Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-v9fdk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-13T00:47:03.782Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

State Formation and Comparative Area Studies – Between Globalization and Territorialization

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  22 December 2011

Carolyn Cartier
Get access

Extract

In his review of Southeast Asia in the Age of Commerce, 1450–1860: Expansion and Crisis, Victor Lieberman plied the margins of Anthony Reid's (1995) portrayal of early modern Southeast Asia and objected with purpose: “critical cultural and political transformations on the mainland without close archipelagic analogy receive little or no attention” (Lieberman 1995, 799). Where connections and crossings characterize historic social formation in insular Southeast Asia, Lieberman focused on a different shore – territorial consolidation of kingdoms in mainland Southeast Asia, from over 20 in the pre-modern era to only three major empires, Burma, Thailand and Vietnam, by the end of the seventeenth century. Yet Reid's two-volume work was exquisitely timed with the theoretical pulses of globalization and their keywords of crossings – diasporas, flows, linkages, mobilities, networks, routes and travels. Closely related to the poststructural theoretical shift, these themes have guided new area studies and are likely to prevail in international scholarship for some time to come.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Journal of Asian Studies , Volume 70 , Issue 4 , November 2011 , pp. 965 - 970
Copyright
Copyright © The Association for Asian Studies, Inc. 2011

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Brenner, Neil, Peck, Jaime, and Theodore, Nick. 2010. “Variegated Neoliberalization: Geographies, Modalities, Pathways.” Global Networks 10(2): 1–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cartier, Carolyn. 2002. “Origins and Evolution of a Geographical Idea: The Macroregion in China.” Modern China 28(1): 79–142.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chung, Jae Ho. 2010. “The Evolving Hierarchy of China's Local Administration: Tradition and Change.” In China's Local Administration: Traditions and Changes in the Sub-National Hierarchy, ed. Chung, J. H., 1–13. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Lieberman, Victor. 1995. “An Age of Commerce in Southeast Asia? Problems of Regional Coherence – A Review Article.” The Journal of Asian Studies 54(3): 796–807.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lieberman, Victor. 2003. Strange Parallels: Southeast Asia in Global Context. c. 800–1830, Volume I: Integration on the Mainland. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Lieberman, Victor. 2008. “Protected Rimlands and Exposed Zones: Reconfiguring Premodern Eurasia.” Comparative Studies in Society and History 50(3): 692–723.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lieberman, Victor. 2009. Strange Parallels: Southeast Asia in Global Context. c. 800–1830, Volume 2: Mainland Mirrors. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lieberman, Victor. 2011. “What I Sought to Accomplish in ‘Strange Parallels’.” Comments prepared for the 2011 Journal of Asian Studies Roundtable.Google Scholar
Ludden, David. 2003. “Presidential Address: Maps in the Mind and the Mobility of Asia.” Journal of Asian Studies 62(4): 1057–1078.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ludden, David. 2010. “Uneven Development, Spatial Inequity, and Territorial Politics: Remapping 1905 in Bengal and Assam.” Paper presented at the meeting of Inter-Asian Connections II: Singapore, 8–10 December 2010.Google Scholar
Ong, Aihwa. 2006. “Mutations in Citizenship.” Theory, Culture and Society, 23(1–2): 499–505.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reid, Anthony. 1995. Southeast Asia in the Age of Commerce, 1450–1680, Volume 2, Expansion and Crisis. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar