Rejoinder_Elden_territory revised.pdf (31.05 kB)
0/0

Rethinking territory

Download (31.05 kB)
journal contribution
posted on 23.10.2014 by Marco Antonsich
This critical commentary engages, both methodologically and theoretically, the notion of territory as discussed by Stuart Elden (2010). Methodologically, I suggest that Elden's philological concern with the term 'territory' rather than with the idea of 'bounded political space' risks producing a partial historical account. As a way to enlarge the scope of analysis and include also forms of 'bounded political spaces' which existed before, during, and after the emergence of modern territory, I propose a new theoretical category, 'territorial'. This category reinstates the importance of 'b-ordering' practices, downgraded as second-order problem by Elden. Theoretically, the commentary also suggests the importance of 'peopling' territory, in order to bring social agency back in and avoiding treating modern territory as a mere terror(izing) tool. Prompted by Elden's account, this piece aims to stimulate a 'territory debate'.

History

School

  • Social Sciences

Department

  • Geography and Environment

Published in

Progress in Human Geography

Volume

35

Issue

3

Pages

422 - 425

Citation

ANTONSICH, M., 2011. Rethinking territory. Progress in Human Geography, 35 (3), pp.422-425.

Publisher

Sage (© The authors)

Version

AM (Accepted Manuscript)

Publisher statement

This work is made available according to the conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0) licence. Full details of this licence are available at: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/

Publication date

2011

Notes

This is the submitted version of an article published in the journal Progress in Human Geography. The final published version is available online at http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0309132510385619

ISSN

0309-1325

eISSN

1477-0288

Language

en

Exports

Logo branding

Keyword(s)

Exports