An excellent review
I thoroughly enjoyed Mathieson's review of Sai Aung Tun's sorely-needed text on modern Shan history; as Mathieson points out, the Shan, though being the second largest ethnicity in Burma/Myanmar, haven't been properly (read: in a generalist way) researched since J. G. Scott's bible was published some 100 years ago. This work, likely warts and all, is bound to become a vade mecum for Shan enthusiasts, students and researchers for years to come.
Hearing from Mathieson that the text is "...multi-disciplinary, blending historiography with political analysis, anthropology and naturalist notes on flora and fauna, including...maps, fascinating ephemera of memos, Shan script, letters and photographs, and lengthy extracts of quotes from a wide range of sources..." has further tweaked my interest and almost banished my fear at shelling out an apparent £60+ (Amazon estimated prices) for my own copy. This cornucopia of knowledge, much of it likely old hat for seasoned Shan followers, will raise its merit as a quick and modern reference guide. Let's just hope that Mathieson is not being overly charitable with the compliments. Furthermore, Mathieson's labelling of Sai Aung Tun's book as reading "...like a late-19th-century British Geographical Society study" raises its value in my estimation, just as it does in his. I am sure that this perception is in the majority of those out there as well.
The apparent faults Mathieson flags up in Sai Aung Tun’s approach are appreciated as well as anticipated; I am sure that many others have already formulated a list of limitations that this type of work - conducted entirely with Burma/Myanmar by a member of the pro-military government Myanmar Historical Society with likely junta funds - would entail. I am pleased, however, that Mathieson views these limitations in the minimum throughout the text. I hope to reach the same conclusion. More worrying is the apparent slapdash usage of historical records and methods, but, having not read it myself, I will avoid commenting here.
Mathieson is right to highlight the book's many triumphs, and I am delighted to hear that several of these involve the most recent history, something that we all can enjoy and relate to through our own studs. This will, it is hoped, continue to energise current debate on modern Shan studies, while created much added (and timely) furore to ongoing debates as an increasing number of international conferences loom and discussion groups grow. Very encouraging indeed.
Lastly, I was pleasantly surprised to see Mathieson's recommendation for additional reading -
Gyan cha tha ba seh,
Naw Liang
