Imperial Citizenship
Empire and the Question of Belonging
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 9799846 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Zoë Laidlaw (0000-0002-5256-6722, Royal Holloway University of London, corresponding author) |
| Year | 2009 |
| Volume | 124 |
| Issue | 506 |
| Pages | 220-221 |
| Publication date | 2009-02-01 |
| Open Access | No |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | The English Historical Review (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0013-8266 • E-ISSN: 1477-4534 |
| Publisher | Oxford University Press (PUBLISHER • GB) |
| DOI | 10.1093/ehr/cen375 |
| OpenAlex | W1972655117 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 7 |
Daniel Gorman's new study argues for a reassessment of the relationship between the Dominions and Britain and a reassertion of its significance, through a consideration of the British Empire's ideological foundations. Gorman wants to disrupt the assumptions of post-colonial scholarship, which, he claims, have unduly homogenised the category of coloniser and falsely attributed to Britons ‘a common imperial motive’. Certainly, Gorman's study of competing conceptions of imperial citizenship in the late Victorian and Edwardian periods foregrounds dissent within the ranks of those Britons who contemplated imperial affairs. Nonetheless, while the five individuals under consideration had divergent views of the theoretical implications and practical ramifications of imperial citizenship, Gorman's book also reveals the profound influence of their shared status as men of a certain age and outlook. This is a scholarly and reflective work; Gorman's tight focus on five white men, however, means it is unlikely to persuade those historians who
British Empire · Citizenship · Colonialism · Dissent · Empire · Focus (optics · Ideology · Imperial unit system · Political science · Politics · Polity · Scholarship · Sociology · White (mutation · Australian History and Society · Gender Studies · History · Law
| Citations per year | 0.47 |
|---|---|
| Citation span | 2011 - 2023 (13) |
| Highly cited | No |