Introduction
Mongolia is a country with such a diverse history that it
is difficult to find a national identity in modern times. Many people of different cultures from past
and present have occupied its territory, including nomadic pastoralists, Mongols,
Buddhists, and Soviets. Regime changes
in the country have overturned previous ideologies with such high frequency
that a future socio-political trajectory is nebulous (Diener and Hagen 2013,
623). Most recently, the transition from
a Soviet-influenced, communist elite in the 1990s has created a new path for
Mongolia in the contemporary global system that integrates various power
structures from its past (ibid. 624). The
researchers of this article used a cultural landscape analysis to piece
together the cultural friction as it relates to urban design and modern
development in Mongolia’s capital, Ulaanbaatar.
Literature Review
Street names, monuments, landmarks, statues, and
architecture can all experience alterations in name or form as a new regime
replaces an old one (ibid. 625). Since
capital cities are rarely razed after a political or ideological shift, it
stands to reason that their landscape becomes a hybrid of the old regime and
the new (ibid. 625). This can ripple
across centuries, as new regimes layer themselves on top of older ones,
creating hybrids that are multiplied. Ulaanbaatar
is a relatively young city, but it has experienced so many regime changes that
the layers have combined into a national identity that doesn’t claim a single
cultural form from its history.
Background and
Geographical Context
Ulaanbaatar
is the capital of Mongolia. It has
changed names many times, most recently in 1924 when the Mongolian republic was
established (Britannica 2024). Located between
two perennial world powers (China and Russia), it has experienced much social
and cultural change over the centuries. Because
of its landlocked location, the country acts as a buffer between its more
powerful neighbors, absorbing cultural influences from the areas surrounding
it.
Methods Used
The researchers of the article adopted a
cultural landscape method of presenting their data. According to Gomez and Jones (2010, 225), this
involves searching through historical archives to document “when and where the
landscape was created, by whom, why, and how [it has] been altered…”. A cultural landscape continuum consists of
historical and contemporary snapshots of accumulated historical occupance
(ibid. 227), normally at an urban location.
Methods for retrieving this information may involve investigating historical
documents, public records, or for contemporary snapshots, fieldwork, surveying,
and interviewing (ibid. 227).
The
authors in this study mostly used written historical documents to illustrate
the cultural landscape of Ulaanbaatar. Historical
documents come in two types: primary or secondary. Primary
documents are first-hand accounts of events, while secondary documents are second-hand
perspectives, often written by a contemporary historian or journalist who doesn’t
directly experience the events.
The
documents used in this study were primarily secondary. They describe how Ulaanbaatar first appeared
as a monastery for Buddhists in 1639 (ibid. 626). Trade helped establish permanent settlements
in the region, which had been suited to nomadic peoples due to its extensive
grasslands. As trade increased and
elites gained wealth, sedentarism became more common (ibid. 626), creating the
first seed of a national identity based on Buddhist culture. Chinese merchant settlement increased during
the Qing dynasty, from 1691 to 1911, resulting in structures that hybridized
Mongolian, Tibetan, and Chinese styles (ibid. 627-628). Tsarist Russia began influencing the region
in 1863, starting a trend toward international geopolitical development (ibid.
627). Soviet socialism ignited a big
change on the city in the 1920s, transforming many buildings that were formerly
religious into social services, like hospitals and schools (ibid. 628). Street names were also changed to reflect the
new leadership. Since the collapse of
the Soviet Union, the cultural landscape has morphed into a more integrated one
that reunites the various ruling elements of the country’s past. This came about because globalization
championed a more democratic, Western ideology that valued freedom, expanding
business and tourism in the city (ibid. 638).
Analysis and Discussion
As with most historical or cultural landscape analyses,
the study had less emphasis on quantitative data and more on qualitative explanations.
The idea was to paint a narrative of the
built environment of Ulaanbaatar from an historical perspective as it changed leadership
between eras. It was thoroughly
demonstrated how the Mongolian national image has evolved as each new power
occupied its territory. Photographs were
used to strengthen the analysis by giving the visual landscape of Ulaanbaatar a
higher understanding.
One challenge I have for the method is that the
iconography of a city is generally constructed by those in power and not those
who have been marginalized. As the
victors of history generally write it, the conquerors of a territory transform
its cultural landscape. We see this in
the way the Mongolian image largely borrows elements from its ruling powers and
not the indigenous nomads who lived there for centuries. The Mongols, widely regarded as founders of
the nation, were the first in a series of ruling classes that shaped its
landscape, and they’d conquered it long before 1639- the earliest date that is
referenced in this article. Yet little
is known about the nomadic tribes who preceded them, for the consolidation of
their tribes is what became the Mongols as we know them today (Bawden 2024).
Conclusion
The researchers of this article did a fantastic job in
providing a cultural background of the landscape of Ulaanbaatar. Despite the dominating iconography of the
ruling class, some believe that modernization in Mongolia “calls for the
marginalization of nomadic values in the new national ideology” (ibid.
643). How much this translates to street
names, buildings, and statues named in honor of nomads remains to be seen. Globalization remains a powerful force on the
cultural landscape of Ulaanbaatar, one in which traditional nomads will once
again struggle to reconcile.
Bibliography
Bawden, C.
R.. "Genghis Khan." Encyclopedia
Britannica, January 1, 2024.
https://www.britannica.com/biography/Genghis-Khan.
Britannica,
T. Editors of Encyclopaedia. "Ulaanbaatar." Encyclopedia
Britannica. February 11, 2024.
https://www.britannica.com/place/Ulaanbaatar.
Diener,
Alexander and Joshua Hagen. “City of
Felt and Concrete: Negotiating Cultural Hybridity in Mongolia’s Capital of
Ulaanbaatar”. Nationalities Papers 41, no. 4 (2013): 622-650. DOI: 10.1080/00905992.2012.743513
Gomez,
Basil, and John Paul Jones III. Research Methods in Geography.
Chichester: Blackwell Publishing Ltd, 2010.
