Jump to ContentJump to Main Navigation
India–China Boundary Problem 1846–1947$
Users without a subscription are not able to see the full content.

A.G. Noorani

Print publication date: 2011

Print ISBN-13: 9780198070689

Published to Oxford Scholarship Online: September 2012

DOI: 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198070689.001.0001

Show Summary Details
Page of

PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2017. All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the licence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of a monograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy).date: 16 December 2017

Two Schools on the Boundary

Two Schools on the Boundary

Chapter:
(p.44) 4 Two Schools on the Boundary
Source:
India–China Boundary Problem 1846–1947
Author(s):

A.G. Noorani

Publisher:
Oxford University Press
DOI:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198070689.003.0004

This chapter focuses on the two schools that emerged in the internal debate over boundary. One school favoured the Kuen Lun range as the boundary; the other, the Karakoram range. This chapter also outlines Francis Younghusband's efforts to define the limits of the British Empire in India. and discusses the ‘no man’s land on which neither China or India had any claim..

Keywords:   boundaries, India, Kuen Lun range, Karakoram range, Francis Younghusband

Oxford Scholarship Online requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books within the service. Public users can however freely search the site and view the abstracts and keywords for each book and chapter.

Please, subscribe or login to access full text content.

If you think you should have access to this title, please contact your librarian.

To troubleshoot, please check our FAQs , and if you can't find the answer there, please contact us .