| Abstract: | The sociology of nation, national identity and nationalism has long been the subject of benign neglect. After examining the few positive contributions made by classical writers, we attempt to explain why the contribution of classical theory to the field is unreliable. In common with others we find that, for all that classical theory might treat the prominence of nation, national identity and nationalism as a passing phase, it in fact takes the existence of all three as givens to such an extent that they and their effects become invisible. But the sociology of nation and nationalism reached a turning point with the publication of Elie Kedourie's influential work in 1960. We explain the effect of this work on later writers, especially Ernest Gellner and Anthony Smith, and survey the work of these and other contributors to the field with an eye to their differences and similarities. We identify various stages in the development of the sociology of nation and nationalism, culminating in the most recent stage in which the significance of the subjective aspects of nationalism has received increased attention. We think there is room for a multiplicity of approaches to the subject and stress its central significance to sociology. We explain why nation, national identity and nationalism are certainly not in decline and suggest where the most fruitful lines of inquiry lie for future research. |
