nomadic and pastoral societies: The Islamic World 781 cialized reliance on both their animals and the environment were all mutually contingent: Movement, which was a necessary precondition of this lifestyle, precluded agriculture for the nomad-pastoralist While life in the wild was often brutal and harsh, it is important to note that many of the issues that people faced in medieval cities, such as crime, overcrowding, and disease, were not a part of the nomad-pastoralist life Coupled with the somewhat salubrious and healthy nature of the dry climate, populations among the pastoralists could reach high levels, forcing migrations This situation meant that pastoralnomadic elements were pressed into contact (sometimes of a violent nature) with the stronger, sedentary people beyond the desert’s margins Historical records from settled lands and empires are quick to enumerate the violent aspects of the association between pastoral-nomadic and sedentary peoples, and this image of the nomad vis-à-vis civilized society is very enduring However, it must also be noted that while these sources relate the attacks of the pastoralists on sedentary societies, many of these same societies also conferred a higher social ranking to pastoralists than to agriculturalists In both the classical pagan religions and the Abrahamic religious traditions, deities often show a higher appreciation for meat offerings, hinting at a different aspect of the nomadic-sedentary interchange Medieval historians of the Middle East were singularly interested in the dynamic of nomadic-sedentary relations The great North African historian and sociologist Ibn Khaldun (1332–1406) presents some interesting observations on the dynamic social interactions between city dwellers (whom he terms hadara) and nomads (called badawi) Agreeing with the earlier Muslim historian al-Masudi (d 957), Ibn Khaldun suggests that there was also a concomitant evolutionary relationship between the two groups Al-Masudi defines the badawi as those people who are not yet sedentary in their lifestyle, living a rough and free existence in the borderlands They fought and stole as necessity demanded, and as the result of the marginal life that pastoral nomadism required, the welfare of the group became paramount The collective could supply the various needs of the individual far better than the individual could supply by himself Ibn Khaldun also observes that it was a natural occurrence for the badawi to mature and become hadara The most important identity construct for each of these groups was a notion of group solidarity, which Ibn Khaldun calls ‘asabiyah This solidarity was born out of necessity, for living in the wilds required a high degree of cooperation This ‘asabiyah made the badawi superior to the hadara because living a civilized town life required one to live within the strictures of man-made law, which forcibly subverted the nature of hu- man beings, making them weak When conflict occurred, the group with the higher ‘asabiyah always won Once the conflict was finished, the transition from badawi to hadara began anew as the victorious nomadic elements settled in to city life, unintentionally weakening themselves and opening the door to their downfall when the next nomadic group arrived two or three generations later This cyclical pattern was repeated throughout the Middle East during the Middle Ages Starting with the Arab conquest and empire in the seventh century, the Turkic migrations and subsequent empires of the 10th century and later periods, and most notably the great Mongol invasion of the 13th century, waves of essentially pastoralist groups came from the margins and violently interacted with the established sedentary groups they encountered, forever changing the political and cultural landscape of the region However, it is important to note that such medieval historians as Ibn Khaldun not glorify these people, for while civilized life Pastoral scene from a manuscript of the Divan (Poems) by Sultan Ahmad Jalayir (ink, color, and gold on paper; ca 1400) (Freer Gallery of Art, Smithsonian Institution, Purchase, F1932-30)