Files in this item
How 'dynasty' became a modern global concept : intellectual histories of sovereignty and property
Item metadata
dc.contributor.author | Banerjee, Milinda | |
dc.date.accessioned | 2022-01-27T00:38:25Z | |
dc.date.available | 2022-01-27T00:38:25Z | |
dc.date.issued | 2022 | |
dc.identifier | 269224127 | |
dc.identifier | 73436343-942d-46df-9121-a840ff2a3dad | |
dc.identifier | 85088830029 | |
dc.identifier.citation | Banerjee , M 2022 , ' How 'dynasty' became a modern global concept : intellectual histories of sovereignty and property ' , Global Intellectual History , vol. 7 , no. 3 , pp. 421-452 . https://doi.org/10.1080/23801883.2020.1796232 | en |
dc.identifier.issn | 2380-1883 | |
dc.identifier.other | ORCID: /0000-0001-7657-5626/work/78205128 | |
dc.identifier.uri | https://hdl.handle.net/10023/24761 | |
dc.description.abstract | The modern concept of ‘dynasty’ is a politically-motivated modern intellectual invention. For many advocates of a strong sovereign nation-state across the nineteenth and early twentieth century, in France, Germany, and Japan, the concept helped in visualizing the nation-state as a primordial entity sealed by the continuity of birth and blood, indeed by the perpetuity of sovereignty. Hegel’s references to ‘dynasty’, read with Marx’s critique, further show how ‘dynasty’ encoded the intersection of sovereignty and big property, indeed the coming into self-consciousness of their mutual identification-in-difference in the age of capitalism. Imaginaries about ‘dynasty’ also connected national sovereignty with patriarchal authority. European colonialism helped globalize the concept in the non-European world; British India offers an exemplar of ensuing debates. The globalization of the abstraction of ‘dynasty’ was ultimately bound to the globalization of capitalist-colonial infrastructures of production, circulation, violence, and exploitation. Simultaneously, colonized actors, like Indian peasant/‘tribal’ populations, brought to play alternate precolonial Indian-origin concepts of collective regality, expressed through terms like ‘rajavamshi’ and ‘Kshatriya’. These concepts nourished new forms of democracy in modern India. Global intellectual histories can thus expand political thought today by provincializing and deconstructing Eurocentric political vocabularies and by recuperating subaltern models of collective and polyarchic power. | |
dc.format.extent | 32 | |
dc.format.extent | 619315 | |
dc.language.iso | eng | |
dc.relation.ispartof | Global Intellectual History | en |
dc.subject | Global intellectual history | en |
dc.subject | Dynasty | en |
dc.subject | Monarchy | en |
dc.subject | British colonialism | en |
dc.subject | Germany | en |
dc.subject | India | en |
dc.subject | D204 Modern History | en |
dc.subject | T-NDAS | en |
dc.subject | SDG 16 - Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions | en |
dc.subject.lcc | D204 | en |
dc.title | How 'dynasty' became a modern global concept : intellectual histories of sovereignty and property | en |
dc.type | Journal article | en |
dc.contributor.institution | University of St Andrews. School of History | en |
dc.contributor.institution | University of St Andrews. St Andrews Centre for the Receptions of Antiquity | en |
dc.identifier.doi | https://doi.org/10.1080/23801883.2020.1796232 | |
dc.description.status | Peer reviewed | en |
dc.date.embargoedUntil | 2022-01-27 |
This item appears in the following Collection(s)
Items in the St Andrews Research Repository are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.