Abstract
As we have mentioned earlier, the history of Southeast Asia1 has unfolded largely in the shadow of its great neighbours, India and China. This should not be taken to imply any reliance on out-dated opinions which often do no justice to the area’s own unique creativity or to the manner in which it has assimilated elements of other cultures ever since the region took part in the process of Asian interchange, a development which perhaps pre-dated the first millennium A.D.2 The somewhat emotive or ‘diplomatic’ discussions on problems of transmission of culture and on the issue of the different levels of social development in Southeast Asia and its neighbours since the inception of the Indianization and Sinization processes are not all directly relevant to our purpose. The main historical questions we do stress in this book deal with the development of relationships between the classes and the role which the state played in that evolution. And this is placed in the framework of international economic and political power relations, within the context of the conditions under which autochtonous private capital could or could not counteract the pressures of ‘Asiatic’ and other stagnating tendencies or those of an alien nature, i.e. foreign competition.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Notes
For the concept ‘Southeast Asia’ see: Benda, ‘Structure’, in: Continuity, pp. 122–127.
Sharp mentions the integration into ‘the great Eurasian Oikoumene’ (a term coined by Kroeber), Man, State and Society, p. 50. This very broad concept is not directly relevant to the ‘classical period’ of Southeast Asia between the 4th and the 14th century (Benda’s periodization: Continuity, p. 125).
Coedes, Les etats, pp. 36–37; Sharp, ‘Cultural Continuities’, in: Man, State and Society, pp. 50–51; Mabbett, ‘Indianization’, in: JSEAS, VIII, 1, March 1977, pp. 13–14. See also: Fisher, ‘Southeast Asia: The Balkans’, in: Man, State and Society, pp. 57 ff; Geertz, Development, p. 80; Purcell, Chinese, p. 11. Fisher (Southeast Asia, pp. 82–83) does reject the position of Coedes: that wet rice cultivation would have been widely practised in Southeast Asia at a very early date (Coedes, Les etats, pp. 26–27). Hall (A History, pp. 221–222) draws attention to the thesis of Gordon Luce that irrigated rice was pioneered by the Mon-Khmer people in the Red River Delta and spread from there to other delta areas by way of migrations. Fryer (Emerging Southeast Asia, p. 39) cannot accept a comparable opinion (of CO. Sauer). Ho (Cradle, pp. 374–376) is of the opinion that Chinese rice cultivation predates Southeast Asia rice culture. The recent contributions on Indonesia in: Early Southeast Asia do not alter the fundamentals of this discussion. See also J. Kennedy’s inconclusive argument against Wheatly’s opinion. Kennedy, ‘From Stage to Development’, in: Economic Exchange, pp. 29 ff.
Hall, A History, pp. 195 ff; Lê Thán Khôi, Le Viet-Nam; Bastin and Benda, A History, pp. 6, 9–11; Benda, ‘Structure’, in: Continuity, pp. 192 ff;Chesneaux, Contribution, p. 25; Fisher, Southeast Asia, 531.
Purcell, Chinese, pp. 15 ff, 24 ff; Bastin and Benda, A History, pp. 73–75.
Mandel, Traité, I, pp. 94–95, 97, 217–219.
Hall, A History, pp. 24 ff, 41 ff; Bastin and Benda, A History, pp. 5 ff; Coedès, Les états, pp. 74 ff, 85 ff, 153 ff, 166 ff; van Leur, Indonesian Trade, pp. 104–105; Bastin and Benda, A History, pp. 5–6; Benda, ‘Structure’, in: Continuity, p. 128. See also: Mabbett, Op. cit.
Sofri, Uber Asiatische Produktionsweise, pp. 142 ff; Mandel, La formation, pp. 115 ff. For the CERM school: Sur le mode de production asiatique. The ‘analysis’ of African societies is particularly revealing.
Fisher, Southeast Asia, pp. 93–94.
Benda, ‘Colonial Political Elites’, in: Continuity, pp. 189–192.
Benda rightly emphasizes the extreme contradiction between the ‘royal’ and the ‘non-royal’ spheres. Benda, Op. cit., pp. 189–190. See also: Hall,.A History, pp. 222–224; McGee, Southeast Asian City, pp. 29 ff; van Leur, Indonesian Trade, pp. 92,138.
Benda, Op. cit., p. 192; Id., ‘Structure’, in: Continuity, p. 128.
Meilink-Roelofsz,i4Mz, Trade, pp. 6–7.
Van Leur. Indonesian Trade, pp. 138, 201–204; Balazs, La bureaucratie, pp. 297 ff.
For the fall of Srivijaya and the Northern Javanese Pasisir principalities: Hall, A History, pp. 61–64; Schrieke, ‘Ruler and Realm’, in: Indonesian Sociological Studies, II, pp. 145 ff; Bastin and Benda, A History, p. 13; van Leur, Indonesian Trade, p. 173; Meilink-Roelofsz, Asian trade, pp. 25, 175 ff; Bronson, ‘Exchange’, in: Economic Exchange, pp. 39–52.
Benda, Crescent, pp. 9–10; van Leur, Indonesian Trade, pp. III ff, 149–150; Bastin and Benda, A History, pp. 11–13; Fisher, Southeast Asia, pp. 92, 249–252.
Van Leur, Op. cit., pp. 34, 132, 134–140, 162, 194–203; Meilink-Roelofsz, Asian Trade, pp. 6–9, 37, 39; Hall, A History, pp. 212, 217, 218.
Bastin and Benda, A History, p. 6; Benda, ‘Structure’, in: Continuity, p. 141.
Bastin and Benda, A History, pp. 73–75; Fisher, Southeast Asia, pp. 176, 179–185.
Bastin and Benda,Op. cit., pp. 4 ff, 11, 12.
Van Leur, Indonesian Trade, pp. 70–71, 110 ff, 148–149, 168–169; Hall, A History, pp. 205 ff; Cator, Economic Position, pp. 5–6; Fisher, Southeast Asia, p. 91; Purcell, Chinese, pp. 24 ff.
Geertz, Mam, pp. 63 ff.
Van Leur, Indonesian Trade, pp. 122, 188–189, 239–245, 282 ff, 346–348.
Mandel, Traité, II, pp. 70 ff.
Meilink-Roelofsz, Asian Trade, pp. 5 ff, 118 ff, 297; Bastin and Benda, A History, p. 18. For the Asian ‘peddling trade’ also: Steensgaard, Asian Trade Revolution.
Van Leur, Indonesian Trade, pp. 159 ff, 189, 220, 226–227, 234–236; Meilink-Roelofsz, Asian Trade, pp. 7–8, 10.
Mandel, Traité, I, pp. 124–130; II, pp. 74–102.
For an analysis of this period: Id., II, pp. 11–81; Id., Spdtkapitalismus, pp. 318 ff.
Wertheim, ‘Southeast Asia’, in: Wertheim, Dawning, pp. 16 ff. See also Myrdal, Asian Drama, III, pp. 448–449; 454 ff, who deals with South Asia too.
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 1980 Martinus Nijhoff Publishers bv, The Hague
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Tichelman, F. (1980). Southeast Asia. In: The Social Evolution of Indonesia. Studies in Social History, vol 5. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-009-8896-5_4
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-009-8896-5_4
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-94-009-8898-9
Online ISBN: 978-94-009-8896-5
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive