John N. Miksic

Early Burmese Urbanization: Research and Conservation

Urbanization in Southeast Asia is sometimes assumed to have been synonymous with the development of orthogenetic structures such as religious centers under external influence. An alternative hypothesis proposes that social structures stimulated by local cultural and environmental conditions and regional historical events emerged in several parts of Southeast Asia, marked by evolution rather than stasis. One of the major stumbling blocks in the path toward a new theory is a lack of appropriate archaeological data with which to test this hypothesis. A thorough research program is therefore needed to refine and implement a methodology for gathering data on a wide range of characteristics from several sites. Myanmar affords one of the best laboratories for such a program. Restoration projects have seriously affected both structures and distributions of artifacts such as pottery before they were thoroughly studied. Previous research in Thailand and Java can provide models on which planners of a project to investigate ancient urbanization in Myanmar can draw. Sustainable heritage tourism can contribute positively to both archaeological research and public education.

Quantitative historical analysis uncovers a single dimension of complexity that structures global variation in human social organization

Significance Do human societies from around the world exhibit similarities in the way that they are structured and show commonalities in the ways that they have evolved? To address these long-standing questions, we constructed a database of historical and archaeological information from 30 regions around the world over the last 10,000 years. Our analyses revealed that characteristics, such as social scale, economy, features of governance, and information systems, show strong evolutionary relationships with each other and that complexity of a society across different world regions can be meaningfully measured using a single principal component of variation. Our findings highlight the power of the sciences and humanities working together to rigorously test hypotheses about general rules that may have shaped human history. Do human societies from around the world exhibit similarities in the way that they are structured, and show commonalities in the ways that they have evolved? These are long-standing questions that have proven difficult to answer. To test between competing hypotheses, we constructed a massive repository of historical and archaeological information known as “Seshat: Global History Databank.” We systematically coded data on 414 societies from 30 regions around the world spanning the last 10,000 years. We were able to capture information on 51 variables reflecting nine characteristics of human societies, such as social scale, economy, features of governance, and information systems. Our analyses revealed that these different characteristics show strong relationships with each other and that a single principal component captures around three-quarters of the observed variation. Furthermore, we found that different characteristics of social complexity are highly predictable across different world regions. These results suggest that key aspects of social organization are functionally related and do indeed coevolve in predictable ways. Our findings highlight the power of the sciences and humanities working together to rigorously test hypotheses about general rules that may have shaped human history.

Archaeology and Early Chinese Glass Trade in Southeast Asia

Les perles de verre de trois regions (Singapour, Riau, Palembang) sont analysees avec la technique EDXRF. Les resultats, ajoute aux donnees historiques, indiquent que les residents de Riau ont probablement obtenu des perles de verre indiennes via une source de Sumatra, peut-etre Palemberg, avant 1200 apr. J.-C. ; apres cette date, ils se sont procure des perles chinoises provenant de differentes sources, dont, peut-etre, Singapour

Archaeological Studies of Style, Information Transfer and the Transition from Classical to Islamic Periods in Indonesia

Archaeologists have long sought to identify the key indicators which would allow them to measure the level and rate of cultural development. Technology and energy capture are two of the indicators which have been proposed, but there are grounds for objecting that these are still variables dependent on another factor: the capacity of a culture to record and process information. The communication of information has been studied by archaeologists but their paradigms, such as the diffusionist model, have been found wanting and discarded. The goal of studying ancient communication processes is an ideal, but achieving it with the data available to archaeologists will be very difficult.

Reply to Tosh et al.: Quantitative analyses of cultural evolution require engagement with historical and archaeological research

We thank Tosh et al. (1) for their interest in our research (2) but note that their analyses do not undermine the main findings of our article. Their suggestion that polity population divided by polity area should be one of the social complexity dimensions raises a number of issues. What does this ratio mean at large spatial scales, where populations are concentrated in large urban centers and much of the territory is not heavily populated? How are societies distributed across this variable and why? For example, a small-scale “simple” society could have a very high population density if it has access to a rich resource base. Tosh et al. (1) do not provide sufficient information or context to meaningfully … [↵][1]1To whom correspondence should be addressed. Email: t.currie{at}exeter.ac.uk. [1]: #xref-corresp-1-1

The Archaeology of Singapore

Singapore (known as Temasek in fourteenth-century sources) was formed around 1300. The majority of the population was probably Malay, but Chinese were residing there by the 1330s. Archaeology has revealed traces of a prosperous trading settlement, which had to pay tribute to both Majapahit in Java and Ayutthaya in Thailand. The settlement covered about 85 ha, with a royal palace on a hill overlooking the Singapore River estuary. The most numerous artifacts are sherds of Malay-style earthenware and Chinese porcelain and stoneware. In addition to commerce, the population pursued various small-scale industries. The settlement was abandoned around 1600.

The Development of Urban Places in Southeast Asia

Settlement hierarchies appeared on the Southeast Asian mainland around the middle of the first millennium BC, at approximately the same time as iron technology. Insufficient archaeological research has been done in insular Southeast Asia to date this phenomenon. By 2000 BP an interaction sphere linked settlements on the mainland and island sectors of the region. In the early first millennium AD, two forms of urbanization appeared in Southeast Asia: administrative centers in agrarian areas with monumental religious architecture, and trading centers in the lowlands. During the next 1500 years a wide range of urban patterns developed. Densely populated, tightly circumscribed settlements with a wide range of occupations and a monetized economy evolved in the early second millennium, during a period when Chinese merchants began to form enclaves of settlement. From sites of seasonal occupation, these evolved into permanent multiethnic urban places.

Asia. China on the sea: How the maritime world shaped modern China. By Zheng Yangwen. Leiden: E.J. Brill, 2012. Pp. x, 362. Figures, Tables, Illustrations, Bibliography, Index.

China on the sea: How the maritime world shaped modern China By ZHENG YANGWEN Leiden: E.J. Brill, 2012. Pp. x, 362. Figures, Tables, Illustrations, Bibliography, Index. The authors premise in this book is that the historiography of China, especially during the Qing dynasty (1644-1911), has been dominated by two related assumptions: that China has been isolated from the rest of the world, partly by geography, partly by cultural preference; and that Chinas history can best be described by focusing on the interaction between the Chinese and the peoples living on Chinas northern and western frontiers. These assumptions have strong points in their favour: two of Chinas last three dynasties, the Yuan (1260-1367) and the Qing, were formed by invaders from the north, and China placed rigid restrictions on the freedom of Westerners to enter and travel within China. Zheng Yangwens counter-argument is that Chinas frontiers which face the sea deserve at least equal attention as factors shaping Chinas historical development. Historians of Southeast Asia have paid considerable attention to periods when Chinese rulers implemented more liberal policies. During the mid-ninth through the mid-fourteenth centuries, China exported large quantities of metal objects, ceramics, and silk by ship in return for two hundred types of products from the Indian Ocean and Southeast Asia. Tang Chinese rulers allowed maritime commerce despite philosophical objections from bureaucrats due to the desire of nobles and Buddhists for foreign goods. These were brought by foreign merchants who lived in circumscribed areas in a few specially designated Chinese ports. The Tang justified this trade by a formula under which foreigners were admitted under guise of presenting tribute to the Son of Heaven, for which the Chinese reciprocated by giving tokens of political recognition, but by the late Song dynasty this was replaced by commercial alliances between Chinese noble families and traders. During the thirteenth century the Chinese began to build their own ships rather than relying on foreigners. Historians have generated an extensive body of data and theories regarding the effects of this relationship on Southeast Asia. Little archaeological or historical research has been conducted regarding the effects of this commercial activity on Chinas society. In the late fourteenth century the newly installed Ming dynasty reinstated ancient prohibitions against foreign trade. This attitude may well have been exacerbated by the fact that the first Ming emperor was attacked from the sea no fewer than 23 times by his rivals (Zheng, p. 50). China became almost completely isolated from the rest of the world. In the late sixteenth century Chinese rulers grudgingly began to allow European traders to live in some ports, but restrictions on foreigners continued until the infamous Opium Wars of the early 1800s. One of the books principal strengths, and source of its original contributions to the historiography of China, is its prolific use of Chinese-language primary sources. …

Fishbones and Glittering Emblems: Southeast Asian Archaeology 2002 (review)

The European Association of Southeast Asian Archaeologists (EurASEAA) held their ninth biennial conference in Sigtuna, a historic city in Sweden, in May 2002. This volume contains a large proportion of the papers presented at that conference, published in what constitutes record time for such large and diverse archaeological meetings as the EurASEAA meetings have become. The meetings of this association must be considered one of the two most important gatherings of scholars working in this field, along with the congresses of the Indo-Pacific Prehistory Association (IPPA). The desire to publish as many contributions as possible leads to a wide variation in the quality of papers in the association’s conference volumes. One of the compensating advantages of this philosophy is that we learn the names and work of some scholars, particularly Asians, who would not otherwise have their voices heard. Eighteen contributors of the 73 (approximately 25 percent) in this volume are Asian. The organizers put in hard labor to raise funds to enable the Asian scholars to attend the conference; for this as well as their timely issue of this publication, they are to be commended. Because the papers are published soon after they are presented, they tend to be little changed from the conference versions. They are brief, and many of them concern research projects at various intermediate stages of implementation, for which no conclusions are yet available. Some are ‘‘opinion pieces’’; others concentrate on presenting data in various states of digestion or analysis. A total of 50 papers (and two ‘‘poster sessions,’’ which are equivalent to papers in length) are included in this book. As a means of grappling with the problem of discussing such a varied book, I will isolate a few themes that bridge the di¤erent sessions and choose—on the basis of my own subjective evaluation—those papers that best exemplify these themes for special mention. One interesting topic concerns the role of the European archaeologist in Asia. This theme is introduced in the conference’s keynote address by Ian Glover. As he notes (p. 24), ‘‘What follows is in no way a history of European involvement in the development of archaeology in Southeast Asia for that would take a substantial volume.’’ The recent publication of a history of the École Française d’Extrême-Orient indicates what such a history might contain. It is to be hoped that such a volume, largely written by Southeast Asians, will appear someday. In the 1960s, some Southeast Asians began to study at archaeology graduate schools in other parts of the world. Others, however, such as R. P. Soejono and Pisit Charoenwongsa, remained in their own countries and served as directors of the major archaeological research institutions; foreign-trained archaeologists became significant only in the late twentieth century. As Glover notes (p. 27), too many foreign archaeologists continue to ignore the work of local scholars and ‘‘sometimes attempt to circumvent, rather than to collaborate with the local researchers, do not communicate their results, forget to send copies of the publications, and do not send back material allowed out on loan.’’ A large proportion publish outside the region, in English, French, or German, ‘‘and are reluctant to become involved with the academic life of the host country’’ (p. 29). It is genuinely a wonder that Southeast Asians continue to be as hospitable to foreign archaeologists as they are. One hopes that book reviews 105

Recent Publications on Angkor

The return of peace to Cambodia has coincided with the appearance of a large number of new books on the country. The works under discussion here form an exception to most of the new publications in that they are the results of long-term research and restoration projects. The works reviewed here fall into two distinct groups. The reports of the Japanese-led restoration teams are highly technical and will mainly attract a specialist audience. The books by French architectural historian Jacques Dumar?ay, on the other hand, are meant for a general audience. The JSA (Japanese Government Team for Safeguarding Angkor) project has three main goals: restoration, documentation publication; and training. The project, utilising 1 John N. Miksic is an Associate Professor in the Southeast Asian Studies Programme at the National University of Singapore. He may be contacted at the following e-mail: seajnm@nus.edu.sg