The "Origin" of Ulaanbaatar City : The Historiographies in Socialist and Post-Socialist　Mongolia

ウランバートルシ　ノ　キゲン　モンゴル　ニオケル　シャカイ　シュギ　ポスト　シャカイ　シュギ　ノ　レキシ　ジョジュツ

ニシガキ, ユウ

Nishigaki, Yu

オオサカ ダイガク ダイガクイン ニンゲン カガク ケンキュウカ シャカイガク ニンゲンガク ジンルイガク ケンキュウシツ

Sociology, Anthropology and Philosophy, Graduate School of Human Sciences, Osaka University

「起源」

歴史叙述

(ポスト)社会主義

連続性/不連続

city

“origin"

historiography

(post) socialism

continuity /discontinuity

We investigate the problem of the "origin" of Ulaanbaatar city, the capital of Mongolia in this paper. The "origin" was described in the historiographies of Ulaanbaatar city in socialist and post-socialist eras. We compare the historiographies of these two periods, and analyze how the "origin" was described in them. In socialist era, one historiographer, Dügersüren (1917-1970), described that "origin" was 1639. According to this, in post-socialist era, that "origin" was set officially on that year, and most of historiographers described the "origin" as same, 1639. The year of "origin" was same among two eras, but they described the "origin" very differntly. In socialist era, the "origin" of the city was described as nomadic camp, which would develop into the city, in which the Revolution broke out in 1921. On the other hand, in post-socialist era, the "origin" was described as the nomadic camp which has continuity from Chinggis Khan. In other words, the former saw the "origin" as the aspect of discontinuity, the latter saw it as the aspect of continuity.