https://heiup.uni-heidelberg.de/journals/index.php/transcultural/issue/feed The Journal of Transcultural Studies 2019-03-06T14:44:06+01:00 Russell Ó Ríagaín russell.oriagain@asia-europe.uni-heidelberg.de Open Journal Systems <p><em>The Journal of Transcultural Studies </em>is a peer-reviewed, open-access journal committed to promoting the knowledge and research of transculturality in all disciplines. It is published by the Cluster of Excellence “Asia and Europe in a Global Context: The Dynamics of Transculturality” of the Ruprecht-Karls-Universität Heidelberg.</p> https://heiup.uni-heidelberg.de/journals/index.php/transcultural/article/view/23921 Cover 2018/1-2 2019-01-17T15:07:40+01:00 Russell Ó Ríagaín russell.oriagain@asia-europe.uni-heidelberg.de 2018-12-20T18:23:54+01:00 ##submission.copyrightStatement## https://heiup.uni-heidelberg.de/journals/index.php/transcultural/article/view/23922 Editorial Note 2019-01-17T15:06:59+01:00 Rudolf G. Wagner wagner@asia-europe.uni-heidelberg.de 2018-12-20T18:27:53+01:00 ##submission.copyrightStatement## https://heiup.uni-heidelberg.de/journals/index.php/transcultural/article/view/23789 The Territorial Foundations of the Sovereign State in East Asia 2019-01-17T15:09:34+01:00 Douglas R. Howland dhowland@uwm.edu <p>European incursions into Asia created Asian awareness of territorial sovereignty by its very violation. The bilateral treaties that Japan and China signed with European and American states in the nineteenth century made explicit the centrality of territory in the modern state form, for these treaties created a regime of extraterritoriality that exempted foreign residents from the jurisdiction of the local state. Only when China or Japan had secured its territorial jurisdiction could it assert a sovereign standing in the world order, and two processes were key: Japan and China had to consolidate their respective territories, lest foreign powers claim proximate footholds that could become security threats. And each needed to possess the legal and political organization that would render each state capable of imposing jurisdiction within its own territory.</p> 2018-12-20T00:00:00+01:00 ##submission.copyrightStatement## https://heiup.uni-heidelberg.de/journals/index.php/transcultural/article/view/23812 Universality, Modernity and Cultural Borrowing Among Vietnamese Intellectuals, 1877–1919 2019-01-17T15:09:34+01:00 Wynn Gadkar-Wilcox WilcoxW@wcsu.edu <p>After 1897, as the power of the Nguyen Monarchy was increasingly restricted by a centralizing administration in French Indochina, it sought to retain its relevance by grappling with reformist ideas, especially those associated with Xu Jiyu, Tan Sitong, and Liang Qichao. This paper examines the influence of those thinkers on the policy questions of 1877, 1904, and 1919 and proposes that even when the monarchy was defending more traditional ideas against reform, these new conceptions were fundamentally transforming the thinking of even more conservative elites.</p> 2018-12-20T16:45:49+01:00 ##submission.copyrightStatement## https://heiup.uni-heidelberg.de/journals/index.php/transcultural/article/view/23813 Korean Translations of Vietnam: Relocating the Great Han Empire in World-Historical Precedent 2019-03-06T14:44:06+01:00 Joshua Van Lieu jvanlieu@lagrange.edu <p>&nbsp; &nbsp;</p> 2018-12-20T18:14:21+01:00 ##submission.copyrightStatement## https://heiup.uni-heidelberg.de/journals/index.php/transcultural/article/view/23792 Anesaki Masaharu's Reception of Leo Tolstoy and His Failed Attempt at Finding the Faith 2019-01-17T15:09:33+01:00 Susanna Fessler sfessler@albany.edu <p>Among the voices opposed to the Russo–Japanese war of 1904–5 was that of the Russian writer Leo Tolstoy, who published an essay titled <em>Bethink Yourselves</em>, arguing against hostilities. The essay was translated and published in Japanese, but gained little traction among the intelligentsia in Japan. There was, however, one strong voice that supported Tolstoy’s ideas: that of the religious studies scholar Anesaki Masaharu. Anesaki’s response to Tolstoy’s essay was at once a commentary about the spiritual state of Japan at the turn of the century and also a veiled criticism of the Japanese government.</p> 2018-12-20T16:55:02+01:00 ##submission.copyrightStatement## https://heiup.uni-heidelberg.de/journals/index.php/transcultural/article/view/23638 Knowledge Production on Central Asia: Transcultural Approaches in Central Asian Studies 2019-01-17T15:09:32+01:00 Sophie Roche sophie.roche@asia-europe.uni-heidelberg.de <p>At the core of area studies lies the idea that studying discrete regions in terms of their political, linguistic, and cultural differentiations is a valid approach. However, there can be a tendency towards inconsistency in the definition of certain areas. Furthermore, there can be an inclination towards the peripherization of certain regions when being treated as part of a wider “area” whose core lies elsewhere. Central Asia is a prominent example of both. Firstly, there is much variance in the spatial use of the term. Depending on who is writing, the term “Central Asia” might refer to the area from Afghanistan to Mongolia and from Xinjiang to the Black Sea, or it might be used to refer to the five post-Soviet republics Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, and Uzbekistan, at times including Afghanistan. Secondly, it is rarely studied of itself, rather it is often treated as peripheral to a perceived core lying elsewhere. Thus, the task of the field of Central Asian studies is to subvert this, placing the people in the region, their history, culture, practices, and politics as the centre of focus.</p> <p>Transcultural approaches have criticized treating discrete areas as bounded units of study, suggesting instead to look for relationships, interconnectivities, and entanglements across regions. Therefore, there is no reason why Central Asia should be treated as peripheral to more established disciplines, ignoring its internal complexity, language diversity, history, political distinct paths, global relationships, and cultural productions. Transcultural methods go beyond monolingual research and political boundaries, their strength is to zoom into micro-processes and out to address larger entanglements, to look at the sudden events and long-term processes. This demands an in-depth knowledge of the subject and of several regions, a challenge that is time and resource consuming. Historically, Central Asia remains relevant to all area studies in Asia but contemporary approaches are not the simple continuation of former empires. Rather, political ruptures, religious orientations, and economic relationships require different approaches for Central Asia since the twentieth century.</p> <p class="TextBody">Transcultural approaches have criticized treating areas as discrete units of study and suggested to look for relationships, interconnectivities, and entanglements across regions. Therefore, there is no reason why Central Asia should be treated as peripheral to more established disciplines, ignoring its internal complexity, language diversity, history, political distinct paths, global relationships and cultural productions. Transcultural methods go beyond monolingual research and political boundaries, their strength is to zoom into micro-processes and out to address larger entanglements, to look at the sudden events and long-term processes. This demands an in-depth knowledge of the subject and of several regions, a challenge that is time and resource consuming. Historically, Central Asia remains relevant to all area studies in Asia but contemporary approaches are not the simple continuation of former empires. Rather, political ruptures, religious orientations, economic relationships require different approaches for Central Asia since the twentieth century.</p> 2018-12-20T16:58:27+01:00 ##submission.copyrightStatement##