Comparative Early Modernities, 1100–1800 ed. by David Porter (review)

The concept of a global or Eurasian early modern period has been subject to rather controversial discussions, and so has the idea of early modernities. This collection of essays speaks to these debates, and it does so by providing insights into a variety of research fields. For instance, the first contribution, written by Ayesha Ramachandran, is based on an analysis of world maps in various parts of sixteenth- and seventeenth-century Eurasia. The second chapter chiefly deals with literary texts, and it does so by problematizing research traditions that focus primarily on national or regional traditions. Its author, Walter Cohen, emphasizes that there are indeed good reasons for further exploring concepts such as “Eurasian literature.” For example, in a variety of societies in China and Western Europe one can observe a rise of vernacular versus increasingly “dead” classical languages, and one can even do so partly during the same time periods. Moreover, Cohen considers the spread of tropes across wide geographical and linguistic distances. Among the examples he provides is the spread of South Asian narrative traditions to East Asia through Buddhism.

In his essay on “Asia-Centered Approaches to the History of the Early Modern World,” Luke Clossey sketches some possibilities for “Asianormative” approaches to this period. He mainly discusses potential ways of viewing the history of this epoch through the lenses of Buddhist or traditional Chinese concepts. Yet at the same time, Clossey’s chapter does not pay much heed to recent debates on how to develop alternative narratives of Eurasian history during the centuries prior to the age of imperialism. This would have grounded his own contribution, especially since there are now quite a number of scholars seeking to overcome earlier Eurocentric perspectives of Eurasian history. For instance, Victor Lieberman, John Darwin, Charles Parker, or Sanjay Subrahmanyam may not try to take Asia-centered visions of the Eurasian past. At the same time, they are part of a growing group of historians seeking to decenter our understanding of Eurasia by rendering conceptions of historical agency more complex.

In the following contribution, Catherine Carlitz compares forms of chastity and pornography in England and China between 1500 and 1640. She comes to the conclusion that, despite important differences, many basic developments were remarkably similar in both societies. During this epoch, both England and China experienced significant degrees of social change, which could even have had similar effects on gender roles. Since in both cases marriage and property were closely connected with each other, economic uncertainties may explain the growing importance of women’s chastity as a sociocultural norm in both societies.

Richard Vinograd’s chapter focuses on “early visual modernity,” mainly by comparing aspects of paintings in China and Europe. In a certain way, the author adds another case study to the growing body of scholarship arguing that growing transcontinental economic ties had ramifications for seemingly unconnected societies in different parts of Eurasia. To be more precise, he first sketches some transfers and common developments in visual techniques such as the rendering of the observer into a sophisticated voyeur of private scenes. Then, Vinograde compares how Chinese and European painters depicted social structures and material cultures. In this context, Vinograd argues that intensifying trade may have been one of the causes behind the growing importance of domesticity and the appreciation of authenticity in both China and Europe during similar time periods.

In the following chapter, Jack Goldstone elaborates on the authority of classical texts in Europe and other parts of the world—most notably in China, India, and the Ottoman Empire. While acknowledging that all these cultures witnessed their own epistemological crises during the 1600s and 1700s, Goldstone maintains that only in Europe did new scientific knowledge undermine the power of traditional core texts to such a degree that intellectual and political life started being based on new paradigms. According to Goldstone, it was not an inherent dynamism in European society that created this pattern. Rather, in his eyes, the European corpus of authoritative...