.
/ ''
1
1 generation in the si:houls fur this adult role.
HISTORICAL OUTLINE
'-t - o<. l<-c-Jl.,r
.,.....
r ""
J_o""
..ro-<,,o-.t- a-. !Mo- ;"" \G. Id'<,(
.,Nvl, p,-\:'(_,(,b..,
I "" lrd M a
,;- o--f i"jo-Lt'-1 a-- ,,JJ
SUMMARY
This historical chapter does not tell the story of the theory and
practice of citizenship in strictly chronological order. We have
chosen, rather, to analyse the historical evidence under six main
headings, though there is a very rough chronological sequence to the
order of the .first four sectio s. itittsip.e in the classJefi
_ _
Graeco-Roman world>. The idea of 'c1V1c vtrtue';, of bemg _a 'good
.citizen, which was one of the features of the classical ideal, was
revived especially in Renaissan,:e Italy and eighteenth-century
America and France. The second strand is the liberal view 0f
titizenship which was particularly pow,erful in the nir.ctccnth century. )
The liberal tradition emphasizes the importance of legal and politicarf
right This was soon complemented by the notiol' of social
citizenship; which slresses the.. right of the citizen to enjoy a certain.-'
. I. First, reflectir,g its diverse expressions, he dcchrcd 'T!,c ,,:;:;;;,: ,,:
minimum 1evel of welfar,e.
However, citizenship is more than duties and rights. It also gives
an individual a political identity and a focus for loyalty. Since the
nineteenth cenrury, therefore, citizenship has become associated with
nationality. On the other hand, an individual need not be re to
being a citizen of just one state. In the ancient Roman Empire\it.;'.was
pos.sibl.,_.to. have..J-d. ual,citizenship,',t and :n federation ""U""fhe
tinited.-,Statei,,,,-,indMduaJ.......u:ult.meouslr..... citizens""-of....,.theil"'
particul1u... 11tatc--1!llwclla1rof"'thc,.federation as, .a whole,, Moreover,
since 'Classical Gr .oai r bc-a,,!.woi:ld"'1itize
10
has ofcen been .irgucd. Finally, beca11sc bcin:, t ruh ,:,,,,,i .11'., 1, .h'l1\t
citizen involves learning much about public lifr, thrnll[:IWllt hi111r\
numerous attempts have been made to prcp,11T th'. 11>l111Fn
THE CLASSICAL TRADITION
"'<- Mankind has experimented with many socio-political relationships:
chieftain and tribe, king and subjects, lord and vassals. Even the tinv
city states 0f Greece in the times described by i-lomcr had kins. Sn
too did Rome at about the same t'.me. As the monnrchics dec:1\'ed or
were overthrown so the idea developed that at least SP111c porlion of'
(vrvt'vU the inhabitants of these city-states should partieipa tc in the processes
of law aud government. '.flho:.e..-who,,.,,werc .. cli!!ihlc for u<'h
participati01' were clearly defined. 11..werc..,. the duties they w1rl"
requircd-toperform .and rthc,,right:.they' could.,,-expcct 10. ,njoy. '!'hr
concept and practice of citizenship naa-ben;,<>rn.:...../,..
Even so. there were wide variations in the wa\'s th.1t the sl:>ll'
evolved in these early times.JP-Greece Spa'ria1 bcc'.1111c a byword tiir
exacting a highly disciplined militaristic loyalty frn111 its citizrnry. 111
contrast, Athensexperimcnted with greifter,.frdom, cvolvi,1!'. a li>rn1
of dernocracy. The very wordemocracy l derives 1r1111 1 (; r!.'d
words mealiing 'government oy the people,'. Howncr, the people',
t:rnt ;s, the citizens, who shared in the formulation of policy ,111(1 the
making and administration of laws, were a,small fHoportion of the
total population: children, women, slaves and resident :tlic11., 11T1r 111>t
citizens.
Aristotle provides u:, wi:h three clues concerni1q: tht 11:11111'1' , > !
Greek citizcnship.
citizenship ... is a question which is often disputed: t:1erc is 1111
general agreement on a single definition' (Aristotle. I <J.rn. 17.71\i).
2. Secondly, citiz:-:ns are 'all who share in the civic life 111 nili11g :111ll
bei11g ruled in tur:1' (Aristotle, 1948, 1283b).
3. And thirdly, this rotating system presupposes :1 s1:1tc s111:dl c1H111gh
for the citizens to 'know one another's characters' (:\ristotk 1 1)18,
i 32Gb).
It is clear that the Greek style of citizenship prcs11pposl'd, hy tlld:1y's
stand:irds, a small, tightly-knit wmmunity.
 12 Foundatio>is of citizenship
Box 1.1
One of the m..:-st famous Athenians. Pericles. delivered a funeral
oration for some of those who fell in the Peloponnesian War
{in the fifth century sc). In this speech ne gave a. no doubt
idealized. picture of citizenship as practised in his city; and he
claims that no other city-state had deveioped the practice of
citizenship to such a sophisticated dl:lgree.
Here each individual is interested not only in his own affairs but in
the affairs of the state as well: even those who are mostly
occupied with their own business are extremely well-informed on
general politics - this is a peculiarity of ours: we do not say that a
man who takes no interest in politics is c1 mon who minds his own
business; we say that he has no business at all. We Athenians, in
our own persons, take our decisions on policy or submit them to
proper dis:::ussions: for we de not think that there is an
incompatability between words and deeds; the worst thing is to
rush into action before the consequences have been properly
debated. ...
And I declare that in my opinion each single one of our citizens.
in all the manifold aspects of life, is able to show himself the
rightful lord and owner of his own person, and to do this,
moreover, with exceptional grace and exceptional versatility.
(Thucydides. 1954, pp. 118-19)
About the time Aristotle was horn (384 BC) the Romans were
extending their sway over the territoiies and peoples of central Italy.
, The status of citizenship required adaptation to these new circum
stances of a rapidly expanding state. The Romans devised two new
facets to the basic idea. These new elements, which in many ways
were contradictions of the Greek concept, rendered citizenship much
more highly flexible. They were:
(a) the extension of the status :o lhe non-Roman peoples whom they
conquered;
(b) the division of tl1e status by introducing the second-class category
of dvitafsitit"fujfr,igitJ (citizenship without the franchise1 i.e. ,egal
but notpolltical riJ'hts}.
By the first century BC (that is, during the last decades of the
Republic}, many men in the severnl lands of the Mediterranean basin
<.,'-"(,,c:...--..G'/ '
r.,.,. L,,r.{;-vr;n''/ -
r . II . l 1,
Hi;toncal 011tli11e I]
enjoyed the status of Roman c.itizenship. Moreover, the iclc:1 1101r
came to be held that the citizen should behave in a m:1n11cr suited 10
his status - echoing in rather less stark and brutal 1111111cr the
Spartan practices. The politicians Cato and Cicr.ro .ind .he hisrori:rn
Livy were most famously insistent that tl1e citizen sho1dd c11lti\':11e the
quality of 'civic virtue'.
This term is a rough translation of the Latin word virt11. -
( It was-- :1 - )
word with many 0vertones. It meant manliness;"especia lly in the form -..,i
,.
of a readiness to petfor'm." mllifary service and to fight with valour. It
meantpatriotism; and it meant an unswerving-devor:ion to duty :ind
the law'.
This Roman vision or ideal of 'virtue', oft ct, c.'lkd 'civic
republicanism', exerted a powerful influence in Italy ;it thc ti m c of th c \
Re!laissance. It remained a significant thread in the hisiory o()
dtizenship to the nineteenth century. It was a model, an image of 1he-l
perfect lifeto be lived by a man in his c:ipacity as n citizen. Pcrh:1ps
tile more one was conscious of the imperfections of men and states,
the more one felt the urge to present the unattainable ideal as a
measure of the need to strive to narrow the gap. Thus it was that the
Florentine st:ltesman and political theorist Machiavcili came 10 ll'rirc
his prnise of ancient Roman qualities, Discourses 011 the First '/"11 1/ord.i
of Titus Livius.
Machiavelli glumly surveyed the parlous condition of the 11:di:111
political scene of his time. Few of tile numer0us states of' the
peninsula displayed the qualities of a republica and kw men 1h1:
qualities of virtt). It must be remembered that rhc modern
constitutional distinction between monarchy and republic did not
obtain in the siJ..'teenth century. By 'republic' Machiavelli- 111:1111 a
f0tm of govm'llent in which there is some share.of power to prevent.
autocratic and arbitrary rule'. He w:es the Italian word vir1,i :is h:iving
similar meanings to the Latin virtus.
Machiavelli recorded that in his own age there were
fewer republics th:m there used to be of old, and that, conscc1'1C11ily, in
peoples we do not find the same love of liberty as there was.
(Machiavelli, 1970, II, ii) - ( It"'
1
'- ' ' . . ' .
f\ ( n ('. t.< ,i ,.1,v
I/
For him, the.efore,(a love offreedomJ especially (ro111 i'orcig11
opr-:ssion, was a vaTuable.. component of civic Yirtt I c, f ." urthr.nnorr,
people becc>me apathetic if prev'!nted from performing thc;ir cirizrnly
' ( uLtv'f' tt C,\ ;< ' c o lc(' f,'f ul ('-<.,v- ')'-' V\
1 VI/'
T'>-\.ev( f'<. vJ ('.,
>I" ,\'( ' V
1--l.,, ... ,,. v-/u (...,,, ,cr- 1 "' r y \.vl,(t 1( ( 1it"" t,Y t \.,,,(
I l .. , , I,,
 14 Foundations of citizenship
role. For he believed that men had to be kept constantly up to scratch
in the performance of their civic obligations. Men must be made into
citizens and kept true to that statJS and function by means of
education, religion and a healthy fear of the consequences of any
dereliction of citizenly duty.
A second quickening of interest in the politics of the classical
world occurred in the eighteenth century. Many of the thinkers of the
Enlightenment lookec! back, just as Mar.hiavelli had, to an idealized
Roman Republic as their exemplar. Most notable of these was the
Fffiich lawycf'iMoritesquieu:'i In The Spirit of tlze Laws he argued that
1
'f.a,statecbased-upon,,popular=partioiJ)ation1 as distinot from other-forms
@f-guvemment1.. depends Mfor its !;t:tb"ltlty on thecivic virtue ofits
cit1!et'IS".''
Sparta was also popular in the eighteenth century as an
exemplification of civic virtue. Of ail the political thinkers of the age
J ;J
1 ean- acques .,.Rousseau, was the most infiuential. By praising th1i
"-f,Spartanst..selfleiwconcem'for"their-city"'StntC", he was able to highlight
what he considered to be the selfish social behaviour of his own age
(see Box 1.2). size of tb.e Greek city-$tate also appealed to him.
Like 1\ristotle he--elieved . .that..-.true-citizenship deptnded on the
intimacy-of--41.. small-scale political--communit.y
While Rousseau idealized Sparta, a regime of rigi<l discipline,
what of freedom! For freedom is surely a condition which helps to
distinguish the citizen from the slave, the vassal or the subject? The
problem of freedom worried Rousseiu a great deal.
Box 1.2
One of Rousseau's books. entitled Emile, is a treatise on
education. In this book he ,elates an anecdote which illustrates
his understanding of the classicF:JI id9al of civic virtue:
A Spartan mother had five sons with the army. A Helot arrived;
trembling she asked his news. 'Your five sons are slain.' 'Vile
slave, was that what I asked thee?' 'We have won the victory.'
She hastened to the temple to render thanks to the gods. That
was a citizen. (Rousseau, 1911, p. 8)
The sons sacrificed' themselves for the state; the mother put hor
feelings for the state above those for her sons.
I industrialized nation-state. Hegel In Gem\any nncl T. I I. Grcei1 in
4 "t"' {<- J. 12.vl.A<,\"\..C v' 'c,
0
1&...."" "'f
C,:,'-- c. <..vV' f""
'' 5<--l-(kV,. tc._ ,_,'t,r
Historical outline 1
S'u:. .... '< .-
He aelieved most passioP..ately that true freedom involves pr0rlc
unst:i11:,i1ly goveming-themselves:-ln"other-words, freedom re qui "\:S
both civio-virtueand,arrici
pation;,,ln another imp(lrl:111t hook, ;;,,.
Social Co11tract, he wrote:
Those-who are.asso1.:iateJ.in,.(the-,body politic)takc collectively t!te
name of.a people, and c.;.11 themselves t.iJ,:Zensrinso for as t!tey share in -
, the sovereign power. (Rousseau, 1968, I, vii)
ousseau had a mental picture of all citizens contributinf; wi1hou1
L_thought of personal advantage to volitical decisions. I [c c.d led th is
ilie-Gent:ral Will. if aii citizens behave in this honest w.1y, :ill wolild
benefit oyerall and would no! experience the oppression suffered
under governments where there was no true citizenship.
Twenty years afrer the death of Montesquieu the /\mcric111 War
of Independence started; and we may date the start of the rrcnch
Revolution ten years after the death of Rousseau. Montesquieu's
ideas had particular influenr.e in America, Rousseau's in rrance.
In both revolutions (for the American events are often considcr-cd
rn be a revolution) the political reformers were particularly worried hy
the problem of corru ption. By co1rupti0n they nH.:n111 the p11ruit rii'
im:ury at the expenst of ciYic duty. In Americ.1, Alexander l lam:lton
warned that a policy -of commercial expansion wo11ld breed :rn-1
attiturie of selfishness. In France Maximilien Robesricrre, lrnrl\\"n ;is
'The lncorr1ptible', wa-willinfduring the.period of" the Tcrrnr to
shed blbbd to ensure the triumph ofvirtue:-ln a speech a Inv 111(111ths
before he was himself guillotined, he spoke of
virtue without which terror is disastrous, and terror wiho111 which
virtue is powerless.
France had to be cleansed of the enemies of the new republic in
order that civic virtue Ghould prevail.
The men of the Renaissance, the Enlightcnmrnt :ind the
American and French Revolutions who were interested in citizenship
:ooked at the problem through the eyes of classical antiquity. The
writers of the nineteenth century who thought in the civic republican
tradition focused their attention more realistically on ti1c modern
0,'...,.,'-- 0;..--ti..-..,_
II
(n;,\-<.
 16 Foundations of citizenship
rEngland 'are the r.1ost important of these writers. They emphasized
e-need to make-citizens aware "Of what their role is -in the modem
state.
By the nineteenth century, however, the classical tradition o[
citizenship was giving way to new, liberal ideas. Where civic
reffflblicarussed-a,stem adherencet<rthe r.itizen's dutie the
libeialsfyle"' stressedthe,.citizen's"entitlement to' justice and rights:
\.___.,;' ,t<.<r.,., - 4-7""c: rf-v .,,t;,ccfP""""'"' c-r e-+iG i;v,
0
c;dh<r<.""'- - t(.._ o-ul f- cloi .,Jl.-c,-t ;S &-<..<t'v-,.,cJ
THE LIE3ERAL TRADITION
To understand the ongtns of this alternative em hasis we must
retrace our steps in time to the eVenfeeimfcerit'Ci '. . ,;;his. as-sthe-.ago
when-&lglishmen...(includingr.the"'Americanieolonim)"'tlll1ffl'ed-rights
which-.. thcy=declarcd-..,could""-nOt'''ltirr1ately"'bemerridden---by"Ythe
monarch ..,,.,.or.,....thec, royal -Govent? The idea grew up that
0
Government and people should act as if there was a kind of legal
contract between them: the people would be obedient to the
Government, but, in its turn, the Government is never justified in
depriving the peo;:ile of certain basic rights.
Although the word 'citizen' was rarely used at the time of the
English Civil War, it was this conflict and its aftermath which brought
the matter of rights to the surface. a:'he demands we<fe twofold, legatl
.and politica equah1ccess to a ;l
taw- a.ad a wider franch These
have been the tw<fr cardit1al features of the liberal version o'
citizenship.
In the 1670s the legal (or civiliugnts of English people were
improved - by confirming the independence of juries and the passing
of the law of hi'ibeas corpus. On the issueAf;-"!'j':!W rights opinion was
split. Some persisted with the view that should be restricted
to those who owned property; others argued for virtually fu!J
democratic rights for men. The most famous expression of this
second attitude was a speech by Colonel Rainborough in 1647. He
declared,
I do think that the poorest man in England is not at all bound in a
strict sense to that gevemment that !le has not had a voice to put
himself unaer.
The struggle to establish effective civil and political citizenship has
_.,...Q.,, c, ... " "'J':1 .. .J r,...,c !:,<..t,.-- ' G v--J...,t, a-,-,
V'-0'1<-o\ C.0'17( - o.
t t"\>
<:.o + 'GI ov, \ :f tt:-.-, f""'"'-" v' ',Lv,...,J...!
?'- , jovl
Ht.,HHi(t ;i tJ:,:.:r;[
c1Jntinucd since the seventeenth centlll)' and has n1c11,k,I bn,,1i.l
England and her North A1-:1erican colonies to the res\ o( t 1 1c world.
The French Revolutiongave the idea and practice a p:Htirnl:ir honst.
In its most radical phaistocratic titles wereabolishcd: all wen.:
adctn.s'.ied by the equal title of-'Citiztn' or 'Citizenes<i'. I !owner, th(:
Revolution went deepec than mere symbol:sfhe Declaration of
the Rights of Man and the Citizen f)rovided an,impressil'c list of civil
and political rights; w!1ile thCnstitution of.. 1791' to whic h ir :1cll:d
_
as preface, gave the nght ofvot.ngtoareasonable proportion of rhe
male populatios.
Throughout the nineteenth century there was consr:1nt pressure in
all states for the liberalization of civil and political systcrns. In Britain,
four Reform Acts from 183Z to 1918 successively extended the
franchise. The arguments centring on the liberal rnncept of
citizenshi were clerly expou?ded by e Bri?sh hiloso pher, Johri
. J""
Stuart Mill. He beheved passionately m freeaom- m all its aspects. )i
Though to his mind, the-.freedom toparticipatein politicnl affoirs is-I,
crucial. He argued tharn.oral marurity:, is impossible unless the
indiviciual involves him- or herself in some form.of eollcnivc activity
with or on behalf u[ fdiow citizeng. Furthermore, citizeniy ,,g-iiancc----..,
)
in public affairs is an essential safeard against the abuse o( their f
autliority by 'faceless' bureaucrats-. _,, {, c . . , , t- , ,, .. ( .' ' 1
r'.veri so, Mill was uncertain whether, 0n the matter( (Ji' \'l)ti111
rights, some citizens should not be more equal than others. I le w.1s
very keen, for example, that w0men should have the s;une rilthts :1s
men. In his essay Considerations 011 Representativl' G111tr11111mt he
wrote:
All human beings have the same interest in good govcrnmcn1. ... If
there be any difference, women require it more than men, since, being
physically weaker, they are more clependent on law a1,d s1Jcic1y fnr
protcctiGn. (Mill, 1910, p. 290) .JlV.<' st,,,,,") ,:\(
On the other hand, he was fearful of allowing ignor:rnr !1eoplc of )
either sex to widd any political influence: givingostmcducatcd peopl\
the franchise, he argued;would not lead to''Wisejovcrnmcnt:
'i'he pressure to extend the franchise has, of course, hcrn
inexorable in most states in tl1e twentieth century. l{csrrictinns by
reasons of wealth, sex and age have all collapsed before the IOf;ic of
the democratic case and popular pressure. The achicvrn1c11t of" legal
 18 Foundations of citizenship
(
I .
Box 1.3
A famous example of a nineteenth-century attempt to extend
political citizenship was the People's Charter and the Chartist
Movement in Britain from 1837 to 1848. The Charter contained
six points:
1. A VOTE for every man twenty one years of age, of sound
mind, and not undergoing punishmer>t for crime.
2. THE BALLOT - to protect the elector in the exercise of his
vote.
3. NO PROPERTY OUAL/FICA T/ON for Members of Parliament -
thus ensbling the constituencie!J to return the man of their first
choicE:: be he rich or poor.
4. PAYMENT OF MEMBERS, ihus enabling an honest tradesman,
working man, or other person, to serve a constituency, when
taken f.om his business to attend to the interests of the
country.
5. EQUAL CONSTITUENCIES, securing the same amount of
repreentation for the same number of electors - instead of
allowing small constituencies to swc:mp the votes of the larger
ones.
6. ANNUAL PARLIAMENTS, thus presenting the most effectual
check to bribery and intimidation, since ... no purse could buy
a constituency . . . in each ensuing twelvemonth, and since
members, when elected for a year only, would not be able tc
defy end betray their constituents as now.
universal suffrage has not, however, brought the debate over political
Hi1ton'cal ()tttline I<)
r,olitical power. The,oest citizs.____the passivl!and apathetic citizen.
Only a wist and dedicated eli.e,sh3'uJd be,,allowcd any rc:il political
influence. Yet, in contrast, the--vidence -.that. most citizens :ire
polirir.ally"impotent .in . .my-casehas led to -ae:trth for :iltcrnntive
means"ofexercisingpower"- foempowefnieilt', 10 use the jargon
word. Various forms of local community involvement nnti clcm:111ds
for the devolution of power from central govcrn111c11t have been
popular, especially since the I %Os.
If the bulk of peop!e are to be encouraged and given the
oppo1tunity to be civically cor:scious and active, it is o(tcn .1rgucd th:,1
their interests will lie not so much in the fields of high politics :1s in
their own working conditions and welfare. Citizenship is not onlv
embodied in civil at1d political rights; it also has a social form.
SOCIAL CITIZENSHIP
.r-
The,,relat. ion:;hip betweeu-the,idal ofcitizenship nnd tlie creation,
acquisition and ownership ofwealt:ho has generated much debate over
the centuries. Is the possession of a certain level of wealth essential
for the proper discharge of one's functions as a citizen'
Aristotle was convinced that this was the case:
r fl,,., < !-o l-c
The citizms of our state must have a s11pply of properly I in mcln lri
have leisure for goodness and political activities]; and i1 is 1hcsc
rersori who are citizens - they, and they only. (Aristo1lc, I 'HX, 1.12'J:i)
,.p.. ,l,.,_.l ._.,<c..l([, ! c,6 ,c-rl-' ' v-s.(c,(i'". ,( ,,

I
O,.
citizenship to an end. - '-1/r.'
- r
Both scholarly investigation and practical experience have led to The arment 1 -pronged. oe 1s .L,at t1 1e possession
the VJew <D o r
.
the raising of two prticidarlMwkwarc! questions.' One derived from wealth gives an md1V1dual asraJcein the l'ommun:ty; the poor h:ive 110
. inceve to.take an interest in public affairs:-The other is 1hr; hclicf
the success Wlth wh.ieh'llnsc11lpulous.,demagogues,have been able tO'
tntmipulatec"'averedulo, ci The other is raised by the that ffiirricjpatlon in,,civio---lifelrequires time-tostudy the issues and
realization that, in-diem-11tate.of ,<lisciplined"political ,parties attend meetings Those whoe eonomic condition forces them t<J
amhpervasivc,,,bur.eaucraoy.,.. ,citizens,"'for, aU"'*ir -,legal..,rights, ,.are labour for most of their waking hours do not have th leisure to bl'
virtually,intp0tcnt'as''87f'"litia!lf6'rcet What pntliitizenship when so citizens in any proper sense.
many citizens in Germany in the 1930s shouted for Hit!er? What -contrary caei has als0a:9een expressed 1y two main
.
price cituenship when the election results in most constituencies in arguments. The first 1s that,the'very process of,-acqu1nng- wealth 1s a c..,
"'
Great Britain are usually predictable? selfish activity and inevitably diverts the individual's mi'ld (rrnn that
These two sets- of observatioi{s have leduite opposite altruistiO\ community spirit which is t!1e hallmark of true citizenship. ;\. '<,,.., 3
"
conclusions. Fear of rabble-rousing dictatorsi ha'l"led -,to the> The second argument is that thfl.,denial of thec. str.tus of ci1i,.c11ship 10 -- -/\..
,suggestion....that..or.dinary itizens,,,should not..,be-,allowed toc, much'0 those lacking the qualifying wealth. is itself a deni:d o( that very,,
<'\
l,otc.vvvpl,\ - v"<>i: (,._,.<-'-I(" .,-v-- f,--'r ,r cJ,,k - (/\'.,IC.,..,(. ,' -- cs n=.--,.,.. J-.
- \. ' \ v----c,1-,,<
i ' ""' cW;t'
u '1 /<. ."/il, y'/,
(
.,.,L. t-,.-,' vS {,t (v-pp.,..r\ ';J Ya.kcl, .,.-, 11::> ..,_ . ,.-, v t" c ... L--tv<- - t"' l'""
J... """"'""r-tt-(_ - t,,' <-cJ I "-c,-J.s,/
0

l,'J' { o,.,(< l.. cJ.c,.,',r-, f""'""""'-< ,,...,- (,,n.,,',,,....Q

ev-(.,W-o(,..,(, - e.,,o,<.,;(,1 f,-rrt......J JY" ,.l.-c9 '"'ct'lh, - (,-. (< \ ,. 'f1\C., , r;
" (
.. I , , .-\ I , . [, ' . ( , .... , , , (J , h,. - ,, l-1-
 20 Foundations of citizenship
princlpl' of eqtlality which hould lie aLtb heatn,f th citizenship"
,ideat. The whoie point of citizenshlpis thapro.vides.-a,preferable
alternative ....to ,. the social "''anci ''politicahdivisions wh;ch-,are th
ehancteristicn,f monarch1cal;feudal and despotic regimes.
The possibility of advancing two quite contradictory sets of
arguments concerning the relatiorn,hip.oujtizenship and wealth is
reflected in the work of Karl Marx on .threlati betweew
citizenship and capitalism. On the one hand, capitalism destroyed the
social divisions,of.-feudalismj ,on-t.hec,ther, it ,ereated the oppression
of,the..-e.working .class--,.by ,the, bourgeoisii, In its first function,
capitalism createdthe0conditions in ,the modem state ,for citizenshlr'
to cdevelop; in its second, tl allowed, the -supposed equality cf thei
citizenly-status to mask the true social and reconomic divisions, which
kept the bulk of so-called citizens in proletarian subjection. The
/destruction of feudalism, Marx asserted, led,to modem man's
schizophrenic condition: part libenlted, selfish individual, part morah
citizent . - , .
. . /, ., ..
Commurusts have seen c111znsh'1p as a temporaryphenomenon to
be replaced by true comradeship once the state has withered away.
-Social democrats; in contrast, have' wished to strengthen citizenship
c..... y affording everyone equal civic rights and opportunities through the
provision of social welfare,
It is inportant to distinguish between the motives which have
sometimes led governments to make state welfare provision. These
include fear of discontel"t, electoral bribe and philanthropic charity.
These considerations may produce the desired reforms, but are
utterly unrelated to citizenship. The social dimension to citizenship
involves the acceptance that the state ewes certain services to the
citi:1:en as a right in return for the loyalty and services rendered by-the
citizen. It is part of the reciprocal rel&tionship between the individual
and the state which is central to the concept of citizenship.
Furthermore, the levelling-up process of social welfare support is
necessary in order to realize the egaliw.rianism and dignity invoh-ed in
the citizenship ideal. Finally state-provided education is essential
since an ignorant citizen is tantamount to a contradiction in terms.
As we shall see in the next chapter, the English sociologist T. H.
Marsha11, in a book published in 1950, put forward the idei: that
citizenship may be divideci into three elements - civil, political and
social. Moreover, he believed tha the rights associated with these
three facets developed in that order. He wrote:
Historical outhne 21
the modem drive towards social equ:.lity is, I believe, the l:ittst phase
of an evolution of citizer.ship which ha been in continuous pr:>ress
for some 250 years. (Marshall, p. 7)
The concept of social citizenship appeared explicitly in France
earlier than in Britain. The Jacobin version of the Dccla ration of t l i e
Rights of Man and the Citizen, drawn up in 179.1, was particularly
forthright:
Publi.:: assistance is a sa-::red duty. Society owes its unfortunate
dtizens sc1bsistence, either by providing them with work, or hy
ensuring the means of existence for those who havC' no ll'Oi'k.
(1 hompson, 1948, Article 21)
In Britain, early welfare-state legislation, in both its pre-First
World War and post-Second Worl<l War phases, owed a i;reat debt
to the teachings on citizenship of the philosopher T. I J. Green and
his followers. William Beveridge, architect of the rcfnrrns of the late
19 40s, had been influenced by this school of thought in his earlier
years in Oxford.
In the 1980s, as we shall see in the next chapter, the idc:1 of sor:i:d
r---
Box 1.4
----------- . - ,
Marshc1ll believed that t'1e principle of social c1ti7f'nship rcnll y
'took off' in England in the late nineteenth cent111y I
A new period opened at the end of the nincwcnth century,
convenientlv marked by Booth's survey of Life and L.al)our of 1/10
Poor in London and the Royal Commission on the Agre/ Poor. It
was the first big advance in social rights, and this involver!
significant changes in tlie egalitartan principles ex1JrossNI in
citizenship. But therr, were other forces at work as well
[narrowing wealth gaps}. . . . All this profoundly alterr.d the scrrin()
in which tha progress of citizen:,hip took place. Social inregriJtion
spread from the sphere of sentiment and patriotism into thar of
material enjoyment.... The diminution of inequa,'ity stu:nr;t//nn,:,I
the demand for its abolition, at least with regard to the essentials
of social welfare.
These aspirations have in part been met bv incorroratinu social
ri9ht. in rhe status of :::itizenship and thus r.reatinr1 a universal
right to real incomR which is not proportionate to /lie marker
value of the c:!aimant. (Marshall and Bottomore, 1992, p. 28)
II I,,,,,, 4/1 ,,.1,,,.. ,,,f ,,,,/,,.,, r.1
v" Ila, "' :01, :11111J.:11,:1,1 ,1w:<l f1y th: t;,t: t.r1 tht <.:JlJLtn <.amt ur,dtr
attack. This was particularly so among the New Kight thinkers and
politicians in the United States and Britain. For them citizenship
meant not so much rights as patriotism.
NATIONAL IDENTITY
The civil, political and social rights and duties associaceJ with
citizenship have varied considerably over the centuries. They have
also been and still are often subject to varying interpretations.
However, whether a person is legally a citizen of a give:1 state and
feels a sense of loyalty to that state is usually much more dear
cut.
Both the legal status (see Chapter 3) and the feeling of belonging
have become associated with the nation-state. Whatever the form of
the state, the matter of the individual's political identity in this C:ual
sense has always been a feature of citizenship. The Romans
established explicit laws about who had the status of citizen; and it
came to be a title worn with pride. Cicero's famous declaration 'Civis
Romanus sum' was both a st?.tement of legal fact and an expression of
self-respect.
In the age of the na6on-state, especially since the eighteenth
century, constitutions and laws have been drafted to define exactly
who qualified for the status of citizen. The state also adopted symbols
such as flags and national anthems so that its citizens could the more
eas:ly identif; with the state and focus their loyalty on it. For
example, the emphasis on citizenship in the French Revolution was
reinforced by the use of the tricolore and the 'Marseillaise'.
Two cl}fferent criteria have been used by states for conferring the
legal status of citizenship. One is jus sanguinis, that is, dest.:ent from
an individual of that nationality. The other is jus soli, that is, the fact
of birth within the state's territory. A survey conducted in 1935
revealed that jus sarzguinis was the more common. Some st?.tes have
developed laws which are a combination of the two.
The cration of European overseas empires complicated the
matter of citizenship. The imperial powers treated their colonial
peoples in ditfernt ways. Let us take three brief examples. The
Portuguese pursued a policy of few admissions to the status and even
then of denying any real rights. The French tried to juggle with the
Box 1.5
The French Constitution of 1791 listed in qreGt ci,'t:ili ,:v1'l\'l'l1t'
considered to have the sta,us of French citizen.
II. Those who were f)orn in France of a French f.11/Jer.
These who, born in France of a foreign father, have /1>:crl 1/Ju11
residence in the kingdom;
Those who, born in a fo:-eign country of a French fnrlwr, /1avC'
returned to establish themselves in Fra.,ce and havo laken
the civic oath;
Fina/Iv those who, born in a foreign country, and a dccenr/Jn:
to some degree from a Frenchman or Frenchwoman who flee/
the country for religious reasons, come to live in France nncf
take the civic; oath.
Ill. Those who, born outside the kingdom of forei9n parenrs,
reside in France, become French citizens E'fter fivC' yenrs of
domicile . . . and take the civic oath.
IV. The legislative power can, for .'mportant cnnsiderarions.
confer naturalisation on a foreigner. . . .
V. The civic oath is: I sweor to be faithful to the notion. to the
law and to the ing, arid to maintJin with all my povvcr the
constitution of the kingdom decreed by thE: Nc1tio:1.1I Con
stituent Assembly.... (Thompson, 1948)
rrinciple that all inhabitants of French territories were (it;zc11s ll'hik
admitting only 2 limited r.umher of Africans and We,t lndi:111s to
rights comparable with those enjoyed in rrance itsl'lf'. The llritish
have never developed an explicit definition of citi:.cqship li l l'
themselves. It is not surprising, therefore, that they never :1ttc11tptcd
to devise a coherent policy for their colonial peoples.
1-Iuwever, whatever the policies of the imperial powns h:td bcrn,
the process of decolonization raised two difficult gencr:d prnhlc111s.
One was the need of thr. newly independent states to create their own
rules and sense of citizenship. Te other was the question of' dclining
the rights of the inhabitants of the former colonies ,is-ri-ris their
former mother country.
If citizenship is defined and thought of in terrr.s of 1L1 tion:di I\, the
concept taks on cultural ovrtones - because nationality is a cult11r:il
concept. However, most of the successor states to the luropcan
empires were, and still are, cultura!ly very mixed. They i11hnitcd :ind,
in large measure, retained the borders drawn by the imperial powers
in utter disregard of the ethnic composition of the la nrls they seil.cd.
IA /',,,,,,,fl1U1,r,: ,tf 1ill7/r1:Jdp
It ha been extra1Jrdinarily difficult tri build a feeling of national
identity and common citizenship in states where linguistic, 'tribal' and
religious divisions tug powerfully towards a sense of separateness.
Bitter civil conflict has even ensued in, for example, Nigeria and Sri
Lanka.
The second problem, that of defining the rights of former colonial
people to citizenship of the former imperial state, has been
complicated by the magnetic effects of employment opportunities and
consequent immigration and settlement, hence the people of African,
West Indian and Asian origin in Britain, France and the Netherlands
particularly. In Britain, various Nationality and Immigration Acts
from 1948 to 1981 attempted to tackle the issue. The 1981 Act; by
creating separate categories of 'citizens' and in effect 'sub-citizens',
emerged, in the view of one authority, with 'many of its provisions '. ..
so obscurely drafted that they are unfit to be in the statute book' (A.
Lester, quoted in Commission on Citizenship, 1990, p. 76).
The idea of combining citizenship witll nation:11ity was an obvious
device in the era of nation-states and nationalism. On the other hand,
it has in .fact led to new and often intractab!e complications (sec
Chapter 10). A possible way out of these difficulties is to place a
much greater emphasis on the concept and practice of mdtipl
citizenship.
MULTIPLE CITIZENSHIP
As early as the times of the Greek and Roman city-states it was
possible for a man to be simultaneously a citizen of his origin.. ) home
city and of another. By the time of Augustus, the principle of dual
citizenship - of Rome :nd of another city - was firmly established in
Roman law. A famous example of this system at work concerns Paul,
one of the founders of Christianity. Although a citizen of Tarsus, in
Asia Minor, when he was arrested he was able to claim certain
privileges by virtue cf being, also, a citizen of Rome.
In the modem world, federally-structured states need to make
provision for their inhabitants to hold both state and federal
citizenships. The founding fathers of the United States wrestled with
this problem bcfdtc arriving at the succinct formul;,. in Article IV.:l of
the Constitution: 'The citizens of each State shall be entitled to all
privileges and immunities of citizens in the several States.' This did
.:::i-...:i.' , ...:::-:.
.rJt, rirr,1e--.er ? cr1;, ?.th Ue Ue'Stior-. )f?.Ch \e\:::. : : .;-.- -
priority when tl:e hrn o: and loyalty to Jie state clashed .,ith ti1rJ,c.: riJ
the overarching federation. The matter was co111plic1tcd i11 the
L'nitcd States by the ambiguous position of slaves. It took a ci1il 11;11'
to resolve these queries. The subsequent Fourteenth 1\111rndmrnt to
the Constitution wa quite plain:
All person. born or naturalized in the United States, and s,ii,jcct to the
jurisdiction thereof, arc citizens of the States wherein they reside. Nn
State shall make or enforce any law which shall abrid !'. c the pri1ikgl.'s
or immuPitics of citizens of the United States.
If we tum now to contemporary history, we have the uniciuc
example of an evolving European Community. In solllc senses
citizens of the Member States have been acquiring the char:1cteristics
of 'European' or 'Community' citi2.ens also. Rights, duties a11d a
sense of identity have been growing at the Community level, nlbf'it 111
a piecemeal wr.y. Community passpo1ts have been lllaclc avail:1hlc;
direct elections to the European Parliament have taken place since
l 97Q: " European flag ha:, been adopted; a Social Ch:1rte r hns been
accepted by all Member State except Britain. MorcO\cr, thcr:: l :1s 1
been considerable concern in both the Commission :111d the
Parliament to transform a 'Technocrats' Europe' into ;1 'l'coplc \
Europe' - or, in the more telling French term, 'E11rnpc des C:itoycm'.
At the same time, much store has been put 0:1 the rri11ciplc ,ii'
subsidiarity. This is the rule-of-thumb tl1at decision; should he
reached at the lowest possible lvcl in the prol'i11ce-11:11io11-
state-Community pyrami<l. This may be taken ns :1 g11iclcli11c
co11cerning the pri0rity which individuals should fivc to tlH dilfn,111
levels at which they behave and act as citizens in a multiple sc11sc.
The desire further to enhance the status of citi;,.rnship 01 <he
European Community was greatly emphasized in the I J')2 Trc;lly 1111
Maastricht (see Chapter 7).
It i :ot, therefore, difficult to discover historic:s I o:a 111pie l'f.
individuals being able, even required. in law te hold nt least d11a:
citizenship. There is, in addition, another, greater, thrJugh lt:ss
tangible, sense in which the term 'multiple citizenshir' 111:1y be llSl'd.
This is the notion that there i5 or can be a world citi;,,cnship which
can be held and honoured alongside a state citizenship.
The Greek word p:1/is is usually translatcJ :is 'citV-\t:11c'.
 26 Foundations of citizenship
Cosmopolis is therefore the 'city of the world' or the universe
conceived as a city. The idea that there is a cosmopolis, governed by
natural law, as distinct from manifold poleis, governed by man-made
laws, emerged in Greece in toe fifth century BC. Its most
distinguished theoretical exponents were the Greek and Rom ::1
philosophers known as Stoics: Zeno, Chrysippus, Seneca and Marcus
Aurelius.
The idea of world citizenship was attractiye two thousand years
later to the thinkers of the Enlightenment. The French wnter
Voltaire took the philosopher-Emperor Marcus Aurelius as his
model. The English radical Thomas Paine declared, 'My country is
the world'. The German playwright Schiller asserted, 'I write as a
citizen of the world'.
In riaction to the perverted nationalist and racialist ideologies
which psychologically triggered and intensified the two world wars of
our own century, the ideas of world citizenship blossomed once
again. Only to fade before the acwsations of impracticability levelled
by the cynic or realist (depending on your point of view). Even :,o, in
more recent years, the ideal has been revived in the belief that
ecological disasters will overwhelm our planet unless a sense of giooal
loyalty and responsibility, that is, world citizenship, is strongly
cultivated.
Throughout the intermittent history of the idea of world
citizenship two major problems have inhibited its widespread
acceptance. First, there has never been a world state; nor would its
creation necessarily be desirabk. However, citizenship is, fundamen
tally, a relationship of an individual with a state. It obviously follows
that world citizenship has never existed in any legal or political sense
- only in belief or as behaviour. The second difficulty is whether
world citizenship, even in its weak sense of a commitment to
universal values and concerns, can be held in association with state
citizenship. For it is evident that many self-proclaimed 'world
citizens' have wished to deny their allegiance to . the state in favour of
their adherence to what they bdieve to be a higher responsibility.
Yet, many others have not; and have sought the realiw.tion of a
multiple citizenship, rendering unto the !:tate that loyalty which is
properly the state's and rendering unto the world that loyalty which is
properly the world's. Socrates, perhaps the most famous of all
philosophers, is said to have declared, 'I l\ffi not an Athenian or a
Corinthian, but a citizen of the universe'. Yet when condemned to
Historical outline 27
death, he chose to drink the cup of hemlock in obedience tn the !;ms
of Athens, of which he acknowledged that he was i11 lq.:;d (1ct
citizen.
EDUCATION FOR CITIZENSHIP
Except in terms otlegal nationality, one is not born a citizen. Citicnship
involves enjoying rights, performing duties and bch:1\'i11g with due
loyalty and responsibility. All these aspects of citizenship must be
learned and cultivated. No one, therefore, can be a citizrn in 1hr proper
and full meaning of the term without being educated for the role.
In the ancient world, young men were taught the pri111v civic skill
of rhetoric: the practice of Jaw and politics required the oral capacity
to present a case logically and persuasively. It is no accident 1:1:1t the
most influential Roman educational theorist was Q_ui11tilia11, whose
widely-used book was Education of an Orator.
We have seen, however, that the classical view ,,, ci1izrnship
emphasized civic virtue. Educational theorists from .1111.:ic11t Grc.:cc
------------------------ ---
Box 1.6
It is interesting to compare the tallowing two excerpts. r1i,,y I oth
oxpress the belief that basic. state citizenship 11ce;rl; Ir) I 11)
complemqnted by a higher iorm of r.itizenship.
Every man's interest consists in following the /c;,11/ nf /)I; nv111
constitution and nature. Now my nature is a ra1io11al ,)!Jc/ civic
uaiu, 2; my city and my cou0try, so far as I am [Mnrc11s . \11re/)I rs/
1
Antoninus, is Rome; tut so far as I am a man, it is Ilic 1111M'r .<;<:.
Whatever therefore is tc! :he advantage of these two c1t1r?.:., anri
that only, is good for me.
The Union shall set itself the following objf:ctivcs to
strengthen the protection of the rights and .'ntercsts of rtw
nationals uf its Member States through the introdur:tion of a
ci,'izenship of the Union.
The first extract is taken from the Meditations of the norn;in
philo..,opher-emperor Marr.:us Aurelius. dating from the lute
second century (reprinted in Barrer, 1956, p. 3.:0). The t;oc?nrl i:;
from the Treaty of Maastricht for consolidating the Curopcnn
Community, 1992 (Title I, Arti'.::le B).
28 Fuundations of citizenship
onwards often advocated developing in the young a responsible
public spirit. The Greek philosopher, Plato, wrote 'what we have in
mind is education from childhood in virtue, a training which produces
a keen desire to become a p<;rfect citizen' (Plato, 1970, p. 73).
Aristotle also advoc,1ted general civic training despite his comment
quoted in Box 8.2.
The classical tradition of education for citizenship tended to
emphasize skills such as presenting an argument and making the
young person want to behave as a good citizen. In contrast, tl1e liberal
style has placed greater stress on rational, clear thinking and factual
learning. Th English, American am! French revolutions of the
seventeenth and eighteenth centuries all prompted recommendations
along these lines. \ and social views. Governments became nervous of what they
However, it was not until. the oinet.eenth century, with the steady
Box 1.7
It was in eighteenth-cE::ntury France that serious proposals were
first made for a truly national system of education. During the
Revolution. in 1793. Condorcet drew up a Report on Public
Educa'tion. One of its notable features was its emphasis on civic
education. Owing to a change of g0vernment. the report was not
put into practice. Nevertheless. it is an interesting indication of
what :,ome influential people were thinking at the time. Here are
a few extracts.
You owe it to the French nation to provide an education in accord
with the spirit of the eighteenth century, of its philosophy ... It;.,
from this very philosophy that we have considered the moral and
political sciences as an essential part of general education....
In the primary schools erich individual is to be taught what is
necessary to be self-relianf and to enjoy his rights to the full. This
education will even adequately include lessons designed for men
to fit them for the simplest public offices, to which it is good that
every citizen should be able to be nominated, such as those of
jury-service and municipal officer.
Condorcet ( 1982) presents the need for life-long education for
citizenship. Therefore.
Each $unday, the teacher will start a public lecture, which will be
attended by ct.izens of all ages.... Here ... that part of the
national laws, ignorance of which would prevent a citizen from
knowi,J and exercising his rights, will be expanded upon.
Historical outline 2()
expansion of the franchise in the states of No:th .\1m:ric:1 :111d
western Europe, that politicians took much clfrcti1c :1cti",1 1,,
encourage citizenship education. By the 1880s 'civics' tc,thonks were
in c,>mmon use in the United States, Britain and Fr:111<-c. In llri1:1i 11
even the term 'citizenship' .1ppeared in the titles of school boob i'rnm
the 1880s to the 1950s. By the 1970s teaching aho11t cons1i1u1ion:d
and political affairs was virtualiy universal, in one form or :11wtlicr .
The American educational rhilosopher, John Dewey, was innue11ti:d
in the early years of the twen:ieth cer.tury, in teaching that democracy
is inconceivable without an aopropriate, supporting ed11c:11io11.
Nineteenth-century socialists, notably in Britain, Fr:111ce and
Germany, strove to introduce the younger generation to their poli1ic:1I
considered to be indoctrination. A similar nervous11css c:111 be
<leer:ted in the liberal-capitalist democracies in the period since tlie
C
1960s concerning any teaching which seemP-d to smack o( a lr.: t-wi11g
challenge to the Establishment.
In contrast, education to proMote patriotism :ind a J"ccli11g or
national cohesion has been supported by governments /cir 1he p:1st
two centuries. A Prussian document of 1818 declared th:1t 'the mos1
sacred duty of all schoolmasters and schoolmistresses' 11':IS 10 m:1c
every school 'a nursery of blameless patriotism'. New na1io11s, fro111
the United States in the late eighteenth century to the indepc11drn1
states of Africa in the 1960s aml 1970s have recognized 11:e cL111,al
function of schools in th process of nation-building.
Finally, teaching the principles of world citizenship h:1s h'm
persistently advocated for the past century. The ecluc:11io11:il c:isc h:1.s
been supported by different concerns and hopes at diffrrrnt ti111cs:
first, the disarmament movement prior to the First World \Var; then
the foundation of the League oi Nations after that conflict; and the
United Nations after the Second World War; and most recently
global environmental consciousness. Since the Stcond World War
UNESCO (United Nations Educal:ional, Scientific and Cultural
Organization) has promoted school progammes in global studies
under the cacious if i::umbersome heading o( 'ccluc:1tion Jin
i1ternationalu;;-dersiariaing, cooperation and peace ;1 ncl cd 11c:11io11
relating to human rights and fundamental freedoms'.
Brief as this historical summary has been, we hope th:11 it li:1s
given some indkation of the rich tradition of citizenship and the
complex meaning of tl1e term. Although the words 'ci1i,cn' :ind
"1 30 Foundations of citizensh(o
;In 'citizenship' are both ofren used in slightly different ways, it is as well
;,,
'If' . always to keep in min<l their full breadth of meaning. A true
I
understanding of citizenship depends on some appreciation of its
long and varied history.
Given the complexity and importance of the topic, it is not
surprising that discussion concerning the nature of citizenship has
persisted. Indeed, during the past few decades the matter has been
the subject of quite penetrating analysis. This contemporary work
requires a separate chapter for its treatment.
Note
An earlier version of this chapter ap;_Jeared in the University of Hull
journal Curriculum. We are grateful to the editor for permission to
reproduce this in a revised form here.
FURTHER nEADING
Barbalet, J.M. (1988) Citizenship (Milton Keynes: Open Universi':y Press)
ch. 3.
I !cater, D. (1990) Citizens/zip: The Civic Ideal in World History, Politics and
Ed11ca11m Part I (London: Longman).
Howe, S.' (1991) 'Citizenship in the New Europe: A last chance for the
Enlightenment?' in G. Andrews (ed.) Citizenship (Milton Keynes: Open
University Press) ch. 3.
2
THE CONTEMPORARY DEBATE
SUMMARY
After a long and variable history citizenship has again in rccc111 yc:11s
become the subject of consi<lerable interest and discussioP. M11ch (/1
this debatt has been couched in ideological terms - tht: ligh1
emphasizing duties, the Left entitlements.
The starti,1g point of recent interest was the ll'ork o( 'J'. l I.
Marshall, which etablishd a threefold analysis of ci1i1.c11ship - ci\il,
political and social. It has also been the subject of' much ui1ic:il
commentary.
The major reason for the intensity of disagrcrn1cnts co11ccrnin
the nature of citizenship as distinct from the detils or i1s rr,1c1icc is
its relationship with the economic ordering of socic1y. Onr :1spcc1
that has been particularly emphasized is the perceived i1.comp:11ihili1y
between the right to property and the undermining 0r th,11 1i(;ht hy
taxation to fund the right to social welfare.
The recent relative success of capitalism comp:1rrd wi1h com1n:111d
econor.1ies has highlighted the matter of the rcl:11io11ship ul
citizenship and market forc,::s. The citizenship J1rinciples o( Jihnly
and equality are seen to come into conflict when m,1rkc1 li)l'(:t, :ire
given free rein.
The Left has generated a considerable literatmc 10 c1nph:1si,c 1iic
desir.:.: primacy of the citizen's social and economic righ1s. ()1/J,r,
t :nphasize the need for constitutional rdorm to prn1tc1 rir-h1, h, I 11
and invigorate the citizenship ideal. M;rny grlll1p, i11 ,, , 1r11.
31