‘Juridicality and Territory’ – a brief historical response

Over at Open Geography, Jeremy has a post about ‘Juridicality and Territory’, discussing the US and a potential assassination of an American citizen thought to reside in Yemen. In the context of the ‘war on terror’, the US has long asserted that its power can extend beyond the borders of its territory, compromising the territorial sovereignty of other states in the process. Executions have happened in many places – including of course Iraq and Afghanistan, but also Yemen, Somalia, and Pakistan and quite likely elsewhere.

What I found interesting/disturbing about the US under the Bush administration was not its violation of international law – which had long been challenged or ignored – but the arguments against it. But the questions raised in this case are of long standing, and in some respects would not have been alien to the 14th century jurists like Bartolus and Baldus who did so much work on the conflict of the laws. Here is Bartolus, for example, offering a commentary on the Codex, I.1; §13. There are, for him, two key questions. First,

First, whether local legislation [statutum] extends beyond the territorium to non subjects; second, whether the effect of such legislation extends beyond the territorium of the legislator.

These seem to be the very issues at stake in this modern case – does the Constitution apply to non-citizens within US territory; and to US citizens abroad? Bartolus goes on to ask (§46):

suppose the army of one city is occupying the territorio of another and one foreigner kills another there; may he be punished by the authorities of this city?

His answer sounds very modern:

Territorium is so called from terrifying [terrendo]. So long as the army is there, terrifying and dictating to that place [terret et coercet illum locum], an offence there committed will properly be able to be punished by the authorities of the city as if it had been committed in their own territorio.

Bartolus provides a reference to the definition given by Pomponius in the Digest (L.16.239), which I quoted as one of the epigraphs to Terror and Territory.

The territorium is the sum of the lands within the boundaries of a civitas; which some say is so named because the magistrate of a place has, within its boundaries, the right of terrifying, that is summoning (or expelling).

Bartolus and his successor Baldus are discussed in some detail in chapter seven of the book I’m currently writing.

Posted in Baldus de Ubaldis, Bartolus of Sassoferrato, Politics, Territory | Leave a comment

Land, Terrain, Territory dialogue

My piece ‘Land, Terrain, Territory’, forthcoming in Progress in Human Geography in early 2011, but already available online, will be the focus of a discussion in the journal. Marco Antonsich has kindly written a response, to which I’ve written a reply. These are due out sometime later in 2011.

I won’t say much about this here, to be fair to Marco, but some of the key points at stake revolve around the kind of approach to be taken in understanding territory; the weighting to be put on the different elements that make it up; and the way to understand what Marco calls ‘territorial formations before territory’.

My key argument – which shouldn’t surprise anyone who’s read my work on this topic – is that any adequate political theory of territory has to be historical in execution.

Posted in My Publications, Territory | 1 Comment

David Harvey lecture

The text of David Harvey’s lecture to the ASA from earlier this month is here

A lot of it will be familiar to anyone who’s heard him speak on this topic recently, but this is the first time I’ve seen it written in this form.

Posted in David Harvey | Leave a comment

The Later Heidegger

Paul Ennis links to his review of Lee Braver’s Heidegger’s Later Writings here. You can find the official site for the book here. I’d not paid much attention to this when it came out – partly due to not having Heidegger as a focus of my work since around 2005, and partly because there can be a bit of an overkill of guidebooks, companions, etc. – but Ennis is positive and it looks worth some attention.

Posted in Martin Heidegger | Leave a comment

Quentin Skinner interview

While looking for something else, I came across this interview with Quentin Skinner. It’s a remarkably open and at times self-critical assessment of his trajectory and how he does the kind of work he does. While eight years old, it’s well worth a read.

Posted in Quentin Skinnner | 1 Comment

Fixing Cricket

In the end it took England only about an hour and a half to wrap things up. A huge margin of victory, which at lunch on Friday seemed inconceivable. But it was a strange thing to watch, and distinctly underwhelming, which after the two terrific days that came before is a terrible shame.

In common with a lot of the cricket commentators on BBC and Sky I’m feeling really angry about this. If I had to choose only one sport to follow it would be easily be cricket, and of that Test match cricket is for me by far the best form. It’s the only sport I go out of my way to try to watch. The way it has been spoiled by these events is desperate. Naturally, all the accused players are innocent until these charges are proved, but even the accusations are hugely disappointing. The only way to ‘fix’ cricket has to be permanent bans for anyone found guilty of such infringements – no second chances, no temporary bans, no reprieves.

Posted in Cricket | Leave a comment

Nijmegen Alexander von Humboldt lecture series

Posted in Boundaries, Conferences, Territory | Leave a comment

Cricket – sport and law

Two days of extraordinary test cricket – in which England looked completely out of it, turned things around with a record-breaking partnership, then crushed Pakistan yesterday – overshadowed by an illegal betting scam. No one is alleging that the progress or likely result of the game has been affected, but rather very small details. The no-balls bowled by Pakistan have been unusual – over-stepping by some distance, instead of the usual fractional infringement – so in a sense it’s unsurprising that questions are being asked. Pakistan’s new ball pairing of Asif and Amir were the best thing about their team, and it will be devastating for Pakistani cricket if this does turn out to be proven. After the ball-tampering incident in 2006, the World Cup death of coach Bob Woolmer, and the inability to stage home games given security concerns, this is a bleak time. The floods in Pakistan have received a lot of attention in the context of the cricket, with the team donating match fees to the aid effort, and their performance in the third test seemed to show they were able to deliver on the field, despite all this. Where this leaves the cricket team now is anyone’s guess. In ninety minutes time they are supposed to come onto the field to try to rescue the game.

Posted in Cricket | Leave a comment

Territory, Globalization and International Relations – new book

A new, and very good book, due out in November – Territory, Globalization and International Relations: The Cartographic Reality of Space, by Jeppe Strandsbjerg of the Copenhagen Business School.

I’ve just finished reading the manuscript to write a publicity blurb for the backcover.

Posted in Territory | Leave a comment

Harvey on Hardtalk

David Harvey interviewed on BBC’s Hardtalk programme here.

Posted in David Harvey | Leave a comment