Reviews

Comparing early- and late-nineteenth-century handbooks on Xinjiang aimed at officials, the author shows how, if the recording of differences remained the primary purpose, in the latter the tone becomes much more didactic, suggesting a more intolerant coloniser than that of the late eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries. At the same time, L. Newby suggests how unpublished sources (of judicial character, in particular) can help us to understand further the representation of unpublished writings and to look beyond them.  She finally appeals to a contextualisation of the representations bequeathed to us in the colonial legacy, whether emanating from coloniser or colonised — in order to understand why initial “curiosity and idealisation have faded and disenchantment set in, on both sides.”

The Redaction
CER: I-3.5.C-348