1983Iranian StudiesRequires access

Tribe and Uymaq in Iran: A Reply

Leonard Helfgott

Open publisher page 2 citations

Abstract

James Reid's objections to my analysis of tribalism rests on his identification of tribalism with the “uymaq system” of early Safavid Iran. Thus, he includes under the rubric “tribalism” the entire ensemble of social, economic, and political relations dominated by a tribal khan and his family. He argues that during the sixteenth century “pastoral, agricultural, and even urban forms of production were subjected increasingly to the command of various families of chieftains, who controlled them for their own benefit.” Indeed, he is correct, for tribal leaders dominated villages and towns in one form or another throughout Iran until the twentieth century. However, because farmers, tradesmen and, artisans fell under the domination of the tribal khans, they did not necessarily become tribal. Reid's uses of the terms “tribalism” and “uymaq” are idiosyncratic and inconsistent.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

James Reid's objections to my analysis of tribalism rests on his identification of tribalism with the “uymaq system” of early Safavid Iran. Thus, he includes under the rubric “tribalism” the entire ensemble of social, economic, and political relations dominated by a tribal khan and his family. He argues that during the sixteenth century “pastoral, agricultural, and even urban forms of production were subjected increasingly to the command of various families of chieftains, who controlled them for their own benefit.” Indeed, he is correct, for tribal leaders dominated villages and towns in one form or another throughout Iran until the twentieth century. However, because farmers, tradesmen and, artisans fell under the domination of the tribal khans, they did not necessarily become tribal. Reid's uses of the terms “tribalism” and “uymaq” are idiosyncratic and inconsistent.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 2 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

James Reid's objections to my analysis of tribalism rests on his identification of tribalism with the “uymaq system” of early Safavid Iran. Thus, he includes under the rubric “tribalism” the entire ensemble of social, economic, and political relations dominated by a tribal khan and his family. He argues that during the sixteenth century “pastoral, agricultural, and even urban forms of production were subjected increasingly to the command of various families of chieftains, who controlled them for their own benefit.” Indeed, he is correct, for tribal leaders dominated villages and towns in one form or another throughout Iran until the twentieth century. However, because farmers, tradesmen and, artisans fell under the domination of the tribal khans, they did not necessarily become tribal. Reid's uses of the terms “tribalism” and “uymaq” are idiosyncratic and inconsistent.

Key concepts: Tribalism, Tribe, Politics, Rubric, Ancient history, History, Ethnology, Political science

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Tribe and Uymaq in Iran: A Reply — Research Paper | ScholarLens