is defined as the following:
o An area of land under the
jurisdiction of a ruler or state.
o ‘the government was prepared to
give up the nuclear weapons on its territory’
o Zoology An area defended by an
animal or group of animals against others of the same sex or species.
o An area defended by a team or
player in a game or sport.
o An area in which one has certain
rights or for which one has responsibility with regard to a particular type of
o Mass noun, with adjective or noun
modifier Land with a specified characteristic.
o ‘woodland territory’
o (Especially in the US, Canada, or
Australia) an organized division of a country that is not yet admitted to the
full rights of a state.
o An area of knowledge, activity, or
The origin of the word base Latin word
‘territorium’ which is used in reference to land or a district, has 2
etymological theories. According to the first, the term comes from the latin
word ‘terra’ (dry land) + orium, the suffic denoting place. The second theory
draws the origin to territorium derived instead from ‘t?rrere’ (to
frighten). When the second theory is drawn out, a territory is a place from
which people are warned off’ which unlike the 1st theory places a
more functional purpose for territories.
The ethological conception draws our attention
to two important points. The first point is that territory has fundamentally to
do with functions.7 For
both animals and the human being, these functions are usually described as defence,
control, reproduction, and access to resources. The second point is that
territory is an imagined entity, a space that
is carved out, excerpted and circumscribed in view of a set of tasks to carry
out. The territorial redux is an imaginative mechanism whereby someone is
recognized as an intruder or insider (or other equivalent qualification) to
One of the main difficulties in talking about
territory is that this concept is transversal to several different
disciplines—ranging macro to micro, from geography to sociology, from ethology,
to ecology, from anthropology to law—all of which have their own idiosyncratic
definition. Which is further more interesting because through the process
defining what each disciple regards as its definition of territory, each
discipline creates respective boundaries of their interpretations of the
concept. ‘the tool one uses to grasp the object is part of the very object one
tries to seize’ Andrea Brighenti, 2006
continues define two pivotal categories to appreciate the relational features
of territory are scale and visibility. Almost all territories can be classified
along these two variables. Interestingly, while the rule of thumb associates
larger scale with higher visibility, this correlation is not always valid.
Rather than simply large-scale ones, the most visible territories are the
institutionalized ones. One can consider for instance the following
territories: the nation-state, the city and its functional places, the
interpersonal sphere, the body, and the psyche.
Relationship, rather than space, is suggested
to be at the conceptual core of territory, so that spatial and non-spatial
territories can be seen as superimposed one onto the other and endowed with
once relations among subjects, rather than space, are put at the conceptual
core of territory, it becomes possible to capture the ways in which spatial and
non-spatial territories are superimposed one onto the other and endowed with
multiple reciprocal connections
according to different scales and degrees of visibility. only the most visible ones are
recognized as proper territories.
explored in the most in Biology, and Sociology. In the former the explored
concept is territoriality which is expressed as a instinctive act (in
reference to animal behaviour) the ability
to react in aggressive and defensive patterns under given circumstances
existing as a biological imperative, this
hypothesis reached in Robert Ardreys’ ‘book ‘The Territorial Imperative where
he elucidate the role that inherited evolutionary instinct, particularly the territorial
imperative plats in human society in the phenomena such as property ownership
and nation building. The problem with Ardreys is he makes
aggressiveness the basis of the terroroty. ‘DG. They sued the understanding of
terriry advanced by etholisht Jakob von Uexkull ot help shift the focus away
from a mechanistic, functional understanding of life onto a more expressive one
Sociologist Robert Sack pushes the idea a step further and say that territorially is instinctual and
favours that at the core of territoriality is strategy and defines
territoriality as “the attempt by an individual or group to affect,
influence or control people, phenomena and relationships, by delimiting and
asserting control over a geographic area.”8 By
making strategy a central concern, Sack frames the question of territory as
inherently political. By pointing
out that territories may exist in degrees, and that they can be switched on and
off according to strategic aims, Sack brought agency to
the foreground of the concept.
The biologist Jakob von Uexküll was probably the first to
point out that territory appears as a subjective and aesthetic production which
cannot be inferred from mere characteristics of any objective physical
environment.4 in…Delueze and Guartti refer to von Uexkulls
to as “”A territory materalizs
when milieu components cease to be directional and functional to become
dimensional and expressive. Functions do not explain the territory but
presuppose it.” Delueze & Guarttari.
For him territory refers to a specific ‘milieu’ that
cannot be serpared from the living thing occupying and creating the milieu, so
that the meaning of the milieu is affective. The territory is marked by indexes
that ”may be components taken from any of the miliues: materials, organic
products, skin or membrane states, energy sources, action perception
condestate.” Delueze and guattai. The terroitrialising elements resides ‘in the
becoming expressive of ryhtim and melody in other words, in emergence of proper
qualities (colour, odour, sound, sillhouete..) Art?