Imperial Landscapes of South Asia

Sinopoli, Carla M.

doi:10.1002/9780470774670.ch15

Cited by 33 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 25 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This variability describes those political formations that were ''successful'' at achieving some level of stability, although many others never made it to that level. If the successful polities are compared to a worldwide sample, it becomes clear that Inner Asian states and empires were no more ephemeral than similar sociopolitical formations elsewhere in the world (Cioffi-Revilla et al 2008;Sinopoli 2006;Taagepera 1997). Empire dynamics studied within a world-systems perspective consider scale and duration (Cederman 1997;Chase-Dunn and Hall 2000;Stein 1999), yet the steppe polities have been relegated to the periphery in these studies, partly due to the lack of easily accessible information for researchers from outside the region.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Inner Asian States and Empires: Theories and Synthesis

Rogers

2012

J Archaeol Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

By 200 B.C. a series of expansive polities emerged in Inner Asia that would dominate the history of this region and, at times, a very large portion of Eurasia for the next 2,000 years. The pastoralist polities originating in the steppes have typically been described in world history as ephemeral or derivative of the earlier sedentary agricultural states of China. These polities, however, emerged from local traditions of mobility, multiresource pastoralism, and distributed forms of hierarchy and administrative control that represent important alternative pathways in the comparative study of early states and empires. The review of evidence from 15 polities illustrates long traditions of political and administrative organization that derive from the steppe, with Bronze Age origins well before 200 B.C. Pastoralist economies from the steppe innovated new forms of political organization and were as capable as those based on agricultural production of supporting the development of complex societies.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Inner Asian States and Empires: Theories and Synthesis

Rogers

2012

J Archaeol Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Empires Sinopoli (2006) called for multiple archaeological surveys in her assessment of studies of empires in South Asia. The benefits of the approach are evident in recent studies elsewhere, especially for the Roman and Inkan empires and also in Mesoamerica and Mesopotamia (for Mesopotamia, see Morandi 2000 andWilkinson 2000).…”

Section: Warmentioning

confidence: 99%

Regional Settlement Pattern Studies

Kowalewski

2008

J Archaeol Res

108

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This is a critical review of regional settlement pattern archaeology published in the last decade. The regional approach proves to be highly productive of new ideas and lasting results. Cultural resource/heritage databases are increasingly important. Notable advances have been made in regional studies of Paleolithic and Holocene foragers, the reciprocal relations between Neolithic communities and their regional societies, and in understanding states and empires. There are new research potentials in comparisons, macroregional analysis, long-term change, and alternative pathways. Research designs should specify systematic coverage at the regional scale and carry out spatial analysis in which social groups are the primary focus.

show abstract

“…12-16). Differing interpretations largely reflect varying levels of reliance on documentary, rather than archaeological, evidence (e.g., Sinopoli 2005).…”

Section: Starkmentioning

confidence: 99%

Early Mainland Southeast Asian Landscapes in the First Millennium A.D.

Stark

2006

Annu. Rev. Anthropol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Southeast Asia's earliest states emerged during the first millennium a.d. from the Irawaddy River of Myanmar to the Red River delta of northern Vietnam. Developments during this time laid the groundwork for the fluorescence of the region's later and better-known civilizations such as Angkor and Pagan. Yet disciplinary and language barriers have thus far precluded an anthropological synthesis of cultural developments during this time. This review uses a landscape focus to synthesize current knowledge of mainland Southeast Asia's earliest states, which emerged in the first millennium a.d. Research from archaeology and history illuminates articulations between physical and social factors in several kinds of Early Southeast Asian landscapes: economic, urban, and political. Social and ideological forces that shaped these first-millennium-a.d. landscapes are discussed as integral aspects of early state formation.

show abstract

Imperial Landscapes of South Asia

Cited by 33 publications

References 25 publications

Inner Asian States and Empires: Theories and Synthesis

Inner Asian States and Empires: Theories and Synthesis

Regional Settlement Pattern Studies

Early Mainland Southeast Asian Landscapes in the First Millennium A.D.

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About