What do you think?
Rate this book
Once Within Borders: Territories of Power, Wealth, and Belonging since 1500
Throughout history, human societies have been organized preeminently as territories―politically bounded regions whose borders define the jurisdiction of laws and the movement of peoples. At a time when the technologies of globalization are eroding barriers to communication, transportation, and trade, Once Within Borders explores the fitful evolution of territorial organization as a worldwide practice of human societies. Master historian Charles S. Maier tracks the epochal changes that have defined territories over five centuries and draws attention to ideas and technologies that contribute to territoriality’s remarkable resilience.
Territorial boundaries transform geography into history by providing a framework for organizing political and economic life. But properties of territory―their meanings and applications―have changed considerably across space and time. In the West, modern territoriality developed in tandem with ideas of sovereignty in the seventeenth century. Sovereign rulers took steps to fortify their borders, map and privatize the land, and centralize their sway over the populations and resources within their domain. The arrival of railroads and the telegraph enabled territorial expansion at home and abroad as well as the extension of control over large spaces. By the late nineteenth century, the extent of a nation’s territory had become an index of its power, with overseas colonial possessions augmenting prestige and wealth and redefining territoriality.
Turning to the geopolitical crises of the twentieth century, Maier pays close attention to our present moment, asking in what ways modern nations and economies still live within borders and to what degree our societies have moved toward a post-territiorial world.
Territorial boundaries transform geography into history by providing a framework for organizing political and economic life. But properties of territory―their meanings and applications―have changed considerably across space and time. In the West, modern territoriality developed in tandem with ideas of sovereignty in the seventeenth century. Sovereign rulers took steps to fortify their borders, map and privatize the land, and centralize their sway over the populations and resources within their domain. The arrival of railroads and the telegraph enabled territorial expansion at home and abroad as well as the extension of control over large spaces. By the late nineteenth century, the extent of a nation’s territory had become an index of its power, with overseas colonial possessions augmenting prestige and wealth and redefining territoriality.
Turning to the geopolitical crises of the twentieth century, Maier pays close attention to our present moment, asking in what ways modern nations and economies still live within borders and to what degree our societies have moved toward a post-territiorial world.
416 pages, Hardcover
Published October 17, 2016
5 people are currently reading
190 people want to read
About the author
Charles S. Maier
36 books8 followersA specialist in European and international history, Charles S. Maier is the Leverett Saltonstall Research Professor of History at Harvard University.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 8 of 8 reviews
February 23, 2023
Imagine that, after suddenly waking from a coma, you find yourself transported to an unfamiliar place. People nearby speak a language you do not recognize. Surrounding you are no identifiable landmarks. Like the TV trope where the lost time traveler demands “what year is this?!?,” you desperately ask “where am I?!?” Naturally, you would expect the “where” in your question to ultimately refer to some political entity—if a passerby says, “Ah, mon ami, you are in West Africa,” you might then ask them, “Côte d'Ivoire or Benin?”
This instinct to categorize space by its national loyalties, which comes so easily to us, is not taken for granted by Maier in Once Within Borders. Maier argues that the idea of territory itself, defined as “global space that has been partitioned for the sake of political authority,” (1) is the result of the historical process of territorialization. In historicising territory, Maier thus denaturalizes the idea that geographic space must be “ordered by certain rules or properties that are ascribed to it.” (8) Territory then, has evolved over time: from the unstable frontiers and glacial empires of the 16th and 17th centuries; to the sovereign Westphalian states that followed; to the tradeable, productive, Cadaster mapped territories of the 18th century; to the industrial, railroad-enabled nations that expanded brazenly throughout the 19th, to the geopolitics of the 20th century wars; and, finally, to contemporary global capitalism.
This is a history of territoriality. What is territory? How did it come to exist in global politics?
From Cadaster maps, to Physiocrats, to Railroads, to Nazis, this is a global history. His breadth of knowledge is a bit intimidating, but ultimately, his argument shows a new way of thinking about territory. Namely that the notion itself is created and ought not be presupposed, especially in a globalized world of capital, migrants, and internets.
This instinct to categorize space by its national loyalties, which comes so easily to us, is not taken for granted by Maier in Once Within Borders. Maier argues that the idea of territory itself, defined as “global space that has been partitioned for the sake of political authority,” (1) is the result of the historical process of territorialization. In historicising territory, Maier thus denaturalizes the idea that geographic space must be “ordered by certain rules or properties that are ascribed to it.” (8) Territory then, has evolved over time: from the unstable frontiers and glacial empires of the 16th and 17th centuries; to the sovereign Westphalian states that followed; to the tradeable, productive, Cadaster mapped territories of the 18th century; to the industrial, railroad-enabled nations that expanded brazenly throughout the 19th, to the geopolitics of the 20th century wars; and, finally, to contemporary global capitalism.
This is a history of territoriality. What is territory? How did it come to exist in global politics?
From Cadaster maps, to Physiocrats, to Railroads, to Nazis, this is a global history. His breadth of knowledge is a bit intimidating, but ultimately, his argument shows a new way of thinking about territory. Namely that the notion itself is created and ought not be presupposed, especially in a globalized world of capital, migrants, and internets.
March 3, 2018
I really wanted to like this book. The concept is interesting, and the author has proven, by not retiring, that he knows his stuff well enough. But this is his golden handshake from the academic establishment. A haphazard bundle of loosely-connected thematic musings, each chapter assigned to a different millennial graduate student whose public school never taught grammar, and whose hastily-submitted work was lightly edited by a bored automaton in an offshore "content management" facility. This is what happens to books after Internet.
July 5, 2018
I feel dirty writing this, but I have not finished this book and nor will I ever. But considering how rare it is I actively give up on a book, it still felt necessary to explain why. One within borders is highly praised and I can feel that there is an important message in there, but feeling as a late arrival to the Californian gold rush, I just can't seem to find the gold everyone claims are there. I started to fear this was one of those must reread books to get the full message until I understood my problem.
My biggest problem with this book, is the same I had with The Waning of the Middle Ages by Huizinga, like in that book, Charles Maier does a lot of name dropping and quick sequences of different setting and context to support his argument. For example pages 74-75 we get: 16th century France, Confuscian theories, Charles I of England, the Ottomans, Genghis Khan, the Mughals and renaissance ideas on politics. In the same chapter he adds, Decartes, Louis XIV, the Spanish americas, the Atlantic trade network, Ming China,the portugese trade factories, classic Rome and so on. Perhaps that is just me, but I go crazy if an author keeps filling pages like this. Even if it is only a name drop it forces me and my mind to recall the essential aspects of the mentioned case to fully appreciate the reference made here. So I spent half the time recalling what I knew about those cultures and persons and half the time comparing that to what is written and it just makes for a read that is as much fun and inspiring as doing homework.
I am also pretty sure that this makes for way to easily made "mistakes" or forced analogies, for example at page 81 Maier talks about Tokugawa rule in Japan and how the Japanese constructed new style of fortress rather similar to the 16-17 century style star forts of Europe, these strongholds do not come with the pedigree of renaissance geometry, he writes, but they emerge from an era of artillery. So he is linking the emergency of new style of fortress in Japan to what he has determined were emerging theories of state power and territory thinking in Europe. Perhaps the influence of gunpowder did play a role but I do know for a fact that the extreme high rates of earthquakes did force early modern japanese to build in a certain fashion. They simply could not built a castle as in Europe of the 13th century for one good earthquake would ruin the fortifications, a castle built with terraces and slow sloping hills with low walles on each hill ring; now that can survive an earthquake intact and I for one am not as convinced as he is that only theories of territoriality and gunpowder are the reason for new castles in Japan (and it makes me suspicious that he does not even acknowledge the ecological factor).
Again, I have not read the book in it's totality and quit after two chapters; the rest of the book I skimmed through and even though it seemed at first glance that the namedropping does relent a bit, it still is way to much to make me struggle on. I picked up this book for three reasons, first the recent publication (2016) and the emphasis placed on borders in a time like this where borders have become central focus once more of public and political debate. The second reason is my interest in cross cultural comparisons (but not executed like this obviously) and thirdly because I noticed that some other big names in the genre of "big history stories that form our present" loved this book (Niall Ferguson for one). Well to bad that this book has the dubious honor of being of the first books in a year that I gave up on.
My biggest problem with this book, is the same I had with The Waning of the Middle Ages by Huizinga, like in that book, Charles Maier does a lot of name dropping and quick sequences of different setting and context to support his argument. For example pages 74-75 we get: 16th century France, Confuscian theories, Charles I of England, the Ottomans, Genghis Khan, the Mughals and renaissance ideas on politics. In the same chapter he adds, Decartes, Louis XIV, the Spanish americas, the Atlantic trade network, Ming China,the portugese trade factories, classic Rome and so on. Perhaps that is just me, but I go crazy if an author keeps filling pages like this. Even if it is only a name drop it forces me and my mind to recall the essential aspects of the mentioned case to fully appreciate the reference made here. So I spent half the time recalling what I knew about those cultures and persons and half the time comparing that to what is written and it just makes for a read that is as much fun and inspiring as doing homework.
I am also pretty sure that this makes for way to easily made "mistakes" or forced analogies, for example at page 81 Maier talks about Tokugawa rule in Japan and how the Japanese constructed new style of fortress rather similar to the 16-17 century style star forts of Europe, these strongholds do not come with the pedigree of renaissance geometry, he writes, but they emerge from an era of artillery. So he is linking the emergency of new style of fortress in Japan to what he has determined were emerging theories of state power and territory thinking in Europe. Perhaps the influence of gunpowder did play a role but I do know for a fact that the extreme high rates of earthquakes did force early modern japanese to build in a certain fashion. They simply could not built a castle as in Europe of the 13th century for one good earthquake would ruin the fortifications, a castle built with terraces and slow sloping hills with low walles on each hill ring; now that can survive an earthquake intact and I for one am not as convinced as he is that only theories of territoriality and gunpowder are the reason for new castles in Japan (and it makes me suspicious that he does not even acknowledge the ecological factor).
Again, I have not read the book in it's totality and quit after two chapters; the rest of the book I skimmed through and even though it seemed at first glance that the namedropping does relent a bit, it still is way to much to make me struggle on. I picked up this book for three reasons, first the recent publication (2016) and the emphasis placed on borders in a time like this where borders have become central focus once more of public and political debate. The second reason is my interest in cross cultural comparisons (but not executed like this obviously) and thirdly because I noticed that some other big names in the genre of "big history stories that form our present" loved this book (Niall Ferguson for one). Well to bad that this book has the dubious honor of being of the first books in a year that I gave up on.
August 15, 2025
This Book Once within borders, is a very interesting analysis on not just borders themselves but territory as an idea, what purpose it serves and how it has evolved throughout history since the 1500s it does this by exploring different epochs of history and in a somewhat chronological analysis of how it has shaped territoriality today. However This book appears to be written for a more historically scholarly class of people than myself I.e by naming historical events without context or background info, as well as lots of very articulate word this effected the flow of my reading as I was frequently googling words and events. I also found the writing style hard to follow at times. However overall it is a very interesting and educational book I particularly liked the chapter 2 ‘Spaces of States’, chapter 4 ‘projects for an Agrarian Regime’ and 5 ‘An invincible Force’.
January 31, 2023
Charles Maier’s Once Within Borders traces the evolution of territory as a concept from the early modern period to the present day, raising questions regarding the status of modern territory. Maier’s methodology relies on secondary literature as well as select published primary sources (rather than archival material). His work thus constitutes a broad synthesis of global history rather than a focused monograph. This approach, like any generalizing one, has pitfalls, yet I would argue that it ultimately fits Maier’s intentions. The chronological scope is appropriate as the study of territory begins with analysis of the early modern state. The geographical breadth as well offers readers the chance to see global connections in the conception and development of borders. Maier clarifies when different geographies see different results, such as diverging phenomena in American and European borderlands, and thus is not solely attempting to generalize. His global study thus has different aims than a local one and is less comparable to a work such as Peter Sahlins’ Boundaries.
April 7, 2022
Really important concepts. Moments of lucid beauty. Lots of typos. A jolty ride. Sometimes self aware. Other times presumptuous and projecting on the reader.
While semi satisfied that I read it through, I would be unlikely to recommend it to others.
Reading the last section sum up and intros of each chapter would likely be sufficient for anyone and everyone.
While semi satisfied that I read it through, I would be unlikely to recommend it to others.
Reading the last section sum up and intros of each chapter would likely be sufficient for anyone and everyone.
February 6, 2018
Very good academic research but kinda not that exciting for me.
January 16, 2024
Eh si quanto sono brutti i confini, peccato che manca una critica al capitalismo. Quando i fascisti si travestono da liberali. E si permettono pure di citare i filosofi poststrutturalisti.
Displaying 1 - 8 of 8 reviews