What do you think?
Rate this book
Tribal Nation: The Making of Soviet Turkmenistan
On October 27, 1991, the Turkmen Soviet Socialist Republic declared its independence from the Soviet Union. Hammer and sickle gave way to a flag, a national anthem, and new holidays. Seven decades earlier, Turkmenistan had been a stateless conglomeration of tribes. What brought about this remarkable transformation?
Tribal Nation addresses this question by examining the Soviet effort in the 1920s and 1930s to create a modern, socialist nation in the Central Asian Republic of Turkmenistan. Adrienne Edgar argues that the recent focus on the Soviet state as a "maker of nations" overlooks another vital factor in Turkmen the complex interaction between Soviet policies and indigenous notions of identity. In particular, the genealogical ideas that defined premodern Turkmen identity were reshaped by Soviet territorial and linguistic ideas of nationhood. The Soviet desire to construct socialist modernity in Turkmenistan conflicted with Moscow's policy of promoting nationhood, since many Turkmen viewed their "backward customs" as central to Turkmen identity.
Tribal Nation is the first book in any Western language on Soviet Turkmenistan, the first to use both archival and indigenous-language sources to analyze Soviet nation-making in Central Asia, and among the few works to examine the Soviet multinational state from a non-Russian perspective. By investigating Soviet nation-making in one of the most poorly understood regions of the Soviet Union, it also sheds light on broader questions about nationalism and colonialism in the twentieth century.
Tribal Nation addresses this question by examining the Soviet effort in the 1920s and 1930s to create a modern, socialist nation in the Central Asian Republic of Turkmenistan. Adrienne Edgar argues that the recent focus on the Soviet state as a "maker of nations" overlooks another vital factor in Turkmen the complex interaction between Soviet policies and indigenous notions of identity. In particular, the genealogical ideas that defined premodern Turkmen identity were reshaped by Soviet territorial and linguistic ideas of nationhood. The Soviet desire to construct socialist modernity in Turkmenistan conflicted with Moscow's policy of promoting nationhood, since many Turkmen viewed their "backward customs" as central to Turkmen identity.
Tribal Nation is the first book in any Western language on Soviet Turkmenistan, the first to use both archival and indigenous-language sources to analyze Soviet nation-making in Central Asia, and among the few works to examine the Soviet multinational state from a non-Russian perspective. By investigating Soviet nation-making in one of the most poorly understood regions of the Soviet Union, it also sheds light on broader questions about nationalism and colonialism in the twentieth century.
320 pages, Paperback
First published September 20, 2004
2 people are currently reading
255 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 10 of 10 reviews
March 5, 2016
Adrienne Lynn Edgar has succeeded in producing a highly readable and detailed account of the processes resulting in the creation of Turkmenistan during Soviet rule in the 1920s and 30s.
Edgar's main argument is that, despite lacking a common dialect, distinct territory, or other classic features of a 'nation,' the Turkmen's strong sense of group identity and common genealogy was able to act as the foundation for the Soviet national policy. She then demonstrates how Turkmen themselves adapted to Soviet rhetoric, and used the language of class interest to advocate for their own vision of national autonomy. For example, many kin groups used Marxist-Leninist discourse to disenfranchise their neighbors' access to water, to promote their local dialect as more socialist and progressive, or to gain access to state assistance.
Especially deft is her use of Terry Martin's concept of the Soviet Union as an 'affirmative action empire.' She shows that Moscow promoted its policy interests through an elaborate, and often conflicting, system of quotas--for women in higher education, for example, or for Turkmen in government jobs. Rivalries between tribes, between ethnic Turkmen and 'European' minorities, and between Ashgabat and Moscow all had their effect on these policies. Often, Soviet planners had to compromise their plans, as outlawing marriage customs and orchestrating land reforms caused resentment among the rural population.
Well-researched and examining key issues such as the importance of genealogy, language policy, and women's emancipation, the book will be valuable for anyone interested in Soviet history, gender in Central Asia, nationalism, and studies on modernization.
Edgar's main argument is that, despite lacking a common dialect, distinct territory, or other classic features of a 'nation,' the Turkmen's strong sense of group identity and common genealogy was able to act as the foundation for the Soviet national policy. She then demonstrates how Turkmen themselves adapted to Soviet rhetoric, and used the language of class interest to advocate for their own vision of national autonomy. For example, many kin groups used Marxist-Leninist discourse to disenfranchise their neighbors' access to water, to promote their local dialect as more socialist and progressive, or to gain access to state assistance.
Especially deft is her use of Terry Martin's concept of the Soviet Union as an 'affirmative action empire.' She shows that Moscow promoted its policy interests through an elaborate, and often conflicting, system of quotas--for women in higher education, for example, or for Turkmen in government jobs. Rivalries between tribes, between ethnic Turkmen and 'European' minorities, and between Ashgabat and Moscow all had their effect on these policies. Often, Soviet planners had to compromise their plans, as outlawing marriage customs and orchestrating land reforms caused resentment among the rural population.
Well-researched and examining key issues such as the importance of genealogy, language policy, and women's emancipation, the book will be valuable for anyone interested in Soviet history, gender in Central Asia, nationalism, and studies on modernization.
February 22, 2021
A must read for any Turkmen willing to know more of their own national history. Also, for students of Politics and International Relations interested in Colonialism, Women's Rights, Rights of Minorities, Nationalism and Nation building. Overall, a very informative and interesting read.
September 5, 2019
A good monograph on the nation-building missionary impulse of the "white man's burden," here dressed in the garb of soviet socialist internationalism. As such it differed little in practice - if at all - from similar schemes of civilization and uplift imported into Africa and Asia by the enlightened imperialists of Western Europe. The Turkmen were nomadic aboriginals attached to their clan and Islam, and a minority within their minority region, much like Kurds in western Asia. The travails of Soviet administrators to make the region pay off via collective farms, cotton culture, resettlement and training, etc., read exactly like the efforts of European rubber planters and mine owners. The willing acceptance of this new order by a trained native elite ran into the colonial mentality of the Center and was as bitterly resented as any integrated aboriginal "betrayed" by Brits or Frenchmen, who did not practice the claimed equality they preached.
Adrienne Edgar focuses on the founding of the Soviet Socialist Republic cobbled from contiguous patches of former khanates and Russian-occupied Turkestan. The creation of a nationality-based system seemed a progressive counter to the influence of conservative tribal elders and pan-Islam, around whom the "basmatchi" insurgents clustered like present-day Taliban further south. The attempt to "cleanse" Turkmen society of its backward traditions - to "liberate women and girls" especially, in the modern progressive jargon favored by Western occupying nation-builders - also has a familiar ring; as well as the stubborn resistance of the "backward." Like present-day Americans spreading their uplifting culture in Kabul, the Soviets of the 1920s thought they were doing something unprecedented and liberating. But even Trotsky knew, and admitted, that establishing modern civil authority in such a place was "not unlike" the tasks of British colonialists in laying the bases of European civilization.
Edgar ends her book on the familiar positive post-Soviet conclusion: the Soviet colonizers created the conditions for a modern state, which the natives took over and made their own as a free member of the family of nations. Whether intentional or not, this overlooks the sad reality of post-Soviet life, not unlike the unglowing time she recounts; and, again, undifferentiated from the post-colonial tyranny so common in Africa and Asia. That "Turkmenbashi" was any improvement over Stalin for leading a new free Turkmenian nation, is as silly as believing Idi Amin a legitimate national heir to imperialist Brits.
Overall, a good look at the inevitable clashes when outside missionaries impose culture and order upon those considered inferior. A look at present-day Iraq and Afghanistan show the "noble tradition" endures.
Adrienne Edgar focuses on the founding of the Soviet Socialist Republic cobbled from contiguous patches of former khanates and Russian-occupied Turkestan. The creation of a nationality-based system seemed a progressive counter to the influence of conservative tribal elders and pan-Islam, around whom the "basmatchi" insurgents clustered like present-day Taliban further south. The attempt to "cleanse" Turkmen society of its backward traditions - to "liberate women and girls" especially, in the modern progressive jargon favored by Western occupying nation-builders - also has a familiar ring; as well as the stubborn resistance of the "backward." Like present-day Americans spreading their uplifting culture in Kabul, the Soviets of the 1920s thought they were doing something unprecedented and liberating. But even Trotsky knew, and admitted, that establishing modern civil authority in such a place was "not unlike" the tasks of British colonialists in laying the bases of European civilization.
Edgar ends her book on the familiar positive post-Soviet conclusion: the Soviet colonizers created the conditions for a modern state, which the natives took over and made their own as a free member of the family of nations. Whether intentional or not, this overlooks the sad reality of post-Soviet life, not unlike the unglowing time she recounts; and, again, undifferentiated from the post-colonial tyranny so common in Africa and Asia. That "Turkmenbashi" was any improvement over Stalin for leading a new free Turkmenian nation, is as silly as believing Idi Amin a legitimate national heir to imperialist Brits.
Overall, a good look at the inevitable clashes when outside missionaries impose culture and order upon those considered inferior. A look at present-day Iraq and Afghanistan show the "noble tradition" endures.
February 11, 2013
A well-written, startlingly well-researched book about one of the least-known Soviet Socialist Republics. Edgar provides a litany of primary sources, both in official documentation and popular media of the day. While focused on Turkmenistan, it helps to tell a story common to all Central Eurasian nations - one of sudden "nationhood" and the subsequent scramble to define Turkmen-ness, Uzbek-ness, Tajik-ness, X-ness. A must read for any aspiring scholar of Central Asia, or of the Soviet Empire.
April 6, 2021
I am familiar with Russian/Soviet history but not central Asian history, yet this was still very interesting and readable.
June 27, 2015
I bought this book because I wanted to learn more about Central Asian republics/countries. Overall, the book provided some solid understanding for me.
I felt that the book was written for an academic audience, instead of a general audience. The style and format of the narrative did not lend itself easily to be understood.
My one pet-peeve with the narrative is the way that the author wrote copiously, at times repeating the same arguments, to explain the differences among the various Turkmen dialects, and their ramifications affected the formation of the nation-state, at least with the creation of the national language. I felt that less could have written to get the point across.
I felt that the book was written for an academic audience, instead of a general audience. The style and format of the narrative did not lend itself easily to be understood.
My one pet-peeve with the narrative is the way that the author wrote copiously, at times repeating the same arguments, to explain the differences among the various Turkmen dialects, and their ramifications affected the formation of the nation-state, at least with the creation of the national language. I felt that less could have written to get the point across.
June 24, 2019
The book covers Turkmenistan from the establishment of Bolshevik control during the Russian Civil War (1917-21) up until about 1932, but that is when, as Edgar argues, the major developments of the Turkmen identity (as conceived by the Soviets) were undertaken. She covers topics like the territory of the republic, the language and writing system, the class system, and the status of women, all in excellent detail. It has become a key source on early Soviet nationality policy, and I'd highly recommend it to anyone interested in the topic, especially as it's such an easy read, even more so for an academic work.
July 28, 2009
Fascinating and well=researched history about Turkmenistan. This is everything that Olcott's book on Azerbaijan is not.
The book documents how the Soviets helped to form Turkmen national identity, which didn't exist before the creation of a Turkment SSR. The Turkmen SSR created the institutions to necessary for nation building.
The book documents how the Soviets helped to form Turkmen national identity, which didn't exist before the creation of a Turkment SSR. The Turkmen SSR created the institutions to necessary for nation building.
July 26, 2011
helped to explain a number of inconsistencies in daily life over the 3 years I lived in TKM. Somethings now make a twisted kind of sense.
May 12, 2018
Edgar's book is typical of the trend in historiographies of the Soviet Union dealing with nationalities policies, including Terry Martin (2001), Francine Hirsch (2005), and Kate Brown (2005). Although the approach is well-worn, Edgar's work represents a bonafide accomplishment, particularly in documenting a social and political context which is largely closed to foreign researchers. Edgar also distinguishes her work by focusing on a single case, namely the consolidation of the Turkmen into a singular national group and establishment of Turkmenistan as a Soviet republic.
Displaying 1 - 10 of 10 reviews