Seminar – 7 February – Sören Urbansky

January 24th, 2017 by anna.c
Respond

Tuesday 7 February 2017

4.30–6.00 Mond Building Seminar Room

Sören Urbansky

Ludwig Maximilian University, Munich & MIASU Visiting Researcher

Same but Different: Sinophobia in Vladivostok, San Francisco and Singapore

Previous scholarship on the “yellow peril” pays little attention on the varying combinations of fear and prejudice that defined different contexts in which it became manifest. Hitherto neglected dynamics between xenophobic discourses and actual dealings in the public sphere can be explored best in a comparative analysis of cities with a high concentration of Asian immigrants. Though the “yellow peril” was established as a concept and a occidental fear that was not bound to urban ethnic ghettos, Chinatowns soon were regarded as breeding places of swirling tales of opium smoking, gambling and interracial romance all of which had become synonymous with the presence of the Chinese and other Asian immigrants.

By investigating selected occurrences, such as romantic love across the ethnic divide, murder cases, or the fear of economic domination, my project will, firstly, test the “yellow peril” phobia on the micro level, its influence on discourses of fear, and the impact of such discourses on official policies and other dealings on the ground as well. A second objective of this study will be to analyze the regional variations and fluctuations of this concept. Thirdly, it will seek to identify the points and trajectories of decline in the perception of Chinese as a “yellow peril.” Fourthly, it will explore how these narratives were received in the Chinese communities themselves. Fifthly and finally, it will explore how people, ideas, laws and institutions moved within the wide universe of the Chinese diaspora to create the “yellow peril” as a global historical phenomenon.

Visiting Scholars – Lent Term

January 20th, 2017 by anna.c
Respond

Lent Term 2017

We welcome the following visiting scholars this term –

October 2016 – September 2018: Sören Urbansky, Ludwig Maximilian University, Munich
‘Faces of Fear – Anti-Asian sentiments in a global perspective”

February 2017 – March 2017: Loretta Kim, University of Hong Kong
‘The comparative history of borderlands and frontiers’, and ‘Chinese ethnic minority languages and literatures’

February 2017: Natalia Ryzhova, Far Eastern Federal University, Vladivostok
‘Where Rising Powers Meet’

March 2017: Gangba Gana, Akita International University, Akita City
‘The Modern History of Mongolia’

Inner Asia 18.2 Contents

January 18th, 2017 by admin
Respond

Inner Asia—Volume 18, Issue 2, 2016
CONTENTS

BRILL—Online issue

Introduction by Caroline Humphrey

This has been a year of momentous dates. First of all we should mark the passing of three of the most eminent contributors to Mongolian studies: Igor de Rachewiltz (1929–2016), authoritative translator, editor and commentator on the Secret History of the Mongols and author of many foundational works on Inner Asian history and Buddhism; Charles R. Bawden (1924–2016), professor of Mongolian language at the School of Oriental and African Studies (London University) and author of numerous scholarly works, from a translation of Altan Tobchi, through a study of shamans, lamas and Christian evangelical missionaries in Buryatia, to his magisterial The Modern History of Mongolia (1968) and his Mongolian–English modern dictionary; and Urgunge Onon (1919–2015), who taught Mongolian for many years at Leeds University, made a fresh translation with annotations of the Secret History of the Mongols, and authored My Mongolian World (2006) and, with Caroline Humphrey, Shamans and Elders: Experience Knowledge and Power among the Daur Mongols (1996). The editors of Inner Asia celebrate the enormous contribution of these three scholars and their long and productive lives.

Urgunge Onon was one of the founders of the Mongolia and Inner Asia Studies Unit at the University of Cambridge. This year, 2016, is a momentous date for the Unit, as it is the 30th anniversary of our founding. We held a conference in celebration on 7 October 2016, with contributions from former and present members of the Unit (see the Report on the Conference in this issue by Joe Ellis). But we also wanted to acknowledge Urgunge’s foundational role in a more permanent way, and so the Unit decided to initiate an annual Onon Prize, to be awarded for excellence in Mongolian and Inner Asian studies. The first recipient of the prize, presented by Dr Temujin Onon, son of Urgunge, was Professor Roberte Hamayon of the University of Paris, for her stellar lifetime contribution.

The present issue of Inner Asia spans the interests of the Unit both historically and geographically. It starts with Pochekaev’s account of Törü, a key early Turkic and later Mongol political concept with a broad span of meanings including ‘law’, ‘principle’ and later ‘state’. Törü has been the subject of numerous scholarly debates and it is a central theme for analysis of the Mongol empire and Mongolian political thought. The article provides a new interpretation of the history of this idea and the way it was used by Chinggis Khan and his successors.

After this historical beginning, the issue moves smartly forward to Mongolia in the present day, with two studies of the capital city Ulaanbaatar, in particular its ‘ger districts’ (the large areas on the outskirts made up of informal settlements with gers—Mongolian felt dwellings—and small self-built houses). The population of these districts has grown enormously over the last two decades and there is much scholarly and policy interest in the problems they present. Anatoliy Breslavsky’s article is a comparison of the ger districts with the growth of informal housing around Ulan-Ude in Buryatia, Russia. His analysis looks at the phenomenon in relation to broader patterns of urban developments in post-Socialist cities and indeed to global forms, such as squatter settlements in Latin America. Breslavsky’s careful and comprehensive study categorises the forms of all types of suburban development in the two cities, clarifies the different rates of increase or decrease of each type, and explains the reasons behind the exponential growth of the most informal and disadvantaged sector. His argument stresses the importance of rural to urban migration, and the different nature of this migration in the two cities. The article by Renato D’Alençon Castrillón, Olivia Kummel and Purev-Erdene Ershuu, also about the ger areas, provides an excellent complement to Breslavsky’s paper. It focuses on one district, Yarmag, and the changing forms and character of social life in this place over the last few years. The article stresses the importance of infrastructure and urban services (or lack of them), such as roads for access, water supplies, sewage and waste disposal, and public spaces where people might congregate and socialise. In conditions of social dislocation, where households arriving in the city have little knowledge of, or contact with, their new neighbours, places where people might make friendly contact, such as those by water sources, are at a premium and deserve more attention from the authorities. The article includes an analysis of the annual naadam festival races as a crucial occasion both for ‘community making’ and for economic opportunities that enable the inhabitants of Yarmag to make a living in their own area. The next paper, by Ariell Ahearn, provides new research on the herding communities from which many of the new residents of Ulaanbaatar are drawn. The focus here, however, is on the mobile pastoralist households who continue life in the countryside under new and changing political-economic conditions. Amid new legislation about land rights, the herders’ claims for winter pasture ownership have become a crucial arena for contestation. The article provides an ethnographically rich explanation of how people do negotiate territorial rights, building on an interpretation of kinship as a ‘technique of power’, above all in relation to local government administration.

The issue’s next contribution moves geographically to the Kalmyks, a people of western Mongolian origin now living in Russia. Valeriya Gazizova’s article begins with a description of Kalmyk history and its Buddhist traditions; but it is mainly devoted to a discussion of contemporary Kalmyk healers and their extraordinary combination of folk images found elsewhere in Mongolia, such as Tsagaan Aav [‘White Father’] and Ökin Tenggri [‘Sky Maiden’], with standard Buddhist deities, along with reinterpreted and new objects of reverence, such as historical personages, ‘black side’ deities and ‘bio-energies’. A tour-de-force of fresh ethnography, the article covers the full range of relevant topics: rituals, vocabularies, life-histories, personalities, and it also contains a valuable analysis of the place of this kind of religious knowledge amid other intellectual currents of the present day.

The last two articles in this issue return to historical topics, both dealing with early twentieth-century politics. Ryosuke Kobayashi’s paper provides intriguing new information on the 13th Dalai Lama’s correspondence with King George v and Queen Mary of Great Britain about the status of Tibet. Sergius Kuzmin and Jürgen von Ungern-Sternberg contribute a paper on an equally important theme of international politics, Baron Roman von Unger-Sternberg’s plans with regard to the unification of the Mongolian population and their merger with the Buryats, Kyrgyz, Manchus and Tibetans—broadly the ‘pan-Mongolian’ idea. These two papers are valuable in that they fill in gaps in our knowledge of events that are already well studied, while the other articles in the issue make contributions of fresh information and analysis.

ISSN: 1464-8172
E-ISSN: 2210-5018

Seminar – 24 January – Baasanjav Terbish

January 17th, 2017 by anna.c
Respond

Tuesday 24 January 2017

4.30–6.00 Mond Building Seminar Room

Baasanjav Terbish

University of Cambridge

Folk Healers in Kalmykia, South-West Russia

The presentation is about folk healers and their eclectic healing practices in Kalmykia. The presenter will describe and try to explain why folk healers, whose healing practices are based on Buddhism and folk beliefs, are prone to absorb modern theologies, ideas, and rituals no matter how strange and alien they may seem. Folk healers purport to derive their healing powers from deities or spirits whom they accept as their guardian patrons during special initiation rituals. In this sense they are spiritual healers too, whose repertoire is wide-ranging, encompassing many aspects of the lives of Kalmyks. People struck by bad luck, suffering from all sorts of ailments, loss, addiction, phobias, infertility, sleepwalking, and those haunted by malevolent spirits all come to see them.

Lent Term – Seminar Programme

January 16th, 2017 by anna.c
Respond

Please see below for this term’s programme which begins on Tuesday January 24  2017.

Research Seminars are held in the Mond Building Seminar Room, Free School Lane, Cambridge, CB2 3RF from 4.30–6.00

LENT 2017