Read an Excerpt
  Reigning the River 
 URBAN ECOLOGIES AND POLITICAL TRANSFORMATION IN KATHMANDU 
 By ANNE M. RADEMACHER 
 Duke University Press 
 Copyright © 2011   Duke University Press 
All right reserved.
 ISBN: 978-0-8223-5080-4 
    Chapter One 
  Creating Nepal in  the Kathmandu Valley    
  IN THE HEART OF KATHMANDU's old urban center, the braided,  seasonally shifting flows of the Bagmati and the Bishnumati rivers  converge. Depending on the season of the year, the rivers may swell  and churn with monsoon rains, or they may barely form a trickle. Depending  on your route, you may find the banks and riverbed laden  with foul-smelling heaps—mounds of garbage flecked with colorful  plastics, shiny chemical slicks, and discarded consumer goods that  persist beyond their utility or fashion. You may find the banks host  to human settlements: some are the makeshift huts of those just arrived  or just barely surviving; some are the more permanent homes  of those who have saved enough to build shelters of brick or concrete  on the eroded riverbed; still others are the imposing mansions of the  urban elite. Settlements give way to temples—some crumble under  the weight of passing time and neglect, while others are alive with the  sounds, colors, and meaning of ritual activity.  
     The wastes of contemporary urban life, the settlements of thousands  of urban residents, and the vast ancient templescape that line  much of the rivers' urban reaches do not fit into neatly defined territories.  They overlap, stretching into and out of one another in uneven,  and often unpredictable, ways. To walk the banks of the Bagmati and  Bishnumati rivers is to encounter simultaneously the natural, cultural,  and political history of a city and the nation-state it dominates. It is  to observe grand temples, the surviving built forms of the past, and to  see the sometimes desperate shanties that make up the built forms of  the present. Amid both lay deposits of waste that a contemporary city  has expelled in hopes that they will simply disappear. It is to witness  before you the tensions between land and water, past and future, and  waste and wealth being lived in this growing, changing city.  
     Teku Dovan, a large temple complex, marks the confluence of the  Bagmati and Bishnumati, and it descends into the river waters by a  steep ladder of stone stairs. The complex is the mythological place of  origin of Kathmandu, a cultural birthplace for the city. According to a  vamshavali, an ancient text that ascribes pious beginnings to Nepal's  early history, the then-king Gunakamadeva (ruled 980–998) founded  Kathmandu, called Kantipur at the time, in accordance with a vision.  In a dream a goddess instructed him to build a city at the junction of  the two rivers. According to the vamshavali, it "was the sacred place  where, in former times, Ne Muni had performed devotions and practiced  austerities, and here was the image of Kanteswara devata. To this  spot Indra and the other gods came daily, to visit Lokeswara and hear  puranas recited." The king thus moved his court from Patan to Kathmandu  (Wright 2000 [1877]:154).  
  
  Like walking the riverscape, tracing the social and natural threads  that weave the ecology of this site demands flexibility; we are at once  compelled to understand the present situation, in which the environmental  state of the rivers seems primary and urgent but also to find  the roots of that urgency in the history of the rivers and of the larger  city that envelops them. Kathmandu is, after all, a point of convergence  itself. Politically, it is the capital of a nation-state, and as such  it has long served as the center of the state's bureaucratic apparatus.  Economically, it is a locus of concentrated wealth and elite privilege,  especially in relation to the rest of Nepal. Since the eighteenth century,  Kathmandu has served as the most important center of political  and economic power in the country. It has also been the seat of the  monarchy. In short, the city is in many ways the center of material and  symbolic power in Nepal.  
     Yet by the beginning of the twenty-first century the Bagmati and  Bishnumati were regarded as almost intractably degraded. Environmental  conditions declined as political dissatisfaction intensified, and  the two rivers were increasingly regarded as being connected in some  ways. Engaging environmental degradation inevitably required attention  to broader debates about the political past, present, and future  of Nepal. The question of the environment, then, turned on a question  of the polity, and how change could happen within it. Would the  monarchy, the international development apparatus, the democratic  Parliament, or some other entity eventually rise to the enormity of the  problem and reverse river decline? Just who held the power to make  change in Kathmandu, and when and how would that power be mobilized?  
     These questions point to the nation-state's history, in both the capital  and the larger territory over which it held sway. By beginning this  inquiry with a focus on power, specifically the power to enact environmental  change, we move away, for the moment, from the biophysical  features of the riverscape and toward the people who organize it and,  in so doing, organize themselves. To do so is also to note historical  continuities between contemporary concentrations of power in the  capital and longstanding processes.  
  
  MANDALA SPACE AND POLITY  
  In fact, political and symbolic power have long radiated outward from  the center that is the Kathmandu Valley and from Teku Dovan within  it. I return to the idea of the mandala for conceptual orientation in a  historical moment riddled with turbulence, dissatisfaction, and environmental  decline. Recall from the introduction that various schools  of analysis engaged the form and symbolic meanings of Valley architecture  through the conceptual and diagrammatic dimensions of the  mandala. This work extends from the German tradition of approaching  the city as a unitary built system (e.g., Gutschow and Kolver 1975;  Mary Slusser's famous cultural historical work, Nepal Mandala [1982];  and many others). Much related scholarship develops analytical associations  between cartographic space and the organization of political  and social life; scholars use the mandala primarily as a means for  understanding how the physical spaces of the Kathmandu Valley's  cities were historically arranged, in concentric circles, along a gradient  of socioreligious purity and impurity (Bledsoe 2004:5). As I suggested  previously, the idea of tracing power as its concentrations radiate  outward lends important insights to an analysis of the politics of  improving the Bagmati and Bishnumati rivers in Kathmandu, and also  to understanding Kathmandu in the broader nation-state of Nepal,  and, at key historical junctures, Nepal in the larger South Asian region.  
     Slusser, in particular, famously emphasized the relationship between  historical Kathmandu and a mandala, in terms of urban design  and social organization. Prior to Prithvi Narayan Shah's territorial  conquest and creation of what is now called Nepal, the term "Nepal"  referred only to the Kathmandu Valley itself—then called the Nepal  Valley, or Nepalmandala. Slusser and others showed that, in part, the  organization of Nepalmandala inscribed caste, and related prescriptions  for political harmony, into geographical space. Centered on the  king's residence, concentric and outward radiating circles organized  the ancient polity along a discernible gradient of descending ritual and  political rank.  
     Recall from the introduction that Slusser's work and the scholarly  traditions that have followed it underline the utility of the mandala  as a window on the spatial and symbolic history of power relations in  the Kathmandu Valley. This utility, however, and the precise historical  uses and meanings of the mandala in the architectural and physical  context of Nepal, are points of ongoing scholarly and popular debates.  These debates are often framed by the very politics suggested  by invoking the mandala itself; both the place and concept of Nepalmandala  are recounted sentimentally by modern Newar intellectuals  as a way to recall the Malla era, when they imagine a lost period of  Valley unity. Although it is unlikely that perfect political and social  harmony existed at that time, present- day nostalgia for the Malla era  plays an important role in contemporary identity formation for the  ethnic group that claims indigenous status in Kathmandu Valley, the  Newar (Bledsoe 2004:60).  
     In my study, the mandala reappeared in the practice of urban  ecology through state spatial practices and performances of citizenship.  As I will describe in more detail later in the book (chapter 5),  the emergency and loktantra periods witnessed specific uses of, and  encounters with, a physical mandala constructed in a new urban park.  On this physical mandala, however, groups from Nepal's furthest  sociopolitical margins gathered to articulate and amplify political demands.  Citizens who occupied it were from Nepal's furthest margins  and were contemporary "outcasts" in social, economic, political, and a  host of other ways. Yet in the turmoil of political transformation, they  took over—both physically and profoundly symbolically—the very  center of Kathmandu's Maitighar mandala. In doing so, they inverted  the historical power relations suggested by the mandala, remapping  (through the practice of urban ecology) old landscapes of caste position  and political power. They conveyed, therefore, the tremendous  extent to which the social order implied by the mandala was itself  transforming. Thus, the processes that we must grapple with to fully  address environmental change in Kathmandu involve even the very  social and political changes that eventually led to the occupation of  one of the state's own modern mandalas.  
     Before proceeding to that case, however, and before addressing  who, in the end, would reign over the rivers (and in so doing assume  symbolic and active power to make positive change) we must review  the legacy of those who controlled the polity and its landscape in the  past, and we must consider the enduring effects of that control on the  politics of contemporary river restoration in Kathmandu.  
  
  BUILDING MONARCHY, DEMOCRACY, AND NATION  
  To understand legacies of political power, I begin by briefly historicizing  the political organization of the Kathmandu Valley over time,  addressing the key elements of monarchy, nation building, the rise of  an international development apparatus for Nepal, and democracy.  I do so with studied caution, however, since every retelling of history  is fragmentary and is animated primarily by the voices of those  powerful enough to have made themselves heard as history makers.  My discussion here is in no way immune to the partiality of historical  narrative; the form and content of national history are actively contested  among scholars and Nepali citizens alike, perhaps never more  fervently than in the contemporary present. A great deal of Nepal's  history was silenced in the more conventional, and historically dominant,  accounts to which my tracing of history will refer. There is much  to recover. Limited though they are for gleaning a full and detailed  history of Nepal, conventional accounts do provide useful anchors for  making sense of Kathmandu's political and environmental present at  the turn of the twenty-first century.  
     To begin, the first dated reference to Nepalmandala is found in  seventh-century inscriptions from the Lichhavi Dynasty; these references  are followed by mention of a sacred realm, or desa. References  to Nepala Desa, or Nepalmandala, signify the Valley as a Hindu realm,  which Burghart (1984:104) describes as "an auspicious icon of the universe  centered on the temple of the king's tutelary deity [Taleju] and  demarcated on the perimeter by temples—often four or eight, which  were situated at the four cardinal directions or eight points on the  compass."  
     A templescape formed the boundaries of the desa, designating the  space inside as being pure and the space outside as being impure.  Burghart refers to Hamilton's (1819:192) description of a Brahmanical  scheme with fifty-six universal desas in the Sacred Land of Hindus.  Nepalmandala's sacred landscape contained 5,600,000 bhairavs and  bhairavis—male and female spirits of Shiva and Shakti. Kings in the  Malla (1200–1769) and Gorkhali-Shah (1769–1990) eras acted symbolically  as protectors of this desa.  
     Wealth from trade provided the material basis for three major  city-states in the Valley: Kathmandu, Patan, and Bhaktapur. At first  a single kingdom, the three became autonomous following a period  of complicated Malla succession between 1484 and 1619. While they  prospered, the later years of the Malla era saw these city-states increasingly  marred by rivalries that weakened the Valley and made it  vulnerable to conquest by the "Great Unifier" from Gorkah, Prithvi  Narayan Shah, in 1744 (e.g., Rai 2002). Kathmandu, Patan, and Bhaktapur  did not unite against Shah, whose campaign in the three cities of  the Valley was completed by 1769.  
     The conquest of Kathmandu was a central part of a general Gorkhali  campaign of regional expansion. Prithvi Narayan Shah based his  new court in Kathmandu, claiming kingship over all three Malla kingdoms.  The throne of the Shah Dynasty was brought from Gorkha, and  the new king assumed his place in the compound of the deposed king  (Burghart 1984: 111). This moment fixed the Nepal Valley as the core of  power and authority for the Gorkhali nation-state; at the same time, it  relegated the territory outside of the Valley to the margins of political  power.  
     In the early period of the Shah kingship, former designations of  who could live where in Nepalmandala were blurred. In particular, the  lowest caste groups that were previously forbidden to live inside the  city were joined by social groups once found exclusively inside it. A  Newar ritual that traced the city walls during the Malla era (upako vanegu—Newar  for "walking the town") was adapted by Gorkha rulers  as desa ghumne, performed annually during the Indra Jatra festival, reproducing  ritually that which had been lost in physical space.  
     While growth and change reshaped the previous boundaries of Nepalmandala,  policies related to ideas of realm purity intensified the  distinction between that which was considered inside and outside it.  Mark Liechty (1997) noted that, by the early 1700s, Gorkhalis self-consciously  thought of their region as being distinct from, and ritually  superior to, much of the territory to the south, mainly because it  had remained "uncontaminated" by Muslim and British rule in much  of India. For Prithvi Narayan Shah, assuming the role of protector of  the realm involved maintaining the region's status as the "pure, true  Hindustan" (asal Hindustan). As territory to the south was increasingly  consolidated under British colonial power, Shah rulers intensified  their distinction between land inside the Valley (pure) and outside  it (impure). Impurity was to be kept outside the realm, and that  which was non-Hindu, foreign, or considered immoral was to be vigilantly  repelled. After 1817, Gorkhali rulers saw theirs as the only remaining  "pure" realm in the entire region.  
     While Prithvi Narayan Shah was not the first ruler to espouse ideas  of realm purity, he enacted them through policies that would later be  interpreted as the beginning of Rana isolationism. By the Rana period,  the exclusion of all dealings with foreigners from public life became  policy. When Rana rule (1846–1951) commenced under Jung Bahadur,  state and nation building started to mirror some of the European  colonial policies seen elsewhere on the subcontinent. For example,  with the declaration in 1854 of the Civil Code, or Muluki Ain, a national  caste system was codified and diverse ethnic groups organized  according to a hierarchy of state-defined purity. The Muluki Ain  also replaced the Hindu Laws of Manu for forming legal judgments  (Hofer 1979; Levine 1987). All peoples were assigned a jat (caste) and  categorized into one of five hierarchically arranged groups. Whereas  previously the territories that diverse peoples occupied determined  their distinctiveness, the new code classed everyone according to their  "species" (Burghart's translation of jat) and assumed that they inhabited  a singular and common territorial unit (Burghart 1984:117). Caste  thus became a unifying tool of state making, and scheduled difference  among castes became an important logic for imagining national  unity. Not incidentally, this social arrangement also reproduced and  sustained high-caste Hindu dominance in state affairs.  
  (Continues...)  
  
     
 
 Excerpted from Reigning the River by ANNE M. RADEMACHER  Copyright © 2011   by Duke University Press.   Excerpted by permission of Duke University Press. All rights reserved. No part of this excerpt may be reproduced or reprinted without permission in writing from the publisher.
Excerpts are provided by Dial-A-Book Inc. solely for the personal use of visitors to this web site.