A Tibetan Village on the Sino-Tibetan Borderland

(1)

A Tibetan Village on the Sino-Tibetan Borderland

A Study of Social Organization, Narrative and Local Identity in Lhagang

Sonam Wangmo (Silangwengmu)

Dissertation submitted for the partial fulfillment of the degree of Philosophiae Doctor, Faculty of Humanities, University of Oslo

June 2019

(2)

ii

(3)

iii Photo 1.1 Lhagang Village, July 2017¹

1 All photos taken by the author.

(4)

iv

(5)

v

Abstract

How have local people in Lhagang, a Tibetan village in Sichuan Province of China, experienced, responded to, and been transformed by the changes that were caused by the state-imposed

urbanization policies? How have they created a world of their own, and told their stories in the course of these changes? Since the beginning of the twenty-first century, globalization has spurred on modernization and the rapid development of the Chinese economy. With the primary goal of the state’s development projects being to bring prosperity to the entire country, which means bringing a market-oriented economy to even the remotest regions and smallest villages, urbanization has become one of the state’s fundamental policies for developing the western

regions of China. Without exception, urbanization-related development projects have dramatically transformed rural areas in Tibet. It is undeniable that this long-term policy of urbanization has had positive as well as negative consequences for Tibetans, especially those who live in rural areas.

However, I argue that local Tibetan communities also play an active and important role in this process of urbanization and are strategically dealing with the changes in which they are involved by employing available resources, both cultural and economic, in their pursuit of new

opportunities.

Based on my year-long fieldwork in Lhagang Village in Eastern Tibet, in this dissertation I present a comprehensive study of the community’s experience of, reactions to, and negotiations with the changes that have taken place in their social and economic world since 2000, and their continued exploration of what these changes mean to them. Specifically, it is about the ways that the local community has made use of and appropriated transitions for securing and advancing its economic and social situation as well as asserting its identity. Thus, this dissertation puts the spotlight on Lhagang villagers’ creation and implementation of collective rules, obligations, and restrictions to organize themselves and protect their economic advantage in the face of recent settlement in the village. They have also disseminated and utilized both written and oral narratives regarding the distinctiveness of the landscape of Lhagang and the seventh-century CE Chinese Princess Wencheng’s visit to Lhagang, bringing with her the Lhagang Jowo (Buddha) statue, to promote tourism and justify their claim to be a unique community. Finally, they have presented and consolidated their identity through cultural representations such as the worship of local protective and mountain deities, the horse racing festival, and the Tibetan New Year celebration. I pay particular attention to the villagers’ efforts to shape and strengthen a sense of belonging to the village and their identity as the original community in that location.

In this dissertation, I highlight the local community’s adaptive strategies and activities to deal

(6)

vi with these changes and to find its own development strategies in the process of urbanization, based on its distinctive resources grounded in local culture. I contend that practices of the Lhagang villagers are not just local reactions to state-induced social change, but also a complex interaction of elements that go beyond local agency. Therefore, although the case study of the Lhagang community presents a particular scenario, it contributes to the debate on survival strategies of small communities in a resilient way, involving resistance, transformation, and adaptation in the vast and diverse areas of Tibet in contemporary China. The research results presented in this study also have wider implications for the study of people’s struggle for

recognition and identity, a phenomenon that is becoming increasingly common in a global context.

(7)

vii

Acknowledgements

Life is a journey, similar to climbing a mountain. Climbing this “PhD mountain” has truly been a life-altering experience for me. Now, with the words of this dissertation, my PhD life is about to come to a conclusion. The dissertation is the result of my work during four years in the

Department of Culture Studies and Oriental Languages (IKOS) at the University of Oslo. I have to admit that writing a PhD dissertation is a long and difficult climb and has been a constant challenge. Thus, completing this journey would have been impossible without the support, encouragement, guidance, and love of numerous people. I would like to express my sincere gratitude to those who have contributed to my dissertation and supported me in one way or another during this amazing journey.

All the people in Lhagang Village in Eastern Tibet deserve my deepest gratitude for sharing their stories and views as well as for helping me in so many ways during my research trips, although they have to remain anonymous. Without the information they so freely provided I could not have completed this dissertation.

A big “thank you!” goes to my primary supervisor, Professor Hanna Havnevik (IKOS) for all the generous support, encouragement, care, and guidance she has provided throughout my academic as well as non-academic life in Norway. I have been extremely lucky to have had her as my supervisor, and she has contributed greatly to my dissertation. In the course of writing the dissertation, I have been inspired by many fruitful discussions related to my research. I really appreciate her prompt reply to all my questions and queries through numerous emails. She has always done her best to help me in so many ways.

My sincerest gratitude is reserved for Professor emeritus Per Kværne for his incredible support, inspiration, and constant guidance from the very beginning of my PhD life. I am really thankful for his valuable comments, suggestions, and insights, and especially for his willingness to tutor me during the process of writing as well as edit my entire dissertation. I remain amazed that despite his busy schedule, he was usually able to meet me in less than a week and discuss all the corrections, comments and suggestions that he made on every page of my text. His remarks and corrections absolutely improved the quality of my dissertation. It would never have been possible for me to bring this work to completion without his patient guidance and effective supervision.

Likewise, I would also like to express my special thanks and gratitude to my co-supervisor Gray Tuttle from Columbia University for reading all my chapters and providing provoking feedback and inspiring comments. I am thankful for his continued motivation and insightful guidance.

(8)

viii My sincere appreciation goes to the Norwegian Quota Scheme for funding a four-year scholarship for my doctoral studies and life in Norway. I also thank the Department of Cultural Studies and Oriental Languages in the Faculty of Humanities for providing me with a stimulating academic environment for my studies. I have learned so much about the academic world through interesting seminars, PhD courses, and discussions on different topics. I also thank the department for

providing me with a well-equipped office and an annual grant from 2015 to 2018. I am grateful for the Faculty of Humanities for funding my research trips in 2017 and 2018 and the University of Oslo Sasakawa Young Leaders Fellowship for funding my two-month fieldwork in 2018 in Lhagang Village. The Network for University Co-operation Tibet-Norway deserves my heartfelt thanks for funding my travel costs for seminars and conferences I participated in during my study, the tutoring fee for my dissertation, final editing costs, and basic living costs during my three- month stay in Oslo in 2019.

My great thanks also go to the administrative staff at the Norwegian Quota Scheme and the Department of Cultural Studies and Oriental Languages for their help, care, and support through my years in Oslo. Asbjørn Brovold, Birgit Mariana Larsen Hatzianastasiou, Kari Andersen, Lynn Joy Josephson, Michele Jeanette Nysæter, Olga Djordjilovic, Sathya Sritharan, and Steinar Salte deserve my special thanks and appreciation. Without their kindness and patience, my study and life in Norway would have been more difficult. Although the Network for University Co- operation Tibet-Norway no longer exists, I still want to thank all its members who have contributed immensely to Tibetan studies and Tibetan students who studied in Norway.

I would also like to thank Professor Tsering Thar at Minzu University, Beijing, China, who was my supervisor for my master’s degree, who introduced me to academic work, and supported and encouraged me in my research. My sincere thanks also go to my mid-term evaluator Heidi Fjeld from the Department of Health and Society at University of Oslo for her stimulating comments and suggestions regarding my project. It was because of her challenging me to strive for a more analytical way of discussion and greater clarity in the general argument and structure of my dissertation that I could form a clearer idea about the theoretical basis for the dissertation. Kerry Fast, my final editor, enhanced the language quality of the dissertation. I also wish to express my deep appreciation to Gerald Roche, Nathan W. Hill, Dan Smyer Yu, Yudru Tsomu, Stéphane Gros, and Astrid Hovden for their generous help and inspiration, especially Gerald Roche for always being available and supportive for editing my articles and writing recommendation letters.

I also want to thank Ragnhild Schea for volunteering to edit one of my chapters at a crucial time.

(9)

ix I would like to extend my thanks to all the Tibetan students and friends in Oslo with whom I have shared so many good memories and fun. Without them, my life would have been lonely. Hiroyuki Suzuki, a truly generous friend whom I have known for six years, has always supported and encouraged my studies. His immense knowledge of Tibet’s linguistic variety and his dedication to academic work is inspiring. Pema Choedon is the sweetest and sincerest girl I have met in my life;

she always encourages me with all her delicious Indian food. I appreciated her companionship during crucial times of writing the dissertation. Ajia Pema Tsamchoe Thargyal and Gen Rinzin Thargyal are the kindest couple in Oslo. I am thankful to them for always inviting me and other Tibetan students to their home and cooking delicious food when we missed our home and felt stressed. I felt extremely touched.

Last but not the least, my family is the most basic source of my life energy. Words cannot express the feelings I have for my parents and family for their constant unconditional support, both

emotionally and financially. They have always encouraged me to explore my potential and pursue my dreams in academia. I would not be here without their understanding and support. I would also like to give my special thanks to my husband, Tsering Samdrup, for supporting and keeping me motivated throughout this work. He has been a constant source of strength and inspiration. He is not only the partner of my life but also a good friend and a teacher. I will always vividly

remember all the discussions and debates we had on academic theories, topics, and worldwide social issues. Later these discussions and arguments became a part of my life, and I have to say that all these experiences have taught me to observe and understand things from different perspectives. These informal conversations and discussions helped me to analyze my own fieldwork data and write my own doctoral dissertation.

I want to say thank you so much again from bottom of my heart to all the above-mentioned people.

You not only taught me about rigorous critical thinking so crucial in academia but also showed me by your example how to practice kindness, dedication, and selflessness in life. Most

importantly, in the writing of the dissertation, you all gave me your time, the most precious and thoughtful gift of all.

(10)

x

(11)

xi

List of maps

Map 1.1 Lhagang Town, Sichuan Province, China ... xix

Map 1.2 Lhagang Village, Lhagang Town and its surroundings ... xx

Map 1.3 Satellite image of Lhagang Village ... 7

Map 1.4 The eighteen villages in Lhagang Town ... 9

Map 1.5 Provincial road S 215 ... 11

Map 1.6 Satellite image of monastic institutions around Lhagang Village ... 40

(15)

xv

List of tables

Table 1.1 Number of households in Lhagang Village (2000–2018) ... 106 Table 5.1 The contents of the dkar chag ... 162 Table 5.2 The contents of the gnas bstod ... 167

(16)

xvi

List of photos

Photo 1.1 Lhagang Village, July 2017 ... iii

Photo 1.2 Lhagang Monastery, February 2018 ... 40

Photo 3.1 Lhagang Grassland monument, July 2017. ... 112

Photo 3.2 Horses ready to be rented out to tourists July 2017. ... 112

Photo 3.3 Tourists riding rented out horses, August 2018. ... 113

Photo 3.4 Stalls in a central tourist location, July 2017. ... 113

Photo 3.5 Tourists and cars in front of Minyag Golden Stūpa, May 2016. ... 114

Photo 3.6 A Lhagangrowa charging tourists a grassland fee, July 2017. ... 114

Photo 3.7 Two Lhagangrowas rent their horses to tourists, July 2017. ... 115

Photo 3.8 A Lhagangrowa making tea for members of her group, July 2017. ... 115

Photo 4.1 Lhagangrowas having lunch during the horse rental business, July 2017. ... 154

Photo 4.2 Two group leaders dividing the day’s earnings, July 2017. ... 154

Photo 4.3 Lhagangrowas taking their shares of the day’s horse rental business, July 2017. ... 155

Photo 4.4 The group leaders making paper notes for assigning community labor using the ... 155

Photo 4.5 Paper notes ready to be picked, July 2017. ... 156

Photo 4.6 Lhagangrowas cutting and packing grass for winter fodder, September 2018. ... 156

Photo 4.7 Lhagangrowas having lunch during communal labor, September 2018. ... 157

Photo 4.8 Tibetan and Chinese letters of guarantee, August 2016. ... 157

Photo 5.1 Lhagang Jowo in Lhagang Monastery, July 2018. ... 193

Photo 5.2 Mount Zhara Karpo, January 2016. ... 193

Photo 6.1 Horse racing on Mount Zhara Lhatse, in front of the shrine of the mountain deity, June 2017. ... 217

Photo 6.2 Lhagangrowa men demonstrating their skill in horse riding, June 2017. ... 217

Photo 6.3 Lhagangrowas burning aromatic juniper branches during the horse racing festival, June 2017. ... 218

Photo 6.4 Lhagangrowa women playing tug-of-war, June 2017. ... 218

Photo 6.5 Lhagangrowas performing a traditional circle dance during the horse racing festival, June 2017. ... 219

(17)

xvii

Note on Tibetan transliteration and Chinese pinyin

There have been many systems of transliteration of Tibetan in Roman script proposed over the years, but the most popular by far has been the Wylie system developed by Turrel Wylie (1959).

Thus, all Tibetan names of people and places in this dissertation are transcribed in the standard Wylie transliteration system, and the root letter of the word is capitalized without italics except for some specific terms, such as the titles of texts, technical terms, and specific local terms. In order to distinguish Chinese terms from Tibetan terms, all Chinese terms are rendered in pinyin transcription with an added “Chin” before the term. Chinese terms are presented in italics except for place names, whose first letter is capitalized. A list of terms with Tibetan letters and Chinese characters is provided in Appendix III.

(18)

xviii

Note on China’s system of administrative division

China’s administrative units are currently organized as a four-tier system, dividing the nation into provinces, counties, townships, and villages.

In the first tier, the country is divided into provinces (Tib. zhing chen; Chin. sheng), autonomous regions (Tib. rang skyong ljongs; Chin. zi zhi qu), special administrative regions (Tib. dmigs gsl srid 'dzin sa khul; Chin. te bie xing zheng qu), and municipalities (Tib. khong gtogs grong chen;

Chin. zhi xia shi) directly under the central government.

In the second tier, provinces and autonomous regions are subdivided into autonomous prefectures (Tib. rang skyong khul; Chin. zi zhi zhou), counties (Tib. rdzong; Chin. xian), autonomous

counties (Tib. rang skyong rdzong; Chin. zi zhi xian), and cities (Tib. grong khyer; Chin. shi).

In the third tier, counties and autonomous counties are subdivided into towns (Tib, grong rdal;

Chin. zhen) and townships (Tib. shang; Chin. xiang). Towns and townships are on the some administrative level, but towns are larger and often more populous and less remote than a township. In the case of Lhagang, it used to be a township, but in 2015 it became a town.

In the fourth tier, townships and towns are further subdivided into villages (Tib. sde ba; Chin.

cun), which serve as a basic administrative unit. Divisions like neighborhoods and communities are informal, but have defined boundaries and designated heads (one per area).

Municipalities are directly under the central government and are large cities, subdivided into districts and counties. Autonomous prefectures are subdivided into counties, autonomous

counties, and cities. Autonomous regions, autonomous prefectures, and autonomous counties are all ethnic areas. The constitution specifically empowers the state to establish special

administrative regions where necessary. A special administrative region is a local administrative area directly under the central government.

China has twenty-three provinces, five autonomous regions, four centrally administered municipalities, and two special administrative regions.

(19)

xix Map 1.1 Lhagang Town, Sichuan Province, China²

2 Chandra Jayasuriya, Cartographer, The University of Melbourne.

(20)

xx Map 1.2 Lhagang Village, Lhagang Town and its surroundings

(21)

1

Preface

My academic connection with Lhagang³ (Map 1.2) and its people began in the summer of 2012 when I first visited the village as a research scholar. I was working on my M.Phil. thesis at the University of Oslo, which was devoted to the history of Lhagang Monastery in eastern Tibet.⁴ At that time, I was collecting data for a comprehensive description of a local monastery in a shifting social context.⁵ During my two-month period of fieldwork in Lhagang, I also glimpsed fragments of lay people’s lives through conversations with them and the occasional meeting I attended. Yet I did not pay much attention to the concerns and activities of the lay community. Thus, my initial PhD project proposal was to continue in the vein of my M.Phil. I intended to study the Lhagang Monastery and its relationship with its mother monastery (Tib. ma dgon), Rikhu (Tib. Ri khud) Monastery, which was founded in 1270 and is located in Bonposhi (Tib. Bon po gshis) Township in Dartsendo (Tib. Dar rtse mdo).⁶ However, a lack of textual sources made me re-evaluate my topic.

The little I had learnt about Lhagang lay people’s lives during my fieldwork for my M.Phil. led me to a new question: Was it only Lhagang Monastery that was forced to deal with various kinds of social and economic transformations? What were the effects of these changes on the local lay people, and how did they respond? While my previous research focus was confined to the monastic community, it became clear to me that the recent transformations and dynamics in Lhagang had multiple sources. Apart from the monastery, the lay community was also actively involved in various social and economic changes and thus had contributed to the cultural and social complexity in contemporary Lhagang. Therefore, in my present study, I explore the world of the local lay community. Specifically, I focus on the community of Lhagangrowas and its responses to the state’s policy of social and economic change. The term “Lhagangrowas” (Tib. ra ba, literally meaning people who live in the same courtyard of Lhagang) refers specifically to the group of Tibetans who are understood to have lived in Lhagang Village (Map 1.2) for generations and thus consider themselves to be the original inhabitants of the village. Hence, the term

3 Lhagang has two administrative levels. First, in a broad sense, “Lhagang” refers to Lhagang Town, which has jurisdiction over eighteen villages. Second, in a narrow sense, it only refers to Lhagang Village, which is one of the eighteen villages in Lhagang Town. According to the administrative system, Lhagang Village is an area covering approximately 17 square kilometers.

4 The term “Tibet” in this dissertation refers to all the Tibetan areas in China, including Tibet Autonomous Region (TAR), Qinghai, Sichuan, Gansu, and Yunnan Provinces, unless otherwise noted.

5 Per Kværne has differentiated between three main types of monasteries: pan-Tibetan monasteries, local monasteries, and hermitages, see Kværne 1997: 87–88. Georges Dreyfus (2003) argues for local and central monasteries and would not categorize a hermitage as monastery.

6 Dartsendo is the capital city of Kandze (Tib. dKar mdzes) Tibetan Autonomous Prefecture in Sichuan Province of southwest China. June 2015, it was changed to a municipality under the jurisdiction of a prefecture from the County.

See “Note on the administrative system of China” in the front material for details.

(22)

2

“Lhagangrowas” as I use it in my dissertation does not include the new residents who have settled in Lhagang Village after 2000.

The question whether Lhagangrowas are original to Lhagang is complex. “Original” in this regard does not strictly speaking mean “native” in the sense of “autochthonous,” as most of the “original”

Lhagangrowas have moved in from other places, except for The Thirteen Households of Lhagang.⁷ In my dissertation I write about Lhagangrowas as a community, but there are social differentiations and stratification within the community in terms of education, gender, and socioeconomic background (see Chapter Two). For the sake of convenience, I refer to both Lhagangrowas and the new residents as “Lhagang villagers.”

In order to develop a better understanding of what these changes mean to Lhagangrowas, the emphasis of this study is placed on their adaptive and transformative activities. These activities present the process of Lhagangrowas’ responses to change and the prominence of their sense of identity⁸ in a context of social, political, and economic change. However, I have also paid

attention to the interrelationship between the community of Lhagangrowas and other communities in the village, such as the new residents and the monastery, as they have all played an important role in this process. I collected data through fieldwork in each community, which allowed me to appreciate how important it is to be aware of interactions and intersections among diverse communities in a single location.

Another motivation to study Lhagang Village was that there are only a few studies on this village, its people, and their life in a broad context of socio-political change, including the recent advent of tourism. Therefore, I went back to Lhagang again for extensive fieldwork for my PhD project in 2015. I immediately learned that people in Lhagang Village had tried to adapt to different

changes and search for new opportunities, so as to create a better life for themselves. Among them, the community of Lhagangrowas actively engaged in establishing and developing various

collective activities. The socio-political changes and the presence of tourists gave them the opportunity to create new ways to secure advantages and preserve their sense of belonging to a specific community, and in the process, they showed a remarkable capacity for adaptation and resilience.

7 Locally known as lha sgang ru ba bcu gsum. More details on Lhagangrowas and the new settlers in Lhagang village are discussed in subsequent chapters.

8 By “identity” I refer to a sense of belonging to a place, and thus applied as local identity. In other words, the identity of the community of Lhagangrowa has no clear-cut linguistic and cultural boundaries distinguishing them from other Tibetans in Lhagang, but they consider themselves as the original community of Lhagang, and thus have a strong sense of belonging to Lhagang. For more details on the concept of “identity,” see Chapter Two.

(23)

3 However, my interaction with Lhagang Village is more than as a research site. There is also a personal reason for my interest. My family has lived in Lhagang for generations, and I myself was born and raised there. My family and friends still live in the village. Thus, I am intimately familiar with every corner of Lhagang.

Yet the numerous changes in my hometown have gradually distanced me from this once familiar place. When I was in primary school, the landscape of Lhagang Village was totally different than it is today. There were few permanent dwellings or shops. Lhagang was a small, semi-pastoral village. I still remember going with friends to pick wild strawberries there. I particularly recall a wintertime scene: the village was covered with smoke from the chimneys, and the small paths were filled with horses and livestock. Such scenes no longer exist, and the change that has taken place can be connected to broader social and economic contexts. In the course of less than two decades, Lhagang has undergone a dramatic transformation and has become a booming tourist village. Therefore, my interest in local peoples’ lives and their local identity also grew out of me witnessing their adaptive activities and practices under changing socio-political circumstances post-2000.

(24)

4

(25)

5

Chapter One: Introduction

On a clear, sunny day in late November 2015, I was having a cup of butter tea in the backyard of my friend’s home and chatting with her since we had not seen each other for nearly three years. In the late afternoon, one of our middle-school classmates joined us. He comes from an adjacent village, about twenty minutes by car. But he was in Lhagang at that time because his parents wanted to circumambulate the monastery and the famous Lhagang Jowo statue (Tib. Jo bo;

Buddha Śākyamuni).⁹ The three of us talked about how things had changed over the years and that everything looked different now, and especially how our hometown had undergone dramatic transformation since our childhood. He said that local people were facing a lot challenges caused by the state’s social and economic policies. However, he thought that people in Lhagang were handling these changes well compared to neighboring places like his own village. He kept saying that Lhagangrowas had created an organized community with established rules and always looked for advantageous opportunities. He felt that the Lhagangrowas community had been strengthened and united by facing and dealing with these changes, displaying a communal distinctiveness—a strong sense of Lhagangrowa identity.

Our conversation was like any other conversation we would have had on meeting each other after a long time. Today, when I reflect on our conversation and my friend’s words, I find that in the face of changes, people in Lhagang have created a local world where they actively engage in change and are flexible to develop other possibilities. The activities and practices they have engaged in to their own advantage and to maintain a sense of identity are understandable, and most importantly, are inseparable from village life in the context of social and economic changes, the rapid development of tourism, and population growth in the village in the twenty-first century.

I. Background of Lhagang Village i. Research objectives and questions

The Lhagangrowas, as the majority residents of the village, consider themselves to be the original inhabitants of the place where they were born and have lived for generations. However, most Lhagangrowas are migrants, having moved to Lhagang Village, according to oral history, for different reasons. Nevertheless, the newly settled residents, including those who have lived and worked in Lhagang for nearly two decades and are registered as Lhagang villagers in the

9 This statue is enshrined in Lhagang Monastery. Local villagers in Lhagang believe that it was brought by the Chinese Princess Wencheng in the seventh century CE when she stopped at Lhagang on her way to Lhasa to marry King Songtsen Gampo (Tib. Srong btsan sGam bo). Thus, it is widely believed that a pilgrimage to the Lhagang Jowo yields the same merit as a pilgrimage to the Lhasa Jowo. For further discussion, see Chapter Five.

(26)

6 authorities’ household registration (Chin. hu kou),¹⁰ are considered outsiders (Tib. phyir nas 'ong mkhan).¹¹ The term “outsider” is used by Lhagangrowas for the households who have come to live and work in recent years in Lhagang Village. It includes both registered and non-registered inhabitants from neighboring villages who have settled in Lhagang Village after 2000. This migration must be contextualized in connection with the socio-political changes and economic development policies post-2000. In this study, I want to explore how these changes have modified local people’s lives in Lhagang. How have local people experienced and reacted to these changes?

Specifically, I want to know how people in Lhagang have created a local world and how they tell their stories in the course of these changes.

Lhagang Village (Map 1.3) is the main focus of my research, as it is not only the place where Lhagangrowas reside but also the most active and economically developed site among

neighboring villages.¹² There is no doubt that change has always been present in Lhagang Village in different historical circumstances and periods, but my study narrows the historical and topical focus to the critical time period after the turn of the millennium, when the village underwent dramatic transformation. I have turned the spotlight on the period between 2003 and 2007, considered to be a transitional period for people in Lhagang because of the state’s policy of accelerating urbanization (Chin. cheng zhen hua) in rural areas.¹³ This policy is not just a technical matter of increased density of buildings and people, but also the means of imposing various transformation projects. The process of urbanization includes changes in population, occupations, industrial structures, land, and geographical space.¹⁴

10 Household registration is a government system of registration, determining where citizens are allowed to live. See Yeh et al. 2015; Andreas and Zhan 2016; Chan 2014; Looney and Rithmire 2016; Phillips et al. 2000: 1–40.

11 “Outsider” is an emic term referring to the recent settled households who do not consider themselves as outsiders to the village. In this dissertation, for the sake of academic clarification to differentiate between the newly settled households and the community of Lhagangrowas, I will use “new settlers” instead of “outsiders.” It is also worth noting that the new settlers do not include non-Tibetan migrants, transient travelers, tourists, and visitors.

12 The village head stated that “Lhagang Village is the most developed village in terms of standard of living and income.” (September 19, 2016). This is also a widely shared perception among local people and neighboring villages.

13 Urbanization, according to the Chinese state refers to, together with the general development of productive forces in a country or region, the progress of science and technology as well as the adjustment of the economic structure, so that society gradually changes from an agriculture-based rural society to a non-agricultural, industry-based modern urban society. In Tibet, the promotion of urbanization is carried out in two ways: first, rural villages and townships are promoted to the administrative rank of towns; second, counties are promoted to the administrative level of municipalities. The former is the transformation of some rural areas into central towns, while the latter is the process of transforming some counties into cities. These two different levels of modification are manifested in creating more employment opportunities, absorbing a large number of surplus rural populations, making these central towns and cities the focus of economic development, driving economic development in other villages and townships, thereby changing the industrial structure of the entire region. By “urbanization,” I specifically refer to the first process.

14 Jiang 2005.

(27)

7 Map 1.3 Satellite image of Lhagang Village

This dissertation presents a comprehensive study of the Lhagangrowas’ experiences and reactions to the post-2000 changes and their continuous exploration of what these changes mean for them.

Specifically, it is about the ways that Lhagangrowas have made use of and appropriated

transitions for securing and advancing their economic and social situation. In other words, their practices of adaptation, transformation, and creation are referred to as “the capacity of resilience”

(see Chapter Two). This will be a theme throughout the dissertation. The goal of this dissertation, then, is to develop a better understanding of the complexities and dynamics of local practices in the lives of a rural Tibetan village in a dramatically changing world.

My study is significant in two ways. First, the analysis of socio-political and economic changes in a rural village extends previous studies of social, political, and economic variations in Tibet.

When discussing Tibetans’ reaction to change, both Tibetan and state discourses omit the diversity of Tibetans, but for different reasons; the debate is polarized as Tibetan adversity versus state accomplishment. As Melvyn Goldstein has shown in important ways, Western discussions of the region and identity formation have been complicit in viewing Tibet as a holistic rather than a diversified and problematic entity.¹⁵ My study thus displays the diversity of Tibet in Lhagang; not only do their geographical environments differ—a rather obvious point—but also their ways of being Tibetan differ, especially when it comes to dealing with and responding to the changes.

Second, the contemporary social transformation and development of a rural Tibetan community should not be considered as creating winners and losers; instead, it can also be an opportunity for staging local people’s identity claims. Rather than seeing Lhagangrowas as passive recipients of

15 Goldstein 1994:76–111.

(28)

8 the state’s policies, this study shows that they are strategically transforming these changes for their own purposes.

My study of Lhagangrowas’ reactions and their adaptive strategies takes a balanced approach that not only addresses the diversity and complexity of Tibetans living in a changing socio-political and economic context, but also provides a more nuanced means for understanding a locality’s developmental process and performance, especially during challenging periods. Although the case study of the Lhagang community presents a particular scenario, it contributes to the debate on survival strategies of small-scale communities, involving resistance, transformation, and adaptation in the vast and diverse areas of Tibet in contemporary China. The research results presented in this study also have wider implications for the study of people’s struggle for

recognition and identity, a phenomenon that is becoming increasingly common in a global context.

ii. Location, population, typography

Since the division of China into provinces, counties, and townships after an administrative reorganization that was begun in 1949, many traditional ways of identifying regions and places have been lost. Thus, one must not take for granted that political boundaries were seen in the past as they are today. Since the reorganization, the definition of “Lhagang” has become blurred in the local community. According to local people, only those living in the village center were formerly called Lhagangrowas. This is in accordance with their conventional way of indicating a person’s belonging by the name of the place where they had been living for a long period of time. In 1957, when the community became a district (Chin. qu),¹⁶ the name “Lhagang” came to denote a larger territory. In 1993 it again changed, this time to a township (Chin. xiang) and then in 2015 it became a town (Chin. zhen),¹⁷ which consisted of eighteen villages (Chin. cun)¹⁸ (Map. 1.4), including Lhagang Villagewith the community of Lhagangrowa as its core component.

16 A district is on the same administrative level as township, which was used before the 1990s. See “Note on the administrative system of China” in the front material for details.

17 Lhagang Township was changed to a town administrative level in 2015.See “Note on administrative system of China” for details.

18 These eighteen villages are not associated with the same monastery and common local ruler (prior to 1949), but most of them are related to tshowa (Tib. tsho ba) alliances (e.g, the Mewa [Tib. rMe ba]): tshowa alliance from Kandze (Tib. dKar mdzes) and Nyarong (Tib. Nyag rong), the Washu (Tib.Wa shul), and tshowa alliance from Serta (Tib. gSer rta) that migrated from other parts of Kandze Prefecture. Thus they speak a variety of local dialects. See Suzuki and Sonam Wangmo (forthcoming) for the migration history, dialects, and the name of every village and their traditional divisions.

(29)

9

Map 1.4 The eighteen villages in Lhagang Town

Lhagang Village is located in the Lhagang Administrative Town in northwestern Dartsendo in the Sino-Tibetan borderlands of Kham. Currently, the village has a population of 700–800 registered inhabitants, ninety-four percent of whom are Lhagangrowas. Nearly five percent belong to households that resettled there in recent years. They are included in the official Lhagang household registration. Chinese who have lived in Lhagang for a long time are also included in the Lhagang household registration, constituting the remaining one percent. Apart from the registered residents, there are more than a hundred Tibetans and eighty Chinese businessmen who are not registered in Lhagang but nevertheless live and work in the village. The administrative office of Lhagang Town is also based in Lhagang Village. Thus, the village also serves as a governmental and commercial center for the surrounding pastoralists, who often come into the village for administrative reasons and to purchase necessities, such as official stamps, ID registrations, and groceries, and to have their motorcycles repaired.

Locally, Lhagang is considered to be a sacred place because of its auspicious and distinctive topography. People in Lhagang say their village resembles a crescent because of the river on the west side of the village that protects it, which they consider to be auspicious. Not only that, the village is surrounded by four holy hills, constituting what traditionally is regarded as a perfect combination. The local belief is that each hill represents a different Buddha, guarding the village and its inhabitants against evil and catastrophe in every direction. Of special importance is the

(30)

10 mountain known as Zhara Karpo (Tib. bZhag bra dKar po),¹⁹ which is regarded as one of the most important pilgrimage sites in Lhagang. It is documented as a retreat site in a number of religious texts, appears in oral traditions,²⁰ and plays a part in religious rituals. Local people say, “Only from Lhagang village can one catch the perfect angle of Zhara mountain.”²¹ Hence many religious masters from other Tibetan areas have visited Lhagang, staying in retreat on the mountain for long periods of time.

The hill to the east of the village is believed to be the residence of the local mountain deity Zhara Lhatse (Tib. bZhag bra lHa rtse). Whenever there is an important event in the village or a

household, people go to the mountain top of Zhara Lhatse to make offerings of burnt juniper twigs and barley flour, praying for peace and harmony. There are many local stories about how Zhara Lhatse has protected the villagers from conflicts and natural disasters.

The dkar chag (a guidebook of the locality),²² a manuscript that is believed to be a rediscovered text, a terma (Tib. gter ma),²³also describes the attributes of the site of Lhagang and contends that it was consecrated at the same time as Vajrāsana in India by Śākyamuni, and is a place chosen by Avalokiteśvara as being auspicious for disseminating the Dharma.²⁴People have imbued the landscape with meanings, usually in accordance with Buddhist ideals of the universe, constructing their own micro-space. The sacred and distinctive environment of Lhagang Village is closely entwined with the villagers’ perceptions and activities. Thus, local people believe that

circumambulation and prostration to the mountains, lakes, and rivers in Lhagang purify one’s sins of this life.

The village is located on one of the main provincial roads (Road 215)²⁵ of Sichuan. This road (Map 1.5) connects Rangaka Town (Tib. Ra rnga Kha) to Bamey Town (Tib. Bar smad), passing through Lhagang Village. It is an important transport and trade route in Kandze Prefecture. The road is significant not only for the people of Lhagang, but also for people living along the road to it. Eugen Weber writes that “the road was not just a facility for going and returning; it was also an

19 This mountain is located at the junction of Dartsendo, Tawu (Tib. rTa'u) and Galrong (Tib. rGyal rong) counties in Kandze Prefecture, Sichuan Province.

20 Both texts, lha sgang ring mos gnas kyi dkar chag (fol. 8b–9b) and ba lha sgang gi gnas bstod (fol. 4a–4b)

(henceforth referred to as dkar chag and gnas bstod respectively) give accounts of religious masters visiting Lhagang.

Oral narratives, likewise, describe prominent lamas who spent their lives in the many retreat huts on Zhara mountain.

See Chapter Five.

21 In local Tibetan, “Lha sgang nas lta na da bzod bzhag bra yag po rig red.”

22 Neither the date nor the author of this text is known. The version I collected was copied from the original manuscript preserved by Lama Sangye in 1990. For more details on the dkar chag, see Section II of Chapter Two.

23 Terma is generally translated as “treasure” or “hidden treasure” and refers to religious texts or objects believed to have been hidden by Padmasambhava in the eighth century CE and subsequently rediscovered by religious adepts.

24 dkar chag, fol. 2a–b.

25 Traders have used the provincial Road 215 from Dartsendo to Lhasa through Rangaka, Lhagang, Bamey, Dege (Tib. sDe dge) and Chamdo (Tib. Chab mdo) since it was opened, together with the national Road 318, in 1954.

(31)

11 opportunity to compare conditions and modes of life.”²⁶ In Lhagang, pilgrims who prostrate along the road from Kham to central Tibet spend several days in Lhagang during winter, merchants travel the road, and numerous domestic and foreign tourists use the road to visit Lhagang.

According to Kellogg Corps–Kham Aid’s report in 2005,²⁷ “86% of tourists in Tagong [Lhagang]

and Kangding [Dartsendo] were domestic tourists. Almost half of the tourists interviewed came from Chengdu or elsewhere in Sichuan Province.”²⁸ The road is not just a conduit for transporting commodities in and out of the village. As the following chapters will show, the road has

increasingly contributed to building trade networks connecting Lhagang to the larger region.

Because of the convenience of the road, the number of pilgrims, tourists, and merchants is steadily increasing, turning Lhagang Village into an assembly point like Dartsendo. At the same time, these opportunities are bringing substantial income to local people and therefore attracting migrants to Lhagang Village.

Map 1.5 Provincial road S 215

26 Weber 2007, as cited in Harwood 2013:3.

27 Kellogg Corps team at Kellogg School of Management, Northwestern University, was engaged by Kham Aid to conduct a market analysis of the feasibility of producing and selling traditional Tibetan artisanal products in Tagong (Lhagang) in July 27, 2005.

28 Kellogg Corps–Kham Aid Report 2005:6.

(32)

12 iii. The village monastery

1. Narratives about the origin of the monastery

Lhagang Village has long been famous because of its monastery, known as Lhagang Monastery (Photo 1.2). It is considered to be one of the most important Sakya (Tib. Sa skya) monasteries in Kham.²⁹ Ren Naiqiang stated in his inspection report on Xikang in 1943 that the Han people knew very little about Lhagang Monastery, but it was famous among the Tibetans, and that it was especially venerated by the pastoralists in the Kham area.³⁰ Today (2017), the monastery has around a hundred monks, and most of them come from the community of Lhagangrowas.

There are different narratives about the foundation of Lhagang Monastery. For example, it is widely believed in Lhagang that the Chinese Princess Wencheng built the monastery in the

seventh century CE to locate the Jowo statue when she stopped at Lhagang on her way to Lhasa to marry the Tibetan king, Songtsen Gampo (Tib. Srong btsan sGam po).

Another story claims that the monastery was built in the seventh century CE on the order of the king himself. The king was happy to receive the Chinese princess as his wife, and built 108 temples throughout Tibet, with gates facing China, the last one being in Lhagang.

Monks in the monastery tell another story, viz. that an Indian master named Dramze Gonpo (Tib.

Bram ze mGon po) founded the monastery. It is said that the master’s sword flew to Lhagang, after which he built a stūpa to enshrine it. The story of the Indian master’s visit to Lhagang is also known to local people, as they believe the Indian master left two big footprints on the hills to the east and west of the monastery.

Ren Naiqiang confirmed that there were many legendary narratives concerning the origin of the monastery, most of which were related to Princess Wencheng.³¹ For instance, one story he learned from local monks was that the princess had an illegitimate child with the Tibetan minister Gar Tongtsen (Tib. mGar sTong btsan) on her way to Lhasa, but she killed the child and built a stūpa in Lhagang in which the body was placed together with many precious objects, including a ceremonial umbrella decorated with pearls. After the princess went to Lhasa, she missed her child so much that she did not have any more children in Lhasa. After she died, she was reincarnated as

29 Kham (Tib. Khams), located in the eastern and southeastern corner of the Tibetan plateau, is one of the three traditional regions of Tibet, along with U-Tsang (Tib. dBus gtsang) and Amdo (Tib. A mdo). Kham is divided between the eastern part of the TAR, western Sichuan, southern Qinghai, and northwestern Yunnan Provinces.

30 Ren, compiled by Laba Pingcuo 2009:56.

31 Ibid.:57.

(33)

13 White Tara and came to spread Buddhism in Lhagang. Thus, it was believed that Lhagang

Monastery was the site of the princess’s religious practice and learning.³²

Ren, however, viewed the narratives concerning Princess Wencheng’s visit to Lhagang as untenable. First, the princess had never passed along this route to Lhasa, but took the road from Xining to Yushu. Second, the princess traveled with a large number of escorts and guardians, so it would have been impossible for her to have a child without anyone being aware of it.³³

He also questioned the narratives about Indian master Dramze Gonpo. He stated that it was

“ridiculous” to claim that a sword flew to Lhagang, whereupon the master constructed the monastery and kept the sword in the stūpa. Moreover, according to Ren, this contradicted the monks’ claim that the stūpa contained a relic of the princess’s illegitimate child. According to Ren, no one knew exactly what was inside the stūpa.³⁴

Ren suggested that the Indian master may have been a student of Drogön Chögyal Phagpa (Tib.

'Gro mgon Chos rgyal 'Phags pa),³⁵ who was sent to promote Sakya teachings and build Sakya monasteries in Kham during the Yuan Dynasty. This would be plausible according to Ren because many Sakya monasteries in Dartsendo, such as Rikhu Monastery, were also built during that time.

It was likely, according to Ren, that Lhagang Monastery and its mother monastery Rikhu

Monastery were sponsored and built by the same monk, possibly Dramze Gonpo. The monastery also houses a bronze statue of Maitreya (Tib. Byams pa), which was given by his teacher Drogön Chögyal Phagpa. Ren further stated that according to the Ming Dynasty Record (Ming shi lu),³⁶ the ceremonial umbrella did not belong to the princess but was given to the monastery by a Sakya monk who likely stayed at Lhagang Monastery on his return to Tibet during the Ming Chenghua period (1465–1487).³⁷

Ren also pointed out that due to lack of historical sources about Lhagang, local people constructed narratives related to the great King Songtsen Gampo and Dramze Gonpo in order to show the significance of the site, which they came to believe.³⁸ Hence, although few historical sources concerning the monastery’s origin and early history are available, local people express their firm belief that it was founded in the seventh century CE as a small temple by Princess Wencheng for

32 Ibid.:57–58.

33 Ibid.:58–59.

34 Ibid.:59.

35 He was the fifth head of the Sakya school of Tibetan Buddhism. He was also the first imperial preceptor of Kublai Khan’s Yuan Dynasty. See Migmar Tseten 2008.

36 It is a chronicle of the history of the Ming Dynasty. It records a large amount of information about fifteen generations of emperors. It has important historical value and is one of the basic historical records of the history of the Ming Dynasty.

37 Ren, compiled by Laba Pingcuo 2009:59–60.

38 Ibid.:60.

(34)

14 housing the Jowo statue. Villagers believe that the Jowo statue generates religious merit for the community and increases its good fortune. It is regarded as having the same historical origin and capacity to confer religious merit as the most famous religious image in Tibet, the Jowo statue in the Jokhang (Tib. Jo khang) temple in Lhasa.³⁹

Apart from the origin of the monastery, Ren provided a detailed description of the landscape and situation of the monastery in the 1940s:

Lhagang Monastery was built on the shallow plain of the waterfront. The land was unstable and close to the water, and thus was not appropriate for tall buildings.

Therefore, there were no great edifices. The shrines were lined up to house the statues of gods and a stūpa, which were surrounded by monastic quarters. There was no wall, only a wooden fence; everything was different from other monasteries. In the shallow soil on the right side of the monastery was the yard of stūpas, known as the 108 stūpas, which was the place where high-ranking lamas’ relics were concealed. Behind the monastery were high mountains, and behind these mountains was the pastoral area of Ser Chukha [Tib. gSer Chu kha].⁴⁰ In front of the monastery, three peaks rose from the other side of the river. The distance between these mountains and their height were about the same. Shallow soil exposed the stone and there were no trees, but the shape of these mountains was solemn and magnificent.

The monastery belonged to the Sakya sect, and the majority of monks came from upper Minyag and two pastoral districts of Kangding. There were more than a hundred monks at that time. Normally, around twenty to thirty monks would live in the monastery, and the rest would scatter to their homes or go to various places to chant and collect alms.

Only during the monastic rituals would they gather at the monastery.

Monastic rituals were performed three times in the whole year. At the end of May during the festival of monastic dance [Tib. 'cham]⁴¹ the nearby pastoralists would come with their yaks and horses to gather at Ser Chukha to celebrate the festival. The

merchants from far away would also come here, and the trade was very vigorous.

Monastic chanting would be held from June 15 until the end of July. At this time, the pastoralists would be at the height of their dairy production so the monastery would receive many donations. After that, the pastoralists would disperse and the monks

39 Warner 2008 and 2011; Alexander 2005.

40 It is only few minutes’ walk to the north of Lhagang Monastery.

41 It is a lively masked and costumed dance associated with some sects of Tibetan Buddhism and Buddhist festivals.

See Pearlman 2002.

(35)

15 would return to their families. On the 20th of the 12th lunar month, the monks would

gather for monastic rituals again and stay until the last day [of the month].⁴²

Lhagang Monastery had a significant reputation in various pastoral areas. The monks did not operate any businesses, thus allowing local trade to flourish. This made Lhagang a commercial market, which could be compared with the trade market in Dartsendo. Moreover, due to the lack of pastureland near Dartsendo, the Tibetan merchants were all happy at Lhagang Monastery.⁴³

Ren’s description of Lhagang Monastery revealed three things. First, in the 1940s, the monastery had more than a hundred monks who were recruited from various places. Second, the monastery was well respected by neighboring pastoralists who would often come to worship, pray, and give offerings. Third, Lhagang served as a trade center that brought together, not only nearby

pastoralists, but also distant merchants during the monastic festivals. It is clear that Lhagang Monastery played a significant role in local religious and economic life.

2. Lhagang Monastery’s connection with Lhagang Village

By tradition, Lhagang Village has been closely affiliated with Lhagang Monastery. The community of Lhagangrowa still provides labor and basic supplies, such as dairy products, firewood, yak dung, and manufactured goods, to the monastery. In return, the monastic community attends to the people’s religious needs, in particular the performance of rituals to protect the villagers from natural disasters and disease. In addition, more than half of the monks are recruited from the village.⁴⁴ Thus, there is a very strong connection between the village and the monastery.

As a response to the development of tourism in recent years, monks have been actively involved in promoting the history and reputation of their monastery, as they wish people to learn about and visit the monastery. Lhagang Monastery has become an important pilgrimage and tourist site for both Tibetan and Chinese visitors, and has become well-known. According to the abbot, the number of pilgrims and tourists who come to worship and visit the monastery has been increasing year by year.⁴⁵ This supports economic development in the village, bringing more opportunities to the local people. Hence, Lhagang Monastery contributes to Lhagangrowas’ economic success.

42 Ren, compiled by Laba Pingcuo 2009: 56–57.

43 Ibid.:61. My translation from Chinese.

44 Interview with the abbot, August 27, 2016.

45 Ibid.

(36)

16 iv. Local livelihoods

According to elderly people in Lhagang, the village used to have a semi-pastoral, or samadrog (Tib. sa ma 'brog, lit. neither agricultural or pastoralist, but something in between) economy.⁴⁶ From spring to fall, villagers would move with their black tents to progressively higher elevations with their livestock (yaks and horses)⁴⁷ and return to their houses in the village for the winter season. However, they kept relatively few animals compared to neighboring pastoral villages; the average number of animals per household was fifty to sixty yaks and at most four horses.⁴⁸

Therefore, not all family members needed to go to the summer pasture with the animals. Those who stayed behind engaged in small-scale agricultural work, such as planting potatoes, radishes, and cabbages in their yard for their own consumption.

In their study of Dzorge (Tib. mDzod dge) County in northwestern Sichuan, Manderscheid et al.

state that “until the 1950s, most consumption requirements could be satisfied with animal products. Economic exchange relations were essential to provide grain requirements, at least for those households who relied exclusively on animal husbandry.”⁴⁹ Similarly, in Lhagang prior to the 1980s, villagers produced dairy products, such as butter, chura (Tib. phyur ba; dried cheese), and zhoshi (Tib. zho zhig; soft cheese)⁵⁰ as a way to preserve their dairy surplus for winter consumption. They also traded dairy products, such as butter and yoghurt, with neighboring farmers for other food items, most importantly the staple grain né (Tib. nas; barley).

In the early twenty-first century, due to the construction of small towns, escalating

sedentarization, and the promotion of tourism, most Lhagangrowas sold their livestock and have slowly adapted to modern life. As a result, pastoral products are in short supply in Lhagang Village today. Even those who still keep a few female yaks, dri (Tib. 'bri), supplement their diet with dairy products from elsewhere because their yogurt, which is made in the summer months when there is plenty of milk, is sold to tourists. Thus, more and more Lhagangrowas look for opportunities for income from non-pastoral labor, including tourism.

Currently, people in Lhagang depend on numerous economic sources to make their living, but tourism-related business has become their main source. Zhou Bo and Tang Lingfei discuss the rapid development of tourism in Tibetan rural areas, noting that the policy of the Construction of

46 Ekvall 1968:21; Rinzin Thargyal 2007:82.

47 Black tents (Tib. sbra) are the traditional form of housing for nomads in Tibet. The tents are usually made from yak hair that has been handspun into yarn. Tents are held up with handspun yak hair ropes and wooden poles, and the top of the tent has a large opening that lets smoke out and sunshine in. Manderscheid 2001; Miller 2006.

48 Interview with an elderly Lhagangrowa, September 6, 2016.

49 Manderscheid et al. 2004:29.

50 Chura is Tibetan dried cheese and an important ingredient in Tibetan cuisine. Zhoshi is full-fat soft cheese, typical to the area of Dartsendo.

(37)

17 A New Socialist Countryside has resulted in three emphases in development: investing in rural tourism, mineral resources, and border trade.⁵¹ The first is well reflected in Lhagang Village:

People in Lhagang today rely predominately on tourism, transforming how Lhagang residents make a living.

According to the statistics that were provided by the Kellogg Corps–Kham Aid Report,

“approximately 5,200 tourists visited Tagong [Lhagang] during July in 2005. As with many other tourist destinations, tourist flow is extremely seasonal. The mass of tourists arrives during the summer months (May–Sept), for specific festivals and other national holidays.”⁵² The village head told me in 2016 that the village normally receives more than 1,000 tourists in a day, each household earning an average of 300 CNY in a day. During the golden period for tourism⁵³ in the same year (2016), each household earned around 15,000 CNY by renting out horses and

organizing horse trips and selling local products such as barley wine (Tib. chang), dried meat, rosaries, and wild mushrooms to tourists, with renting out horses being the single most important source of income.⁵⁴

Although Lhagang Village served as a minor trade hub for surrounding villages, there were no hotels specifically catering to tourists before 2010. This corresponds to the Kellogg Corps–Kham Aid report that “the vast majority of visitors (96%, according to our research) do not spend the night in Tagong [Lhagang].”⁵⁵ In 2016, the village head negotiated with a Chinese company to invest in a hotel. He believed that with new hotels, more tourists would spend the night in Lhagang, thus bringing more revenue to the village.⁵⁶ Today (2018), with the flourishing of tourism, a variety of large and small hotels, shops, and restaurants that cater to tourists can be found in Lhagang. People from adjacent villages call Lhagang Village the “international village”

(Tib. rgyal spyi'i grong pa) because it receives many tourists from around the world. Two Americans have opened the Khampa Café and Art Center and Himalayak Tibetan Restaurant, a western-style restaurant that serves pizzas and yak meat hamburgers, but also provides travel information about buses, taxis, and rental bicycles, motorcycles, and horses.⁵⁷

51 Zhou and Tang 2007:1.

52 Kellogg Corps–Kham Aid Report 2005:5.

53 It refers to the period around Chinese National Day (October 1) and Labor Day (May 1) holidays, known as lü you huang jin shi qi in Chinese. Normally both holidays comprise fifteen days.

54 Interview with the village head, September 6, 2016.

55 Kellogg Corps-Kham Aid Report 2005:24.

56 Interview with the village head, September 7, 2016.

57 In 2005, the restaurant was co-opened by a Tibetan tour guide and an American. It used to be called Sally’s Western Restaurant. An American opened the cafeteria in 2009, but in 2017 it was sublet to a Czech. Both the cafeteria and the restaurant were still in business in 2017.

A Tibetan Village on the Sino-Tibetan Borderland