Di Cosmo, N., 2002. Ancient China and its Enemies: The rise of nomadic power in East Asian history. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Fleming, D.E., 2004. Democracy’s Ancient Ancestors: Mari and early collective governance. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Freud, S., 1989. Civilization and Its Discontents. New York (NY): W.W. Norton. Khatchadourian, L., 2016. Imperial Matter: Ancient Persia and the archaeology of empires. Oakland (CA): University of California Press. Legg, S., 1971. The Heartland. New York (NY): Farrar, Straus & Giroux. Nietzsche, F., 1989. Beyond Good and Evil. New York (NY): Vintage Books. Palmeri, F., 2016. State of Nature, Stages of Society: Enlightenment conjectural history and modern social dis- course. New York (NY): Columbia University Press. Porter, A., 2011. Mobile Pastoralism and the Formation of Near Eastern Civilizations: Weaving together society. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Rousseau, J.-J., 1992. Discourse on the Origins of Inequality (eds. R.D. Masters & C. Kelly). Hanover (NH): University Press of New England. Scott, J.C., 1998. Seeing Like a State: How certain schemes to improve the human condition have failed. New Haven (CT): Yale University Press. Scott, J.C., 2009. The Art of Not Being Governed. An anarchist history of upland Southeast Asia. New Haven (CT): Yale University Press. Smith, A.T., 2015. The Political Machine: Assembling sover- eignty in the Bronze Age Caucasus. Princeton (NJ): Princeton University Press. Trouillot, M.-R., 2003. Global Transformations: Anthropology and the modern world. New York (NY): Palgrave Macmillan. Wolf, E., 1982. Europe and the People Without History. Berkeley (CA): University of California Press. Going Against Whose Grain? Archaeological Theory and Southeast Asia’s Premodern States Miriam T. Stark Southeast Asia is a paradox to Western scholars. Few are familiar with its history, yet Southeast Asia has been a veritable intellectual resource extraction zone for twentieth- and twenty-first-century social thought: imagined commu- nities, galactic polities, agricultural involution and the moral economy of peasants all emanate from work done in Southeast Asia. The region’s archaeological record is equally paradoxical: late Pleistocene ‘Hobbit’ hominins dis- rupt models of human origins, the world’s largest Buddhist monument of Borobudur now sits in a wholly Muslim land mass in central Java, and the world’s largest premodern city of Angkor is located in Cambodia, a country that remains resolutely rural. So we should not be surprised that Scott’s Against the Grain: A deep history of the earliest states draws from a career in Southeast Asian studies to study human history (the entire Anthropocene). This essay concentrates on how Scott believes early Mesopotamian states became legible. Scott’s engaging book will please the educated non- archaeological public and rile archaeologists who dislike treatments of our field by those outside it. Certainly some of Scott’s key points are conventional wisdom in our field, like the reciprocal nature of plant and animal domes- tication (e.g. Rindos 1984) and the short lifespans of ancient states (e.g. Baines & Yoffee 1998; Yoffee & Cowgill 1988). And few working archaeologists are environmental deter- minists vis-à-vis collapse: most agree that human agency shaped a world of climatic ‘predictable unpredictability’ (Miller 2011). Yet much of Scott’s model is generalizable to premodern Southeast Asian states. One contribution from his work concerns literacy as a ‘technology of com- munication’ (p. 148; see also Scott 1999; 2010). Southeast Asian states emerged soon after the embrace of Sanskrit-derived writing systems. The role of tax versus tribute is currently under discussion, and libraries that Chinese annals describe have not been found, perhaps because they held records written on bamboo. Remaining stone inscriptions, however, fit Scott’s model: writing made Southeast Asian states legible and elites into kings. A second contribution lies in Scott’s vision of ancient states as brittle structures that were prone to shatter. He is at least as interested in continuities in rural agrarian life through time as he is in particular ‘collapse’ events (a term he dismisses as ‘histrionic’, p. 201) of the small elite and urban sector of the population. Elites formed delicate superstructures that rested precariously atop foundations of ‘smaller and more stable components’ (pp. 187, 253), CAJ 29:4, 709–711 © 2019 McDonald Institute for Archaeological Research doi:10.1017/S0959774319000416 Going Against Whose Grain? Archaeological Theory and Southeast Asia’s Premodern States 709 https://doi.org/10.1017/S0959774319000416 Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. IP address: 128.171.118.52, on 30 Oct 2019 at 19:28:26, subject to the Cambridge Core terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms.