The Missions of Bogle and Turner According To the Tibetan Texts

Petech, Luciano

doi:10.1163/156853250x00113

Cited by 4 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…On the many renunciates visiting Lhasa in the 17th century under the patronage of the 5th Dalai Lama, see Schaeffer (2011). On the 18th century, see Petech (1988). As Huber observes, the relationship between Chait Singh, raja of Benares 1770-1781 and the Panchen Lama is particularly significant here.…”

Section: Badrinathmentioning

confidence: 76%

Kailas Histories

McKay¹

2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Badrinathmentioning

confidence: 76%

Kailas Histories

McKay¹

2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The report of his exact location in these two journeys of 1766 and 1767 varies; it is generally stated that he was “on the frontiers of Bhutan” (e.g., in Rodd 1930, 293). Field (1962) resonates specific details from Cammann (1951) and Petech (1950) that contain persuasive evidence sourced from Tibetan accounts (such as the Autobiography of the Third Tashi-Lama and Life of the Fourth Tashi-Lama ) as opposed to the British ones. This is in marked contrast with the conventional view, which is endlessly cited by numerous British scholars, who draw upon Markham ([1881] 2010) or White's ([1909] 1996) account, and later Indian scholars who reproduced the same imperial British sources.…”

mentioning

confidence: 90%

“Where Is Bhutan?” The Production of Bhutan's Asymmetrical Inbetweenness in Geopolitics

Kaul¹

2021

J of Asian Stud

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this article, I interrogate the exhaustive “inbetweenness” through which Bhutan is understood and located on a map (“inbetween India and China”). I argue that this understanding naturalizes a contemporary geopolitics with little depth about how this inbetweenness has shifted over the centuries, thereby constructing a timeless, obscure, and remote Bhutan that is “naturally” oriented southward. I trace how the construction of Bhutan's asymmetrical inbetweenness is nested in the larger story of the formation and consolidation of imperial British India and its dissolution, and the emergence of post-colonial India as a successor state. I identify and analyze the key economic dynamics of three phases marked by commercial, production, and security interests, through which this asymmetrical inbetweenness was consolidated. Bringing together sources from different disciplines and archival work, this account also challenges some of the dominant historical scholarship on Bhutan in each phase. I conclude by emphasizing that critical work at the intersection of geographical/political/historical contingencies is important to the subalternizing of geopolitics, which recognizes the myriad ways in which dominant powers have shaped both the geopolitical environment as well as knowledge-making that has constrained small states.

show abstract

“…Luciano Petech's (1950) analysis of Tibetan texts from the period shows that these visits by British colonial officials were not seen as significant by the Tibetans.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Strategic Hypocrisy: The British Imperial Scripting of Tibet's Geopolitical Identity

Anand

2009

J of Asian Stud

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The protests in and around Tibet in 2008 show that Tibet's status within China remains unsettled. The West is not an outsider to the Tibet question, which is defined primarily in terms of the debate over the status of Tibet vis-à-vis China. Tibet's modern geopolitical identity has been scripted by British imperialism. The changing dynamics of British imperial interests in India affected the emergence of Tibet as a (non)modern geopolitical entity. The most significant aspect of the British imperialist policy practiced in the first half of the twentieth century was the formula of “Chinese suzerainty/Tibetan autonomy.” This strategic hypocrisy, while nurturing an ambiguity in Tibet's status, culminated in the victory of a Western idea of sovereignty. It was China, not Tibet, that found the sovereignty talk most useful. The paper emphasizes the world-constructing role of contesting representations and challenges the divide between the political and the cultural, the imperial and the imaginative.

show abstract

The Missions of Bogle and Turner According To the Tibetan Texts

Cited by 4 publications

References 0 publications

Kailas Histories

Kailas Histories

“Where Is Bhutan?” The Production of Bhutan's Asymmetrical Inbetweenness in Geopolitics

Strategic Hypocrisy: The British Imperial Scripting of Tibet's Geopolitical Identity

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About