This article is within the scope of WikiProject History, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the subject of History on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Anthropology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Anthropology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Sociology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of sociology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Philosophy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of content related to philosophy on Wikipedia. If you would like to support the project, please visit the project page, where you can get more details on how you can help, and where you can join the general discussion about philosophy content on Wikipedia.
This subject still might be missing things, such as the impact of the Magna Carta, the US Constitution, and even technology in affecting the history of citizenship. This beginning is mostly drawn from academic sources but there are still some good ones I didn't yet delve into much: papers by T. H. Marshall Marshall's famous papers: Citizenship and social class (1963), Social Policy (1965), The Right to Welfare and Other Essays (1981). Also: A. N. Sherwin-White's The Roman Citizenship. James T. Kettner The Development of American Citizenship. Roger Brubaker's Citizenship and Nationhood in France and Germany. Philip B. Manville's The Origins of Citizenship in Ancient Athens. Renee Waldinger et all -- The French Revolution and Meaning of Citizenship. Peter Riesenberg -- Citizenship in the Western Tradition: From Plato to Rousseau. History of citizenship, by Margaret Somers. Also I came across Macpherson's eight principles -- not sure what they are and how they relate to citizenship. Also I have material to add to the citizenship article but in the next few days.--Tomwsulcer (talk) 05:08, 7 February 2012 (UTC)
Another thing: in Middle Ages, the idea of tracing one's lineage back to kings or rulers or patricians, became more important, partly as a way to secure (or win) membership in the aristocracy. Genealogy became important in many instances. This practice began about AD 800 and continued throughout the Middle Ages, and it may have some impact on the whole idea (later) of birthright citizenship. Wonder if there is a reference for this.--Tomwsulcer (talk) 12:25, 2 June 2012 (UTC)
Other place like China and India, Arab, Inca, Mayan states had no citizenship? Meaning they though all people equal in their territories equal? People were free people not owned by governments? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Trinhhoa (talk • contribs) 04:51, 24 March 2012 (UTC)
Yes. This is what reliable sources say (academics, experts on citizenship). Citizenship is essentially a notion of western civilization; it has only recently (last hundred years or so) been adopted in eastern countries, notably Japan, and is beginning to gain ground in other eastern countries as an accepted relationship. If you can find a reliable source discussing ancient Mayan citizenship, or ancient Inca/Chinese/Indian citizenship, please show us; I didn't find any. And citizenship isn't just about "all people being equal" -- throughout most of civilized history, approximately 90% of people lived as serfs, agricultural workers, supporting the 10% of the ruling class -- these serfs were equal, but you could hardly describe them as citizens.--Tomwsulcer (talk) 10:55, 24 March 2012 (UTC)
I'm surprised that the concept of citizenship is not discussed as it relates to the form of government. Traditionally, in monarchies and dictatorships, very few (if any) other than the leader are considered citizens. The rest of the people are considered subjects - i.e. property of the crown or state. There are also strong differences regarding how citizenship or subjectship is obtained: By inheritance (jus sanguis - usually in republics), by place of birth (jus soli - usually in monarchies), and variations in naturalization (becoming a citizen during one's lifetime). In Rome, naturalization required a citizen sponsor, or for gladiators, could be won in the arena. In Switzerland, naturalization requires payment to the local government (one is a citizen of country, canton, and town). In the U.S., naturalization requires passing a history test in the native language (English) after having lived in country for 5+ years (and other requirements). 126.96.36.199 (talk) 08:31, 4 December 2014 (UTC)
Good points. These ideas can be added to the article, ideally with sources backing them up.--Tomwsulcer (talk) 12:47, 4 December 2014 (UTC)
The article is bullshit! The modern concept of citizenship is closely tied to republics and the French Revolution. In monarchies the analogous concept is subject. This article makes no comparison or distinction between the two; it does not even once use the word subject in this context. A central part of the history of citizenship is how subjects evolved into citizens. British subjects only started regarding themselves as "citizens" after WWII.
I have added a See also link to British subjects in the UK section, but the article needs a complete rewrite. -- Petri Krohn (talk) 03:29, 4 March 2016 (UTC)
When you start out with a blatant statement like The article is bullshit! finished by an exclamation mark, and this well-referenced highly read article has been in Wikipedia for years, it is hard for us Wikipedians to take seriously whatever else you might say. Reading further, it seems your argument is that citizenship only began in modern times, and that the chief transition is between subject => citizen. There is much evidence to the contrary, although it could be argued that this view is debatable (indeed, the article does point out that scholars disagree about whether citizenship is exclusively a modern phenomenon, or whether the concept originated with the ancients). If you'd like to add referenced verifiable material to bolster that view, please do; or if you'd like to add referenced verifiable material about the evolving concept of subject, please do.--Tomwsulcer (talk) 11:14, 4 March 2016 (UTC)