Yesterday’s post comparing the maps of Patrick Chovanec and William Skinner has garnered many responses, not the least of which from Patrick Chovanec himself. We have been exchanging emails this morning, and a brief summary of our discussion can be found below. —————————— Dear Jeremiah, It was great to talk with you earlier today concerning the points you raise about my article “The Nine Nations of China.” Readers of your blog may be interested in a post I made on my own blog “Intellectual Antecedents” that addresses some of these issues. The “Nine Nations” framework is not based upon Skinner’s work, it is the result of many years of independent research and analysis. The substance — including the regional descriptions — are my own and original. But you are absolutely right to call attention to the fact that there have been many preceding scholars – Chinese and Western — who have studied the question of China’s regional make-up, and that my own conclusions in some ways match and validate their own. I actually noted this in my original submission to The Atlantic, but the final product was cut to about half its original size, and it was all I could do to insist that