While the study of the Mongol Empire is flourishing in both specialised monographs as well as several introductory books on the history of the empire, the study of modern Mongolia often seems neglected. A quick glance at available books reveal numerous travel accounts and several studies, particularly in anthropology, but much less on the history of the Mongolia. While the monographs are excellent studies, they are rather daunting to those who are just beginning to enter the study of Mongolia. Furthermore, the lack of accessible (and in print) books on post-Mongol Empire Mongolian history makes it all the more difficult to teach the history of Mongolia. Thus, the publication of Michael Dillon's Mongolia: A Political History of the Land and its People is most welcome.
With only 223 pages, including bibliography and index, the work is a slender volume and thus should not be considered comprehensive. Nonetheless, the title provides an adequate description of the contents. Dillon focuses on the political history of the Mongols from the twentieth century to the present. The initial chapter consists of the obligatory description of the land and climate as well as cultural influences. Of course, Chinggis Khan makes his appearance as well. Dillon does not linger too long in Mongolia's medieval glory, but moves quickly to the nineteenth century and the waning of the Qing Empire in the early twentieth century. He provides sufficient information to provide context. Specialists will wish for more, but for the type of work and intended audience, the Introduction and Chapter One are adequate.
In the first chapter, Dillon does a fine job in providing an overview of Mongolian culture and religion. While the book largely uses brief summaries in order to cover much ground, Dillon does occasionally take the time and space to expand on certain points of interest. One such episode is his discussion of the accoutrement of a shaman which will grab the reader's attention. Throughout the book one can detect the ghost of Owen Lattimore. While perhaps a bit dated and neglectful of more current scholarship, the author's references to Lattimore are not unwelcome as Lattimore's deep knowledge and personal experience in Mongolia, particularly in the first half of the twentieth century, can never be forgotten or dismissed. Indeed, Dillon's work may lead some to discover the rich work of Lattimore—not only as a traveller and witness to history, but also as a scholar. He also provides a brief but useful discussion of the Buddhist institution in Mongolia. While adequate, in his discussion of Zanabazar, the first Jebtsundamba Khutughtu, he does muddle things a bit. He indicates that Zanabazar was the 16th incarnation of Jebtsundamba, one of the Buddha's early disciples. While not inaccurate, it needs to be clarified that as Zanabazar became the first Jebtsundamba Khutughtu (incarnated lama), which is slightly different as the current Jebtsundamba Khutughtu is the ninth. Furthermore, Dillon's statement also ignores the more complex issue of the Jebtsundamba Khutughtu's more complex ties to an incarnation in Tibet and also the Boddhisatva Vajrapani.
In Chapter Two, Dillon provides an overview of early twentieth century Mongolia including contacts between the Russian Empire and Mongolia. He also discusses the development of Urga, the home and camp of the Bogd Khan, the title of the Eighth Jebtsundamba Khutughtu when he became the ruler of an independent Mongolia in 1911. Although the author relies a good bit on Thomas Ewing's controversial Between the Hammer and the Anvil? Chinese and Russian Policies in Outer Mongolia, 1911–1921 (1980), one cannot fault his decision due the relative dearth of scholarship in English on the topic. In this chapter, the author does engage in what will be a hallmark of the book. Each chapter has numerous subsections, averaging two pages. These hold up as discrete stand-alone units. This format will be followed for the entire book. They are reminiscent of encyclopedia entries. Furthermore, the author has written these to include his own observations on locations visited in his travels. Thus, the text (being conveniently travel sized) can also serve as a convenient travel reference for noteworthy historical sites, such as the Bogd Khan's palace.
Chapter Three focuses on the brief career of Sükebaatar and the rise of Choibalsan. Often paired as Mongolia's Lenin and Stalin, Dillon rightly demonstrates that this is an overly simplistic view and that it does not reflect either man accurately, especially in terms of roles or authority.
The coverage of Choibalsan continues into Chapter Four which discusses his political career and rule. Dillon sticks with the standard narrative that Stalin controlled everything indirectly, thus absolving Choibalsan of many of the more horrific aspects of the Choibalsan period (purges and collectivisation). Although Choibalsan did largely follow the trends occurring in the Soviet Union, he cannot be fully absolved as he carried out his own actions and made decisions. While his efforts to accumulate power may have been in emulation of Stalin, he ultimately was a willing agent for better or for worse. Mongolia's participation in World War II also receives attention, although the lion's share is on the battle of Khalkhyn Gol.
With the end of the war and Choibalsan's live, Chapter Five moves us into the rule of Tsedenbal, Choibalsan's successor. Dillon is largely positive of Tsedenbal's era and on the development of the Constitution of the Mongolian People's Republic. In this chapter, Dillon also discusses the Yalta Conference of 1944 which led to a referendum in which the people of Mongolia resoundingly (and unsurprisingly) voted for independence from China, thus achieving not only de facto but also de jure independence. Dillon mentions that the Yalta Conference helped preserve Mongolia, with the exception of Stalin carving off Tannu Tuva, but he does not investigate it, being content with the argument that Tannu Tuva was Turkic and not Mongolian. Despite his overall favourable view of the Tsedenbal period, Dillon does indicate that there were controversies. He reserves judgement and simply presents the events as is. The chapter is concluded by moving into the era of Batmönkh, the next leader of Mongolia (1984–1990).
In Chapter Six, the book moves into the Democratic Era. Dillon rightfully praises Batmönkh for not using force to stay in power, although it was certainly considered by the government in 1990. Dillon does a fine job of placing the democracy movement in Mongolia into the larger context of the fall of the Soviet Union in 1989–1990 while comparing the reaction to the breaching of the Berlin Wall and China's reaction to Tiananmen Square. Dillon also demonstrates that in many ways, the democracy revolution in Mongolia was a counter revolution as it was initially started by members of the Mongolian People's Revolutionary Party, who advocated for Gorbachev's reforms which they encountered when visiting the Soviet Union. His focus on Zorig and Elbegdorj, the latter a future president of Mongolia, provides a more personal touch. The story of Zorig becomes tragic as he was later murdered, most likely for his efforts to root out corruption.
The ramifications of the end of the socialist model and a move to a market-capitalist economy is the topic of Chapter Seven. With the transfer of government, Dillon discusses the Washington Consensus and does not whitewash the rocky transition to a democratic market economy. He also does not shy away from discussing the growing concern about China's intentions after the departure of Russian troops from Mongolia. The latter ties into the topics of Chapters Eight and Nine.
Chapter Eight deals with Mongolia's place in the new East Asia order. Dillon acknowledges that Mongolia views itself as an honest broker in East Asia. With its low population and weaker economy vis-à-vis China, South Korea, and Japan, it seeks to leverage its neutrality to help arbitrate differences. To this end, the author describes the Ulaanbaatar Dialogue, President Elbegdorj's role in diplomacy, and the Shanghai Cooperative Organization. Throughout this chapter we see Mongolia's balancing act of maintain trade with its fear of Chinese domination.
Chapter Nine is focuses on the relations between Mongolia and China. Interestingly, perhaps timely, the author also discusses the role of Inner Mongolia. He provides a brief history of Inner Mongolia and why it did not become part of Mongolia. Although he mis-states that there are 4 million Mongols (currently 6 million) in Inner Mongolia compared with 3 million in Mongolia, his point is still valid: there are more Mongols in Inner Mongolia than Mongolia proper. While brief, his inclusion of Inner Mongolia serves as a nice comparison of the development of the two regions.
In the final chapter, Chapter Ten, Dillon discusses the transformation of Urga into Ulaanbaatar as well as the search for a new identity outside of the Soviet imposed dogma. This leads to brief, but needed, discussion of Chinggis Khan becoming the central figure as well the revival of Buddhism. Additionally, there is a discussion of ties to other countries and those corresponding influences despite being a landlocked countries between Russia and China. Oddly, while he hints around it, the author never delves into the Third Neighbor policy which has been a cornerstone of Mongolian diplomacy since the move to democracy.
There are some issues with the book. Dillon refers to Chinggis Khan (the Mongolian name) as Genghis Khan, the needlessly anglicised version. Curiously, he states this is the Persian or Turkish from of the name (p. 13). It is unclear where he received the idea as Chinggis does not appear as the “G-word” in either language. Chinggiz and Cingiz are the Persian and Turkish forms respectively, using a clear CH phoneme.
The early history of Mongolia is not Dillon's forte and thus minor mistakes are, while unfortunate, understandable. In his discussion of the territories of Chinggis Khan's sons, he indicates that the Chaghatayids ruled parts of what is now Iran (p. 13). This is inaccurate as the Chaghatayid territories existed in Central Asia and ended at the Amu Darya River, separating modern Uzbekistan from Turkmenistan and Afghanistan. Undoubtedly, he saw references that indicated Chaghatayids in Khurasan. While there is an Iranian province by this name, the medieval Khurasan was a vast, vaguely defined region that stretched from Mazandaran to Herat or even to Taliqan in Afghanistan. Regardless, medieval Khurasan is divided between modern Turkmenistan, Afghanistan and Iran. While Chaghatayids did make inroads in Afghanistan in the 14th century as well and Chaghatayid princes in exile settled in Khurasan at various points, it was not part of the Chaghatayid domain per se but rather the Ilkhanate that dominated much of the Middle East (the Mongols of Persia). Thus, in terms of modern geography, the Chaghatayids gradually expanded into Turkmenistan and Afghanistan, but not Iran.
In this context, Dillon also mentions Chaghatai Turkic and refers to it as the lingua franca of the steppes (p. 13). He overstates its influence. While Chaghatai Turkic did indeed become a standard language, it was a literary language and primarily used by elites. There were some desultory efforts in the nineteenth and twentieth century to use it as the standard language of the Turks in the Russian Empire, but in the early modern period its use remained in Central Asia with less influence west of the Volga River.
Also in the introduction, he refers to the Emir Temür (Tamerlane) as a Mongol Emperor (p. 14). While not wholly inaccurate in the sense of real authority, it is misleading as Temür was not a Chinggisid and thus could not claim the title of Khan. Furthermore, while Temür was always the true power in Central Asia, for most of his career, he maintained a true Chinggisid prince on the throne as Khan. Dillon is, however, quite correct that the founders of the Mughal Empire were Temür's descendants.
A final comment on the faults of the book is the distracting tendency of the author to equate China with the Qing Empire. This is a tendency among many scholars and one that should be ended. China was not the Qing Empire, but simply a part of it. It may have been the core territory, but the rulers were Manchus and thus foreigners to China and not ethnically, culturally, or linguistically similar to the Han Chinese. Indeed, this is one of the reasons the Nationalist movement overthrew the Qing dynasty with the 1911 revolution. Furthermore, historic China was only part of the Qing Empire. Manchuria, Mongolia, Tibet, Xinjiang, much of Inner Mongolia, as well as portions of territory in Russia and Kazakhstan comprised the rest of the empire. Indeed, Chinese claims to Xinjiang, Tibet, and Manchuria, and much of Inner Mongolia only stem from the Qing period. While the PRC may extend those backwards in time, they are tenuous at best. Indeed, as Dillon acknowledges Chang Kai Shek claimed Mongolia for China, but Dillon recognised that it was largely based on the earlier Qing acquisition and recognition of the Qing as a “Chinese” dynasty. Thus when referring to the government during the period of 1633 to 1911, one should use Qing. For earlier periods, also the proper dynastic name should be used while post-1911, China as the state name would suffice.
Despite book's encyclopedic format, it is not encyclopedic in content. I do not view this as a detriment. It is a handy volume that one can accompany one while traveling in Mongolia. Additionally, with the abundance of names and places foreign to most readers, Dillon's brevity allows his book to be an accessible primer or gateway to more in depth study. He writes in a lucid and engaging manner while providing a good bibliography of sources in English to guide the reader to future knowledge. As the book is accessible it also serves as a nice text for those who might teach a course (or want to) on modern Mongolia. It provides students with sufficient context while leaving the professor with sufficient room to lecture on topic in greater detail.
