The History of Arsaces, Prince of Betlis

Recounting the eventful travels of Selim, an intrepid young Arab who runs away from his parental home to learn about the world, The History of Arsaces, Prince of Betlis (1774) by the Co. Limerick-born Charles Johnston (c.1719–c.1800) is an inventive mixture of fictional genres and styles: romance, satire, sentimental narrative and oriental fantasy. The novel appeared at a politically charged moment, on the eve of the American revolutionary war and in the aftermath of the Bengal famine of 1769–70, world events that were linked by the nefarious operations of the ubiquitous East India Company. These momentous occurrences, polarising public opinion and stimulating Irish patriot sympathies in the mid-70s, provide the undercurrent to Johnston’s thoughtful examination of war, commerce, and empire through the lens of a fictional ‘history’. Enclosing a series of tales within tales, Johnston’s oriental romance offers its readers a remarkable concoction of Gulliver-inspired fantasy, political satire and moral reflection, played out within an expansive historical and geographical setting. As the Monthly Review, or, Literary Journal commented on its first appearance in 1774, The History of Arsaces provided ‘striking intimations, of the utmost national importance, with respect to over-grown empire, and colony connexions’.

Photographing Vladimir Putin: Masculinity, Nationalism and Visuality in Russian Political Culture

This article introduces the study of photographs of politicians as an object of geopolitical analysis. It does this through exploring the holiday photographs of Vladimir Putin released by the Kremlin in 2007, 2009, and 2010. Putin's biography provides a backdrop to a detailed analysis of the geopolitical representations contained in the photographs of him. In the same fashion as other images, the photographs seek to provide a contemporary view of events and, at the same time, serve as a medium through which particular political scripts are narrated. The photographs also help to reproduce (and question) hegemonic discourses about public forms of masculinity in Russia. This article is intended to contribute to the debate on how visual images can help make sense of the geopolitical world

Keeping it in the Family: Surviving Political Exile, 1870-1917

A sentence of exile was a regular feature of the Russian revolutionary’s underground career. In order to survive this punishment and continue their struggle against Tsarism, revolutionaries relied on help from their fellow exiles, their party, the Political Red Cross and, often, their families. Historians have rarely acknowledged the role of kin in supporting the revolutionary movement and very few studies have noted the attempts by families to mitigate the worst aspects of a sentence of exile. This article explores the ways in which spouses and siblings, parents and children obtained concessions from the Tsarist authorities regarding their loved ones’ sentences of exile, helped off-set the poverty to which many exiles were reduced, and, above all, combated the sense of loneliness and depression to which those in exile were exposed. This article argues that such familial support had a collective and positive impact on revolutionaries’ experience of exile. More broadly it provides an illuminating case study of the blurred space between public and private which the revolutionary occupied and highlights the way in which the movement depended on help from sympathisers and family members in order to function effectively on a daily basis.

State power matters: power, the state and political struggle in the post-war American novel

This article is concerned with resituating the state at the centre of the analytical stage and, concomitantly, with drawing attention to the dangers of losing sight of the state as a locus of power. It seeks to uncover the relationship between two related lines of critical inquiry: Marxist and Foucauldian theories of the state; and the attempts by three postwar American novelist (Ken Kesey, William Burroughs and E.L. Doctorow) to determine the nature and extent of this power and to consider under what conditions political struggle might be possible. It argues that such a move is needed because recent critical analysis has been too preoccupied by corporeal micropolitics and global macropolitics, and that the postwar American novel can help us in this move because it is centrally concerned with the repressive potentiality of the US state. It maintains that the resuscitation of Marxist state theories in early 1970s and a debate between Poulantzas and Foucault is intriguingly foreshadowed and even critiqued by these novels. Consequently, it concludes that these novels constitute an unrecognized pre-history of what would become one of the key intellectual debates of the late twentieth century: an engagement between Marxist and post-structuralist conceptions of the power and resistance.

Famine and land in Ireland and India 1845-1880: James Caird and the political economy of hunger

The perception of Ireland and India as ‘zones of famine’ led many nineteenth-century observers to draw analogies between these two troublesome parts of the British empire. This article investigates this parallel through the career of James Caird (1816–92), and specifically his interventions in the latter stages of both the Great Irish Famine of 1845–50, and the Indian famines of 1876–9. Caird is best remembered as the joint author of the controversial dissenting minute in the Indian famine commission report of 1880; this article locates the roots of his stance in his previous engagements with Irish policy. Caird's interventions are used to track the trajectory of an evolving ‘Peelite’ position on famine relief, agricultural reconstruction, and land reform between the 1840s and 1880s. Despite some divergences, strong continuities exist between the two interventions – not least concern for the promotion of agricultural entrepreneurship, for actively assisting economic development in ‘backward’ economies, and an acknowledgement of state responsibility for preserving life as an end in itself. Above all in both cases it involved a critique of a laissez-faire dogmatism – whether manifest in the ‘Trevelyanism’ of 1846–50 or the Lytton–Temple system of 1876–9.