Analysis of community governance through oaths reveals significant impacts on interpersonal relations in nomadic societies.
Just as every nation has its unique and defining features that characterize its culture and traditions, nomadic societies also adhered to distinctive principles. In the vast steppes, specific methods evolved to maintain peace, vigilance, and friendship, to ensure the fulfilment of responsibilities, and to uphold the spoken word. One such institution that helped organise the social structure was the oath. This article examines the manifestation of oaths, their historical and practical significance, and their role not only in the lives of individuals but also in the governance of the community, based on examples from the Turkic-Mongol peoples, supported by historical data and research. The study aims to explore the features of the social structure of medieval Turkic and Mongol peoples through the lens of the oath institution. The objectives derived from this aim include: revealing the place and significance of the oath as an institution regulating interpersonal relations within the nomadic society, using folklore and written sources as the basis; and investigating the specific characteristics and mutual influences within these societies. Innovative perspectives on the civilizational characteristics of the organizational practices in nomadic societies are taken as the guiding framework for the analysis. The concept of the oath discussed in the article encapsulates principles that were fundamental to resolving societal issues. It demonstrates how individuals, as integral parts of their community rather than as isolated entities, worked collectively and interdependently to achieve the shared goals of nomadic communities. This was achieved through mutual support and unwavering adherence to their oaths and actions. These principles, as illustrated by the Turkic-Mongol peoples, contributed to defining the destiny of the land, the nation, and the individual.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Koshymov et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: