Analysis Before Southeast Asia: Passages and Terrains Prof. Wang Gungwu traverses through time and space to reconstruct the shaping of Southeast Asia as a region and what it means for ASEAN today. W hen the word “Southeast Asia” was used in the 1940s, we were surprised and intrigued by the idea that this part of the world had been recognised as a region. As far as ‘the region as a geographic and spatial concept’ is concerned, Southeast Asia is a very diverse set of lands with a tremendous range of “passages and terrains”: from the highlands and lowlands along the great rivers of mainland Southeast Asia to the Malay archipelago with thousands of islands. Given this space as defined, why was it not given earlier recognition as a region? Why did it take so long to identify the region “Southeast Asia”? Against this backdrop, historians set out to work with linguists, archaeologists and anthropologists, among others, to resolve this intriguing question. Historically, the shaping of Southeast Asia as a region could be discerned through three periods. were content with their diverse and fragmented areas, interlocked in one way or another, without having to come together as a region. There were some exceptions, for example the Angkor Empire on mainland Southeast Asia inspired by ideas from India, but it was not sustained and did not go much beyond the lower reaches of the land between the two river systems of the Mekong and the Menan (Chao Phraya). In the maritime part, a bureaucratic state did emerge on the island of Java. But this development also served to demonstrate the people’s openness to new ideas coming from India about the state, religion, art, architecture and Before the 16th century The first period was before the 16th century. Diversity defined this part of the world from the very beginning, not only in terms of the lands with varied “passages and terrains” but even more so with the peoples scattered throughout the archipelagic and continental spaces. Not unrelated to that diversity was the fragmentation of many kinds of social and cultural units that did not come together to form a major political entity. It was not that these people did not have the capacity to do that, but rather that they did not feel the need for such enlargements. Deep in their culture from the very beginning, these people, especially those on the Malay archipelago, had a certain openness to influences and relationships that enabled them to move around, reach out and connect with one another, and build subtle and complex relationships without feeling that they had to set up some huge bureaucratic system. Openness is a strong residual characteristic of Southeast Asians from ancient times, enabled by the sea which saw migration flows from the mainland to the islands. On land, people from Southern China, Southwestern China and even from Tibet also migrated down the rivers to the mainland part of Southeast Asia. This openness of the locals was not only to ideas and migration but also to the active trading that helped them create surpluses and build thriving societies. Their “local genius” was the ability to pick and choose what they wanted from external influences, and make the most of it for their own purposes. They 2 — ISSUE 5/2018 Facsimile from World Atlas of Antonio Millo, by Deuschle, German