The Kazakness of sedentarization: Promoting progress as tradition in response to the land problem

Abstract

There is little doubt that the Russian colonization of the Kazak steppe had a tremendous impact on the Kazak society during the 19th century. Russian administrators replaced the traditional leaders of the community while muzhik settlements restricted grazing lands and disrupted the nomadic economy. The very survival of the Kazak people seemed in question by the early 20th century. The most immediate threat to Kazak society was the land question, which became the principle issue of debate among those who claimed the mantle of Kazak leadership. Those engaged in this discussion were forced to struggle with the very notion of what it meant to be Kazak. Participating in this discourse was a new elite, the Kazak intelligentsia, who came to advocate the radical position that the Kazak community should change from a nomadic society to a sedentary one. They defended this position by articulating that the true nature of Kazak society was based on progress, with sedentarization being the next step in that progress. Their goal was to save their remaining pasture from further Russian settlement. To do so the Kazak intelligentsia had to posit themselves as the true leaders of the Kazak community while declaring the traditional leaders of the Kazaks, who advocated nomadism, to be the enemies of the Kazak nation. The Kazak intelligentsia based their claim of leadership on the concept of a Kazak nation. A nation that they argued was once great but since had fallen into decline because of the greed of the few—the khans, sultans, ulema and now the aqsaquls and biis. The intelligentsia’s view of these traditional leaders was that they had kept the nation divided and backward in order to serve their own whims. In order to return the Kazaks to their rightful place as a leading nation, the Kazak intelligentsia advocated modernizing Kazak society through education and sedentarization. They believed modernization would not only aid the Kazaks economically, but more importantly it was essential for the preservation of their homeland—the fundamental component of a nation. Paradoxically, this new modern elite posited themselves as leaders of the Kazak community, while at the