The organizational and cultural features asociated with this kind of lead ship com entourages, factions and cliques. penonal patron-clientship marriage alliances and tributary and ritual relations with followers, and the need constantly to disseminate knowledge and present evidence of the leader's prowess as well as gather information on behalf of the political centre about local conditions and the opinions of one's subjects. With regard to the concep tualization of time and space in this kind of politico-cultural order, Wolters argues that the importance of demonstrating and actively sustaining prowes meant a preoccupation with the present that came from the need to identify in one's own generation those with abnormal spiritual quali (ibid-21). There was, therefore, not a dominant concem with the past with descent and ances- try. but with what was happening in the present and what needed to be done here and now to preserve one's status and position. Social groupings and political units were also not enclosed within a defined and fixed territory. but were on centres which radiated indefinitely outwards, and waxed and waned in their fortunes, influence and extent. The concept which Wolters uses is that of the 'mandala' (the e circle of kings): polities were dynamic, multi-centred and overlapping; th were not fixed, exclusive a nd defined in territorial terms. In his earlier formulation. Wolters p resented exceptions to this cultural complex: they comprised Vietnam with its adopted Chinese model of organ uation and more clearly defined, bounded and fixed pol cal centres and sub. centres, and the tribal populations who lived in the "distant highlands" beyond recorded history (ibide 36 -39). In his re-evaluation of his earlier paper Wolters suggests more recently that. alt hough the ietnamese polity did differ from th ndianized states. the dividing line is not as sharp as he originally proposed since the early Vietnamese 'emp did de monstrate the importance of personal rule entage. men of prowess, and an orientation to the present (ibid: 143ff). As for those co munities in the distant uplands or hinterlands, W olters recomites rently that they were not as distant from the lowland centres as he had supposed. There were various political, econo mic and cultural linka ages and interrelations between upland and lowknd populations, as well certainl shared assumptions about th emselves such as the existence innate prowess, the need to compete for personal prestige, the ten dency for the less successful to affiliate the selves th the more suc cessful by joining the latter's entourage. and familiarity with open social systems. The uplands could also be a place of refuge when con ditions in the lowlands were disorderly or harsh (ibid. 161-162) Wolters also adds another element to his South-East As an cultural complex which does make sense in terms of the importance attached to cogna tion, per sonal prowess, status achievement a the preoccupation with the present. This is the concept of heterarchy. rather than hierarchy, which he adopts fromalliances and tributary and ritual relations with followers, and the need constantly to disseminate knowledge and present evidence of the leader's prowess as well as gather information on behalf of the political centre about local conditions and the opinions of one's subjects. With regard to the concep tualization of time and space in this kind of politico-cultural order, Wolters argues that the importance of demonstrating and actively sustaining prowes meant a preoccupation with the present that came from the need to identify in one's own generation those with abnormal spiritual quali (ibid-21). There was, therefore, not a dominant concem with the past with descent and ances- try. but with what was happening in the present and what needed to be done here and now to preserve one's status and position. Social groupings and politi cal units were also not enclosed within a defined and fixed territory. but were on centres which radiated indefinitely outwards, and waxed and waned in their fortunes, influence and extent. The concept which Wolters uses is that of the 'mandala' (the e circle of kings): polities were dynamic, multi-centred and overlapping; th were not fixed, exclusive a nd defined in territorial terms. In his earlier formulation. Wolters p resented exceptions to this cultural complex: they comprised Vietnam with its adopted Chinese model of organ uation and more clearly defined, bounded and fixed pol cal centres and sub. centres, and the tribal populations who lived in the "distant highlands" beyond recorded history (ibide 36 -39). In his re-evaluation of his earlier paper Wolters suggests more recently that. alt hough the ietnamese polity did differ from th ndianized states. the dividing line is not as sharp as he originally proposed since the early Vietnamese 'emp did de monstrate the importance of personal rule entage. men of prowess, and an orientation to the present (ibid: 143ff). As for those co munities in the distant uplands or hinterlands, W olters recomites rently that they were not as distant from the lowland centres as he had supposed. There were various political, economic and cultural linka ages and interrelations between upland and lowknd populations, as well certainl shared assumptions about th emselves such as the existence innate prowess, the need to compete for personal prestige, the ten dency for the less successful to affiliate the selves th the more suc cessful by joining the latter's entourage. and familiarity with open social systems. The uplands could also be a place of refuge when con ditions in the lowlands were disorderly or harsh (ibid. 161-162) Wolters also adds another element to his South-East As an cultural complex which does make sense in terms of the importance attached to cogna tion, per sonal prowess, status achievement a the preoccupation with the present. This is the concept of heterarchy. rather than hierarchy, which he adopts from