world-economies and south asia 1600-1750
TRANSCRIPT
-
8/16/2019 World-Economies and South Asia 1600-1750
1/9
Review (Fernand Braudel Center), Fernand Braudel Center and Research Foundation of State University of New
York are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Review (Fernand Braudel Center).
http://www.jstor.org
Review Fernand Braudel Center)
Research Foundation of State University of New York
"World-Economies" and South Asia, 1600-1750: A Skeptical NoteAuthor(s): Sanjay SubrahmanyamSource: Review (Fernand Braudel Center), Vol. 12, No. 1 (Winter, 1989), pp. 141-148Published by: for and on behalf of theResearch Foundation of State University of New York
Fernand Braudel CenterStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/40241119Accessed: 02-02-2016 23:05 UTC
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at http://www.jstor.org/page/ info/about/policies/terms.jsp
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of contentin a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship.For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].
This content downloaded from 128.97.227.216 on Tue, 02 Feb 2016 23:05:47 UTCAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/http://www.jstor.org/publisher/rfsunyhttp://www.jstor.org/publisher/fbchttp://www.jstor.org/stable/40241119http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/stable/40241119http://www.jstor.org/publisher/fbchttp://www.jstor.org/publisher/rfsunyhttp://www.jstor.org/
-
8/16/2019 World-Economies and South Asia 1600-1750
2/9
World-Economies nd South
Asia,
1600-1750:
A
Skeptical
Note
Sanjay
Subrahmanyam
Recently,
several
papers
have
emerged
rom he
world-systems
school,
urporting
o
ntroducento outhAsian
history
he on-
cept
f he
world-economy
s a
significant
nalytical
ool.The stated
aim
of some
of these
writings
s
relatively
odest;
or
xample,
m-
manuelWallerstein
n a recent
aper
merely
laims hat
by
using
a
world-systemserspectiventhe tudy f SouthAsia, the ssuesun-
derdebate
and
thereforehe
objects
ffurther
esearch)
an be made
sharper
1986:
esp.
28).
But other
writersmake
far
tronger
laims,
as is evident rom
recent
ssayby
a
conglomerate
omprising
avi
A.
Palat,
Kenneth
Barr,
James
Matson,
Vinay
Bahl,
and Nesar
Ah-
mad
(henceforth
eferredo
as
Palat,
et
al.).
Here,
we are informed
that he
world-systems
chool
s
in
the
process
f
providing
recon-
ceptualization
f
South
Asian
history,
s well s
an
agenda
or outh
Asian
history
1986:
171).
Dissatisfaction
s
expressed
ith he
urrent
state f hehistoriography,hichwearetold)uses nappropriatenits
of
nalysis
erived rom
olitical istory
or
he
tudy
f
inkages
hat
are farbetter lluminated
y
the
concept,
world-economy.
Palat et
el. set out
n
the
space
of
ess than
forty
ages
to address
five
ssues
n
SouthAsian
history.
hese are
(i)
the rise and demise
of
omething
alled South
Asian
world-economy
etween
600-1750;
(ii)
the
incorporation
fSouthAsia
into he
European
or
capitalist)
world-economy
n
the
second
half f
the
eighteenth
entury;
iii)
the
limitedndustrialization
fBritish
ndia,
n the atenineteenth
nd
early
twentiethenturies;iv) theemergencend success fthe ndianNa-
REVIEW, XII, I, WINTER,
I989,
I4I-48
141
This content downloaded from 128.97.227.216 on Tue, 02 Feb 2016 23:05:47 UTCAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp
-
8/16/2019 World-Economies and South Asia 1600-1750
3/9
142
Sanjay
Subrahmanyam
tionalCongress; nd (v) thePartition f ndia. The very act hat
group
fhistoriansould
even etout to
answer uch
n enormous i-
versity
f
uestions,
owever
entatively,
n
so
short
space,
may
eem
a
reflection
n the
present
tate
f the
historiography
n South
Asia.
As we shall ee ahead
though,
he
problem
s not o much hat he
his-
toriography
s
sparse
nd hence
ripe
for old
generalizations,
s that
the
world-systems
chool
s
unfamiliar
ith
mportant
ections
f t.
Surely
necessary
ondition or
reconceptualization
s a
familiar-
ity
with xtant
oncepts.
In thepresent ote, shall onfinemyselfotakingssuewith alat
et al.
(as
well
s with
Wallerstein)
n the
very
tility
f
world-systems
perspective
or he
understanding
fSouth
Asian
history
etween
600
and
1750.
I
shall focus
n
particular
n the
concept
f the world-
economy,
nd its
application
o South
Asia.
The
primary
ontention
is that his
pproach,
arfrom
larifying
ny
major
ssues,
erves
s
a
diversionary
ctivity,horing
p
dated
views nd
perpetuating
meth-
odology
hat
ubstitutes
uperficial
econdary
aterial
or uthentic
oc-
umentation.
any
of hose
resently
orking
n thefield
re
dissatisfied
with heuse ofunits uch s theMughal ndianeconomy
r the
Vi-
jayanagar
conomy.
owever,
o
replace
hese
with he
oncept
f he
world-economy.
s
simply
ubstitutinging
Log by
King
Stork.
Readerswould
ecall hat
Wallerstein
n
the wovolumes
ublished
up
to nowof
TheModern
orld-System
as few omments
o offer
n
South
Asian
or
even
Asian)
history
n
the
period
500 o
1750.Asia
s treated
as
being
outside
he
European
world-economy
n
this
period,
o
be
incorporated
n
the
post-1750
ra.
The fewremarks
hat re made
on
Asia
serve,
n
point
f
fact,
o
mislead ather
han lluminate:
hus,
the characterizationf Euro-Asian
rade
n
the
sixteenthnd
seven-
teenth
enturiess
remarkable
nly
for
eing
wide
off
he
mark.Wal-
lersteinsserts
hat
n
the ixteenth
entury,
uro-Asianrade
witnessed
a considerable
xpansion,
ut then
ontracted
n
the
eventeenth
en-
tury,
hereas
n
fact,
as
any
tudent
f he
period
knows)
he ixteenth
century
aw
only
limited
xpansion
n
Euro-Asian
rade
nd the ev-
enteenth
entury
farmore
rapidgrowth
1980:
17-18).
Wallerstein's
more ecent
ssay
n the
incorporation
f he ndian ubcontinent
nto
the
apitalist
orld-economy
1986)
does
not
particularly
eassure ne
on the xtentfhisgrasp f he
iteraturen South
Asian
history,
irca
1500 o
1750.
Still,
thas the
virtue f
consistency,
ontinuing
o assert
This content downloaded from 128.97.227.216 on Tue, 02 Feb 2016 23:05:47 UTCAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp
-
8/16/2019 World-Economies and South Asia 1600-1750
4/9
world-economies and south
asia,
1600-1750
143
that the ndiansubcontinentefore 750 was]a zone largely xter-
nal
to the
operations
f the then
Europe-basedcapitalist
world-
economy.
. .
1750-1850
was]
the
period
during
which
t,
along
with
many
ther
arts
f he
world,
as
ncorporated
nto he
world-economy
(1986:34).
In
the
period
etween
oughly
500 nd
1750,
we
may
on-
clude from
Wallerstein,
herewas
a
European
world-economy
nd
an
Asian
world-economy.
uro-Asianrade
nd the
Company
resence
in
Asian waters
epresented
he
meager
meeting
round
fthese
wo.
It
might
e
useful t this
oint
o consider
fwhat
his
Asianworld-
economymight aveconsisted.Wallersteins, after ll,notalonein
his use ofthe
term. ernand
Braudel,
n his three
olume
work,
Civ-
ilizationnd
Capitalism,
5th-18th
entury
1981,
1982,
1984),
also
makes
repeated
se
ofthe
term
world-economy
hile
dealing
withAsia
in
the
period
1500-1750.
We learn
from
imthat
n
this
poch,
the
Far
East taken
s
a whole
onsisted
fthree
igantic
orld
conomies:
s-
lam,
overlooking
he
ndian
Ocean,.
. .
India
. . .
and China
1984:
484).
However,
lsewhere
n the
same
work,
we also
encounter
men-
tion
fother
sian
world-economies,
ost
notably
he
Turkish
orld-
economy,ndaJapaneseworld-economy,hat eems ohave
ome
nto
existence
n the
1630's.
More
confusing
till
s
Braudel's
ssertion
hat
between
he
15th
nd
the
18th
enturies,
t s
perhaps
ermissible
o
talk
of
a
single
world-economy
roadly
mbracing
ll three -
hina,
India
and
the
slamic
world
1984:
441,
467,
484,
533,
passim.).
his
somewhat
mbarrassing
urfeit
f
world-economies
n
the
Asia
ofthe
period
500-1750
ay
rompt
he
eader
o
ask
what
world-economy
is
anyway.
ccording
o
K.
N.
Chaudhuri,
he
erm
whenused
in
the
sense
dopted
by
Fernand
raudel
ignifies
a well-defined
conomic
area under he nfluencefa central-placercentral egion with]
functional
nd
possibly
ierarchical
elationship
etween
he
enter
nd
peripheral
reas
1985:
230).
If
ndeed
we
accept
he
notion
f
single
world-economy
mbracing
he
slamic
world,
ndia,
and
China,
where
might
his
picenter
e?
Hard
pressed
or
n
answer,
iels
Steensgaard
has
recently
rovided
hree
andidates:
Melaka
from
400 o
1500,
Goa
from
500
o
1600,
nd
Batavia
from
600
o
1700
1987).
This absurd
characterization,
hich
onfuses
he
history
f
European
xpansion
n
Asia
with he
tructure
f
he
Asian
economy
n
the
period,
till
waits
a justificationn Loschianterms.1
A
second
ook
t
what
Braudel
erms
world-economies
n theAsian
This content downloaded from 128.97.227.216 on Tue, 02 Feb 2016 23:05:47 UTCAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp
-
8/16/2019 World-Economies and South Asia 1600-1750
5/9
144
Sanjay Subrahmanyam
context hows hat he ermlikemany thermodeworten)as ittle on-
tent r
utility.
e are
n
fact
ealing
with
erfectly
onventionalnits
the
Ottoman
empire,
he
Islamic worldof the Middle
East, India,
China,
the ndian
Ocean,
the
Trading
World
f
Asia,
and so on
-
and
glorifying
hemwith he uffix
world-economy.
as this larified
ny
issue?
To
return o Palat et
al.,
as wellas to
Wallerstein,
heir
otion f
the
world-economy
arries
ar
moredefinite
aggage.
First,
t s not
an
empire,
heother ort f
world-system
hat heir hesaurus d-
mits. n a world-economylaWallerstein,heremust e a core nd
a
periphery
plus
the
rag-bag
f
semiperiphery ),
nd above ll there
mustbe
unequal
exchange.
Unequal
exchange
s
defined,
ot n
the
rigorous
but
probably
ndefensible)
erms
fa
labor
theory
f
value,
but
somemore nchoate
oncept
f
monopoly, onopsony,
nd a con-
sequent
deviation romwhat
early
classicaleconomists
might
have
termed
just
rice.
ll
this
s
summed
p
in
thedefinitionhat
alat,
et
al.,
provide
f
a
world-economy :
unit hat involvesn
integra-
tionof
production rocesses
n a
hierarchical ivision f aborwithin
an
interstate
ystem1986: 174).Now,
f
ne s to follow hese
uthors,
such
n
entity
ame nto xistence
n
SouthAsia around
1600,
where-
as
previously
t had not
existed.
Regrettably,
ts
geographical
xtent
remains
ague.Apparently,
t ncluded he
ndian
sub-continent,
ut
the other
omponent arts
re
never
learly
elineated.
Moreover,
f
it s
referredo at times s the
SouthAsian
world-economy,
qually
it
appears
on other ccasions s
the ndian
Ocean
world-economy,
as
if
he
wo
weremuch he ame.So
much or ts
being
well-defined
economic
rea. Above
all,
it s
a
profoundly
ndo-centric
ntity:
he
principal
ausesfor tsrise
nd decline re
ocated
olely
n
ndia,
more
precisely
n
the
Gangetic
duab.
The rise f
his
world-economyby
he
arly
eventeenth
entury
is
explained
sing simplepolitical
vent: he
etting p
of
theDelhi
Sultanate.
According
o
Palat,
et
al.,
the
stablishmentf the
Delhi
Sultanate
n
the
mid-thirteenth
entury
et n
motion
series f
eco-
nomic
nd
political rocesses
hat ed
tothe
mergence
f
SouthAsian
world-economyy
the
early
eventeenth
entury.
he
rulers f
Delhi
apparently
laimed
larger
hare
f he
grarian
urplus
han
did
pre-
decessor
tates, r,
f
nothinglse,replaced
host f
ndividual axes
by
a
single
ax. This
is
a
change
hat s
for ome
reason
thought
o
This content downloaded from 128.97.227.216 on Tue, 02 Feb 2016 23:05:47 UTCAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp
-
8/16/2019 World-Economies and South Asia 1600-1750
6/9
world-economies
and
south
asia,
1600-1750
145
be of momentousmport. he surplus lass wasnaturally rincipally
resident
n theurban
reas,
nd used
the
grarian
urplus
o
fuel
raft
production.
rowing
manufactures
aturally
timulated
rade,
nd
translated
given
ome
heroically
nstated
hanges
lsewhere
n
Asia)
to
a
South
Asian
world-economy,
1986:
173-76,
assim.).2
his
world-
economy
ontinued
o function
uring
he
eventeenth
entury
nd
the
first
alf fthe
eighteenth
entury.
owever,
round
1750
the
nicely
traditional
ate of
Plassey)
the
ndian
subcontinent
tarts
o be
in-
corporated
which
may
be
read
as
colonized ).
he causes
ofthe
de-
miseof heSouthAsian oris the ndianOcean?)world-economyre
again
simple
nd
perfectly
rthodox.
uropean
ntrusion
accelerates
the
dismemberment
f
he
world-economy -
curious
elief,
iven
hat
in
the
erms
f
Palat,
t
al.,
the
world-economy
f
South
Asia did
not
even
xist
efore
he
European
ntrusion.3
ut
the
real
cause
ofthe
de-
mise
of
the
world-economy
s
another
raditional
hipping-boy:
he
jagirdari-ijaradari
risis
f he
ate
eventeenth
nd
early
ighteenth
en-
turies.
his
eads
to
the
subversion
f
peasant
griculture
in
Habib's
hyperbolic
hrase,
ited
with
pproval
y
Wallerstein
nd
Palat,
t
al.);
thedeath n 1707ofAurangzeb,hatmost lichéd
f
subcontinental
turning-points,
s
followed
y
political
ragmentation
hat
was si-
multaneously
process
f he
disarticulation
f he
South
Asian
world-
economy
Palat,
et
al.,
1986:
178).
For
historians
ho
profess
reat
disdain
for
raditional
olitical
istory,
alat,
et
al.,
are
quite
unspar-
ing
n their
ecourse
o
it.
The
central
roblem
with
he
thesis
s
it
stands
s that
ne
is
left
wholly
nconvinced
f
he
xistence
f
n
animal
alled
he
South
Asian
(or
Indian
Ocean)
world-economy
n
the
period
from
600
to
1750.
However,etus momentarilyhelve his ssue
and
first
onsider
he
methodological
trategy
dopted
by
Palat,
et
al.
To
explain
he
riseof
this
world-economy,
ecourse
s
taken
o
the
State
as deus
x
machina,
confirming
he
orthodox
iew
hat
tates
an
affect
ocieties
or
pen-
etrate
hem,
s
the
phrase
goes),
but
are
not
an
organic
part
of so-
cieties
t
all.
This
is
a
peculiar
orm
f
political
eterminism
hat
its
very
neasily
n
the
model
of
economic
nterlinkages
hat
he
world-
systems
chool
eems
o
espouse.
t
is
also
quite
simply
ncorrect,
s
well
s
misleading
s
an
approach
o
the
relationship
etween
tate
nd
society nd stateformationn general.4
Looking
now
o
the
rgument
oncerning
ow
he
world-economy
This content downloaded from 128.97.227.216 on Tue, 02 Feb 2016 23:05:47 UTCAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp
-
8/16/2019 World-Economies and South Asia 1600-1750
7/9
146
Sanjay Subrahmanyam
centered roundSouthAsia perished,neobserves hatneitherWal-
lerstein or
Palat,
et
al.,
take
ny
noteof
n
extensive
iterature
rep-
resented or nstance
y
he
writings
fC.
A.
Bayly
1983],
rank erlin
[1985;
1978;
1985],
Stewart ordon
1977],
nd more
recently
ndré
Wink
1986],
nd Muzaffar
lam
[1986])
on
the
eighteenth
entury.5
To sum
up
the
mport
fthis iterature
which
s
by
no meansmono-
lithic
though),
these
writings onvincingly
emonstrate
hat the
eighteenthentury-
ar rom
eing period
f he subversion
f
peas-
ant
agriculture -
as characterized
y
a
prosperous
nd at
times a-
pidly xpanding easant roduction.he decline f heMughal mpire
did not mean economic
haos,
any
morethandid
the
decline
f the
Vijayanagar
mpire
omewhat ver
century
arlier.
ll
this vidence
seems o
have
escaped
henotice
f
Wallerstein,
nd
Palat,
t
al.,
who
fall nto he onventional
rap
hat tems
rom
use of
purely olitical
units o
study
conomic
nterlinkages.
ar
from
roviding
recon-
ceptualization,
heir
writings
hus
reiterate
oaryhistoriographical
myths.
Moreover,
o return o the central
ssue,
that
f
the South
Asian
world-economy,
nd
of
the
xtent f
this
nit,
t s here hat hewhole
edifice rumbles.Wherewas the core and whatwas the
periphery
f
this
world-economy?
he
Greater
ndia
perspective
f
Palat,
et al.
might
ead
them
o believe hat he ndian
sub-continentas
indeed
the
core,
nd areas
such as Indonesia he
periphery.
here are
three
majorproblems
with hisview.
First,
t
does not
provide
n
adequate
characterizationf
xchange
etween hina nd
Southeast sia
Souza,
1986:ch.
I).6
Secondly,
t s
really
crudeform
f volutionism:
ndia
exported
extiles,
hichwere
higher p
on some scale of
achieve-
ment
hanthe
pepper, pices,
r
base and
precious
metals
produced
and
exported
rom
ndonesia.
But the
third
bjection
s the
most el-
ling
of ll: where n all
this s
unequal
exchange?
We
note he
discreet
silenceof
the
world-systems
choolon this
ssue,
and
suggest
hat
t
is
significant.7
To
sum
up
then,
what s
proposed
y
the
world-systems
rotag-
onists s a
trivialization
f
South Asian
history,
ased on
some mis-
conceptions
nd the
orthodoxies
f several
decades
ago.
That this
viewpoint
as
received ven
ome
imited
urrency
o far
mong
his-
torians f
SouthAsia
stems rom
desire
particularly
vident
mongSouthAsianistsnthe
West)
o
universalize
he
history
f he
region,
This content downloaded from 128.97.227.216 on Tue, 02 Feb 2016 23:05:47 UTCAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp
-
8/16/2019 World-Economies and South Asia 1600-1750
8/9
world-economies
and
south
asia,
1600-1750
147
as wellas to conceptualize t any price.The formers no doubta
laudable
end,
but it cannotbe
separated
rom he means used.
It
is
thebelief f at
least some ofthose
presently orking
n
the
field hat
South Asian
history
ill
be takenmore
seriously y
other
rea
spe-
cialists
f
sufficientumber
f
authentic
nd
high-quality
orks re
produced,
hich
appen
o throw
p problems
hat
eally
ave
broad
appeal
either
oncrete r
more ikely)
methodological.8
thers
re-
ferwhat eems
simpler ath
to universalization :
oarding
n
ex-
isting
andwagon.
his s
where he
dialectic
etween
nds
nd
means
mustbe perceived. he short-cuts bound to prove ongand diver-
sionary,
iven
he
ickety
hape
f hewheels
f
urrently
vailable
and-
wagons.
NOTES
1. The reference
s
naturally
o
the lassic
work f
August
osch
1954),
which orms he
basis for he
study
f hierarchical
market
tructures.
2.
This view f
manufactures
s determined
in
a
Quesnay-esque
ashion)
y
hedemand
ofthe
urplus-class
s criticized
n
Subrahmanyam
1986b:
ch.
VIII).
The
critique
ocuses
n
particularn Raychaudhuri1981).
3. Note too
the
unsatisfactory
iscussion
fthe
olonization
f
ndia,
where
escription
is confused
with
xplanation1986:
178-84).
4.
On
this
uestion,
ee
Perlin
1985)
and
Subrahmanyam
1986a).
5. To
this,
ne can add
numerous
ther
writings,
ut these
lone
should
uffice
o
make
the
point
lear.
This
particular
spect
of the
world-systems
chool
generalizations
ased
on
a
highly
ncomplete
nderstanding
f
even
econdary
material
is noted
albeit
n a tor-
tuous
fashion)
y
FrankPerlin
1986:
16-22).
6.
The
unwary
world-systems
heorist
may
well onclude
rom
ouzas
discussion
hat
Southeast
Asia
in fact
played
he
role of
periphery
o China's
core.
7. The
problems
resented
y
the
oncept
f
unequal
xchange
avebeen
noted
n the
context
f he
European
world-economyy
everal
f
Wallerstein's
ritics.
or
particularly
sharp
omment
though
erhaps
oo
simplistically
eo-classical
n the
lternative
t
presents),
see Klein 1982).
8. It s
mportant
ot o
employ
ouble
tandards
ere. t
s no
more
ncumbent
n
a south
Asianist
o
pose
problems
with
universal
ppeal
than t
is on
a historian
f,
ay,
medieval
France.
Of
course,
t is no
less so
either.
REFERENCES
Alam,
Muzaffar
1986).
The
Crisis
f
mpire
n
Mughal
orth
ndia.
Delhi: Oxford
Univ.
Press.
Bayly,
.
A.
(1983).
Rulers,
ownsmen
nd
Bazaars.
ambridge:
Cambridge
Univ.
Fress.
Braudel,
Fernand
1981,
1982,
1984).
Civilization
nd
Capitalism,
M-Wth
entury,
vols.
New
York:
Harper
&
Row.
Braudel,Fernand 1984). CivilizationndCapitalism,5th-18thentury,II: ThePerspectivef heWorld.
New York:
Harper
&
Row.
This content downloaded from 128.97.227.216 on Tue, 02 Feb 2016 23:05:47 UTCAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp
-
8/16/2019 World-Economies and South Asia 1600-1750
9/9
148
Sanjay
Subrahmanyam
Chaudhuri,
K. N.
(1985).
Trade nd Civilisation
n the ndianOcean.
ambridge:CambridgeUniv. Press.
Gordon,
Stewart
1977).
The
Slow
Conquest,
Modern sian
tudies, , 2,
Apr.,
1-40.
Klein,
R. W. Dutch
Capital
and the
European
World-
conomy,
n
Maurice
Aymard,
d.,
Dutch
apitalism
nd World
apitalism. ambridge:
Cambridge
Univ.
Press,
75-91.
Losch,
August
1954).
TheEconomies
f
Location. ew
Haven:
Yale
Univ.
Press.
Palat,Ravi,
et
l.
(1986).
The
ncorporation
nd
Peripheralization
f outh
Asia,
1600-1950,
Review, , 1, Sum.,
171-208.
Perlin,
rank
1978).
Of
WhiteWhale
and
Countrymen
n the
Eighteenth-Century
ara-
tha
Deccan,
Journalf
Peasant
tudies,
, 2,
Jan.,
172-37.
Perlin,
Frank
1985).
StateFormation
econsidered,
odern
sian
tudies,
IX, 3,
July,
415-80.
Perlin,
Frank
1986).
Comparative
istory,
r
Groping
Around
n
All
Fours,
unpubl.
paperpresentedo the nternational orkshopnRuralTransformationnAsia,Delhi,
October
2-4.
Raychaudhuri,
apan (1982).
Inland
Trade,
n
T. Rauchaudhuri
I.
Habib,
eds.,
The
Cambridge
conomic
istoryf
ndia,
,c.
1200-c.
1750.
Cambridge:
ambridge
niv.
Press,
325-59.
Steensgaard,
iels
1987).
The IndianOcean
Network
nd the
Emerging
World-bconomy
(c.
1550
to
1750),
n S.
Chandra,
d.
The
ndianOcean:
xplorations
n
History,
ommerce
and
Politics.
ew
Delhi:
Saçe,
125-50.
Souza,
George
B.
(1986).
The urvival
f
Empire:
ortuguese
rade
nd
Society
n China
nd
the
South
hina
ea,
1630-1754.
Cambridge:
Cambridge
Univ.
Press.
Subrahmanyam,
anjay 1986a).
Aspects
f
State
Formation
n South
ndia
and
South-East
Asia,
1500-1650,
ndian
conomic
nd Social
History
eview,
XIII, 4,
356-77.
Subrahmanyam,anjay 1986b).
Trade
nd the
Regional
conomy
f
ndia,
c.
1550 o
1650,
unpubl.
Ph. D. Diss., Univ. ofDelhi.
Wallerstein,
mmanuel
1974).
The
Modern
World-System,
:
Capitalist
griculture
nd
he
rigins
of
he
uropean
World-Economy
n the
ixteenth
entury.
ew
York:
Academic
Press.
Wallerstein,
mmanuel
1980).
The
Modern
World-System,
I:
Mercantilism
nd
the onsolidation
of
he
uropean
World-Economy,
600-1750.
New
York:
Academic
Press.
Wallerstein,
mmanuel
1986).
Incorporation
f
he
ndian
Subcontinent
nto
he
Capitalist
World-Economy,
conomic
nd
Political
Weekly,
XI, 4,
Jan.,
PE-28-PE-39.
Wink,
André
1986).
Land
and
Sovereignty
n
ndia.
Cambridge:
Cambridge
Univ.
Fress.
This content downloaded from 128 97 227 216 on Tue 02 Feb 2016 23:05:47 UTC