kevbot9000 reviewed On Kings by David Graeber
Review of 'On Kings' on 'Goodreads'
5 stars
Interesting but at times quite dense. One way to boil it down would be on the battle between rulers and subjects and either expanding or containing their power. (A related idea that caught my attention that isn't central to the book but gets mentioned towards the end is that 'sovereignty of the people' is an oxymoron. Sovereignty is something you do to the people) The other two ideas that come to mind are stranger kings and galactic kingdoms. Stranger kings being the origins of rulers always starting outside the polity, (whether descendents of gods or foreign rulers or whatever) and the ensuing saga to civilize them/tie them to the land. Galactic kingdoms are the spheres of influence that extend beyond the actual control of the king, (think Mongols-China or Gaul-Rome for a few familiar examples) but are shaped by the central polity. The point Graeber and Sahlins seem to be …
Interesting but at times quite dense. One way to boil it down would be on the battle between rulers and subjects and either expanding or containing their power. (A related idea that caught my attention that isn't central to the book but gets mentioned towards the end is that 'sovereignty of the people' is an oxymoron. Sovereignty is something you do to the people) The other two ideas that come to mind are stranger kings and galactic kingdoms. Stranger kings being the origins of rulers always starting outside the polity, (whether descendents of gods or foreign rulers or whatever) and the ensuing saga to civilize them/tie them to the land. Galactic kingdoms are the spheres of influence that extend beyond the actual control of the king, (think Mongols-China or Gaul-Rome for a few familiar examples) but are shaped by the central polity. The point Graeber and Sahlins seem to be pushing themselves is that the current idea that societies spring up and shape themselves is wrong, it's the interplay between polities that shapes them.
