The Eastern cousins of European sovereign states? The development of linear borders in early modern Japan

IF 2.7 1区 社会学 Q1 INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS European Journal of International Relations Pub Date : 2022-11-01 DOI:10.1177/13540661221133206
Naosuke Mukoyama
{"title":"The Eastern cousins of European sovereign states? The development of linear borders in early modern Japan","authors":"Naosuke Mukoyama","doi":"10.1177/13540661221133206","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The conventional accounts of the history of the sovereign state system assume that territorial sovereignty originated in Europe and spread to the rest of the world through colonial expansion. This implies that territory, which is a core feature of the modern state, and more specifically, linear borders, had not existed outside Europe before other societies encountered the West. Focusing on early modern Japan, this article challenges that assumption by showing that there was a similar territorial order outside Europe that developed in parallel with its European counterpart. Through an investigation of boundary disputes, boundary markers, and map-making during the Edo period (1603–1868), it demonstrates that linear borders were not foreign to early modern Japan. Domains in Edo Japan were already well into the process of building a territorial order with demarcated borders and mutual exclusion. This article contributes to International Relations scholarship by addressing the “Westphalian myth” from a geographical rather than temporal perspective and shifting the focus of the study of non-Western international systems from differences to similarities. It also suggests a potential revision of scholarly understandings of discontinuity before and after the Meiji Restoration in Japan.","PeriodicalId":48069,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of International Relations","volume":"29 1","pages":"255 - 282"},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2022-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Journal of International Relations","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/13540661221133206","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: 1

Abstract

The conventional accounts of the history of the sovereign state system assume that territorial sovereignty originated in Europe and spread to the rest of the world through colonial expansion. This implies that territory, which is a core feature of the modern state, and more specifically, linear borders, had not existed outside Europe before other societies encountered the West. Focusing on early modern Japan, this article challenges that assumption by showing that there was a similar territorial order outside Europe that developed in parallel with its European counterpart. Through an investigation of boundary disputes, boundary markers, and map-making during the Edo period (1603–1868), it demonstrates that linear borders were not foreign to early modern Japan. Domains in Edo Japan were already well into the process of building a territorial order with demarcated borders and mutual exclusion. This article contributes to International Relations scholarship by addressing the “Westphalian myth” from a geographical rather than temporal perspective and shifting the focus of the study of non-Western international systems from differences to similarities. It also suggests a potential revision of scholarly understandings of discontinuity before and after the Meiji Restoration in Japan.
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
欧洲主权国家的东方表亲?近代早期日本线性边界的发展
关于主权国家体系历史的传统说法认为,领土主权起源于欧洲,并通过殖民扩张传播到世界其他地区。这意味着,在其他社会与西方相遇之前,作为现代国家核心特征的领土,更具体地说,是线性边界,在欧洲之外并不存在。本文以近代早期的日本为研究对象,通过展示在欧洲之外也存在与欧洲相似的领土秩序,从而挑战了这一假设。通过对江户时代(1603-1868)的边界纠纷、边界标记和地图制作的调查,它表明线性边界对近代早期的日本并不陌生。江户日本的疆域已经进入了建立边界明确、相互排斥的领土秩序的过程。本文从地理而非时间的角度探讨了“威斯特伐利亚神话”,并将非西方国际体系研究的重点从差异转向了相似性,从而对国际关系学术做出了贡献。这也暗示了对日本明治维新前后不连续性的学术理解的潜在修正。
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