics and Migration Patterns
The Yomut constitute one of the largest Turkmen tribes, with the majority residing in Turkmenistan's Balkan Velayat, where they predominate among the region's approximately 530,000 inhabitants as of 2022, alongside Teke subgroups.[12] Smaller but substantial communities inhabit Iran's Golestan Province within the Turkmen Sahra region, comprising part of the roughly 1 million Iranian Turkmens.[13] Additional minorities exist in Uzbekistan and Afghanistan, the latter hosting an estimated 500,000 Yomut as of early 21st-century assessments.[14] This distribution traces to an 18th-century bifurcation, with northern Yomut expanding into the Balkhan steppe and southern groups settling near Gurgan amid Oghuz migrations and regional conflicts.[15] Post-Soviet policies have accelerated sedentarization, transforming most Yomut from pastoral nomads to semi-sedentary herders or settled farmers, as state-driven mechanized agriculture in Balkan areas reduced reliance on seasonal migrations.[2] Pure nomadism has declined sharply since the 1990s, with fewer than 10% of Turkmen pastoralists—including Yomut—maintaining full mobility by 2000 due to land privatization and irrigation projects.[16] Internal migration patterns feature rural-to-urban shifts toward Caspian hubs like Turkmenbashi (formerly Krasnovodsk), where hydrocarbon extraction since the 1990s has attracted Yomut labor for energy infrastructure and port activities, boosting local populations amid oil/gas revenue inflows exceeding $10 billion annually by 2010.[7] Cross-border movements remain limited, primarily seasonal labor exchanges with Uzbekistan or family reunifications, though restrictive visa regimes post-1991 have curtailed larger flows.[17] Economic incentives from Caspian resource booms, rather than conflict or famine, drive contemporary patterns, contrasting earlier political adaptations to imperial pressures.[10]Social Structure
Tribal Divisions and Subgroups
The Yomut maintain a patrilineal descent system organizing society into nested clans and lineages, enabling flexible alliances and resource management across varying ecological zones from the Caspian steppes to riverine valleys. This structure, documented in ethnographic studies of northern Iranian Yomut, prioritizes genealogical ties traced through male lines, with residence groups often aligning with these descent units to balance pastoral mobility and local defense needs.[2] While folklore attributes clan origins to the sons of a legendary founder named Yomut, empirical evidence from kinship analyses underscores adaptive patrilineal fission and fusion rather than rigid mythic descent.[18] Geographic divisions emerged prominently by the 18th century, separating northern Yomut—concentrated west of Khiva in present-day Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan, allied with the Khivan Khanate—from southern Yomut in the Gorgan plain of northern Iran, driven by territorial expansions and pressures from neighboring tribes like the Teke. Northern groups, such as the Khiva Yomut, adapted to arid steppes with more centralized nomadic camps, while southern counterparts in fertile Atrek and Gurgan river basins incorporated semi-sedentary elements for agriculture and fishing. These splits reflected pragmatic responses to environmental scale, with clans absorbing smaller Turkmen subgroups through marriage and tribute alliances to bolster survival against khanate levies and raids, as seen in 19th-century pacts exempting Yomut from certain taxes in exchange for military service.[18][19] Key clans, known as tiye in Turkmen tradition, include major lineages like Cunı, Şarab, Küçük, Bayram Şah, and Cafer Bey, each comprising multiple branches for localized herding and conflict resolution. Historical estimates from 1819 indicate clan sizes ranging from 2,000 to 15,000 families, underscoring their role as units of economic cooperation amid nomadic pressures.| Clan | Estimated Families (1819) | Notable Branches/Subgroups |
|---|---|---|
| Cunı | ~15,000 | 10 branches |
| Şarab | ~15,000 | Various |
| Küçük | ~8,000 | 8 branches (Küçük Tatar) |
| Bayram Şah | ~14,000 | 5 branches (Bayram Şalı) |
| Cafer Bey | ~2,000 | - |
| Şeref | - | 6 branches |
Kinship Systems and Leadership Hierarchies
The Yomut kinship system follows patrilineal descent, tracing lineage and inheritance exclusively through males, with patrilocal residence requiring brides to relocate to their husband's household upon marriage.[20] This arrangement channels livestock— the primary form of wealth—directly to sons, sustaining pastoral viability amid unpredictable arid conditions where herd losses could precipitate famine.[21] Marriage entails bridewealth payments or reciprocal exchanges known as chalshik, forging alliances across kin groups to secure mutual aid in grazing rights and defense, while the absence of mandatory clan exogamy permits cousin unions that bolster internal solidarity without fragmenting mobile units.[22] [23] Leadership emerges decentralized within local obas (camps), where begs or khans gain authority through demonstrated competence in herd management, raiding prowess, and mediation, rather than rigid hereditary succession, allowing adaptive responses to seasonal migrations and intertribal conflicts.[7] [2] Elders, termed aksakals or yashulıs, hold sway in councils achieving consensus among adult males for resource disputes and migratory routes, their prestige rooted in longevity and kin ties that deterred feuds capable of immobilizing nomadic groups.[24] [2] External impositions, such as Khanate hierarchies favoring noble houses, periodically eroded this fluidity by privileging coercion over influence, exacerbating internal divisions.[25] Gender divisions of labor align with ecological demands: men dominate herding, limited agriculture, and warfare to safeguard flocks from theft and rivals, while women direct domestic spheres encompassing weaving, dairy processing, and childcare, yielding portable goods like carpets for barter that supplemented subsistence.[10] [26] This specialization maximized efficiency in labor-scarce settings, where men's mobility for defense complemented women's stationary production, averting the vulnerabilities of undivided family units in predator-prone steppes.[2]Traditional Economy and Livelihood
Pastoral Nomadism and Livestock Management
The Yomut Turkmen practiced pastoral nomadism as their foundational economic activity, herding livestock across the arid steppes and desert fringes of northeastern Iran, Turkmenistan, and adjacent regions, where ecological conditions—characterized by forest, steppe, and steppe-desert zones—favored mobile grazing over irrigated agriculture.[2] This system centered on small ruminants, with sheep and goats forming the core of herds due to their adaptability to sparse vegetation and capacity for wool, milk, and meat production oriented toward both subsistence and market sale.[19] Camels provided transport and secondary dairy, functioning as browsers to complement sheep grazing patterns, while horses— including the renowned Yomut breed—enabled rapid mobility for herding and defense; cattle were less prominent, limited by water scarcity.[27] Herd diversification across these species mitigated risks from forage variability, as grazers like sheep exploited grasses while browsers like goats and camels accessed shrubs, enhancing overall resilience in unpredictable arid environments.[27] Livestock management involved seasonal migrations, with camps and herds following differentiated paths to optimize access to water and pasture: during wetter periods, short daily moves of up to 10 kilometers occurred within local areas, while longer treks shifted between winter quarters in sheltered lowlands and summer ranges in higher steppes to avoid overgrazing and align with vegetative cycles.[3] These patterns, documented among charwa (fully pastoral) Yomut groups, demanded intensive labor for tent relocation and animal oversight, yet proved ecologically rational by distributing pressure on marginal lands unsuitable for fixed crops without extensive irrigation.[10] Pastoral nomadism's mobility conferred advantages over sedentary farming in drought-prone zones, allowing herders to relocate to viable grazes during scarcity, thereby sustaining populations where crop failures would devastate immobile communities—a causal dynamic rooted in the vast, low-rainfall expanses that precluded reliable agriculture absent artificial water systems.[2] Herd size served as the primary metric of household wealth and social standing, with fluctuations tied to environmental factors and management efficacy; larger flocks, often numbering in the hundreds per family unit, generated surplus for trade or bridewealth, reinforcing kinship ties and economic autonomy.[28] This livestock-centric economy fostered self-reliance, as products like wool, hides, and animals themselves circulated as currency in inter-tribal exchanges, while the imperative to expand herds through natural increase or acquisition drove adaptive strategies, including selective breeding and vigilant predator control.[29] Empirical accounts from mid-20th-century observations confirm that such practices yielded sustained yields in yields of meat and dairy, underscoring nomadism's efficiency in exploiting rangelands where alternative livelihoods faltered.[30]Supplementary Activities: Crafts, Fishing, and Trade
![Child's tunic, Yomud Turkmen people, Northern Afghanistan, early to mid-20th century][float-right] Yomut women traditionally produced woven textiles, including carpets, storage bags (torba), and tent bands (ensi), utilizing wool sheared from the tribe's sheep and goat herds. These crafts featured distinctive geometric motifs, such as the kepse gul in main carpets, reflecting tribal identity and serving both practical household needs and as tradeable commodities in regional bazaars.[31] [32] The weaving process employed symmetrical knotting techniques, with production integrated into daily nomadic routines, providing supplementary income through barter or sale for essentials like grains or metal goods.[33] Coastal subgroups of the Yomut, particularly those in the western Turkmen territories adjacent to the Caspian Sea, supplemented pastoral activities with seasonal fishing using reed boats, nets, and hooks to harvest species like sturgeon and mullet. This practice contributed to local food security and trade, with salted fish and caviar exchanged in nearby markets; by the mid-20th century, Soviet-era mechanization introduced motorboats and synthetic nets, enhancing yields until overexploitation and upstream damming led to stock declines attributed to centralized planning failures rather than indigenous overharvesting.[34][35] Yomut nomads engaged in caravan-based trade along Central Asian routes, leveraging their mobility to transport and exchange woven goods, wool felts, and surplus dairy for salt from inland deposits, silk fabrics from sedentary artisans, and tools from distant suppliers, embodying pragmatic adaptation to imperial-era commerce networks predating Russian conquest in the 1880s.[36] This entrepreneurial involvement extended beyond subsistence, with tribal leaders often facilitating deals that bolstered camp economies without reliance on state infrastructures.[37]Culture and Traditions
Daily Life, Customs, and Social Norms
The Yomut Turkmen traditionally maintained a nomadic lifestyle centered on black felt tents (kara oý), which served as the primary units of communal living during seasonal migrations with their flocks. Women bore primary responsibility for erecting and dismantling these tents, reflecting a division of labor where females managed domestic mobility while males oversaw herding and external affairs.[38] Within the tent, spatial norms enforced gender and seniority segregation: married couples avoided direct interaction in the presence of elders, and guests were hosted in a designated reception area separate from women's quarters to uphold respect hierarchies and agnatic solidarity.[38] These arrangements reinforced patrilineal authority, with husbands holding disciplinary rights over wives, often through mild physical correction, to preserve household order amid the uncertainties of pastoral transhumance.[38] Hospitality norms, deeply embedded in Yomut social structure, mandated generous reception of strangers to foster alliances and deter feuds in a resource-scarce environment prone to intertribal raids. Ethnographic accounts highlight the Yomut's reputation for such mehmandarlik, where hosts provided food, shelter, and protection without immediate reciprocity expectation, though violations risked honor-based retaliation that could escalate into vendettas.[38] Honor codes further emphasized male guardianship of female chastity, with purity lapses threatening clan reputation and prompting compensatory bridewealth adjustments or exogamous restrictions.[38] Marriage customs prioritized endogamy within localized subgroups to preserve kinship ties and cultural continuity among the Yomut and related Turkmen groups in Iran. Unions involved substantial bride price payments, calibrated by village norms and exceeding mere economic exchange to bind families and delay unions until males could afford flocks, thereby stabilizing patrilineal descent amid nomadic pressures.[39] While arranged matches dominated, elopements occasionally occurred as assertions of agency against parental control, carrying risks of feud or reduced bride price but serving as a check on elder authority in rigid hierarchies.[38] Seasonal cycles dictated communal gatherings for betrothals or feasts tied to migration endpoints, enhancing resilience through shared rituals that mitigated isolation without erasing underlying tensions from resource competition.[38]Material Culture: Rugs, Attire, and Artifacts
Yomut ensi rugs employ the hatchli format, dividing the field into four quarter panels intersected by a vertical bar and horizontal band, facilitating compact, rectangular shapes suited to tent interiors and portability during seasonal migrations.[40] These textiles are primarily woven from handspun wool or goat hair using symmetrical knotting for larger pieces, enhancing durability against abrasion from constant rolling and transport on pack animals.[41] Natural dyes derived from local plants and minerals, such as indigo for blues and madder for reds, produce colorfast palettes that withstand exposure to sun and dust without synthetic fading.[42] ![The high-class Yomut women from Krasnovodsk.jpg][float-right] Elite Yomut women donned the kasaba, a tall cylindrical headgear reserved for high-status individuals, as documented in photographs from Krasnovodsk (now Türkmenbaşy) circa 1883, where it served to display marital or social rank through its height and ornamentation.[43] This headdress, often constructed from stiffened fabric or felt, was embellished with silver plaques, chains, and semi-precious stones like carnelian and turquoise, accumulating over time as family wealth markers and providing lightweight protection from environmental elements during travel.[44] Accompanying attire included layered wool tunics and robes for men and women, reinforced with metal amulets and jewelry that doubled as portable currency in nomadic exchanges, prioritizing functionality over ostentation.[45] Yomut artifacts encompass camel and horse trappings, including woven saddle blankets, band girth covers, and khorgin pack bags, typically in wool kilims or felted materials to cushion loads and prevent chafing over long distances.[46] These items, such as ceremonial horse saddle rugs from the late 19th century, incorporated reinforced stitching and padded undersides to support armed riders in raids or herders in transhumance, directly contributing to the tribe's mobility and combat readiness by minimizing injury to livestock and enabling swift assembly.[47] Donkey khorgins, paired saddle bags with compartmentalized designs, optimized cargo distribution for family migrations, reflecting adaptations to the arid steppe where unbalanced loads could halt progress or damage gear.[46]Religion, Folklore, and Worldview
The Yomut Turkmen predominantly practice Sunni Islam of the Hanafi madhhab, characterized by adherence to the five daily prayers (namaz), each preceded by ritual ablution (wudu) and performed facing Mecca with prescribed postures and recitations.[48] These rituals, observed universally among adults, function as costly signals of commitment to communal norms, fostering trust in a society prone to raiding and livestock disputes.[48] Sufi elements, inherited from orders like Yasawiyya that facilitated 12th–14th century conversions, permeate practice through veneration of pirs (saints) at shrines (mazars) and incorporation of ecstatic rituals, providing spiritual mediation amid pastoral vulnerabilities such as disease outbreaks or harsh migrations.[49] Syncretic adaptations overlay Islamic orthodoxy with pre-Islamic Turkic residues, evident in the widespread use of tumar amulets—silver pendants containing Quranic verses or protective charms—worn to ward off the evil eye (nazar) or jinn, particularly by herders facing unpredictable losses of camels and sheep.[50] These objects, crafted with motifs echoing shamanistic appeals to spirits for safeguarding kin and herds, reflect pragmatic responses to environmental and social uncertainties rather than doctrinal purity, as ethnographic fieldwork among Yomut in northern Iran documents their role in daily risk mitigation without supplanting core Islamic tenets.[48] Folklore centers on genealogical myths tracing Yomut origins to an apical ancestor named Yomut, positioned as a descendant of the eponymous Oghuz Khan, the legendary progenitor of Oghuz Turks; such narratives, transmitted orally through akyls (elders), delineate tribal subsections like Gaynarbat and Dehistan and bolster collective resilience by embedding shared descent in rituals of alliance and revenge.[2] These tales prioritize causal utility in maintaining morale and endogamous boundaries over historical veracity, as lineages extend patrilineally to invoke obligations in feuds or marriages, countering fragmentation in nomadic confederations. The Yomut worldview integrates Islamic qadar (predestination, akin to kismet) with nomadic pragmatism, viewing fate as a framework for endurance against arid steppes and imperial incursions, yet emphasizing self-reliant agency through adaptive mobility and kin-based reciprocity to exploit opportunities like cross-border raiding.[48] This balance refutes characterizations of inherent passivity, as rituals and myths causalize proactive strategies—such as seasonal transhumance or Sufi-inspired healing—for survival, with fatalism serving as psychological ballast rather than paralysis in a context of recurrent scarcity and conflict.[2]Historical Development
Early History and Pre-Khanate Period
The Yomut Turkmen emerged as a distinct ethnographic group within the broader Oghuz Turkic confederation, with roots traceable to ancient Central Asian Turkic peoples documented as early as the 8th century in Chinese records as T'ö-kü-Möng, denoting Islamized or "faithful" Turks near the Syr Darya River.[18] Medieval sources link the Yomut name to specific Oghuz lineages, such as the Yapurlı (8th tribe per Reşîdeddin Fazlullah's 14th-century Oğuznâme), Yasır (6th tribe per Ebulgazi Bahadır Khan's genealogy), or Çarukluğ (22nd tribe per Kaşgarlı Mahmud's 11th-century Divanü Lügat'it-Türk), with a purported ancestor in Bedri, son of the Salur clan's Ögürcık Alp.[18] These affiliations positioned the proto-Yomut within the Üçok division of the 24 Oghuz tribes, characterized by totemic symbols (onguns) and brands (tamgas) that facilitated identification amid fluid alliances.[18] Oghuz dispersals from the Syr Darya and Yedisu regions in the 10th century carried Yomut forebears westward to areas like Siyāh-Kūh (later Mangyshlak Peninsula) and Cend (circa 960–986 CE), with further movements into Khorasan supporting Seljuk military campaigns, as noted by geographers al-Muqaddasi (987 CE) and al-Birûnî (1048 CE).[18] The Mongol invasions of the 13th century disrupted these semi-nomadic networks, prompting some groups to migrate to Anatolia while Yomut core populations consolidated in the Üst-Yurt plateau, Balhan region, Karakum Desert, and eastern Caspian fringes, assimilating local Iranian and Turkic elements for survival in arid steppes.[18] Post-Mongol records indicate a shift from "Oghuz" to "Turkmen" nomenclature, reflecting deepened Islamization and adaptation to fragmented polities without centralized authority.[18] Lacking a unified state, Yomut organization relied on loose tribal confederations suited to pastoral mobility, enabling resource access across seasonal pastures from the Atrek River banks in summer to Ak Tepe interiors in winter.[18] This structure, evident from 8th–9th-century cavalry contributions to regional empires, prioritized defensive martial practices over expansion, as inferred from sparse accounts of inter-tribal skirmishes over grazing lands amid post-Mongol ecological pressures.[18] By the 16th century, these confederations governed via customary law in peripheral zones like Mangyshlak, forestalling integration into nascent khanates until later pressures.[18]Role in the Khiva Khanate
The Yomut Turkmen occupied the southwestern fringes of the Khorezm oasis, functioning as semi-autonomous nomadic actors within the decentralized Khiva Khanate throughout the 18th and early 19th centuries.[4] Their position enabled them to serve as a de facto buffer against western threats, including Iranian incursions, through mobile defense and raiding expeditions that extended khanate influence while safeguarding tribal pastures.[11] Yomut internal khans and clan leaders preserved autonomy by managing livestock herds and orchestrating raids (alaman), nominally acknowledging Khiva's authority via tribute systems that concealed substantial independence and resisted encroaching centralization.[2] Efforts by khans, such as Muhammad Rahim Khan I (r. 1806–1825), to bind Yomut elites through land grants in fertile oases underscored the khanate's reliance on tribal consent rather than direct control, allowing Yomut to exploit structural weaknesses for continued nomadic freedoms.[51] Militarily, Yomut contingents constituted a primary and effective component of Khiva's forces, participating in alliances and campaigns that bolstered the khanate against rivals, though their engagements often prioritized tribal interests over unwavering loyalty.[52] Relations with the Teke tribe exemplified competitive interdependence: pasture disputes fueled raids, as in the 1715–1717 Parau conflict, yet mutual aid emerged against common foes, including joint victories over Iranian armies at Gara-gal in 1859 and resistance to Nader Shah's expeditions in the 1730s.[11] This dynamic, including factional rivalries within Khiva such as Yomut support for Kungrats against Teke-backed Mangyts around 1763, highlighted Yomut agency in leveraging khanate divisions to maintain leverage without full subordination.[11] Under the 19th-century Qongrat dynasty's centralizing push, Yomut resistance to sedentarization and taxation preserved core pastoral practices amid mounting pressures.[4]