The Institute of Pacific Relations and the Origins of Asian and Pacific Studies

Abstract

W ESTERN, PARTICULARLY NORTH AMERICAN, SCHOLARS of Asia and the Pacific work amidst an abundance of materials, research programs, funding sources and the other features characteristic of major academic endeavors. Most have never known other circumstances. Given the relative sufficiency of their surroundings, many of these scholars-especially those trained since mid-century-may be unaware that the academic structure they depend upon dates back only five or six decades and was developed by a pioneering generation of scholars who, although diminished in number, are still present and peripherally active. As recently as the late 1920s, there were no mechanisms for the systematic study of either Asia or the Pacificno graduate programs, no research centers, no professional associations, no regular conferences, and no substantial library collections. Indeed, aside from the early efforts of a few like George H. Blakeslee, Stanley K. Hornbeck, and Kenneth S. Latourette, there were not even elementary courses offered through organized departments. A good number of these scholars may also be unaware that the Institute of Pacific Relations, an organization prominent from the late 1920s to the mid 1950s but now largely unknown except to older scholars, is almost solely responsible for changing these conditions. Through an extensive series of conferences on Asian and Pacific issues and a highly productive collaborative research program focused upon related topics, it laid the foundation for modern Asian and Pacific studies in the West. The Institute's achievements in research are especially significant. The classic studies of Asia and the Pacific during the 1930s, 1940s and early 1950s-works such as J. Lossing Buck's Land Utilization in China, George McT. Kahin's Nationalism and Revolution in Indonesia, Felix M. Keesing's Modern Samoa, Owen Lattimore's Inner Asian Frontiers of China, E. Herbert Norman's Japan's Emergence as a Modern State, Richard H. Tawney's Land and Labour in China, and Teng Ssu-yu and John King Fairbank's China's Reponse to the West-as well as many hundreds of lesser known titles were produced under its aegis.1 Perhaps no other organ-