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

Learn More →

Conflict and Conversion: Catholicism in Southeast Asia, 1500–1700 by Tara Alberts (review)

Conflict and Conversion: Catholicism in Southeast Asia, 1500–1700 by Tara Alberts (review) a second quibble, while the author denies a causal role for religion, in some of his book’s accounts religious understandings were said to motivate specific acts of violence. My major concern was the author’s treatment of the relevant literature. In a theory chapter titled “Religious Violence?”, Duncan locates his study alongside the work of Gerry van Klinken, Jacques Bertrand and others whose accounts downplay the role of religion in violence. While perhaps fair, he then shifts to theories of remembering, neglecting to engage with literature that speaks to the core focus of the book. The reader may immediately think of work by Stanley Tambiah, Hans Kippenburg, Mark Juergensmeyer or Michael Jerryson. Much later in the book, these authors do appear, and their ideas shape Duncan’s conclusions. The engagement with theories of religion and violence would have been far more effective if those theories had been addressed earlier and more directly. In concluding, Duncan notes that “Although religion may not have been a causal factor in the conflict, it became the defining one over time as the conflict narrative changed” (p. 172). This is the essence of the book, moving beyond essentialism in discussing the ways in which religion http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Sojourn: Journal of Social Issues in Southeast Asia Institute of Southeast Asian Studies

Conflict and Conversion: Catholicism in Southeast Asia, 1500–1700 by Tara Alberts (review)

Conflict and Conversion: Catholicism in Southeast Asia, 1500–1700 by Tara Alberts (review)

Sojourn: Journal of Social Issues in Southeast Asia , Volume 29 (2) – Jul 17, 2014

Abstract

a second quibble, while the author denies a causal role for religion, in some of his book’s accounts religious understandings were said to motivate specific acts of violence. My major concern was the author’s treatment of the relevant literature. In a theory chapter titled “Religious Violence?”, Duncan locates his study alongside the work of Gerry van Klinken, Jacques Bertrand and others whose accounts downplay the role of religion in violence. While perhaps fair, he then shifts to theories of remembering, neglecting to engage with literature that speaks to the core focus of the book. The reader may immediately think of work by Stanley Tambiah, Hans Kippenburg, Mark Juergensmeyer or Michael Jerryson. Much later in the book, these authors do appear, and their ideas shape Duncan’s conclusions. The engagement with theories of religion and violence would have been far more effective if those theories had been addressed earlier and more directly. In concluding, Duncan notes that “Although religion may not have been a causal factor in the conflict, it became the defining one over time as the conflict narrative changed” (p. 172). This is the essence of the book, moving beyond essentialism in discussing the ways in which religion

Loading next page...
 
/lp/institute-of-southeast-asian-studies/conflict-and-conversion-catholicism-in-southeast-asia-1500-1700-by-f7S8Cj9MqE
Publisher
Institute of Southeast Asian Studies
Copyright
Copyright © Institute of Southeast Asian Studies.
ISSN
1793-2858
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

a second quibble, while the author denies a causal role for religion, in some of his book’s accounts religious understandings were said to motivate specific acts of violence. My major concern was the author’s treatment of the relevant literature. In a theory chapter titled “Religious Violence?”, Duncan locates his study alongside the work of Gerry van Klinken, Jacques Bertrand and others whose accounts downplay the role of religion in violence. While perhaps fair, he then shifts to theories of remembering, neglecting to engage with literature that speaks to the core focus of the book. The reader may immediately think of work by Stanley Tambiah, Hans Kippenburg, Mark Juergensmeyer or Michael Jerryson. Much later in the book, these authors do appear, and their ideas shape Duncan’s conclusions. The engagement with theories of religion and violence would have been far more effective if those theories had been addressed earlier and more directly. In concluding, Duncan notes that “Although religion may not have been a causal factor in the conflict, it became the defining one over time as the conflict narrative changed” (p. 172). This is the essence of the book, moving beyond essentialism in discussing the ways in which religion

Journal

Sojourn: Journal of Social Issues in Southeast AsiaInstitute of Southeast Asian Studies

Published: Jul 17, 2014

There are no references for this article.