Show simple item record

Files in this item

Thumbnail

Item metadata

dc.contributor.authorCosta Buranelli, Filippo
dc.date.accessioned2023-09-28T14:30:01Z
dc.date.available2023-09-28T14:30:01Z
dc.date.issued2023-09-27
dc.identifier255222234
dc.identifierbbb240b3-ed0d-4831-a9e7-907e91f068ca
dc.identifier85173443307
dc.identifier.citationCosta Buranelli , F 2023 , ' Of nomads and khanates : heteronomy and interpolity order in 19th-century Central Asia ' , European Journal of International Relations . https://doi.org/10.1177/13540661231200370en
dc.identifier.issn1354-0661
dc.identifier.otherORCID: /0000-0002-2447-7618/work/143335764
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/10023/28468
dc.description.abstractScholars of International Relations (IR) and Global Historical Sociology alike have recently become more and more interested in Eurasian order(s). Yet, most recent works on Eurasian historical international relations approach the subject from a long durée perspective, mostly focusing on “big polities” from a “high altitude.” Central Asia, or “Turkestan,” and its constitutive polities such as the khanates of Bukhara, Khiva, and Khoqand and the vast array of nomadic groups surrounding them are yet terra incognita in IR, specifically with respect to the pre-Tsarist period. By relying on both primary and secondary sources, this inductive research reveals how precolonial Central Asia was an interpolity order on its own, premised on heteronomy and based on the institutions of sovereignty between the khanates and suzerainty between khanates and nomads; territoriality; Sunni Islam; trade and slavery; diplomacy; and war and aq oyluk. This paper contributes to filling this gap, and to the broader literature on Eurasian historical orders, in three respects. First, it adds granularity, detail, and specificity to current IR knowledge on Eurasia by looking at smaller polities as opposed to empires, which as noted have been the main analytical focus so far. Second, the paper adopts an emic approach to uncover local practices, institutions, and norms of precolonial Central Asia, thus adding to the recent “Global IR” debate. Third, by focusing on a case where heteronomy was the rule, this paper adds a new case to the literature on the entrenchment and durability of heteronomy in historical IR and contributes to its theory-building.
dc.format.extent228736
dc.language.isoeng
dc.relation.ispartofEuropean Journal of International Relationsen
dc.subjectHistorical sociologyen
dc.subjectInternational historyen
dc.subjectOrderen
dc.subjectEnglish Schoolen
dc.subjectHeteronomyen
dc.subjectEurasiaen
dc.subjectT-NDASen
dc.titleOf nomads and khanates : heteronomy and interpolity order in 19th-century Central Asiaen
dc.typeJournal articleen
dc.contributor.institutionUniversity of St Andrews. Centre for Global Law and Governanceen
dc.contributor.institutionUniversity of St Andrews. School of International Relationsen
dc.identifier.doi10.1177/13540661231200370
dc.description.statusPeer revieweden


This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record