HIMALAYA, the Journal of the

Association for Nepal and

Himalayan Studies

Volume 35 Number 2 Article 8

January 2016

Introduction | Charting Himalayan Histories

Arik Moran
University of Haifa, Israel

Catherine Warner
Harvard University

Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.macalester.edu/himalaya

Recommended Citation
Moran, Arik and Warner, Catherine. 2016. Introduction | Charting Himalayan Histories. HIMALAYA 35(2).
Available at: https://digitalcommons.macalester.edu/himalaya/vol35/iss2/8

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.

This Research Article is brought to you for free and open access by the DigitalCommons@Macalester College at
DigitalCommons@Macalester College. It has been accepted for inclusion in HIMALAYA, the Journal of the Association
for Nepal and Himalayan Studies by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@Macalester College. For more
information, please contact scholarpub@macalester.edu.
Introduction | Charting Himalayan Histories

Acknowledgements
We wish to thank Sara Shneiderman, Sienna Craig, and Mark Turin for their feedback and encouragement
on this special issue, the contributing authors without whom it would not have seen light, and the
anonymous reviewers.

This research article is available in HIMALAYA, the Journal of the Association for Nepal and Himalayan Studies:
https://digitalcommons.macalester.edu/himalaya/vol35/iss2/8
Introduction | Charting Himalayan Histories

Arik Moran
Catherine Warner

Introduction innovatively with Himalayan sources while keeping

apace of developments in their disciplines; they must also
Historians cut a slightly odd group among scholars of the
effectively communicate their findings to non-historian
Himalaya. Although sympathetic to and fundamentally
scholars of the region so as to further advance the field. It
reliant on the ethnographies that have defined the field
is this straightforward formula that we adopt in presenting
since the 1950s, they frequently shirk from engaging
this issue, and which permeated the discussions that saw
with the theoretical elaborations that these entail. At the
its inception at the Association for Asian Studies annual
same time, the sophisticated paradigms and frameworks
conference in Philadelphia in March 2014.
developed for studying the history of neighboring regions
(not to mention other areas, or indeed, global history) Future interdisciplinary engagements have a strong
seldom feature in Himalayan history.1 Neither members of foundation in South Asian studies from which to build.
the anthropological vanguard nor comfortably at home in From the 1980s, both historians and anthropologists have
the exalted tradition of their discipline, historians of the reflected on the colonial foundations of their disciplines
Himalaya have, till recently, been the odd ones out in most in order to chart new post-colonial methodologies as well
academic discussions on the region. This state of affairs, as understand better the workings of colonialism. Ber-
applicable to most of the twentieth century, has been nard Cohn, who led the way forward in such a disciplinary
undergoing a subtle change since the 1990s, as the ‘crisis’ overhaul, emphasized the British early colonial use of
of postcolonial anthropology (i.e., its complicity in Europe- history for “codifying and reinstituting the ruling practic-
an Imperialism and its need to redefine itself in the era of es” of previous regimes, and “as the most valuable form
nation states) spurred a deep rethinking of the field. In the of knowledge on which to build the colonial state” (Cohn
Himalaya, this also led to an opening of a hitherto decided- 1996: 5). A productive mutual borrowing between history
ly anthropology-centered scholarship to other disciplines, and anthropology also underpinned much of the Subaltern
some new (Development Studies, Refugee Studies) and Studies project, representing a continued coming-to-terms
others established (Geography, History). For all the termi- with history’s colonial legacy and its complicity with vari-
nological and epistemological bridges such a rapproche- ous forms of imperial and state power. Although subjected
ment entails, its pursuit should lead to closer collaboration to various critiques, the Subaltern Studies movement did,
between scholars of the region across disciplinary bound- as K. Sivaramakrisnan argues, succeed in unsettling older
aries, and a continuing dialogue about interdisciplinary structural models of history and anthropology as “histor-
methodologies. To achieve this, historians must engage ical processes driven by economic and material structures

32 | HIMALAYA Fall 2015

in society” and “timeless cultural ones that motivated people and place. The place in question, it soon transpires,
human agents in cycles of production and reproduction” is defined differently by different people: the Himalaya
(2002: 215).2 may thus include Tibet or not, may stretch into the South
East Asian highland massif or not, may reach beyond the
In the context of the Himalaya, a number of anthropolo-
Karakoram to Afghanistan or may simply end at Kashmir.
gists combined historical methods with ethnography even
Sara Shneiderman (2010), noting a number of different
earlier, for a variety of purposes. French anthropologists,
scholarly concepts of the greater region, argues that the
many of whom were affiliated with CNRS, were perhaps
eastern Himalaya overlaps with upland Southeast Asia,
some of the first to engage seriously with historical meth-
and that the recently coined term ‘Zomia’ (more on which
odology as a complement to ethnographic studies, a trend
below) may be used as an analytical concept to facilitate
that carried over several generations.3 The combination of
comparison across regions rather than as an exclusive area
history and anthropology in Anglophone circles did not lag
description. She emphasizes that we should consider the
far behind, bequeathing a series of landmark studies that
historically contingent and politically activist ways people
add considerable nuance to existing (anthropological and
living in the Himalaya, who often engage in cross-border
historical) theories on sound empirical bases (an inex-
movements that bring them into contact with multiple
haustive list includes Allen 2012[1976], Gellner 2003[2001],
states, have themselves employed different concepts of the
Holmberg 1989, Macfarlane 1990, Ortner 1978, Ramble
region and notions of belonging to particular spaces.
2008, Shneiderman 2015).
Such reflections on changing and overlapping notions of
The articles herein build upon these historiographical
space are congruent with the multi-disciplinary synchro-
precedents, but also indicate the possibility for new con-
nization taking place between scholars engaged with the
nections across regions and a renewed interest in history
Himalaya, and may be usefully furthered to fend pervasive
as a disciplinary tool for thinking about the Himalaya.
tendencies to romanticize the region as a space apart.
They draw upon various interdisciplinary influences,
While it might be tempting to trace this view to colonial
ranging from folklore to museum studies, and offer inno-
writings, subcontinental notions of the sacred Himalaya
vative readings of a variety of non-traditional sources in a
— both predating and contemporary with British imperial
number of languages. In this respect, they reflect the ex-
expansion — have also contributed to this sense of oth-
tensive resources available to historians willing to engage
er-ness or other-worldliness. Indeed, scholars working in
with such materials, and ultimately attest to the vitality of
archaeology, anthropology, linguistics and geography, in
historical research on the Himalaya today.4 While it may
particular, have deepened our understanding of multiple
be too soon to predict where this trend is headed, this col-
constructions of Himalayan sacred spaces, indicating that
lection of papers offers an opportunity to meditate upon
sacred space is very much a historically inflected concept.
the significance of history — and, specifically of modern
According to Axel Michaels, “holy mountains are not
history, which is their focus — as a disciplinary tool for
simply there, but made, they are the product of discovery
the Himalayan regions.5 In what follows, we present two
and taming” (2004: 17). While analyzing ritual narratives
thematic threads that we perceive to be crucial for reading
invoking sacred geography in several “Tibetan-speaking
this collection in context: the definition of Himalayan
societies” of Nepal, Charles Ramble observes that gods
space, and the ways in which its development may be fruit-
and other beings associated with particular places often
fully historicized.
differ a great deal from their established textual represen-
tation. Ramble suggests that “supernatural beings” offer
Historicizing Himalayan Space
a contingent and “flexible idiom for the representation of
One of the first questions to deal with is what do we mean geographical space,” largely influenced by political and
by ‘the Himalaya’ and what can we productively learn from environmental contexts (1996: 142). The notions of sacred
an engagement with the space of this broad region? While space and historical change are thus not mutually exclu-
“connected histories” that de-center the nation-state sive, a point further illustrated by Toni Huber and Stuart
have offered a way to move beyond essentialisms in other Blackburn’s edited volume on Origins and Migrations in the
historiographical contexts, this is not a clear-cut cor- Extended Eastern Himalayas (2012), and in the reconstruction
rective in the case of the Himalaya where the region has of the multiple layers that inform current perceptions of
sometimes been read as outside of history.6 In other words, Mt Kailas as a sacred space by Alex McKay (2015).
some studies of the Himalaya have overly emphasized
Attending to the construction of ideas, sacred or other-
the “natural” aspect of the landscape at the expense of
wise, about the Himalaya is particularly important because
historically nuanced readings of the interaction between
the trope of the ahistorical Himalaya continues to crop

HIMALAYA Volume 35, Number 2 | 33

up in unexpected contexts. Contemporary scholarship regional concept that logically facilitates comparison with
employing the concept metaphor of Zomia, for example, other mountain regions, why not compare mountains
has to tread a fine balance to avoid reading the region as and oceans via the intermediary of South Asia? After all,
outside of history.7 In an article on borderland road-build- both sets of historical regional studies (one albeit slightly
ing between Tibet/China, Nepal and India, Galen Murton more institutionally developed than the other) focus on a
succinctly summarizes a common interpretation of Zomia number of similar themes, such as long distance merchant
“as a radical framework that identifies Asia’s highland re- communities and global trade, inter-Asian connections,
gion as a traditionally non-capitalist and trans-state space environmental history, migration, and the relationships
extending from Southeast Asia to the Western Tibetan between mobile people and states.
Plateau” (Murton 2013: 610). It is worth returning here to
Murton’s reading of van Schendel also draws upon the no-
van Schendel’s much-cited article to engage with how he
tion of Zomia outlined in James Scott’s work, which raises
originally posited Zomia as a way to uncover the practi-
the question of whether there is anything particularly dis-
cal politics and unexamined assumptions undergirding
tinct about the histories of capital and state formation that
area studies thinking. In the process, van Schendel clearly
set the Himalaya apart. Perhaps it is because Himalayan
shows that areas are neither trans-historical nor do they
histories do not fit well with the argument of upland Zomia
encompass all aspects of social and cultural life in a given
as anti-state and resistant to capitalist accumulation that
region. They are as much ideational, or “metaphorical
Scott seems to, at least partly, leave it out of his theoreti-
spaces,” as geo-political or “material” (van Schendel 1992:
cal construct, which he references as the “great mountain
660). A focus on flows across regions, he argues, can offer
realm on the marches of mainland Southeast Asia, China,
a corrective to area thinking by highlighting the contin-
India, and Bangladesh” (Scott 2009: 13-14). The notion that
gencies and continuous changes in the “architecture” of
the Himalaya was bypassed by capitalist modernity, for
emerging “spatial configurations” (ibid 1992: 665). Thus,
example, often appears in development studies of Nepal
the idea of Zomia as articulated by van Schendel aims to
that have typically dated the country’s involvement in
destabilize pre-existing areas of study in the academy, and
circuits of global capital to after the country was opened to
not to offer a more accurately described, fixed area for
outsiders in the 1950s. Sociologist Chaitanya Mishra (2007),
investigating all aspects of the greater Himalayan region.
drawing on world systems theory and historical litera-
If we are to take heed of van Schendel’s query about why ture from Nepal, has argued against this interpretation,
seas and not mountains have been used to construct positing instead that the Rana rulers had by the 1880s very
“Braudelian regional worlds,” (van Schendel 1992: 654), a clearly incorporated Nepal into circuits of capital through
project that James Scott (2009) pushed ahead successful- state policies that favored the export of natural resourc-
ly, we might fruitfully compare the career of Himalayan es and labor over manufacture within the country. This
versus Indian Ocean studies in relation to the area of South highly uneven and intensified involvement with capital
Asia. Histories of the Indian Ocean in the western acad- networks benefited a tiny ruling elite but limited possibili-
emy have formed an institutional synergy with the area ties for certain modes of production to develop within the
of South Asia since the 1970s. This approach has gained borders of Nepal. When the country was opened to greater
considerable traction in the last two decades with the foreign contact in the 1950s, ‘underdevelopment’ was ex-
publication of studies linking South Asia to global history acerbated as a growing middle class joined in the state-run
via the Indian Ocean from the early modern period to the project of self-enrichment by mediating Nepal’s economic
twentieth century.8 Historians of the Himalaya have much peripheralization. Whether one agrees with Mishra’s basic
to envy their Indian Ocean scholars. While the Himalaya theoretical premises or not, his highlighting of the close
provided links between South Asia and China, Southeast nexus between the state, mercantilist policies in the 18th
and Central Asia throughout history, their perception as and 19th centuries, histories of capitalism, and cross-bor-
a barrier to such contacts continues to dominate most der movements in the Himalaya points to the considerably
literature on the subject. Thus, although it was through more complex genealogy of the challenges the country
the Himalaya that Buddhism entered and revolutionized currently faces. Mishra’s work thus firmly highlights the
Tibetan society, religion, and polity, and while it was via notion that even the ‘isolation’ of mountain regions has a
the same region that Indian knowledge and technologies particular history which can be linked to contemporary
disseminated to and from Central Asia and beyond, very global trends.
limited attention has been given to how these mountains
The articles in this volume resonate with Mishra’s by
have connected South Asia to world history frameworks.9
emphasizing the close association of state-making in the
Instead of conceptualizing Zomia or the Himalaya as a
Himalaya with an increased control of people, resources,

34 | HIMALAYA Fall 2015

and the accumulation of wealth. The central Himalaya tions of citizenship — have merited increasing attention
has a particularly long history of state-formation cen- across disciplines in the last several years (cf. Chhetri
tered on the trade routes connecting the Tibetan plateau 2015; Das 2014; Evans 2010; Gerwin and Bergmann 2012;
with the mountainous interior and the lowlands through Guyot-Rechard 2013 Middleton 2013; Shneiderman 2013).
controllable (i.e., defendable and taxable) mountain passes Given the relative novelty of borderland studies in South
that follow seasonal market complexes in the plains. At Asia, their utility in troubling methodological nationalism,
the same time, state formation in the Himalaya has also and the continued need to untangle the colonial histories
coincided with resistance and refusal (see, for example, of many of the region’s borders, we should expect border-
Krauskopff 1996, 1997, Lecomte-Tilouine 2009) — partly land studies to continue to grow in scope and variety (cf.
because of the opportunities of terrain, which the Zomia Gellner 2013) — and the Himalaya are likely to be a major
theory implies. However, as Mahesh Sharma’s discussion locus of such studies.
of Gaddi narratives in this issue indicates, resistance and
accommodation to regional states can blend in popular Writing Histories of the Himalaya
narratives and ritual observations such that it is not always
As the above indicates, we need more engagement with
easy to conceptually disaggregate the one from the other.
histories of the Himalaya; the articles in this volume con-
Such difficulties are indicative of the complex social reality
tribute to such a trend. Many historical ‘gaps’ still need to
in which these West Himalayan narratives originate. As
be filled not only to increase our empirical understanding
pastoral-nomads who have transitioned to sedentary or
of the region but also to allow us to theorize better the
semi-sedentary lifestyles in the past two centuries, the
relationship between the past and the present. Gender is
West Himalayan Gaddis are a classic case of a borderland
one such area that is often sidelined in existing historical
society that functions within the established framework of
literature. For example, we know anecdotally that royal
the nation-state.10 Similar to the Gaddis, the Gujjars of the
women were key players in mountain polities and state
plains uphold a semi-nomadic lifestyle that is emblematic
formation, although their role has not always been agreed
of long-term continuities in lowland-highland dynamics:
upon. In the case of Nepal, some historians have not been
conspicuous in Himachal Pradesh in spring, Gujjar herders
willing to imagine royal women as effective political
today secure the grazing rights that used to be granted
actors.12 Sanjog Rupakheti’s recent dissertation, however,
(for a fee) by local kings through the Forest Department.
“Leviathan or Paper Tiger: State Making in the Himala-
At the same time, the histories of such groups also reveal
yas, 1740-1900” (2012), offers several chapters that push
stark ruptures that followed the reformulation of power
forward a rethinking of gendered and familial relations in
relations in Republican India. Vasant Saberwal (1998) has
the making of the Nepali state. He analyses the House of
thus demonstrated how, in the case of the Gaddi, politici-
Gorkha’s construction of a narrow Rajput identity, partly
zation is linked to the need to protect the grazing rights
through marriage alliances and controlled endogamy; the
associated with the group’s legacy of a non-sedentary life-
state’s reform of inheritance laws to promote same-caste
style, reminding us of the inextricability of ecology, state,
marriage; and the centrality of female slaves to the forma-
and society in the region as explored by Chetan Singh in
tion of elite households. Several of the collected articles
Natural Premises (1988).
indicate that further work on gender, political power, and
The relationship with areas beyond the mountain chain in women’s agency in Himalayan polities will shed new light
both Himachal Pradesh and Uttarakhand is more complex. on the issue of state formation and sovereignty.
Supported by an extensive network of borderland traders
In addition to bringing elite women’s lives into histori-
until the 1950s, the highland regions adjoining Tibet (e.g.,
cal focus, the historical experiences of the people “who
Upper Kinnaur along the Sutlej) are home to a dazzling
escaped the historian’s net” merit considerably more at-
array of agents: smugglers of goods, authorized pilgrims
tention than that usually allotted to them.13 Social history
to Mount Kailas, ascetics who never made much of borders
and history-from-below have been under-emphasized in
to begin with, and, most recently, an invigorated Sino-In-
Himalayan historiography, which has instead tended to
dian relationship that seems set to transform the region
piece together, from inscriptions and royal documents,
by bringing it closer to both India and China.11 Borderland
the political and (state sponsored) religious history of the
histories are thus central to engagements with the Himala-
region.14 As Charles Ramble, Peter Schwieger and Alice
ya as a region. Mobility, migration, and the fluid nature of
Travers point out in the introduction to a volume on new
many borders in the region means that Himalayan people’s
explorations in Tibetan social history, work on marginal
cross-border affiliations — despite modern nation-states’
regions away from the state center as well as middle-rank-
frequent attempts to fashion exclusive and narrow defini-
ing strata of society, in addition to Gramscian-style subal-

HIMALAYA Volume 35, Number 2 | 35

terns, will add nuance to our knowledge of state and soci- western Himalaya. Focusing on the erstwhile kingdoms of
ety more broadly. This observation easily can be applied to Chamba and Kangra, Sharma points to the links between
other regions of the Himalaya where the view from below the state’s provision of access to water and its agents’ per-
or the margins is rarely emphasized. Some of our collected ception of gender roles. In regional folklore, the founding
articles, such as those by Alice Travers, Jayeeta Sharma, of states and the achievement and maintenance of produc-
and Leah Koskimaki provide case studies that enrich our tive control over water resources (the two often closely
understanding of the social histories of early twenti- knit together) are as intimately tied to the physical and
eth-century Tibet, Darjeeling and Kumaon respectively. social dominance of women, including, in extreme cases,
honor killing and ritual sacrifice. Power, which accrued
In order to approach history-writing from understudied
from controlling gender relations and natural resources,
perspectives, it is vital to find sources that move beyond
was further codified through the formalization of local Ra-
the narrow bounds of high politics, as well as to engage
jput identities from the Mughal period. Sharma’s analysis
with various genres of literature and documentation in Hi-
of Gaddi shepherds’ ballads further captures hints of resis-
malayan languages. Articles in this issue do so by drawing
tance to caste domination and hegemonic gender norms
from a variety of unique and under-explored sources, such
that bolstered regional state formation.
as oral histories and interviews, folklore, Hindi newspa-
pers, Nepali state archives, and Tibetan autobiographies. Leah Koskimaki’s paper builds upon her ethnographic
Searching for innovative sources or reading relatively work in Uttarakhand as well as collected Hindi newspapers
well-known sources with new questions in mind can help printed from the 1920s to the 1940s. This unique combina-
to build up a richer historiography of subaltern lives, as tion of sources allows her to trace how ‘youth’ developed
well as move away from historical paradigms left over as a political category in the public sphere in the last
from colonial writing. Witzel (1990) and Mishra (2010), for decades before independence. In Kumaon and Garhwal,
example, advocate for historians to adopt a more nuanced youth (generally male, upper-caste and Hindu but referred
approach to reading ‘traditional’ sources such as vamsha- to in universal terms) were exhorted via regional publi-
valis and thyasaphu (or chatas in Mishra’s formulation) for cations in Hindi to actively take on new political roles in
their historical textures rather than simply mining them the 1920s and act out alternative, anti-colonial futures.
as sources.15 Emma Martin takes this call for new readings Koskimaki shows that youth activism became an iterative
farther. Tracing the meanings of diplomatic encounters process as later generations chose from available political
and material exchanges across the Tibetan-British impe- language and the examples of particular activists to shape
rial borderlands during the 13th Dalai Lama’s brief flight new political strategies related to the movement for a new
as a refugee to Calcutta in 1910, she shows how the British state and economic development therein.
foreign department drew upon both the expertise of
In her study of private schools in pre-1951 Tibet, Alice
officers with practical experience in Tibetan culture and
Travers combines oral history interviews and published
Himalayan states, as well as precedents from negotiations
Tibetan materials, particularly autobiography, to chart
in Persian courtly settings worked out in the plains, to
the dense landscape of non-religious private schools that
shape an appropriate diplomatic protocol for receiving the
then existed in Central Tibet, and to characterize the
Tibetan leader. Focusing on the etiquette around the tra-
persons, motivations, and social strategies behind them.
ditional Tibetan silk scarf or khatak, Martin uses the notion
Painstakingly researched, her paper highlights a middle
of “material knowledge” to highlight the contingent and
layer of society that often had professional connections in
layered creation of colonialism in the borderland. In her
government service, and that independently established
article, the notion of the Himalaya is composed of multiple
educational institutions as a form of non-religious, social
threads — the exigencies of British imperial power and
service. Travers notes that this middling class, “composed
diplomacy at the edge of the subcontinent, the histories
of government secretaries, aristocratic families’ and mo-
of other imperial contacts, especially in the plains, and
nastic treasurers, managers and secretaries, merchants,
the shifting relationship between China and the states to
large land-holding farmers and military officers,” managed
its south, as well as the circulation of material objects and
to largely reproduce its technical skills and social standing
personnel across open and unsettled borders. She draws
through such private educational establishments.
upon painting, colonial archives, Tibetan monographs on
the khatak, and several memoirs to draw out a finely nu- Darjeeling transformed from an exploitative hill station,
anced history of cross-cultural encounters in the Himalaya. built upon the backs of mostly non-local laborers from the
1830s, into a space of cosmopolitan regional modernity
Mahesh Sharma’s paper explores gender and patriarchy
with new possibilities for Himalayan migrants by the late
through oral traditions and material evidence from the

36 | HIMALAYA Fall 2015

nineteenth century, according to Jayeeta Sharma. Drawing
Arik Moran (D.Phil. Oxford) is Lecturer in South Asian History
upon colonial reports and oral history interviews, Shar-
at the University of Haifa, Israel. His research concerns
ma reviews the making of the sanatorium and the hub
modern West Himalayan history, oral tradition, social
of tea plantation capital, as a space which also embodied
memory, and the socio-political aspects of highland religion.
possibilities for upward mobility and encounters with
He has published several papers on these and related topics,
colonial modernity for families of some hill laborers and
and is currently investigating the uses of history in oral
merchants. By focusing on migrant laborers and peripatet-
traditions from Himachal Pradesh as part of a Marie Curie
ic traders who participated in the city and its industries,
Fellowship granted by the European Commission (FP7-
Sharma’s case study of a hill station in the making further
334489). He is also Book Reviews Editor at the European
links Himalayan history to South Asian histories of labor
Bulletin of Himalayan Research.
and urban development.
Catherine Warner (Ph.D. History, University of Washington) is
Sanjog Rupakheti’s paper focuses on state-formation in
currently a College Fellow in the Departments of South Asian
Nepal from the perspective of administration and law.
Studies and History at Harvard University. Her dissertation
He reads a number of petitions from across the kingdom
(2014) focuses on circulation, sovereignty and border-
in the late eighteenth and nineteenth centuries to high-
crossing in the making of the India-Nepal borderland from
light the expectations diverse state subjects held for the
1780 to 1930. Her research and teaching interests include
developing Gorkha state. Arguing against vestiges of the
exploring connected histories of South Asia, migration and
colonial stereotype of “Oriental despotism” and ahistor-
circulation, the intersections of gender, social and economic
ical, ritual-based notions of the Nepali state, he suggests
history, and methodologies and theories for reading
that state-making in Nepal was rather a practical affair
literature from a historical perspective.
dependent upon effective judicial administration tailored
to diverse groups of people. Rupakheti’s analysis high- We wish to thank Sara Shneiderman, Sienna Craig, and Mark Turin
lights the processual nature of state-building, the state’s for their feedback and encouragement on this special issue, the
contributing authors without whom it would not have seen light,
intervention in “intimate aspects of social lives” and the
and the anonymous reviewers.
state’s evolving capacities to reach into the grassroots and
community level — all of which depended on practical and
day-to-day modes of governance.

Read together, these papers make a case for moving be- Endnotes
yond political histories towards a regional approach that 1. Within the discipline of history in the western
builds and expands upon the paradigms advanced by van academy, the historian still finds a need to make the case
Schendel and Scott, and that is based on innovative read- for the centrality of the Himalaya as a region of study.
ings of new and familiar sources to create new social and In contrast, other disciplines (such as development
cultural histories. Such histories are indispensible if we are studies and anthropology) may be more apt to view the
to conceptualize more fully the always-changing relation- Himalaya as a central, rather than a peripheral, region of
ships between people and place, region and global power, study. A succinct appraisal of these processes, to which
discipline and area. From the fortunes of Tibetan khataks we shall return, may be found in Shneiderman (2010).
For an important exception to these trends, see Gellner
in 1910-Calcutta and the private schools of the plateau
(2003[2001]).
prior to 1951, to the interactions of plantation workers and
traders with 19th century-Darjeeling and youth politics 2. For a cogent assessment of the school’s development
in early 20th century-Kumaon, and finally to the multi- and devolution, see Eaton (2000).
ple methods for controlling nascent states in Himachal
Pradesh and Nepal, this issue is a contribution to the 3. For a useful outline of the trajectory of this field, see
exciting new directions of Himalayan history in the past Toffin (2009).
decades. As the cursory outline of the field above indicates,
4. A number of scholars have clearly argued that sources
it is not likely to be the last. are not a limitation for the writing of Himalayan histories.
However, as for example Witzel (1990) has pointed out,
the preservation of archives and sources should remain of
concern to historians and other scholars of the region. For
a sense of the range of available sources see, Witzel (1990),
Mishra (2010), Sharma (2009). For reproductions of records

HIMALAYA Volume 35, Number 2 | 37

either reproduced in or translated into Nepali or English, References
often with some commentary, see the journals Purnima,
Ancient Nepal, CNAS, Regmi Research Series, etc. (available at Acharya, Baburam, Shreekrishna Acharya and Madhav
<http://www.digitalhimalaya.org>). Acharya. The Bloodstained Throne: Struggles for Power in Nepal,
1775-1914. New Delhi: Penguin Books, 2013.
5. For example, at the recent 4th Annual Kathmandu
Conference on Nepal and the Himalaya, less than 5% of all Allen, Nicholas J. Miyapma: Traditional Narratives of the
papers presented were historical studies. Thulung Rai. Kathmandu: Vajra Publication. 2012 [1976].

6. See Subrahmanyam (1997) for an early and much- Amrith, Sunil. 2013. Crossing the Bay of Bengal: The Furies of
cited article advocating for “connected” rather than Nature and the Fortunes of Migrants. Cambride, M.A.: Harvard
comparative histories. This dichotomy is, however, University Press, 2013.
relatively common to debates on world history (cf Dunn
2000). Anderson, Clare. 2000. Convicts in the Indian Ocean:
Transportation from South Asia to Mauritius, 1815-53. New
7. On Zomia as a concept metaphor, see Jonsson (2010). York: St. Martin’s Press.

8. A random sample of a much larger field of work, which Bhattacharya, Bhaswati, Gita Dharampal-Frick, and Jos
nevertheless includes various perspectives on the link Gommans. 2007. “Spatial and Temporal Continuities of
between South Asia, the Indian Ocean and global history, Merchant Networks in South Asia and the Indian Ocean
includes: Mukherjee (2011), Ashin Das Gupta (2001), Sunil (1500-2000).” Journal of the Economic And Social History Of The
Amrith (2013). Bhattacharya et al (2007). Jos Gommans Orient 50: 91-105.
(2012), Hofmeyr (2012), Anderson (2000).
Chatterjee, Indrani. 2013. Forgotten Friends: Monks, Marriages,
9. Several exceptions which do make a case, more or less and Memories of Northeast India. Delhi: Oxford University
directly, for linking Himalayan to global histories, include Press.
Bernardo (2011), Chatterjee (2013), Gommans (1995), van
Spengen (2000). Chettri, Mona. 2015. “Engaging the State: Ethnic
Patronage and Cultural Politics in the Eastern Himalayan
10. On the impact of civic boundary demarcations within Borderland.” South Asia: Journal of South Asian Studies: 1-16.
India states on social relations, see Piliavsky (2013).
Cohn, Bernard. 1996. Colonialism and its Forms of Knowledge:
11. See, for example, Murton’s (2014) observation on The British in India. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University
the opening of the Nathu la trade route between India Press.
and China (in 2006) occurring in the very same week as
the Beijing-Lhasa high-speed railway was inaugurated, Das Gupta, Ashin. 2001. The World of the Indian Ocean
pointing to the Himalaya’s facilitation of extensive Merchant, 1500-1800: Collected Essays of Ashin Das Gupta. Delhi:
connections between South Asia and China’s political Oxford University Press.
center.
Das, Debojyoti. 2014. “Understanding Margins, State
12. For a critical assessment of this theme in light of Power, Space and Territoriality in the Naga Hills.” Journal of
postcolonial discourse theory, see Moran (2015). For non- Borderlands Studies 29(1): 63-80.
academic, “anecdotal” histories of royal women in Nepal,
see Karmacharya (2005). For an exceptionally negative Dunn, Ross. 2000. The New World History: A Teacher’s
view of women as historical actors see Acharya (2013). Companion. Boston: St. Martin’s.

13. Ramble, Schwieger and Travers borrow this term from Eaton, Richard. 2011. “(Re)imag(in)ing Other2ness: A
William Dalrymple’s written discussion of the Mutiny Postmortem for the Postmodern in India” Journal of World
Papers in the National Archives of India, Delhi, which History 11(1): 57-78.
contain a great deal of information about the non-elite and
Evans, Rosalind. 2010. “The Perils of being a Borderland
the everyday.
People: On the Lhotshampas of Bhutan.” Contemporary
14. This seems to be the case for Tibetan histories as much South Asia 18(1): 25-42.
as for those of Nepal. Ramble, Shwieger and Travers (2013).
Gellner, David. 2003[2001]. The Anthropology of Buddhism and
See also, Slusser and Vajracharya (2005), DR Regmi (1965).
Hinduism: Weberian Themes. Delhi: Oxford University Press.
15. For an example of this method’s fruitful
implementation in South India, see Rao et al. (2001).

38 | HIMALAYA Fall 2015

Gellner, David, ed. 2013. Borderland Lives in Northern South Machado, Pedro. 2014. Ocean of Trade South Asian Merchants,
Asia. Durham, North Carolina: Duke University Press. Africa and the Indian Ocean, c. 1750 - 1850. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
Gerwin, Martin, & Bergmann, Cristoph. 2012. “Geopolitical
Relations and Regional Restructuring: The Case of the McKay, Alex. 2015. Kailas Histories: Renunciate Traditions and
Kumaon Himalaya, India.” Erdkunde 66(2): 91-107. the Construction of Himalayan Sacred Geography. Leiden: Brill.

Gommans, Jos. 1995. The Rise of the Indo-Afghan Empire, Michael, Bernardo. 2011. Nepali History as World History.
c.1710-1780. Leide: E.J. Brill. Kathmandu: Himal Books.

Gutschow, Niels, Axel Michaels, Charles Ramble, and Ernst Michaels, Axel. 2003. “The Sacredness of (Himalayan)
Steinkellner, eds. 2003. Sacred Landscape of the Himalaya: Landscapes.” In Sacred Landscape of the Himalaya: Proceedings
Proceedings of an International Conference at Heidelberg, 25-27 of an International Conference at Heidelberg, 25-27 May 1998,
May 1998. Vienna: Austrian Academy of Sciences Press. edited by Gutschow et al, 13-18. Vienna: Austrian Academy
of Sciences Press.
Guyot-Réchard, Bérénice. 2013. “Nation-building or State-
making? India’s North-East Frontier and the Ambiguities Mishra, Chaitanya. 2007. “Development and
of Nehruvian Developmentalism, 1950–1959.” Contemporary Underdevelopment: A Preliminary Sociological
South Asia 21(1): 22-37. Perspective.” In Essays on the Sociology of Nepal, 47-80.
Lalitpur, Nepal: Fine Print Books.
. 2015. “Reordering a Border Space: Relief,
Rehabilitation, and Nation-building in Northeastern India Mishra, Yogesh. 2010. “Towards a Case Typography of
after the 1950 Assam Earthquake.” Modern Asian Studies 49 Historiography: Reading Historical Texts from South Asia.”
(4): 931-962. Presented as a Special Lecture at the Graduate School of
Asian and African Area Studies of the Kyoto University.
Holmberg, David H. Order in Paradox: Myth, Ritual, and
Exchange among Nepal’s Tamang. Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell Moran, Arik. 2015. “‘The Rani of Sirmur’ Revisited: Sati and
University Press, 1989. Sovereignty in Theory and Practice.” Modern Asian Studies
49 (2): 302-335.
Hofmeyr, Isabel. 2012. “The Complicating Sea: The Indian
Ocean as Method.” Comparative Studies of South Asia, Africa Mukherjee, Rila. 2011. Networks in the First Global Age, 1400-
and the Middle East, 32(3): 584-590. 1800. New Delhi: Primus Books.

Huber, Toni, and Blackburn, Stuart eds. 2012. Origins and Murton, Galen. 2013. “Himalayan Highways: STS, the
Migrations in the Extended Eastern Himalayas. Leiden: Brill. Spatial Fix, and Socio-Cultural Shifts in the Land of Zomia.”
Perspectives on Global Development and Technology 12: 609-621.
Jonsson, Hjorleifur. 2010. “Above and Beyond: Zomia and
the Ethnographic Challenge of/for Regional history.” . 2014. “Review of ‘Geographical Diversions: Tibetan
History and Anthropology 21: 191-212 Trade, Global Transactions’ by Tina Harris,” Himalaya, the
Journal of the Association for Nepal and Himalayan Studies, 34,
Karmacharya, Ganga. 2005. Queens in Nepalese Politics: An
pp. 146-147.
Account of Roles of Nepalese Queens in State affairs, 1775-1846.
Kathmandu: Educational Publishing House. Ortner, Sherry B. 1978. Sherpas through their Rituals.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Krauskopff, Gisele. 1996. “Chiefs, Gods of the Land and
Land Registry in Nepal.” Études Rurales, 143-144: 95-116. . 1989. High Religion: A Cultural and Political History
of Sherpa Buddhism. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University
. 1997. “Emotions, Seasonal Melodies and Rhythms of
Press.
Nature, the Oral Literature of the Tharus of Dang (Nepal).”
Purusartha 18: 383-402. Piliavsky, Anastasia. 2013. “Borders without Borderlands:
On the Social Reproduction of State Demarcation in
Lecomte-Tilouine, Marie. 2009. Hindu Kingship, Ethnic
Rajasthan.” In Borderland Lives in Northern South Asia: Non-
Revival, and Maoist Rebellion in Nepal. New Delhi: Oxford
state Perspectives, edited by David Gellner, 24-46. Durham,
University Press.
North Carolina: Duke University Press.
Macfarlane, Alan, and Indrabahadur Gurung. 1990. Gurungs
Rao, Velcheru Narayana, Sanjay Subrahmanyan, and David
of Nepal: A Guide to the Gurung. Kathmandu, Nepal: Ratna
Shulman. 2001. Textures of Time: Writing History in South Asia
Pustak Bhandar.
1600-1800. Delhi: Permanent Black.

HIMALAYA Volume 35, Number 2 | 39

Ramble, Charles. 1996. “Patterns of Places,” 141-153. In Toffin, Gérard. 2009. “Fields and Writing: Fifty Years of
Reflections of the Mountain, edited by Anne-Marie Blondeau French Anthropology in Nepal.” Studies in Nepali History and
and Ernst Steinkellner. Wien: Verlag der Ӧsterreichischen Society 14, 261-301.
Akademie der Wissenschaften.
Townsend, Middleton. 2013. “Anxious Belongings: Anxiety
. 2008. The Navel of the Demoness: Tibetan Buddhism and and the Politics of Belonging in Subnationalist Darjeeling.”
Civil Religion in Highland Nepal. New York: Oxford University American Anthropologist 115(4): 608-621.
Press.
van Schendel, Willem. 2002. “Geographies of Knowing,
Regmi, D.R. 1965. Medieval Nepal. Calcutta: Firma K. L. Geographies of Ignorance: Jumping Scale in Southeast
Mukhopadhyay. Asia.” Environment and Planning D: Society and Space 20(6):
647–68.
Rupakheti, Sanjog. 2012. “Leviathan or Paper Tiger: State
Making in the Himalayas, 1740-1900”. PhD Thesis. New van Spengen, Wim. 2000. Tibetan Border Worlds: A
Jersey: Rutgers University. Geohistorical Analysis of Trade and Traders. London: Kegan
Paul International.
Saberwal, Vasant K. 1998. Pastoral Politics: Shepherds,
Bureaucrats, and Conservation in the Western Himalaya. Delhi: Witzel, Michael. 1990. “On Indian Historical Writing: The
Oxford University Press. Role of the Vamshavalis.” Journal of the Japanese Association
for South Asian Studies 2: 1-55.
Scott, James. 2009. The Art of not being Governed: An Anarchist
History of Upland Southeast Asia. New Haven: Yale University
Press.

Sharma, Mahesh. 2009. Western Himalayan temple Records:

State, Pilgrimage, Ritual and Legality in Chamba. Leiden: Brill.

Shneiderman, Sara. 2010. “Are the Central Himalayas in

Zomia? Some Scholarly and Political Considerations across
Time and Space.” Journal of Global History 5(2): 289-312.

. 2013. “Himalayan Border Citizens: Sovereignty and

Mobility in the Nepal–Tibetan Autonomous Region (TAR)
of China Border Zone.” Political Geography 35: 25-36.

. 2015. Rituals of Ethnicity: Thangmi Identities between

Nepal and India. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania
Press.

Singh, Chetan. 1998. Natural Premises: Ecology and Peasant

Life in the Western Himalaya, 1800-1950. Delhi: Oxford
University Press.

Sivaramakrishnan, K. 2002. “Situating the Subaltern:

History and Anthropology in the Subaltern Studies
Project.” In Reading Subaltern Studies: Critical History,
Contested Meaning and the Globalization of South Asia, edited
by David Ludden, 212-255. London: Anthem Press.

Slusser, Mary, Vajracarya, Gautamavajra, & Fuller,

Manuela. 2005. Art and Culture of Nepal: Selected papers.
Kathmandu: Mandala Publications.

Subrahmanyam, Sanjay. 1997. “Connected Histories: Notes

towards a Reconfiguration of Early Modern Eurasia.”
Modern Asian Studies 31(3): 735-762.

40 | HIMALAYA Fall 2015