Of nomads and khanates: heteronomy and interpolity order in 19th-century Central Asia

IF 2.7 1区 社会学 Q1 INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS European Journal of International Relations Pub Date : 2023-09-27 DOI:10.1177/13540661231200370
Filippo Costa Buranelli
{"title":"Of nomads and khanates: heteronomy and interpolity order in 19th-century Central Asia","authors":"Filippo Costa Buranelli","doi":"10.1177/13540661231200370","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Scholars 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.","PeriodicalId":48069,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of International Relations","volume":"582 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Journal of International Relations","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/13540661231200370","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Scholars 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.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
游牧民族与汗国:19世纪中亚的他律与内乱秩序
近年来,国际关系学者和全球历史社会学学者对欧亚秩序越来越感兴趣。然而,最近关于欧亚历史国际关系的研究大多是从一个长期的视角出发的,主要集中在“高海拔”的“大政治”上。中亚,或称“突厥斯坦”,及其构成政治体系,如布哈拉汗国、希瓦汗国和Khoqand汗国,以及围绕它们的大量游牧群体,在国际关系中仍是未知的领域,特别是在沙皇时代之前。通过对一手资料和第二手资料的综合考察,本文揭示了前殖民时期的中亚是如何以他律为前提,以汗国之间的主权制度和汗国与游牧民族之间的宗主权制度为基础,形成了一个独立的国际秩序;地盘;逊尼派伊斯兰教;贸易和奴隶制;外交的;还有战争和伊拉克战争。本文在三个方面填补了这一空白,并为更广泛的欧亚历史秩序文献做出了贡献。首先,它通过观察较小的政治而不是帝国,为目前欧亚大陆的IR知识增加了粒度、细节和特异性,如前所述,这是迄今为止主要的分析焦点。其次,本文采用了一种主题方法来揭示前殖民时期中亚地区的当地实践、制度和规范,从而为最近的“全球国际关系”辩论增添了新的内容。第三,通过对他律作为规则的案例的关注,本文为历史国际关系中他律的巩固和持久的文献提供了一个新的案例,并有助于其理论建设。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.60
自引率
8.80%
发文量
44
期刊介绍: The European Journal of International Relations publishes peer-reviewed scholarly contributions across the full breadth of the field of International Relations, from cutting edge theoretical debates to topics of contemporary and historical interest to scholars and practitioners in the IR community. The journal eschews adherence to any particular school or approach, nor is it either predisposed or restricted to any particular methodology. Theoretically aware empirical analysis and conceptual innovation forms the core of the journal’s dissemination of International Relations scholarship throughout the global academic community. In keeping with its European roots, this includes a commitment to underlying philosophical and normative issues relevant to the field, as well as interaction with related disciplines in the social sciences and humanities. This theoretical and methodological openness aims to produce a European journal with global impact, fostering broad awareness and innovation in a dynamic discipline. Adherence to this broad mandate has underpinned the journal’s emergence as a major and independent worldwide voice across the sub-fields of International Relations scholarship. The Editors embrace and are committed to further developing this inheritance. Above all the journal aims to achieve a representative balance across the diversity of the field and to promote deeper understanding of the rapidly-changing world around us. This includes an active and on-going commitment to facilitating dialogue with the study of global politics in the social sciences and beyond, among others international history, international law, international and development economics, and political/economic geography. The EJIR warmly embraces genuinely interdisciplinary scholarship that actively engages with the broad debates taking place across the contemporary field of international relations.
期刊最新文献
Global injustice and the production of ontological insecurity Why the West’s alternative to China’s international infrastructure financing is failing Manufacturing consensus: China’s strategic narratives and geoeconomic competition in Asia The afterlives of state failure: echoes and aftermaths of colonialism Hidden figures: how legal experts influence the design of international institutions
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1