scholarly journals The Volatile State in Southeast Asia: Evidence from Sumatra, 1600–1800

2003 ◽  
Vol 62 (2) ◽  
pp. 497-529 ◽  
Author(s):  
Freek Colombijn
Keyword(s):  
Southeast Asia ◽  
Early Modern ◽  
State Formation ◽  
State Power ◽  
Southeast Asian ◽  
The State ◽  
Central State ◽  
Seminal Work ◽  
Clifford Geertz ◽  
State Capital

The communis opinio of historians is that early modern, or precolonial, states in Southeast Asia tended to lead precarious existences. The states were volatile in the sense that the size of individual states changed quickly, a ruler forced by circumstances moved his state capital, the death of a ruler was followed by a dynastic struggle, or a local subordinate head either ignored or took over the central state power; in short, states went through short cycles of rise and decline. Perhaps nobody has helped establish this opinion more than Clifford Geertz (1980) with his powerful metaphor of the “theatre state.” Many scholars have preceded and followed him in their assessment of the shakiness of the state (see, for example, Andaya 1992, 419; Bentley 1986, 292; Bronson 1977, 51; Hagesteijn 1986, 106; Milner 1982, 7; Nagtegaal 1996, 35, 51; Reid 1993, 202; Ricklefs 1991, 17; Schulte Nordholt 1996, 143–48). The instability itself was an enduring phenomenon. Most polities existed in a state of flux, oscillating between integration and disintegration, a phenomenon which was first analyzed for mainland Southeast Asia by Edmund Leach (1954) in his seminal work on the Kachin chiefdoms. This alternation of state formation and the breaking up of kingdoms has been called the “ebb and flow of power” and the “rhythm” of Malay history (Andaya and Andaya 1982, 35). In this article, I will probe into the causes of the volatility of the Southeast Asian states, using material from Sumatra to make my case.

V. State Formation and Transformation in Early Modern India and Southeast Asia

Itinerario ◽  
1988 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
pp. 91-110 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sanjay Subrahmanyam
Keyword(s):  
Southeast Asia ◽  
Early Modern ◽  
State Formation ◽  
The State ◽  
South And Southeast Asia ◽  
The One

Orthodox viewpoints on the formation and transformation of states in early modern (or late pre-colonial) South and Southeast Asia fall broadly into two strands. On the one hand, there are those who see the state as ephemeral, and essentially divorced from society in general.

The Costs of Regularization in Southeast Asia

Contexts ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 20 (1) ◽  
pp. 21-25
Author(s):  
Maryann Bylander
Keyword(s):  
Southeast Asia ◽  
Legal Status ◽  
Well Being ◽  
Global South ◽  
Southeast Asian ◽  
The State ◽  
Asian Context

In the Southeast Asian context, legal status is ambiguous; it enlarges some risks while lessening others. As is true in many contexts across the Global South, while documentation clearly serves the interest of the state by offering them greater control over migrant bodies, it is less clear that it serves the goals, needs, and well-being of migrants.

Interlocking Patrimonialisms and State Formation in Qing China and Early Modern Europe

2011 ◽  
Vol 636 (1) ◽  
pp. 164-181 ◽  
Author(s):  
Liping Wang ◽  
Julia Adams
Keyword(s):  
Early Modern ◽  
State Formation ◽  
Political Power ◽  
The State ◽  
Ancien Regime ◽  
Early Modern Europe ◽  
Modern Europe ◽  
Ancien Régime

Familial power contributed to binding territories together and systematically severing them in both China and early modern European states. In the early Qing (1644–1911) Empire, Manchu conquerors met the challenges of securing and expanding rule by discovering ways to use laterally related brothers and imperial bondservants to hold Chinese bureaucrats in check, while deploying bureaucracy to restrain princely brothers from partitioning the state. The ensuing interlock of patrimonial practices and bureaucracy, developed in a style similar to ancien régime France, stabilized political power for centuries.

Religious Resurgence in Contemporary Asia: Southeast Asian Perspectives on Capitalism, the State, and the New Piety

2010 ◽  
Vol 69 (4) ◽  
pp. 1031-1047 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert W. Hefner
Keyword(s):  
Southeast Asia ◽  
Spiritual Disciplines ◽  
Well Being ◽  
The State ◽  
Insufficient Attention ◽  
Participation Of Women ◽  
The Social ◽  
East And Southeast Asia ◽  
New Varieties ◽  
State Capital

Large portions of East and Southeast Asia are in the throes of a historically unprecedented upsurge in religious observance and association. Many of the new varieties of religiosity are more popular, voluntary, and laity based than the religions of yesteryear. Many are also marked by the heightened participation of women, and an emphasis on inner-worldly well-being as well as otherworldly transcendence. Focusing on Southeast Asia, but with references to developments in China, this article examines the social and moral genealogy of eastern Asia's religious vitalization. Many analysts have emphasized the influence of postcolonial secularisms, neoliberal disciplines, and ascendant civil societies in the religious resurgence. Although these factors have indeed played a role, the macro-narratives of the state, capital, and democratization often give insufficient attention to the micro- and meso-passions of self, family, and neighborhood, all of which have contributed to the popularization and proximatization of once restricted spiritual disciplines.

Southeast Asia in the Early Modern Period; Twenty-Five Years On

1995 ◽  
Vol 26 (1) ◽  
pp. 92-98 ◽  
Author(s):  
Leonard Y. Andaya ◽  
Barbara Watson Andaya
Keyword(s):  
Nineteenth Century ◽  
Southeast Asia ◽  
Early Modern ◽  
Early Modern Period ◽  
Southeast Asian ◽  
Early Nineteenth Century ◽  
General Acceptance ◽  
Convenient Tool ◽  
Modern Period ◽  
Asian History

The identity of “Southeast Asia” has been debated since the 1950s, when the region began to develop as an area of academic viability around which courses could be constructed, programmes built, and research published. Much less controversy has accompanied the growing use of “early modern”, a term which seems set to displace “precolonial” in periodizing Southeast Asian history. The phrase, of course, comes from scholarship on Europe, where it was popularized as a result of efforts to find shared “periods” that would facilitate the writing of a general history. It would be surprising if questions as to the applicability of “early modern” in Southeast Asia do not spark off some debate, especially in light of subaltern writings that reject the notion of modernity as a universal. For such historians the very invocation of the word implicitly sets a “modern Europe” against a “yet to be modernized non-Europe”. But whatever decision is made regarding terminology, scholarship on Southeast Asia is increasingly viewing a period that stretches from about the fifteenth to the early nineteenth century as rather different from those traditionally described as “classical” and “colonial/modern”. The term “early modern” itself is at present a convenient tool for historical reference, and only time will tell whether it will find general acceptance.

Race, Language, and National Cohesion in Southeast Asia

1980 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. 122-138 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lee Yong Leng
Keyword(s):  
Southeast Asia ◽  
Cultural Factors ◽  
Southeast Asian ◽  
The State ◽  
The Political ◽  
National Group ◽  
Two Factors ◽  
Independent States ◽  
Newly Independent States ◽  
State Form

Southeast Asian states are often referred to as “nations” (for example, the Association of Southeast Asian Nations or ASEAN), thus implying that the peoples of each state form only one national group and are easily distinguished and characterized. In fact, more often than not, each population of the various states shows not only differences of nationality but also many other differences. Among these factors of differentiation, the political geographer attaches particular importance to the two factors of language and nationality. These two cultural factors are elements of the “state-idea” and can affect the cohesion and strength of a state. All the newly independent states of Southeast Asia are seeking to establish their state-ideas and, i n the analysis of each state's population, these two factors can throw much light on the cohesion, functioning, and viability of that particular state.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document