28 - 30 OCTOBER 1999
COPENHAGEN, DENMARK
Mongolians from Country to City
On 28-30 October, 1999, an international workshop with the above title was held at the Nordic Institute of Asian Studies (NIAS), Copenhagen, Denmark. The workshop, which was sponsored by the European Science Foundation and the IIAS-NIAS Strategic Alliance, brought together 48 scholars and students from Australia, East and Central Asia, Europe, and the United States. A total of nineteen papers was presented, including eight papers by scholars from Asia and the rest by scholars from America, Europe, and Canada. The majority of the participants were anthropologists and historians, but scholars from various other disciplines such as sociology, philosophy, political science, and religious studies were also present at the workshop.
By LI NARANGOA & OLE BRUUN
A discussion of some broad themes pertaining to the position of the Mongolians in the modern world and international relations in Central Asia opened the workshop. Within this broad context the workshop focused mainly on three issues. The first topic the workshop addressed was the pastoral nomadic heritage and modern forms of pastoralism as well as the Mongolian herders' predicament after the collapse of socialist institutions and the privatization of livestock in the early 1990s. The paper by Veronika Veit and that of Mary and Morris Rossabi discussed the continued importance of traditional animal husbandry in modern Mongolian pastoralism, while a mixture of papers by Mongolian and foreign researchers with recent fieldwork experience gave a vivid account of contemporary Mongolian pastoralism, including institutional frameworks, coping with crises, child health, pasture use, management styles, related ideological debates, and eco-tourism.For example, the papers by Ole Bruun and Morten Perdersen, both based on very recent fieldwork in Mongolian rural areas, analysed the social and economic problems caused by the market economy and the concomitant social and cultural changes in rural Mongolia today. With the advent of democratization and political decentralization, the collective system collapsed and so had central planning in the livestock sector. Privatization will obviously lead to new patterns of pastoralism, presumably with a lower level of mobility, which may eventually cause severe environmental problems, as David Sneath suggested in his paper.
The second topic was Buddhism and Shamanism and their revival or transformation in the context of a liberalized society. This block of papers demonstrated that religion occupies a much stronger position among modern Mongolians than has hitherto been assumed. Beside the Chingis Khan cult, Buddhism in particular is considered to be one of the most important elements in the Mongolian identity today. In making assessments it should not be overlooked that economic and social crises have driven people to seek new hope in religion. Agata Bareja-Starzynska and Hanna Havnevik's joint paper dealt with the revival of Buddhism in the Republic of Mongolia and compared Mongolian Buddhism to its source, Tibetan Buddhism, in order to find out what is new in Mongolian Buddhism today. The revival of Buddhism, not only in Mongolia, but also in neighbouring Buryatia and Inner Mongolia were also discussed. Hurelbatur's paper based on his recent fieldwork in Buryatia showed how traditional Buddhism may be understood in the context of the modern society. Laetitia Merli's paper showed how Shamanism had evolved and adapted itself to contemporary Mongolian society, arguing that without a knowledge of Mongolian Shamanism, it is impossible to have a full understanding of Mongolian Buddhism.
Cultural reconstruction
Mongolian identity and Mongolia's relations with its neighbours China, Russia, and other Central Asian countries were debated as third topic. Since 1990 democracy has been introduced in Mongolia and the country has been able to try its wings as a truly independent state, Mongols both inside and outside Mongolia have started to seek their national identity in their own history and culture, as was mentioned in relation to the revival of Buddhism. It is extremely important to examine the impact of deliberate cultural reconstruction, both by internal and external actors. In the Russian and Chinese regions, very substantial immigration of non-Mongol groups has been accompanied by the manipulation of the educational system and by purges and outright cultural destruction. Several papers contributed ideas to these matters. For instance, Huhbaturs paper addressed one of the most important elements in identity, namely language, showing how Chinese political and economic policies have affected the development of the Mongolian language in Inner Mongolia. Vladimir Ganzhurov's paper discussed the identity of Buryatia and its future development from a geopolitical point of view. In the compass of the Mongol lands, under conditions of territorial partition, provincial or minority identities are as important features of Mongolian culture as are the efforts to develop aspects of a common national identity. Uradyn E. Bulag's paper discussed how the Daur-Mongols in Inner Mongolia have struggled to maintain their identity under the constraints of the political conditions prevailing in Inner Mongolian.
The overall purpose of this conference was to examine the impact of the revolutionary changes and general historical processes of the twentieth century on a nomadic people. We wished to consider the interaction of the basic features of pastoral nomadism in Mongolia with the larger modern economies, both communist and capitalist. As a testimony to the pertinence of the workshop, three concentrated days were devoted to the discussion of all sort of imaginable issues pertaining to transition, revival, nationhood, cultural and social changes in the Mongol lands, and modern Mongolian identity. The workshop was testimony to a rising interest in Central Asia in general and Mongolia in particular. We were also impressed by the presence of a strong contingent of PhD students studying Mongolia and Mongolians from various angles, which is very promising for the future state of the field.
The conference papers will be edited as a book, which through new research is conceived of as a platform to address contemporary forms of pastoralism, migration, city life, religion, and identity in Mongolian society. *
Ole Bruun and Li Narangoa were the convenors of the conference. The latter was also the contact person.
E-mail: nara@nias.ku.dk