The Master Signifier and the Four Discourses

2018 ◽  
pp. 29-47
Author(s):  
Bruce Fink
Keyword(s):  
Four Discourses

Art. XX.—The Chahár Maqála (“Four Discourses”) of Nidhámí-i-'Arúḍi-i-Samarqandí

1899 ◽  
Vol 31 (4) ◽  
pp. 757-845
Author(s):  
Edward G. Browne
Keyword(s):  
Central Point ◽  
One Year ◽  
Four Discourses

They relate thus, that Naṣr b. Aḥmad, who was the central point of the Sámánid group, whose fortunes reached their zenith during the days of his rule, was most plenteously equipped with every means of enjoyment and material of splendour—well-filled treasuries, an efficient army, and loyal servants. In winter he used to reside at Bukhárá, his capital, while in summer he used to go to Samarqand or some other of the cities of Khurásán. Now one year it was the turn of Herat. He spent the spring at Bádghís, where are the most charming pasture-grounds of Khurásán and 'Iráq, for there are nearly a thousand watercourses abounding in water and pasture, any one of which would suffice for an army.

Empire—A World History

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-88
Author(s):  
Peter Fibiger Bang
Keyword(s):  
Bronze Age ◽  
World History ◽  
Balance Of Power ◽  
The Other ◽  
Local Elites ◽  
Four Dimensions ◽  
The Third ◽  
The Us ◽  
Third Millennium Bce ◽  
Four Discourses

This chapter attempts a synthesis of the imperial experience in world history. Setting out from an in-depth comparison of two incidents, one from the US occupation of Iraq, the other from the Jewish uprising against Nero (66–70 CE), cooperation with local elites is identified as the key to imperial government. The chapter proceeds to discuss current definitions of empire, followed by a wide-ranging survey of modern theories of empire. Most of these can be grouped within four discourses that originate in societal debates from the early 1900s: about monopoly, capitalism and empire; about empire as predatory networks of aristocratic elites; about empire and national identity; and about geopolitics and the balance of power. These four theoretical discourses provide the four dimensions of an analytical matrix that, finally, structure an attempt at synthesizing the imperial experience in world history, from the third millennium BCE Levantine Bronze Age until the present.

scholarly journals What counts as ‘good sociology’? Conflicting discourses on legitimate sociology in Finland and Sweden

2018 ◽  
Vol 62 (4) ◽  
pp. 357-371
Author(s):  
Johanna Hokka
Keyword(s):  
Qualitative Study ◽  
The Other ◽  
Policy Discourse ◽  
Internal Dynamics ◽  
Relative Value ◽  
Scientific Elite ◽  
Strong Position ◽  
Four Discourses ◽  
Conflicting Discourses ◽  
Swedish Data

This qualitative study explores how sociology is legitimated among established Finnish and Swedish sociology professors, who are conceived as a scientific elite. Drawing on a Bourdieusian framework, the analysis traces the discourses that define legitimate sociology in these two national contexts, and the relations between those discourses. While the scientific elite of Finnish and Swedish sociology share four discourses – the Excellence, Humboldtian, Emancipatory and Policy discourses – the relative value of each differs between the different national contexts. The Excellence discourse dominates in the Finnish data, while the Humboldtian discourse is dominant in the Swedish data. The emphases on the other two discourses also vary: in Finnish interviews, the Policy discourse holds a strong position, while the Emancipatory discourse is articulated only with nostalgia; in Swedish interviews, the Emancipatory discourse is strong and the Policy discourse is weak. The results show that different national contexts produce variations in sociology’s internal dynamics.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document