| Project/Area Number |
22K00911
|
|---|
| Research Category |
Grant-in-Aid for Scientific Research (C)
|
| Allocation Type | Multi-year Fund |
|---|
| Section | 一般 |
|---|
| Review Section |
Basic Section 03030:History of Asia and Africa-related
|
|---|
| Research Institution | Kyoto University |
|---|
Principal Investigator |
|
|---|
| Project Period (FY) |
2022-04-01 – 2025-03-31
|
| Project Status |
Completed (Fiscal Year 2024)
|
| Budget Amount *help |
¥4,290,000 (Direct Cost: ¥3,300,000、Indirect Cost: ¥990,000)
Fiscal Year 2024: ¥1,430,000 (Direct Cost: ¥1,100,000、Indirect Cost: ¥330,000)
Fiscal Year 2023: ¥1,430,000 (Direct Cost: ¥1,100,000、Indirect Cost: ¥330,000)
Fiscal Year 2022: ¥1,430,000 (Direct Cost: ¥1,100,000、Indirect Cost: ¥330,000)
|
|---|
| Keywords | Territorial disputes / Siam history / Border demarcation / Ethnicity / Colinial politics / Siam-Burmese relations / Religion and politics / Historical treaty / Territorial conflicts / Spatial knowledge / concept of sovereignty / Colonial politics / Thai-Burmese Relations / Thai-Burmese Border / Ethnographic factor / Modern border-making |
|---|
| Outline of Research at the Start |
This project examines the making of the modern territorial borderline between Siam and Myanmar. Britain and Siam jointly conducted surveys and negotiations to draw the borderline between the two states. This research investigated how the ethnographic factor plays a role in defining boundary. It will uncover (1) how the British and Siamese surveyors/researchers jointly conducted the ethnographic classification (2) how the findings of ethnographic classification were used to map the border region and (3) how Britain and Siam negotiated the demarcation of the border.
|
| Outline of Final Research Achievements |
This research revealed that the Burma;Thailand border was shaped not merely by imperial fiat, but through negotiations deeply embedded in ethnographic classification and field encounters. British and Siamese surveyors used inconsistent and often politicized ethnic categories to map and legitimize territorial claims, effectively “placing” certain groups on one side of the border to serve strategic goals. Rather than creating a clear boundary, this process produced zones of ambiguity where identity and sovereignty overlapped. The study demonstrates that ethnic classification was not just a tool of governance but a dynamic force that influenced the very contours of the state. These findings challenge conventional, top-down accounts of border formation by showing how local knowledge, political interest, and ethnographic practice worked together to shape territorial order in mainland Southeast Asia, offering new insights into the co-production of identity, space, and sovereignty.
|
| Academic Significance and Societal Importance of the Research Achievements |
This research advances border studies by revealing how ethnographic practices shaped state formation in Southeast Asia. It highlights the political use of identity in mapping and offers insights into how local agency contested colonial and national authority.
|
