In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

3 _1.-.--___.. WHEN NOMADS SETTLE: Changing Technologies of Building and Transport and the Production of Architectural ForIll aIllong the Gabra, the Rendille, anld the SOIllalis LABELLE PRUSSIN • INTRODUCTION The architecture of nomadic societies, in contrast to the stone, concrete , and earthen architectures associated with sedentarism and permanence , has long been ignored and neglected, ]10t only by architects and architectural historians but by social scientists and scholars in the arts and humanities. 1 The reasons are manifold-Il0t the least of which has been the very definition of nOllladism. Scholars who have addressed the nomadic condition continue to struggle with definitions and distinctions among pastoralists and nomads. Even when a simple distinction is made between economies (herders and agriculturalists) or in lifestyles (nomads and sedentarists) the typologies continue to elude clear definition.2 Nomadic cultures are elusive, difficult to document and to record. Polities and stale governance have always had problems dealing with their nomadic populations and, for whatever the reasons proffered, have sought to settle them in order to control therrl. Nomads do not observe political boundaries or pay taxes; they are fiercely independent, and they tend to live outside the pale of the culture in whose domain they move even when they maintain a symbiotic relationship with their sedentary neighbors. In those models which compartmentalize and classify geographically, they defy cultural circumscription.3 The lack of access to nomadic populations a:nd the rigors of fieldwork among them have militated against the study of their material culture; as a consequence, scholars have often erroneously concluded that recitation , rhetoric, and poetry (Le., the verbal arts) are their major form of artistic expression. Furthermore, because nOITladic cultures have traditionally been documented by male scholars, it has been the arts created by men which have been brought to our attention. Pastoral life has been studied primarily in relation to herding activities, and since men assume 74 Labelle Prussin the primary responsibility for such activities, the so-called "nonproductive " domestic, less accessible sectors of the economy, such as architecture created by women, tend to be ignored. Sibyl Mohaly-Nagy once said that there can be no culture without architecture. But how can there be a nomadic architecture when the Vitruvian4 tenets of permanence, stability, and endurance continue to overtly or covertly underlie contemporary architectural theory and practice , deconstructivism notwithstanding? Durability translates into fixity and permanence. But permanence is not necessarily synonymous with sedentarism. A canvas, leather, or mat-covered tent, maintained and repaired over time, perpetuated by a repetitive renewal process, is often more durable and permanent than a wood-frame or an earthen structure . By the same token, we tend to assume that "temporary" is synonymous with "transient." If something moves, we consider it temporary. Although mobility may be its underlying function, a movable structure is not necessarily temporary. What is seemingly transitory and ephemeral , processual and only a body of images, is often more durable than our eroding monuments of stone. As a consequence, nomadic dwellings are still often denied a place in the world of architecture, whether it be vernacular or institutional. And yet, when viewed in the context of process rather than end product, the architectures of nomadism are actually as permanent as any so-called permanent, stationary building complex, even though they are transient , seemingly ephemeral, and composed of less enduring, less stable materials. Transportable and demountable, their components are reconstructed , reused, reassembled, renewed, and, above all, inherited from one generation to the next. When viewed in the dual contexts of space and time, continuity endows the traditional, classic concept of permanence with new meaning. Such considerations, normally outside the purview of traditional scholarship, are critical to our understanding of the aesthetic values which govern their creation. In this chapter I compare some aspects of building and transport technology among the Gabra, Rendille, and Somali nomads in East Africa (map 3.1), who contribute to a particular architectural form. Then I consider some of the ways in which the sedentarization process affects and changes architectural form and its attendant aesthetic.5 These three cultures are historically related, all use camels as pack animals, and, although language and dialects vary, key architectural terms are interchangeable . From the exterior, their mat-covered armature tents appear to be similar (figs. 3.1, 3.2, and 3.3). All three of these contiguous nomadic cultures are characterized by a singular set of phenomena: spatial mobility is inherent in the cultural lifestyle; the architectures are created [3.149.233.97] Project MUSE...

Share