The first part of the paper explores some of the reasons why contemporary border studies understate the full significance of state borders and their global primacy. It is argued that this failing is rooted in a much wider lack of historical reflexivity—a reluctance to acknowledge the historical positioning (the ‘where and when’) of contemporary border studies themselves. This reluctance encourages a form of pseudohistory, or ‘epochal thinking’, which disfigures perspective on the present. Among the consequences are (a) exaggerated claims of the novelty of contemporary border change, propped up by poorly substantiated benchmarks in the past; (b) an incapacity to recognise the ‘past in the present’ as in the various historical deposits of state formation processes; and (c) a failure to recognise the distinctiveness of contemporary state borders and how they differ from other borders in their complexity and globality. The second part of the paper argues for a recalibration of border studies aimed at balancing their spatial emphases with a much greater, and more critical, historical sensitivity. It insists that ‘boundedness’, and state boundedness in particular, is a variable that must be understood historically. This is illustrated by arguing that a better analysis of contemporary border change means rethinking the crude periodisation which distinguishes the age of empire from the age of nation-states and, in turn, from some putative contemporary era ‘beyond nation-states’ and their borders.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AgnewJ, 2003, “Sovereignty over time and space”, paper presented to Conference on Globalization, Territoriality, and Conflict, University of California, San Diego, 17–18 January; copy available from the author, Department of Geography, University of California, Los Angeles
2.
AgnewJ, 2008, “Borders on the mind: Re-framing border thinking”Ethics and Global Politics1175–191, DOI: 10.3402/egp.v1/4.1892
3.
AndersonJO'DowdL, 2007, “Imperialism and nationalism: The Home Rule struggle and border creation in Ireland, 1885–1925”Political Geography26934–950
4.
AndersonM, 1996Frontiers: Territory and State Formation in the Modern World (Polity Press, Cambridge)
5.
BalibarE, 2004We, the People of Europe: Reflections on Transnational Citizenship (Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ)
6.
BalibarE, 2009, “Europe as borderland”Environment and Planning D: Society and Space27190–215
BayleyC A, 2002, “‘Archaic’ and ‘modern’ globalization in the Eurasian and African arena”, in Globalization in World History Ed. HopkinsA G (Pimlico, London) pp 47–73
9.
BeckJ M, 2008, “Has the Basque borderland become more Basque after opening the Franco – Spanish border?”National Identities10373–388
10.
BeckU, 2005Power in the Global Age: A New Global Political Economy (Polity Press, Cambridge, MA)
11.
BeckUGrandeE, 2007Cosmopolitan Europe (Polity Press, Cambridge)
12.
BeissengerM R, 2005, “Rethinking Empire in the wake of Soviet collapse”, in Ethnic Politics after Communism Eds BaranyZMoserR G (Cornell University Press, Ithaca, NY) pp 14–45
13.
BerezinM, 2003, “Introduction. Territory, emotion and identity: Spatial recalibration in a new Europe”, in Europe Without Borders Eds BerezinMSchainM (Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore, MD) pp 1–30
14.
BrennerN, 1999, “Beyond state-centrism? Space, territoriality, and geographical scale in globalization studies”Theory and Society2839–78
15.
BuchananAMooreM, 2003States, Nations and Borders: The Ethics of Making Boundaries (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge)
16.
CastellsM, 1998The Rise of Network Society (Blackwell, Oxford)
17.
ColásA, 2007Empire (Polity Press, Cambridge)
18.
ConnollyW, 1994, “Tocqueville, territory and violence”Theory, Culture and Society1119–40
19.
CooperF, 2004, “Empire multiplied: A Review essay”Comparative Studies in Society and History46247–272
20.
EldenS, 2006, “Contingent sovereignty, territorial integrity and the sanctity of borders”SAIS ReviewXXVI11–24
21.
FavellA, 2001, “Migration, mobility and globaloney: Metaphors and rhetoric in the sociology of globalisation: A Review essay”Global Networks1389–398
22.
FearonJ DLaitinD D, 2003, “Ethnicity, insurgency and civil war”American Political Science Review9775–90
23.
FergusonN, 2002Empire: How Britain Made the Modern World (Basic Books, New York)
GiddensA, 2002Runaway World: How Globalization is Shaping our World? (Profile Books, London)
26.
GriggsRHocknellP, 2002, “Fourth world faultlines and the remaking of international boundaries”, Stiftelsen Skånsk Framtid, Documentation Project, http://www.scania.org/ssf/docu/1214grgs.htm
27.
HardtMNegriA, 2000Empire (Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA)
28.
HeldDKoenig-ArchibugiM (Eds), 2004American Power in the 21st Century (Polity Press, Cambridge)
29.
HobdenS, 1999, “Theorising the international system: Perspectives from historical sociology”Review of International Studies25257–271
30.
HobsonJ M, 2002, “What's at stake in ‘bringing historical sociology’ back into international relations?: transcending ‘chronofetishism’ and ‘tempocentrism’ in international relations”, in A Historical Sociology of International Relations Eds HobdenSHobsonJ M (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge) pp 3–41
31.
HopkinsA G (Ed.), 2002Globalization in World History (Pimlico, London)
32.
JacobsonD, 1997, “New frontiers: Territory, social spaces and the state”Sociological Forum12121–135
33.
KumarK, 2003, “The idea of Europe: Cultural legacies, transnational imagining and the nation-state”, in Europe Without Borders Eds BerezinMSchainM (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge) pp 33–50
34.
LamontMMolnárV, 2002, “The study of boundaries in the social sciences”Annual Review of Sociology28167–195
35.
MannM, 1986The Sources of Social Powervolume 1 (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge)
36.
MannM, 1993The Sources of Social Powervolume 2 (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge)
37.
MannM, 2003Incoherent Empire (Verso, London)
38.
MannM, 2005The Dark Side of Democracy: Explaining Ethnic Cleansing (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge)
39.
MannM, 2007, “The age of nation-states is just beginning”, plenary paper presented to the ‘Beyond the Nation’ conference, Queen's University, Belfast, 12 September; copy available from the author, Department of Sociology, University of California, Los Angeles
40.
MotylA J, 2001Imperial Ends: The Decay, Collapse and Revival of Empires (Columbia University Press, New York)
41.
O'DowdL, 2002, “Transnational integration and cross-border regions in the European Union”, in Transnational Democracy: Political Spaces and Border Crossings Ed. AndersonJ (Routledge, London) pp 111–128
42.
OhmaeK, 1990Borderless World: Power and Strategy in the Inter-linked World Economy (Harper Business, New York)
43.
PaasiA, 1996Territories, Boundaries and Consciousness: The Changing Geographies of the Finnish – Russian Border (John Wiley, New York)
44.
PaasiA, 2006, “Boundary studies and the problem of contextuality”, paper presented at the Linea Terrarum—International Border Conference, El Paso, Ciudad Juarez and Las Cruces, 27–30 March copy available from the author, Department of Geography, University of Oulu
45.
PaasiAProkkolaE, 2008, “Territorial dynamics, cross-border work and everyday life in the Finnish – Swedish border area”Space and Polity1213–29
46.
ProzorovS, 2008, “De-limitation: The denigration of boundaries in the political thought of late modernity”, in Ed. ParkerNThe Geopolitics of Europe's Identity: Centres, Boundaries and Margins (Palgrave Macmillan, London) pp 25–41
47.
RumfordC, 2008Cosmopolitan Spaces: Europe, Globalization, Theory (Routledge, London)
48.
SecorA, 2007, “Review essay: Territory, enmity and American globalism”Review of International Political Economy14535–549
49.
SmithN, 2003American Empire (University of California Press, Berkeley, CA)
50.
SoA Y, 1990Social Change and Development: Modernization, Dependency and World Systems Theories (Sage, London)
51.
TherbornG, 1995European Modernity: The Trajectory of European Societies, 1945 – 2000 (Sage, London)
52.
TillyC, 1991, “How (and what) are historians doing?”, in Divided Knowledge Across Disciplines Eds EastonDSchellingC S (Sage, Newbury Park, CA) pp 86–117
53.
TillyC, 1992Coercion, Capital and European States, AD 990 – 1992 (Basil Blackwell, Oxford)
54.
TippsD C, 1973, “Modernization theory and the comparative study of societies: A Critical perspective”Comparative Studies in Society and History15 (March) 196–216
55.
TorpeyJ, 1998, “Coming and going: On state monopolization of the legitimate ‘means of movement’”Sociological Theory16239–259
56.
Van HoutumH, 2005, “The geopolitics of border and boundaries”Geopolitics10672–679
57.
WalbyS, 2003, “The myth of the nation-state: Theorising society and politics in a global era”Sociology37529–546
58.
WaltersW, 2004, “The frontiers of the European Union: A Geostrategic perspective”Geopolitics9674–698
59.
WimmerA, 2008, “Elementary strategies of ethnic boundary making”Ethnic and Racial Studies311025–1055
60.
WimmerAGlick ShillerN, 2002, “Methodological nationalism and the study of migration”Archives of European SociologyXLIII217–240
61.
ZielonkaJ, 2007Europe as Empire: The Nature of the Enlarged European Union (Oxford University Press, Oxford)
