Skip to main content

Part of the book series: International Political Theory ((IPoT))

  • 50 Accesses

Abstract

The contributions made by British intellectuals to modern international political thought have been at the centre of several debates in recent decades in disciplines such as international relations.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    Istvan Hont’s Jealousy of Trade: International Competition and the Nation-State in Historical Perspective (2005) was the first major attempt in contemporary research to analyse the changes and ruptures that occurred during the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries. According to Hont (2005, 5–6), “The phrase ‘jealousy of trade’ refers to a particular conjunction between politics and the economy. It emerged when success in international trade became a matter of the military and political survival of nations. Jealousy of trade signaled that the economy had become political. It inaugurated global market competition as primary state activity.”.

  2. 2.

    As Hont (2005, 7) states, “To account for jealousy of trade one needs at least two historical ‘tunnels’ simultaneously, a political and an economic one. Urgent and interesting issues in politics are rarely located entirely on either side of the alleged fault line between realism and liberalism, or between ancient and modern republicanism. There is a messy overlap where pure theory is adapted to political reality. This hybrid space is the natural home of jealousy of trade.”.

  3. 3.

    The process of civilisation is described by John Pocock (1999, 278–88) as the “enlightenment narrative.”.

  4. 4.

    As Hont (2005, 4) mentions, “The eighteenth century produced a vision of the future as a global market of competing commercial states.”.

Bibliography

  • Adam, Smith. 1776. An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nation. ed. Campbell Skinner and Todd. Liberty Fund.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ahn, Doohwan, and Richard Whatmore. 2020. Peace, Security, and Deterrence. In A Cultural History of Peace in the Age of Enlightenment, ed. Stella Ghervas and David Armitage, 117–133. London: Bloomsbury.

    Google Scholar 

  • Armitage, David. 2012. Foundations of Modern International Thought. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Arneil, Barbara. 1996. John Locke and America: The Defence of English Colonialism. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Arneil, Barbara. 2023. Colonialism Versus Imperialism. Political Theory. https://doi.org/10.1177/00905917231193107.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Behr, Hartmut. 2010. A History of International Political Theory: Ontologies of the International. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Bloomfield, Arthur I. 1994. Essays in the History of International Trade Theory. New York: Edward Elgar.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bourcier, Benjamin. 2021. Bentham’s International Political Theory: Taking States’ Responsibilities Seriously. Utilitas 33 (3) (September): 287–303.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cavallar, Georg. 2011. Imperfect Cosmopolis: Studies in the History of International Legal Theory and Cosmopolitan Ideas. Chippenham, Wiltshire: University of Wales Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • David Boucher. 1998. Political Theories of International Relations. Oxford, Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fitzmaurice, Andrew. 2014. Sovereignty, Property and Empire, 1500–2000. Ideas in Context 107. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fleming, Sean. 2020. Leviathan on a leash. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Forman-Barzilai. Fonna. 2010. Adam Smith and the Circles of Sympathy. Cosmopolitanism and Moral Theory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ghervas, Stella. 2017. Balance of Power vs. Perpetual Peace: Paradigms of European Order from Utrecht to Vienna, 1713–1815. The International History Review 39 (3): 404–425.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grotius, Hugo. 2004 [1609]. The Free Sea (Mare Liberum), ed. David Armitage. Indianapolis: Liberty Fund.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hall, Ian, and Lisa Hill, eds. 2009. British International Thinkers from Hobbes to Namier. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hont, Istvàn. 2005. Jealousy of Trade, International Competition and the Nation-state in Historical Perspective. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kapossy, B., I. Nakhimovsky, S.A. Reinert, and R. Whatmore, eds. 2018. Markets, Morals, Politics: Jealousy of Trade and the History of Political Thought. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kapossy, B., I. Nakhimovsky, and R. Whatmore, eds. 2017. Commerce and Peace in the Enlightenment. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108241410

    Google Scholar 

  • Koskenniemi, Martti. 2021. To the Uttermost Parts of the Earth: Legal Imagination and International Power, 1300–1870. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Larrère, Catherine. 1993. L’invention de l’économie au XVIIIè siècle. Paris: Puf.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marquer, Eric. 2012. Léviathan et la loi des marchands: Commerce et civilité dans l’œuvre de Thomas Hobbes. Paris: Classiques Garnier.

    Google Scholar 

  • Muthu, Sankar. 2012. Empire and Modern Political Thought. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Penman, Leigh T.I. 2020. The Lost History of Cosmopolitanism: The Early Modern Origins of the Intellectual Ideal. London: Bloomsbury.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pinheiro, Lucas. 2022. A Factory Afield: Capitalism and Empire in John Locke’s Political Economy. Modern Intellectual History 19 (1): 1–28.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pitts, Jennifer. 2005. A Turn to Empire. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Pitts, Jennifer. 2018. Boundaries of the International: Law and Empire. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Pocock, John G. A. 1999. Barbarism and Religion, vol. 2. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Raynal, Guillaume-Thomas. 2010–2023. Histoire philosophique et politique des établissements et du commerce des Européens dans les deux Indes. Tomes I–IV. Ferney: Centre international d’étude du XVIIIè siècle.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ricardo, D. 2015. On the Principles of Political Economy, and Taxation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781107589421

  • Richard, Whatmore. 2012. Against War and Empire, Geneva, Britan and France in the Eighteenth Century. Yale University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sally, Razeen. 1998. Classical Liberalism and International Economic Order: Studies in Theory and Intellectual History. Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schabas, Margaret, and Carl Wennerlind. 2020. A philosopher’s Economist: Hume and the Rise of Capitalism. Chicago, IL: Chicago University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Skornicki, Arnault. 2011. L’économiste, la cour et la patrie. Paris: CNRS éditions.

    Google Scholar 

  • Senga, Shigeyoshi, Masatomi Fujimoto, and Taichi Tabuchi, eds. 2017. Ricardo and International Trade. London and New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shelley, Mary. 2006. Frankenstein or the Modern Prometheus, ed. Maurice Hindle. London: Penguin Classics.

    Google Scholar 

  • Skinner, Quentin. 2002. Visions of Politics, vol. 1, Regarding Method. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sorell, Tom. 2011. Hobbes, Public Safety and Political Economy. In International Political Theory After Hobbes: Analysis, Interpretation and Orientation, ed. R. Prokhovnik and G. Slomp, 42–56. New York: Palgrave.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ince, Ulas, and Onur. 2018. Colonial Capitalism and the Dilemmas of Liberalism. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Winch, Donald. 1996. Riches and Poverty: An Intellectual History of Political Economy in Britain, 1750–1834. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Benjamin Bourcier .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2024 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Bourcier, B., Jakonen, M. (2024). Introduction. In: Bourcier, B., Jakonen, M. (eds) British Modern International Thought in the Making. International Political Theory. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-45713-5_1

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics