accommodated and mutually transformed each other. This can be seen as a process of transculturation, rather than unidirectional acculturation of local societies by the Islamicate world system. It was this process of ‘Islamicate transculturation’ that enabled forging of linkages among diverse areas and social groups.The paper by Professor Sunil Kumar depicts the changing relationships between Delhi Sultans and Sufis in 13th and 14th century North India through the analysis of the textual compilations of Sufi teachings called malfuzat. It is a fascinating and informative research on the conflict, competition and accommodation between Sultans and Sufis. Professor Kumar adeptly shows how Sultans who first attempted to gain legitimacy through shariati rule increasingly had to seek support from Sufis; and how Sufis, in this case mainly Chishti Tariqa, gradually succeeded in establishing its powerful influence not only in vernacular Muslim society but also in the Islamic state. It would be interesting to further enquire how Sufis succeeded in gaining such influence on the state. If it is related to the increasing importance of Sufis in the vernacular society, how did Sufis attain popularity thereof? What were the attractions of Sufis and tariqas for the people in local society?The paper by Professor Masashi Hirosue deals with the very interesting relationship between Muslim coastal rulers and people of the hinterland. He looks at how coastal rulers, in need of guaranteeing the collection and cultivation of products at hinterland, associated their power with agricultural productivity. Here Sufism played a part in legitimating the divine power and thus supporting the rulers’ influence over hinterland communities. Professor Hirosue clearly goes beyond the previous externalist or autonomist historiography of Southeast Asia and locates the changes from an overall point of view, with the coastal rulers and Muslim saints acting as the pivot connecting the external and the autochthonous. Despite the important roles of the Sufis, however, Professor Hirosue points out that whether inland people became Muslim or not was of secondary importance to the rulers in Sumatra. It would be interesting to investigate what kind of social and religious transformations occurred among the inland people with the development of transregional trade in which they were involved.The paper by Professor Kanji Nishio discusses state formation in pre-17th century Malay Islamic states, using a Malay court history on Melaka sultanate. His interests lie in explicating pre-Islamic elements (either indigenous or Hindu elements) and their relations with Islamic factors. This is a very interesting and important question indeed. His conclusion is that the main axis of state formation of Melaka before the 17th century lay in the Malay political contract between rulers and their people. However, Professor Nishio also points out that the contract and the conception regarding supernatural powers were based on the Islamic framework, and pre-Islamic (native, Indian) elements remained merely as a sub-system. Here, it would be necessary to further clarify whether the main structure of ruler-people relationships rested on the indigenous framework with Islam working just as a plain facade or on the Islamic framework where previous elements were contained in a subsidiary manner. Professor Nishio also points out that the Islamic norm became a more substantial guiding principle defining how a just ruler should be in the Malay Islamic states after the 17th century. The interesting question here is how this transformation occurred and how that change was related to the history of Islami(ci)zaiton from the 13th to 16th centuries. We may expect some change in moral economy involving the ruler, merchants and the people during the 13th to 16th centuries as the hinterland became connected with the wider world via port cities. In this connection it would be interesting to think about to what extent the start of the 15th century̶the post-Tamerlane watershed for the whole Eurasia and the beginning of the age of commerce for Southeast Asia̶may be considered an important historical mark for port city states in Southeast Asia. What was the role of Islam and Islamicate civilization thereof? The paper by Professor Wagoner discusses the interaction between the Persianate and Sanskritic political cultures in the Deccan between 1350 and 1650. The example of the gold coin Professor Wagoner has looked at is 068MODERN ASIAN STUDIES REVIEW Vol.5