多学科学术在喜马拉雅边界与边疆研究中的思考

N. George
{"title":"多学科学术在喜马拉雅边界与边疆研究中的思考","authors":"N. George","doi":"10.1177/09749284221146532","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Early mapping of Himalayan frontiers, were intimately tied to the imperial conquest of space. Polycentric contestations of the British, Russian, Qing and even Tibetan expansionist imaginaries dominated such territorial endeavours. In the mid-twentieth century, in the switch from empire to nation, scholarship on borders and borderlands reinforced methodological nationalism in spaces with multiple sovereignty and overlapping treaties. While early post-colonial scholarship critiqued the colonial construction of borders, there have been efforts to tease out newer ways of narrating borders that take cognisance of the continuing heterarchies of violence in the modern nation. Such scholarly ‘decolonial’ endeavours have challenged the overwhelming emphasis on state and territoriality in colonial and later national accounts on borders. By imagining the Himalayan transregional frontier as central, rather than peripheral to state making, these notes challenge the cultivation of the Himalayas as culturally, even civilisationally ‘primitive’. Conceptualising the borderland as an epistemic category, these survey notes synthesise more recent decolonial scholarship on Himalayan borders and borderlands to sketch out emerging geographies of (im)mobility, militarisation and violence.","PeriodicalId":81509,"journal":{"name":"India quarterly","volume":"79 1","pages":"109 - 127"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-02-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Reflections on Multidisciplinary Scholarship in the Study of Himalayan Borders and Borderlands\",\"authors\":\"N. George\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/09749284221146532\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Early mapping of Himalayan frontiers, were intimately tied to the imperial conquest of space. Polycentric contestations of the British, Russian, Qing and even Tibetan expansionist imaginaries dominated such territorial endeavours. In the mid-twentieth century, in the switch from empire to nation, scholarship on borders and borderlands reinforced methodological nationalism in spaces with multiple sovereignty and overlapping treaties. While early post-colonial scholarship critiqued the colonial construction of borders, there have been efforts to tease out newer ways of narrating borders that take cognisance of the continuing heterarchies of violence in the modern nation. Such scholarly ‘decolonial’ endeavours have challenged the overwhelming emphasis on state and territoriality in colonial and later national accounts on borders. By imagining the Himalayan transregional frontier as central, rather than peripheral to state making, these notes challenge the cultivation of the Himalayas as culturally, even civilisationally ‘primitive’. Conceptualising the borderland as an epistemic category, these survey notes synthesise more recent decolonial scholarship on Himalayan borders and borderlands to sketch out emerging geographies of (im)mobility, militarisation and violence.\",\"PeriodicalId\":81509,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"India quarterly\",\"volume\":\"79 1\",\"pages\":\"109 - 127\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-02-12\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"India quarterly\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/09749284221146532\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"India quarterly","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/09749284221146532","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

早期的喜马拉雅边界地图,与帝国对太空的征服密切相关。英国、俄罗斯、清朝甚至西藏扩张主义者的多中心争夺主导了这种领土努力。在20世纪中期,在从帝国到国家的转变中,关于边界和边境地区的学术研究在多重主权和重叠条约的空间中加强了方法论民族主义。虽然早期的后殖民学者批评了殖民时期对边界的建构,但人们一直在努力梳理出叙述边界的新方式,这些方式认识到现代国家中持续存在的暴力等级制度。这种学术上的“非殖民化”努力挑战了殖民时期和后来的国家边界核算中对国家和领土的压倒性强调。通过将喜马拉雅跨区域边界想象为国家制定的中心,而不是外围,这些笔记挑战了喜马拉雅文化甚至文明的“原始”。这些调查笔记将边境地区概念化为一个认知范畴,综合了最近关于喜马拉雅边境和边境地区的非殖民学术研究,勾勒出了(非)流动性、军事化和暴力的新兴地理。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Reflections on Multidisciplinary Scholarship in the Study of Himalayan Borders and Borderlands
Early mapping of Himalayan frontiers, were intimately tied to the imperial conquest of space. Polycentric contestations of the British, Russian, Qing and even Tibetan expansionist imaginaries dominated such territorial endeavours. In the mid-twentieth century, in the switch from empire to nation, scholarship on borders and borderlands reinforced methodological nationalism in spaces with multiple sovereignty and overlapping treaties. While early post-colonial scholarship critiqued the colonial construction of borders, there have been efforts to tease out newer ways of narrating borders that take cognisance of the continuing heterarchies of violence in the modern nation. Such scholarly ‘decolonial’ endeavours have challenged the overwhelming emphasis on state and territoriality in colonial and later national accounts on borders. By imagining the Himalayan transregional frontier as central, rather than peripheral to state making, these notes challenge the cultivation of the Himalayas as culturally, even civilisationally ‘primitive’. Conceptualising the borderland as an epistemic category, these survey notes synthesise more recent decolonial scholarship on Himalayan borders and borderlands to sketch out emerging geographies of (im)mobility, militarisation and violence.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信