Introduction
In the summer of 2009, I traveled to Mongolia to visit my partner who was involved in research and teaching in Ulaanbaatar. For two weeks we spent some time in the city but mostly traveled the countryside. It is a fascinating country with sharp contrasts between old and new, rural and urban.
This paper supplements a visual analysis case study by providing explanations of the methodologies and theories behind the place-making of Sükhbaatar Square. Morphology, socio-political change, and cultural and religious continuity of the past 90 years at the Square are explored utilizing historical maps and images, literature review, and visual analysis via cross sections, sketches, and diagrams. These analyses have uncovered a link between the square, adjacent architecture and functionality, and Mongolian religious tradition.
Since its democratic revolution in 1990, Mongolia has been a place of turbulent change as it adjusts to globalization and to rural-to-urban migration. Prior to 1990, Mongolia experienced a major political revolution when it became aligned with the Soviet Union in the 1920s. Changes in social, political, and economic structures over the last century are reflected in the urban landscape of its capital, Ulaanbaatar. My analysis suggests that Mongolia’s socio-political context relates to urban design and perception of Ulaanbaatar, and specifically, Sükhbaatar Square. This paper explores two main questions: Has the meaning of Sükhbaatar Square (Ulaanbaatar’s central urban square) evolved as a response to the social and political climate of Ulaanbaatar and Mongolia as a whole, and how are memory and tradition visible in the Square today?
Methodology
A key to understanding this case study is Ulaanbaatar’s past and present urban morphology and land use and how these are shaped by political and economic changes in Mongolia since the 1920s. These changes are explored utilizing historical maps and images, literature review, and visual analysis of the square via cross sections, sketches, and diagrams. In addition, photos and site plans from the early- to mid-20th Century (from the Mongolian National Museum) have been digitized and set to scale. These methods support more accurate depictions of the morphology of the Square from the 1920s to the present day and how they relate to cultural perceptions of place and national identity.
Figure 1: Location of Sükhbaatar Square in Ulaanbaatar (Google)
Mongolia and Sükhbaatar Square before, during, and after Soviet control
Prior to the 1921 revolution, Mongolian culture and religion drew from Tibetan Buddhist (Lamaism) concepts and, to a lesser extent, Mongolian Shamanism (Tenggerism). Buddhism, introduced to Mongolia in the 16th Century, did not replace shamanism in a hostile way. Rather, certain rituals blended the ‘old’ ways with ‘new’ ones, which have been integrated to the extent that they are, in essence, Buddhist (Atwood, 1996). Symbolism and meaning were found in sky (father) and earth (mother), and the directions of north, south, east, west, and center (Atwood, 1996; Otgony, 2008).
The ger (Mongolian for “house”) embodied a place where interactions with the spiritual realm occurred as they overlapped with the physical realm. Every extent of the ger came to symbolize a relationship to the cosmos (Figure 2), and the spiritual arrangement of the universe is evident in the placement of objects within the ger (Dinsmoor, 1985). For example, the altar (north) venerates the ancestors and spiritual leaders. The door of the ger (south) represents an opening to the outside world. The masculine (west) side and feminine (east) side of the ger are where the father’s and mother’s tools were kept. Traditionally, men keep their bridles, knives, bows, and other tools on the western side of the ger; whereas, on the east side, women keep household goods, storage for curdled milk, and water vessels (Dinsmoor, 1985). Upon visiting the countryside of Mongolia today, it is evident that the man’s role is to tend the herd of animals, often away from home for hours at a time, while the woman’s role is to look after the home in the more immediate vicinity of the ger.
Figure 2: the ‘ger’ spatial arrangement and relationship to the cosmos (by author)
The present-day site of Sükhbaatar Square has long been used as a central gathering place. Erected in 1946, the Sükhbaatar Monument sets at the center of the Square reminding Mongolians of their national and cultural identity. Paintings from the early and mid-20th Century (Atwood, 2005) depict the capital city of Khüriye (now Ulaanbaatar) as having a monastery to the north with the city’s ceremonial gate located to the south. In 1921, upon learning that China was threatening to re-conquer Mongolia, Damdin Sükhbaatar (Sükhbaatar literally translates to “axe hero”) led his people into a new era, securing an alliance with the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics. Sükhbaatar, often called “Mongolia’s Lenin,” died prematurely in 1923, and it would later be rumored he was assassinated (Kaplonski, 2004). This signaled the beginning of the principles that would help shape the 20th century urban center of Mongolia’s capital, Ulaanbaatar.
By the 1940s and throughout the Soviet period, Ulaanbaatar’s architecture was driven by a combination of Soviet and Mongolian architects. In 1942, the National University of Mongolia was founded in Ulaanbaatar which played a major role in altering Mongolian culture by emphasizing Marxism-Leninism (Rossabi, 2005). The center of the capital displayed an architectural unity in a neo-classical style that would later come to be marred by dilapidation in post-Soviet times and by the addition of steel and glass constructions (Atwood, 2005). Additionally, rapid growth in Mongolia throughout the 1960s to the 1980s led to an increase in industrial and public housing projects, although they were primarily on the outskirts of the city and came to be known for their poor production and alienating gigantism (Atwood, 2005). The first master plan of Ulaanbaatar was developed in 1954 and at least three others were drafted in subsequent years—adopting a typical ‘top-down’ master plan approach—to deal with increased urbanization and rural-to-urban migration which gained momentum throughout the 20th century (Chinbat, 2006; Byambaa, 2009). Throughout the 20th Century Soviet era, not much attention was given to Mongolian tradition or public input regarding the development of urban areas in Ulaanbaatar (Byambaa, 2009); although one notable exception is the Mongolian architect B. Chimed who imitated Soviet styles but later began adding touches of Mongolian national characteristics (Atwood, 2005) with his design of the Ulaanbaatar Hotel in 1961 (Figure 3).
Figure 3: Ulaanbaatar Hotel, with roof treatments reminiscent of temple architecture (Wikipedia source, retrieved 2010)
Figure 4: Cultural implications on urban form (Byambaa, 2009)
Figure 5: Sükhbaatar Square figure-ground study as seen in modern times (top) and a century ago (bottom), by author
In 1990, the Soviet Union was on the verge of collapse when it withdrew its troops from the Mongolian/Chinese border, and Sükhbaatar Square was the site of student protests that led to the democratic revolution (Rossabi, 2005). In the Soviet era, nationalism and the veneration of Chinggis Khan were kept silent or even banned, particularly during the Stalinist regime (Kaplonski, 2004). During the 1990s, however, renowned poet Ochirbat Dashbalbar became a nationalist known for his writings that call for stronger ties between Mongolians and their past. In a segment from his poem “We are the Wolfish People of Time,” Dashbalbar (2008:96) wrote:
The grey wolf howls the sky full.
The world is shivering, and the wolf howls.
We are the wolfish people of time!
We are the wolfish lords of space!
If we harm wolfish Mongolia, then the earth itself will perish.
If we save wolfish Mongolia, then the earth itself will be saved.
Our family – the blue Wolf of the steppe.
Our lineage – the blue Wolf of the world.
Our noble ancestor – wolfish Chinggis… our origin is the Wolf of Heaven!
Dashbalbar’s poems were often a passionate response to the new model of privatization of land increasingly being imposed on Mongolians as a result of the new democracy and globalization. His poems demonstrate the pastoral imagery of wide open spaces and freedom of movement through time and space, giving reference to the nomadic/tribal history of Mongolia. In commentary to the above poem, Dashbalbar writes that “no longer should we ignore the fact that the Mongolian people are the body of the sky, and the lords of space, how theirs is the craft of time, how they have the secret spirit of innate virility” (Dashbalbar 2008:97). Modern Mongolia has also been said to view itself ideologically and politically like an endogamous tribe—in contrast to its increasingly globalized, free-market economy—generating a post-socialist ‘hybridity’ (Bulag, 1998) which favors a homogenous state. Additionally, the entry of Mongolia into the global economy has caused some social and economic instability resulting in what has been called a xenophobic attitude toward the world (Rossabi, 2005).
Symbolism and Meaning in Sükhbaatar Square
At each end of the Square, we can see a reflection of Mongolian cosmology as it relates to the ger (home) and division of male/female responsibilities. Located to the east are the National Theater and Opera House buildings, which are a national display of Mongolian crafts and culture. Here we see a feminine expression of cultural preservation in light of the woman’s traditional role in taking care of the camp and the immediate vicinity of the ger while the west side of the Square houses the City Administration buildings, embodying the masculine expression of the shepherd tending the herd.
The north of the square has for many years been the seat of national government. Facing south, the Chinggis Khaan Monument is like the altar in a ger where foreigners and Mongolian citizens alike can give homage to the “noble ancestor.” Completed in 2005 as an addition to the Parliament Building, the Chinggis Khaan Monument demonstrates how Mongolia is reaching into its past to build on its future of democracy with a profound and historic national identity. Additionally, like the door of the ger or the traditional city gate, to the south of the Square we see commercial uses and public park space, demonstrating an opening to the world as characterized by the Foreign Ministry building and private enterprise.
Looking back toward the Chinggis Khaan Monument and Russia is Sükhbaatar’s monument. Positioned in the center of the Square, Sükhbaatar assumes the place of the gal golomt (family fire-hearth) in the center of the ger. According to Mongolian tradition, misfortune would come to any family without its own hearth, and rituals involving fire are very important. For instance, a person wishing to join a household (such as in marriage) should “kneel at the family fire-hearth and pray for acceptance and protection from the hearth” (Otgony, 2008:147). The first fire of a new family “was started by a high public official…. This encouraged the belief that each family’s fire-hearth as a total was united with the State fire-hearth” (Otgony, 2008:149). Atwood (1996:126) writes:
The state, the cosmos, and the family are all seen as composed of dualistic, male and female pairs, generating progeny. The aim of the ritual is to identify the tent [ger] and family both with the cosmos centered on the fire and the state, and the man and woman of the house with the sovereign genitors of the realm and of the cosmos itself, and by so doing render the house and family prosperous and invulnerable to harm.
Conclusion
This paper has analyzed the evolution of Sükhbaatar Square in Ulaanbaatar, Mongolia, from three main perspectives. First, the morphological perspective has shown a major change in the landscape over the past 90 years with the adoption of European and Soviet neo-classical styles of architecture and city planning. Second, an analysis of Mongolia’s societal aspects has demonstrated changes that reflect the economic and political landscapes over the course of the past several decades. For instance, the mid-20th Century shows a steady increase in state planning and civic improvements while post-Soviet democracy and a free market leads to the rise of more buildings comprised of commercial uses, particularly to the south of the Square. Lastly, a look at cultural symbolisms has uncovered a link between the Square, adjacent architecture and functionality, and Mongolian religious tradition. In the Square, Damdin Sükhbaatar can be viewed as the high public official who, in 1921, re-kindled the fire of the Mongolian state with his revolution. By means of his position at the hearth relative to the surrounding architecture, Sükhbaatar Square becomes the ideal state ger, the center of the Mongolian cosmos, and the genitor of an invulnerable and prosperous state (Figure 6).
Figure 7: Sükhbaatar Square urban morphology over time, 1920s to 2010 (by author)
Based on a paper originally written December, 2010. All content (c) Noah S. unless otherwise noted/cited.
Sources:
Atwood, C. (1996). Buddhism and Popular Ritual in Mongolian Religion: A Reexamination of the Fire Cult. History of Religions, Vol. 36, No. 2 (Nov., 1996), pp. 112-139.
Atwood, C. (2005). “Art and Architecture of Mongolia.” History of Civilizations of Central Asia: Towards the contemporary period: from the mid-nineteenth to the end of the twentieth century. M.K. Palat and A. Tabyshalieva, eds. Paris: UNESCO; pp. 731-755.
Bulag, U.E. (1998). Nationalism and Hybridity in Mongolia. Oxford: Oxford.
Chinbat, B. (2006). Investigation of the Internal Structure Changes of Ulaanbaatar City using RS and GIS. http://www.isprs.org/proceedings/XXXVI/part7/PDF/054.pdf
Byambaa, B. (2009). People’s Participation in Urban Land Use Planning in the City of Ulaanbaatar. GTZ, Land Management and Fiscal Cadastre project.
Dashbalbar, O. (2008). The Battle for Our Land Has Begun. Dashbalbar Foundation, Ulaanbaatar.
Dinsmoor, W. B., III (1985). Mongol Housing: With an Emphasis on Architectural Forms of the ‘Ger’ (Yurt, Baishing). Ph.D. dissertation, Indiana University, United States – Indiana.
Kaplonski, C. (2004). Truth, History, and Politics in Mongolia. London, UK: Routledge.
Otgony, P. (2008). Mongolian Shamanism: Fifth Edition. Ulaanbaatar: Munkhiin-Useg.
Rossabi, M. (2005). Modern Mongolia: From Khans to Commissars to Capitalists.Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
Rossabi, M. (2009). Mongolia: Transmogrification of a Communist Party. Public Affairs Vol. 82, No. 2.