Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

Pockets of Empire: Integrating the Studies on Social Organizations in Southeast China and Southeast Asia

Pockets of Empire: Integrating the Studies on Social Organizations in Southeast China and... KweeHuiKian Co o a iv rat ia , eS tu s di e o f As th Af a ic a nd th e 2 7 .N o 15 / Ea 7 2 1xiv 7 - 03 res ol. V o d 3 ,2 .12 i10 07 0 92 108 ke hen central hioal issues regarding late ierial China are juxtaposed with those on early modern Southea Asia, a very intereing peculiarity, almo an oxymoron, presents itself. As Sinologis preoccupy themselves with queions on why China fell, or, more precisely, fell back behind Weern Europe, various scholars are ruck by the general Chinese economic success in the hiory of Southea Asia. The situation is an indication of how far both fields of udy — early modern Southea Asia and late ierial southea China — have ignored each other. In the English-language scholarship, the udy of the hiory of Asia is generally broken up into area udies as Northea Asia, Southea Asia, South Asia, Central Asia, and so on, where academics tend to become specialis in one or two countries in each sphere of udy. With regard to China and Southea Asia, various hiorians like Hsu Yun-chiao, Chen Ching-ho, http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Comparative Studies of South Asia, Africa and the Middle East Duke University Press

Pockets of Empire: Integrating the Studies on Social Organizations in Southeast China and Southeast Asia

Download PDF
17 pages

Loading next page...
 
/lp/duke-university-press/pockets-of-empire-integrating-the-studies-on-social-organizations-in-GGgMBuB5T9

References

References for this paper are not available at this time. We will be adding them shortly, thank you for your patience.

Publisher
Duke University Press
Copyright
© 2007 by Duke University Press
ISSN
1089-201X
eISSN
1089-201X
DOI
10.1215/1089201x-2007-037
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

KweeHuiKian Co o a iv rat ia , eS tu s di e o f As th Af a ic a nd th e 2 7 .N o 15 / Ea 7 2 1xiv 7 - 03 res ol. V o d 3 ,2 .12 i10 07 0 92 108 ke hen central hioal issues regarding late ierial China are juxtaposed with those on early modern Southea Asia, a very intereing peculiarity, almo an oxymoron, presents itself. As Sinologis preoccupy themselves with queions on why China fell, or, more precisely, fell back behind Weern Europe, various scholars are ruck by the general Chinese economic success in the hiory of Southea Asia. The situation is an indication of how far both fields of udy — early modern Southea Asia and late ierial southea China — have ignored each other. In the English-language scholarship, the udy of the hiory of Asia is generally broken up into area udies as Northea Asia, Southea Asia, South Asia, Central Asia, and so on, where academics tend to become specialis in one or two countries in each sphere of udy. With regard to China and Southea Asia, various hiorians like Hsu Yun-chiao, Chen Ching-ho,

Journal

Comparative Studies of South Asia, Africa and the Middle East – Duke University Press

Published: Jan 1, 2007

There are no references for this article.