A history of Southeast Asia: critical crossroads
A history of Southeast Asia: critical crossroads
复制标题
东南亚的历史：关键的十字路口
DOI：
10.1080/10357823.2016.1202172
复制
发表时间：
2017
影响因子：
1.2
通讯作者：
Craig A. Lockard
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Craig A. Lockard
开创性的东南亚通史首次出版于20世纪50年代和60年代。反映了殖民时代的学术和冷战，他们倾向于强调1500年前印度的影响和1500年后西方的干预和主导地位。由于当时资料来源和学术研究有限，这些文本大多将政治发展（包括国家建设、王权、帝国主义和殖民主义）置于关注的中心。到了1960年代，一些历史学家开始批评以欧洲为中心的著作，并发展出“以亚洲为中心”的方法，强调战前荷兰学者JC货车勒（JC van Leur）所称的东南亚历史的“自主性”。货车勒建议从印尼海岸而不是荷兰船只的甲板上观察事态发展。这集中在地方文化，社会和动态不一定主要取决于欧亚大陆其他地区的影响和人民。从那时起，新的调查教科书，受益于西方和亚洲学者产生的蓬勃发展的学术，试图平衡外部和内部（或自主）的方法与不同的结果。安东尼里德的刺激，创新和可读的新通史大大有助于这一长期的讨论。里德的大部分职业生涯都是在澳大利亚国立大学度过的，他是最多产、最有影响力和最受尊敬的东南亚主义者之一，出版了许多关于近代早期和现代时期的重要书籍和文章，特别是关于群岛领域的书籍和文章。很少有人更有资格准备一份调查文本，将近年来日益丰富的学术，同时也从事辩论之间的其他学者，如詹姆斯斯科特和维克托利伯曼。里德并没有忽视外部力量，而是把东南亚人和他们的传统放在中心位置。里德的全面调查涵盖了所有的主要社会和许多小的，从缅甸到菲律宾在整个世纪，研究整个地区的模式和地方变化，同时提供与其他欧亚社会的比较。像许多历史学家，里德认为东南亚作为一个连贯的地区，具有不同的文化，语言和历史，一个“关键的十字路口”，人民，思想，技术和经济产品相遇和混合。但是，使文本与众不同的是主题的选择和广泛的“自主”方法。在其他主题中，他强调并研究了该地区值得世界历史学家关注的三个不同原因：其危险的构造表面（特别是火山）影响欧亚和全球气候;妇女比其他欧亚社会拥有更多的经济和社会自主权;国家在塑造经济和文化一致性方面不如其他地方重要。继詹姆斯·斯科特之后，里德避免强调政治和对国家地位的追求，认为国家是外来入侵者，只是在20世纪才成为一股强大的力量。他写道：“在寻求理解......东南亚根深蒂固的多元主义时，我们必须放弃欧洲和中国历史上关于文明和国家同步崛起的假设。”（第19页）相反，他关注的是其他因素：“废黜国家为（讨论）环境、宗教、社会、文化、人口、健康和智力变化提供了比国王的所作所为更大的空间”（第20页）。经济问题也受到广泛审查。20章集中在广泛的年表内的主题（即“[1500年前]贸易及其网络”，“本土身份，1660-1820”，“成为热带种植园.
The pioneering general histories of Southeast Asia were first published in the 1950s and 1960s. Reflecting colonial era scholarship and the Cold War, they tended to emphasise Indian influences before 1500 CE and Western interventions and dominance after 1500 in shaping the region. Limited by the sparse sources and scholarship then available, these texts mostly placed political developments (including state building, kingship, imperialism and colonialism) at the centre of attention. By the 1960s a few historians began critiquing Europe-centric writings and developing “Asia-centric” approaches emphasising what the pre-war Dutch scholar JC van Leur had termed “the autonomy” of Southeast Asian history. Van Leur proposed viewing developments from the Indonesian shore rather than the decks of Dutch ships. This focused on local cultures, societies and dynamics not necessarily conditioned chiefly by influences and peoples from other parts of Eurasia. Since then newer survey textbooks, benefiting from burgeoning scholarship produced by both Western and Asian scholars, have attempted to balance external and internal (or autonomous) approaches with varied results. Anthony Reid’s stimulating, innovative and readable new general history greatly contributes to this longstanding discussion. Based for much of his career at the Australian National University, Reid is one of the most prolific, influential and respected Southeast Asianists, publishing many important books and articles on both the Early Modern and Modern eras, particularly on the archipelago realm. Few are more qualified to prepare a survey text incorporating the increasingly rich scholarship of recent years while also engaging in debates among other scholars such as James Scott and Victor Lieberman. Reid does not ignore the outside forces but places Southeast Asians and their traditions at the centre. Reid’s comprehensive survey covers all of the major societies and many of the minor ones from Burma to the Philippines throughout the centuries, examining region-wide patterns and local variations while offering comparisons with other Eurasian societies.Like many historians, Reid views Southeast Asia as a coherent region marked by diverse cultures, languages and histories, a “critical crossroads” where peoples, ideas, technologies and economic products met and mixed. But what makes the text distinctive is the choice of topics and the broadly “autonomous” approach. Among other subjects, he highlights and examines three distinct reasons the region merits attention from world historians: its dangerous tectonic surfaces (especially volcanoes) influence Eurasian and global climate; women had more economic and social autonomy than in other Eurasian societies; and states were less important in shaping economic and cultural coherence than elsewhere. Following James Scott, Reid eschews emphasising politics and the quest for statehood, arguing that states were alien intruders that only became a strong force in the twentieth century.“In seeking to understand… the entrenched pluralism of Southeast Asia,” he writes,“we must abandon assumptions from European and Chinese history… about the rise in tandem of civilization and the state”(p. xix). Rather, he concentrates on other factors:“Dethroning the state allows more room for [discussing] environmental, religious, social, cultural, demographic, health, and intellectual changes than the doings of kings”(p. xx). Economic issues also receive extensive examination. The 20 chapters focus on themes within broad chronologies (ie “[Pre-1500] Trade and its Networks”,“Vernacular Identities, 1660–1820”,“Becoming a Tropical Plantation …