Colonizing the <i>Lu</i> ’s Realm: How Lowland Aquacultures Transformed the Upper Brahmaputra’s Waters in the Twentieth Century

This article argues that first the British, then the Indian, and especially the Chinese states extended their control over the upper Brahmaputra River’s waters in Tibet and the Himalaya, marginalizing Indigenous beliefs—particularly those regarding aquatic spirits (lu)—and establishing extractive aquaculture industries. The presence of two highland polities, Bhutan and Sikkim, and limited technology constrained British and Indian extraction. The Chinese state faced fewer obstacles. It took control of central Tibet in the 1950s, and by the 1990s, it had incorporated the plateau’s waterways into its extensive aquaculture system. The article also outlines Indigenous resistance to this enclosure and how it differed from resistance to terrestrial enclosure. As British encroachment occupied a realm set aside for lu, it went relatively unnoticed. Intense Indigenous resistance surfaced only in the 1990s, as aquaculture grew exponentially and fish eating became politicized.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Environmental History
Published
2026-01-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1086/738534
Primary Topic
South Asian Studies and Conflicts
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Colonizing the Lu ’s Realm: How Lowland Aquacultures Transformed the Upper Brahmaputra’s Waters in the Twentieth Century

Hongzhang Xu, Ruth Gamble
Environmental History
South Asian Studies and Conflicts
article

Colonizing the Lu ’s Realm: How Lowland Aquacultures Transformed the Upper Brahmaputra’s Waters in the Twentieth Century

Hongzhang Xu, Ruth Gamble
article en

Abstract

This article argues that first the British, then the Indian, and especially the Chinese states extended their control over the upper Brahmaputra River’s waters in Tibet and the Himalaya, marginalizing Indigenous beliefs—particularly those regarding aquatic spirits (lu)—and establishing extractive aquaculture industries. The presence of two highland polities, Bhutan and Sikkim, and limited technology constrained British and Indian extraction. The Chinese state faced fewer obstacles. It took control of central Tibet in the 1950s, and by the 1990s, it had incorporated the plateau’s waterways into its extensive aquaculture system. The article also outlines Indigenous resistance to this enclosure and how it differed from resistance to terrestrial enclosure. As British encroachment occupied a realm set aside for lu, it went relatively unnoticed. Intense Indigenous resistance surfaced only in the 1990s, as aquaculture grew exponentially and fish eating became politicized.

Environmental HistoryVol. 31(1)
Australian National University (AU), La Trobe University (AU)
Openalex Percentile: Top 96%
South Asian Studies and Conflicts
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Colonizing the <i>Lu</i> ’s Realm: How Lowland Aquacultures Transformed the Upper Brahmaputra’s Waters in the Twentieth Century — Hongzhang Xu, Ruth Gamble · Environmental History (2026) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS