1Nationhood is an important thus, disputed subject within social sciences, and this issue of the Revue des mondes musulmans et de la Méditerranée invites to rethink the concept through the multilayered case of Jordan. Within the Middle East – a region that has long been regarded as a privileged space for observing the “funeral of nation-states” (Badie and Smouts, 1992) – the Jordanian state is simultaneously characterised by both its “fragility” and its “exceptional stability.” Supporting these narratives, the country is often described in terms of its colonial construction, be it as a “buffer state” or a “frontier kingdom”. However, only limited attention is paid to local or regional political dynamics from the post-Ottoman era to the present day. This observation may be linked to Jordan’s marginal position in studies on the Nahda – the intellectual dynamics of the early 20th century often associated with “modernity” and competing national projects.

2The premise of a lack of major cities until the second half of the 20th century, the assimilation of its population to Bedouin identities, and the arrival of thousands of displaced Palestinians after the Nakba (catastrophe) and Naksa (relapse) are often interpreted as a lack of a Jordanian national project. The very idea of a Jordanian nation as a long-term social construct was, and continues to be, questioned in terms of its essence, credibility and historicity. Studies of nationhood are thus often limited to examining the nation or national identity as narrated in official discourses – by the British Mandate and the Hashemite monarchy. This supposed initial fragility is further emphasised first by the ongoing migration and its significant impact on the country’s demographics and contemporary history (Bel Air, 2005; Al Husseini, Napolitano and Neveu, 2024). Second, by the establishment of a constitution based on tribal, confessional or ethnic modes of belonging – sometimes reified as a mosaic (Chatelard, 2004; Maggiolini and Ouahes, 2021), and finally, by the centrality and influence of Palestinian nationalism and its effects on the Jordanian national territory.

3This issue argues that these perceptions make Jordan an ideal case for rethinking nationhood in the post-2011 era – post-revolutions and counter-revolutions, (civil) wars and social movements in the Middle East. These developments have reposed questions about modes of representation, political participation and the processes of “nation-making.” Approaching the “nationhood question” allows us to see the nation as a social phenomenon – a set of manifestations, a construct involving diverse actors, mechanisms and representations. In what ways do these “nation effects”, adapt to Mitchell’s (1999) “making the nation” and “nationalising” society? To address these questions, it is essential to move beyond a state-centred approach that solely emphasises the state’s autonomy, overriding society and the nation (Catusse, 2016). The national question cannot be reduced to the outcome of colonial ventures or nationalist political projects. Instead, it involves a multitude of practices, imaginaries, reformulations and acts of citizenship (Catusse, 2016) that must be observed to grasp the full complexity.

4Jordan’s founding myth – rooted in the revolt led by Sharif Hussein of Mecca against the Ottoman Empire in 1916 on which the Arab nationalist project is based – illustrates the construction of an official national discourse with its logics of exclusion, adjustments and long-term developments. Yet, this narration represents only one arena in which nationhood is elaborated. Nationhood in Jordan entails various and non-exclusive interpretations depending on the time and actors: sometimes exhibiting pan-Syrian sentiments, sometimes embedded in Arab nationalist rhetoric, and sometimes shaped as a counterpoint to Palestinian nationalism. This issue aims to explore and decipher mechanisms that have constituted Jordan’s nationhood over the long term, the modes of operation and the variety of actors. It is precisely because Jordan has rarely been considered a stand-alone case study regarding these themes that it offers new pathways for understanding and challenges going beyond the idea of a necessary coherence in the national project. Therefore, the contributions in this issue investigate original and often under-explored areas, highlighting the complexity of political, social, cultural and economic constructions in Jordan and extending an approach to the country that has so far been dominated by the migration problem or the tribal issue (Layne, 1994; Bocco, 1995; Shryock, 1997; Jungen, 2009).

Approaching nationhood in the Middle East

5Umma, watan, qawmiyya … From these terms, how can nationhood be characterised in Jordan? This issue approaches nationhood by engaging with critiques put forward in recent years that are either overly focused on state discourses and practices or that portray the construction of nationhood in a static, even essentialist manner (Fox and Miller-Idriss, 2008). Although some approaches consider multiple actors, nationhood is nevertheless conceptualised in binary terms and in tension with the state. The contributions in this issue, however, consider the nation as an outcome of, and not its origin in, nationalism – while acknowledging that nationhood often constitutes the centre of nationalist discourses. To put it differently, nationalism is understood as the effort to align political unity (the state) with cultural unity (the nation) (Brubaker, 1996; Laniel and Thériault, 2020), positioning nationhood within the process of state formation.

6However, shaped by the insights gained from postcolonial approaches – such as those that examine the colonial legacy in national constructions (Chatterjee, 1993) or the role of the military or law in Jordan (Massad, 2001) – the contributions in this issue go a step further. They seek to move beyond framing nationhood as merely tied to modernity or reducing it to an ideology, a political project or a historical construction defined by the dynamics of inclusion and exclusion. Inspired by Anthony Smith’s approach, this issue does not focus on state discourses but examines how “symbols, myths, values, memories, attachments, customs, traditions, laws, institutions, routines, and habits contribute to nationhood” (Smith 1998: 138). Therefore, nationhood is viewed as a daily practice (Fox, 2004), shaped by the actions of actors including ordinary people and citizens.

7Previous studies have sought to understand the mechanisms of national belongings to grasp the corresponding political and social constructions. These studies situate the Middle East within the modernity of the age of nationalisms, beginning in the 19th century (Hobsbawm, 1992). Nationalist projects, often competing, have been analysed as emerging from Ottoman nationalism (Karpat, 2002) as well as more localised forms, such as Arab nationalism (Khalidi et al., 1991), Kurdish nationalism (Tejel, 2008) or Young Turk nationalism (Zürcher, 2000). Nationhood was later associated with state-building after the fall of the Ottoman Empire, focusing on borders and shifts in mobility regimes under the mandates (Kozma, Schayegh and Wishnitzer, 2015; Tejel and Öztan, 2022). The interplay between national aspirations, transnationalism and colonial rule was analysed through mandate policies (Mitchell, 2002; Pedersen, 2015; Bourmaud, Neveu and Verdeil, 2020) and nationalist mobilisations, such as the 1936‒1939 Palestinian revolt.

8From the 1940s to 1967, a time often described as the golden age of Arab nationalisms, discourses on origins established from the 1920s onwards – like Phoenicianism in Lebanon or Pharaonism in Egypt – gained traction, influencing urban landscapes, discourses and modes of mobilisation. Studies on nationhood during this period largely focused on Nasser’s Egypt, pan-Arab rhetoric and its transnational aspects (Jankowski, 2002). Within this dialectic between unity and national identity, national sovereignty emerged as both a limit to political experiments and a driver of demands, as in the example of the United Arab Republic. Egyptian nationalism was analysed through its diplomatic, cultural and activist expressions, particularly during the Cold War, whether through the promotion of women as symbols of modernity (Baron, 2005) or through art (Shalan, 2002).

9Following Benedict Anderson’s work (1983), studies of nationhood in the Middle East explored the dynamics of imagined and socially constructed communities, gradually moving beyond colonial legacies. A frequently examined case is Israel, with analyses of its national discourse (Dieckhoff, 1993; Sand, 2018), social categories and representations through museums and archaeological sites. Israeli nationalism has also been studied through its political evolution, such as the role of kibbutzim as embodiments of the national project. Conversely, Palestinian nationalism remains a central subject, focusing on its cultural productions (Slitine, 2023; Halaby, 2001) and key actors (Legrain, 1996; Larzillière, 2003; Khalidi, 2009), whether political or intellectual, in exile or on the ground. This inherently transnational nationalism, shaped by exile (Achilli, 2015), mobilises regionally and internationally, indirectly shaping other nationalisms, particularly Arab nationalism (Dakhli, 2009), which oscillates between state discourse and grassroots movements that challenge official national narratives.

10After the liberal turn of the 1970s, analyses of nationhood focused primarily on the state, reinforcing the nation-state paradigm. Authoritarian regimes asserted exclusive control over national narratives, leveraging solidarity networks studied through the lens of ‘asabiyya (or group solidarity) (Seurat, 1985). However, since the 2000s, research has highlighted the structuring role of social movements and civic dynamics across the region (Geisser, Karam and Vairel, 2006). In this context, national rhetoric exhibited by movements linked to political Islam were brought into focus (Roy, 2003; Pierret, 2013).

11Additionally, scholarly works have described an opposition in the realm of nationhood between actors tied to the state, and actors belonging to one or multiple ethnic, tribal or confessional categories. As such, Elizabeth Picard (2003) demonstrated how these categories and their associated forms of belonging can constitute civic practices (Smith, 1992) and state-driven effects embedded within the process of nation-building – for example, the mobilisation of Bedouin identity within Jordanian nationalism. Following Frederik Barth (1969), understanding how communities are imagined requires deconstructing the mosaic to analyse internal structures, boundaries and political interactions. Consequently, in the Jordanian context and beyond, national projects are not incompatible with dynamics of confessionalisation or tribalisation.

12Finally, research on the post-2011 period has focused on modes of mobilisation within so-called fragile states. This era, rich in democratic experiments, has brought new perceptions of nationhood. The idea of a gradual decline of states in the Middle East appears validated by social actions against these states and their authoritarian regimes. Yet, in this context, national claims or calls for reforming the national project often remain central. The question remains: who constitutes the nation? Or put differently: how do claims for statehood and nationhood continue to underpin post-2011 political mobilisations and projects?

Rethinking nationhood through Jordan

13In the numerous studies on nationhood, nationalism and state formation in the Middle East, Jordan often appears secondary, because its national project has long been ignored or even disregarded. Additionally, the dominance of the colonial perspective on Jordan – as a British imperial construction – and the lingering influence of a Khaldunian framework linking Jordan to tribalism – specifically a Bedouin identity dissociated from political structures – has, for a long time, hindered the understanding how the Jordanian regime functions and the mechanisms of nation-building that has been underway for over a century. These processes have taken place at various scales and involved a plurality of actors. Consequently, studies on the Jordanian national movement, its currents and its theoretical constructs remain fragmented.

14In Jordan, the official narrative of nationhood begins with the arrival of the Hashemite family in Bilad al-Sham in the early 20th century. This dominant perspective shaped how the formation of the state and its social fabric is conceived and analysed. The tension between state formation and nation is at the heart of our approach to nationhood. It positions Jordan as an important case study, with the national movement often considered marginal for the understanding of nationhood compared to the complex set of mechanisms, particularly cultural ones, that this special issue seeks to decode. The Hashemite affiliation with tribal identities plays a fundamental role in the discourse on national identity (Abu Nowar, 1989; Shryock, 1997; Maffi, 2011; Robins, 2019). In this sense, the concept of 'tribe' becomes an essential analytical tool to describe modes of belonging and analyse Jordanian nationhood (Layne, 1994; Bocco, 1996; Haddad, 2006; Alon, 2007). Therefore, tribes are considered political spaces that structure modes of belonging, electoral behaviour and relationships with the state (Bocco and Tell, 1995; Chatelard, 2004).

15Furthermore, emphasis is placed on the relatively recent formation of the state and the nation, dating to the Emirate of Transjordan under the British Mandate in 1921, and on Jordan’s role as a host country for significant communities of displaced, exiled and refugee populations. Both perspectives emerge from and reiterate the perception of a contested and contestable Jordanian nationhood (Lerner, 1958). This includes the perception of a Jordanian territoriality that is situated within a territorial framework tied to Palestine and that centres on the Jordan River: Transjordan or Sharq al-’Urdun (East of the Jordan). However, the Jordanian national project has been recurrently challenged since the country’s formal independence in 1946 by competing ideological constructs: Arab nationalism in its Ba‘athist and pan-Syrian expressions, Palestinian national claims (Latte Abdallah, 2006), and those articulated by Islamist groups (Abujaber, 1989; Wagemakers, 2016, 2020). In response to these challenges, Jordanian authorities have deployed discourses and campaigns to claim and define the contours of the Jordanian nation (Brand, 2006, 2017). Additionally, national sovereignty and the regime’s legitimacy are framed within a connected perspective shaped by regional dynamics, including Syria’s attempts to interfere starting in the 1980s. These combined factors give the study of the Jordanian nation a particularly heuristic quality, revealing the interwoven processes and tensions characteristic of all national contexts.

16The widely accepted portrayal of Jordan as an exception – a “stable” country in a region beset by multiple crises and a state in “democratic transition” – has been questioned since the 1990s (Brand, 1995a). Approaches that have deconstructed narratives around the “artificial” nature of the Jordanian nation have shed light on the socio-historical processes specific to this national construct. For example, studies on national sentiment have explored negotiations between political elites and Transjordanian tribes (Layne, 1994; Bocco, 1996; Shryock, 1997; Alon, 2007). Other works have retraced the links between the ruling family and its subjects, analysing the process of consolidating Hashemite power in the socio-economic sphere (Tell, 2013). These consolidation processes are displayed in museum exhibits that emphasize narratives of Jordanian origins and folklore (Maffi, 2004), sometimes repurposed for tourism by Bedouin actors (Chatelard, 2005). Religious tourism, in particular, reinforces the importance of sacred sites, integral to the national project. Renovation policies for these sites connect the Prophet Muhammad’s companions to the ruling family, presented as the long-standing unifying element of the nation (Neveu, 2010).

17Studies on “colonial effects” within the judiciary or military institutions have expanded the focus to include other actors in addition to the Hashemite family (Massad, 2001). This approach, juxtaposed with analyses of national consciousness through political mobilisations (Anderson, 2005; Larzillière, 2013) or social movements (Latte Abdallah, 2006; Schwedler, 2022), have ruptured the narrative of Jordanian nationhood that is reduced to the royal family and its entourage. Most importantly, the social composition of the Jordanian nation has been revisited beyond binary oppositions and rigid categories such as Transjordanian/Palestinian, Christian/Muslim, Sunni/Shiite, Bedouin/urbanite, or even the notion of minorities (White, 2011). Some approaches have focused on everyday practices and narratives of the Jordanian population (Martínez, 2022). These new perspectives have re-examined sectarian issues and Christian-Muslim relations, challenging the “mosaic” framework traditionally imposed to understand social dynamics and modes of belonging. Sectarian identity is only one element of complex belonging systems, alongside lineage and locality (Rogan and Tell, 1994; Chatelard, 2004; Jungen, 2009). Similarly, the reinterpretation of group affiliations categorised as minorities, such as Circassians, has challenged hegemonic nationalist interpretations (Shami, 2009).

18However, the Transjordanian/Palestinian dichotomy persists, sustained by various actors following the 1967 war, particularly after Black September, which remains a social and memorial taboo in Jordan. The violent persecution and expulsion of the Palestine Liberation Organisation, as well as Palestinian and Jordanian fedayeen between 1970 and 1971, and the official 1988 renunciation of Jordanian claims over East Jerusalem and the West Bank, marked a radical shift in the state’s position toward Palestine and Palestinians in Jordan. Politically, this shift translated into the intensification of the “Jordanisation” of national identity, spearheaded by Prime Minister Wasfi al-Tell. However, it was with the “Jordan First” (al-’Urdun awalān) campaign in 2004 that a strictly Jordanian national identity was introduced. This focus on the “national self” weakened Arab solidarity and seems to mirror Palestinian identity (Brand, 1995b; Abu-Odeh, 1999). The Palestinian presence in Jordan highlights both the strength of the Palestinian national narrative and the malleability of the Jordanian nation, which remains a critical framework for understanding tensions surrounding Jordanian national identity (Schwedler, 2005).

19Furthermore, feminist studies adopting an interdisciplinary approach position the Jordanian nation within a regional and global perspective (Sonbol 2003, Pratt 2022). Also, recent publications in Ottoman studies challenge the timeline of modernity and state formation, re-examining modernity as depicted in imperial and nationalist historiographies (Barakat, 2023; Troyanski-Hamed, 2024). These studies offer a genealogy of nationhood as a global and concomitant phenomenon, expressed locally, regionally and through specific manifestations. While these processes have yet to be fully grasped, tracing the nation through these perspectives reveals an ever-evolving genealogy of Jordan, both domestically and internationally. With this in mind, the articles in this issue aim to go beyond a static understanding of the opposition between nation and society (Migdal, 2001; Mitchell, 1991) by revisiting this relationship.

Approaching Nationhood through its Imaginaries, Mobilisations and Global scale

21The main contribution of this issue lies in stepping away from the convenient readings of Jordan as illustrated above. Therefore, new research directions adopt a bottom-up approach to nationhood (Bayart, 1981) by emphasizing the practices, imaginaries and discourses of a wide spectrum of actors. Embedded in various social science disciplines, the contributors to this special issue employ a broad scope of methodological approaches, including ethnographic studies, archival analysis, literary and visual content analysis, while examining state apparatuses, institutions and singular events.

22Three main themes emerge from this special issue on Nationhood and Jordan:

Nationhood and its imaginaries

23This special issue, first, addresses nationhood through the imaginaries that are produced and evoked by a variety of actors. This approach moves beyond the established dichotomy between essentialist interpretations of the nation – as built solely on cultural and primordial ties (Geertz, 1973) – and constructivist reading that conceptualises the nation as the product of state policies (Gellner, 1983). Focusing on imaginaries allows for an exploration of constructing the nation through narratives, imageries and shared culture through education (Gellner, 1983; Hobsbawm, 1992) and its appropriation by the population. How does this “creative fiction” (Thiesse, 2000) forge bonds among citizens to form an “imagined community” (Anderson, 1983) through language, music (Morelon-Luzon and Nagore-Ferrer, 2024), cuisine (Ranta and Ichijo, 2023) or sports (Whigham, 2024)?

24Thomas Richard’s study of the Amman Military Museum contributes to this first theme of the special issue. He describes the exhibition, structured around key historical moments and military victories. Central to this narrative is the 1916 Arab Revolt, embodied by the Hashemite family, as the founding myth. Richard argues that this narrative serves to obscure dissonances within the national narratives, particularly regarding the Battle of Karameh, that entail conflicting memories between Palestinian and Jordanian nationalists. The museum emerges as a site of Jordanian national memory and a state instrument to promote official narratives.

25Within this theme, several articles delve into cultural production (literature, media, songs, street art), offering a dynamic perspective on the ways in which national imaginaries are produced and appropriated. For example, Annamaria Bianco analyses the literary work of Amjad Nasser (1955–2019). Focusing on his first novel Ḥaythu lā tasquṭ al-amṭār (Where the Rain Doesn’t Fall, 2010), in which the author blends autobiography with dystopian narrative, Bianco illustrates the potential of exile literature to challenge hegemonic national narratives and reinvent collective imaginaries.

26Yousef Barahmeh and Jona Fras explore Jordanian national imaginaries through popular cultural expressions. The authors engage with nationalist songs, football chants, graffiti, gastronomy and social media posts such as hashtags and memes to carefully examine “everyday nationalism”. Ultimately, the authors demonstrate that these expressions represent modes of belonging to the Jordanian national community, effectively dismantling the simplistic binary between Transjordanians and Jordanians of Palestinian origin.

27These contributions reveal converging and competing national imaginaries, shaped by mutual borrowings and entanglements. However, they also highlight the hegemony of the official discourse and its control over diverging narratives and imaginaries.

Mobilisations and Appropriations of Nationhood

28This second themes entails diverse protagonists and their engagements with nationhood. Instead of a static element or rigid identity, nationhood is approached as a field of diverse manifestations and appropriations at the intersection of social, cultural, economic and political dynamics (Noiriel, 2001). In this context, rather than reducing Jordanian nationhood to conventional list of factors – such as the Hashemites, Arabic language and Islam as unifying elements, or symbols like flags and anthems – the articles uncover struggles among various actors that appropriate, redefine and shape nationhood.

29For instance, Sally Sharara and Tariq Tell explore the intellectual legacy of Nahed Hattar, a forthright journalist, to document the little-known Jordanian national movement. The contribution unpacks Hattar’s pan-Syrian nationalist reading of Jordanian nationalism, beginning in the Mandate period and the formation of the Jordanian state. By focusing on a controversial and influential author in the Jordanian political field – who was assassinated in 2016, Sharara and Tell are taking the readers into the heart of the nation’s intellectual and cultural production.

30Camille Abescat provides an ethnographic study of Jordan’s Parliament, showing how its members articulate national narratives, first, by establishing the primacy of religion and second, by emphasizing so called conservative, or “local” values to defend their visions of national identity against foreign influences. Therefore, the Chamber of Deputies becomes a site for inventing traditions and thus, a Jordanian identity rooted in tribalism and religious conservatism.

31Finally, Inès Delpuech investigates the Jordanian Writers Association, shedding light on the emergence of cultural nationalism in the 1970s and the complex relationships between political power and cultural actors. The trajectories of writers illustrate varied appropriations of the national narrative that is on the one hand oscillating between the canonisation of literary figures as national symbols and on the other hand the formulation of a critique of the instrumentalisation of literature by the state.

Nationhood and Globalisation

32The third theme examines Jordanian nationhood within its broader regional and global contexts. The articles explore Jordan’s integration into global circulations of economic, political and cultural actors, goods and discourse. As such, the contributions collectively portray Jordanian nationhood as co-shaped by global or external constraints and interdependencies.

33Rather than viewing globalisation as the decline of the nation-state, this approach highlights its reconfigurations and diverse modes of integration into flux transnationaux, or transnational networks (Lecler, 2013). In this vein, Jordanian nationhood illustrates a dynamic field analogue to other contexts in a three folded way: full integration into globalised networks, state consolidation and the promotion of a political identity emerging from an official nationhood narrative (Bayart, 2022). Moreover, Jordan’s nationhood is situated in constant tensions between a territorial anchoring – expressed by defending specific interests and promoting its distinctiveness – and modes of belonging that are rooted in the regional history, namely, Palestinian nationalism and dependencies on Western entities and the Gulf.

34Against this background, the contributions decipher the ways in which the Jordanian state has become integrated into globalisation. Namely, they study the global circulation of actors, goods and discourse in the economic, political and cultural sectors, and highlight the shifting boundaries of national identity. Simon Mangon examines the formation of Jordanian journalism within a global network. Using a highly internationalised journalism school as a case study, he demonstrates that the training of Jordanian journalists is shaped by transnational dynamics and norms. Simultaneously, this cohort is contributing to the definition of a particular image of the Jordanian nation: liberal, committed to “modernity,” and open to the outside world. The state thus becomes an agent of the “nationalisation of the international” (Ferjani, 2003), in the sense that the authorities promote and appropriate external resources.

35The Jordanian state relies on these external resources to anchor its political strategies and promote a national narrative that combines “local” specificities and full integration into globalisation and “modernity”.

36Ismael Gil proposes studying the expression of national identity based on the city – the capital, Amman – and the progressive construction of a local urban identity. His article examines the role of the municipality and writers in reshaping the city’s image through the construction of a local urban identity. This process became particularly significant in 2002, when Amman was named the Arab Capital of Culture, placing the city within a broader “globalised dialogue”. Gil shows that Amman serves in this context as both a crucial element of the Jordanian nation – due to the interactions between cultural and administrative institutions – and as an object of diverse identity appropriations by literary actors and social groups that make up the city.

37Finally, Taher Labadi and Katharina Grüneisl, analyse the dynamic and ambiguous position of Jordan’s textile industry in the Qualified Industrial Zones (QIZ). Their study reveals how global integration coexists with a “Jordanisation” policy, that re-affirms the “national” character of these international economic zones. Although, the QIZ are portrayed as beneficial for the population and despite this being merely symbolic, the economic free-trade zones in Jordan also serve as an American diplomatic tool to normalise Jordanian-Israeli relations. These strategies of the state of “nationalizing the international” (Ferjani, 2003) demonstrate how external resources are appropriated and integrated into national policies to construct narratives blending local specificities with global modernity. At the same time, this structural dependence should not obscure the strategies of appropriation of external resources by local actors and their integration into national policies.