THE MAKING OF THE NATIONS—IVThe Making of the Nations, IVProfessor FREDERICK RATZEL
THE MAKING OF THE NATIONS—IV
The Making of the Nations, IV
Professor FREDERICK RATZEL
The State and its Territory
I
IT is not without reason that so much importance is attached to extent of surface in geography. Area and population represent to us the two chief characteristics of a state; and to know them is the simplest means—often too simple—for obtaining a conception of the size and power of a nation. We cannot conceive of any man, much less a human community, without thinking of surface or ground at the same time. Political science may, through a number of clever conclusions, reduce the area of a state to a mere national possession; but we all know that territory is too tightly bound up with the very life of a state for it to assume a position of so little importance. In a nation, people and soil are organically united into one, and area and population are the measure of this union. A state cannot exchange or alter its area without suffering a complete transformation itself. What wonder, then, that wars between nations are struggles for territory? Even in war the object is to limit the opponent’s sphere of action; how much more does the whole history of nations consist in a winning and losing of territory. The Poles still exist as they did in former times; but the ground upon which they dwell has ceased to belong to them in a political sense, and thus their state has been annihilated.
The Vast Modern Empires
During the course of history we constantly see great political areas emerging from the struggle for territory. We see nations from early times to the present day increasing in area: the Persian and Roman Empires were small and mean compared with those of the Russians, English, and Chinese. Also the states of peoples of a lower grade of culture are insignificant compared with the states of more advanced races. The greatest empires of the present day are the youngest; the smallest—Andorra, Liechtenstein, San Marino, Monaco, appear to us only as venerable, strange petrifications of an alien time. The relation of surface to the growth of spheres of commerce and of means of communication is obvious. Communication is a struggle with area; and the result of this struggle is the overcoming of the latter. The process is complicated because, as control is gained over area, one also acquires possession of its contents: advantages of location, conformation, fertility, and, by no means least, the inhabitants of the territory themselves. But the loss in value of all these things, brought about by their being widely scattered throughout an extensive area, can be overcome only by a complete control of the region over which they are spread.
Traffic Leads to Empire
The development of commerce is the preliminary history of political growth. This applies to all races, from Phœnicians to North Americans, who point out to us a post of the American Fur Company as the germ from which Nebraska developed. Every colony is a result of traffic; even in the case of Siberia, merchants from European Russia travelled thither as far as the Ob about three centuries before its conquest. The phrase “conquests of the world’s commerce” is perfectly legitimate. The building of roads is a part of the glory of the founders and rulers of nations. To-day, tariff unions and railway politics have taken the place of road-making. It has always been so; both state and traffic have had the same interest in roads and thoroughfares. Traffic breaks the way, and the state improves and completes it. It seems to be certain that the firmly organised state in ancient Peru opened the roads which were later a service to traffic. In a lower phase of development we may see commerce leading directly to the establishment of states; in a higher, to victory in war, arising from commercial and railway communication. It would be impossible for France to construct the Sahara Railway without first subjugating the Tuareg and seizing their country.Highways of traffic as weapons for hostile states, the important part played by commercial nations and the culture of strictly industrial and commercial peoples, the endeavour of traffic to be of service to the policies of states, and, finally, the powerful reactions caused by the removal and disuse of thoroughfares of commerce to races, nations, and to entire spheres of civilisation—can only be indicated here.
Every Trader Bears his State with him
Every political movement, whether it be a warlike expedition or a peaceful emigration, is preceded by movements which are not political. Inquiries must be made and relations instituted; the object must be determined, and the road explored. All the while that knowledge of the world beyond the bounds of a country is being gained, there is also an imperceptible broadening of the geographical horizon; and this not only widens out, but becomes clearer. Fabulous tales are circulated as to the terrors of strange countries; but the fear gradually vanishes as our knowledge increases, and with the latter a spirit of political enterprise awakens One can say that every trader who passes the bounds of his country bears his state with him in his load of merchandise. To be sure, there are both long preparations made and quick leaps taken in the processes of commerce. Roman merchants prepared the way to a knowledge of Gaul and its conquest. But how different the attitude of the Romans to Gaul before and after the time of Cæsar! What a difference in the Spanish estimate of the worth of American colonies before the days of Cortez and Pizarro, and afterward! The broader and clearer the geographical horizon grows, the greater become political schemes and standards of policy.
Causes of National Success and Failure
The widening of the geographical horizon and the clearing up of mysteries beyond are invariably a result of the travels of individuals or of groups for peaceful purposes. The first of these purposes is commerce; the chase and fishing are also to be taken into consideration; and the involuntary wanderings of the lost and strayed are not to be excluded. Europe possessed a Pytheas and a Columbus who discovered new worlds; and every primitive community had its explorers, too, who cleared paths from one forest glade to another. If such pioneers return, they also bring back with them contributions to the general stock of knowledge of the world without, and it becomes less difficult for others to follow in their footsteps; finally armies or fleets may advance, conquering in their tracks. Whenever traffic makes busy a multitude of men, and employs extensive means by which to carry on its operations, the truth of the saying, “The flag follows trade,” is finally established in its broadest sense. With all this struggling and labouring, territory does not fall to the state simply as a definite number of square miles. Just as single individuals bring enlightenment to the state, in the same manner the idea of area arises in the intelligence of the aggregate.
When we say that an area increases, we must remember that by this we mean that the intelligence which views it and the will that holds it together have increased, and naturally, also, that which is requisite for rendering intelligence and will capable for their work. In this lies one of the greatest differences that exist between nations, one of the greatest causes of success and failure in development.
A disposition for expansion that advances boundaries to the farthest possible limit is a sign of the highest state of civilisation. It is a result of an increase both of population and of intellectual progress.
Small States in Fine Situations
There is something very attractive in the small political models of early times: those city-states whose development had in definiteness and in precision a great deal of the lucidity and compactness of artistic compositions. Lübeck and Venice are more attractive than Russia. The concentration of the forces of a small community in a limited, beautifully situated, and protected location, is a source of a development that takes a deeper hold on all the vital powers of a people, employing them more extensively, and therefore ending in a more rapid and definite perfection of historical individuality. Thus small areas take the lead of large territories in historical development; and we may see many examples of a slow but sure transference of leadership from the small area to the large, and of the gradual diffusion of progress in the latter. Thus Italy followed Greece; Spain, Portugal; England, Holland.
THE COMMAND OF THE SEAS: GREAT BRITAIN’S MIGHTY MACHINERY OF DEFENCEGreat Britain’s strength is a proof of the tremendous importance of the sea as a factor of political power. This is a bird’s-eye view of the British Navy assembled at Spithead.LARGER IMAGE
THE COMMAND OF THE SEAS: GREAT BRITAIN’S MIGHTY MACHINERY OF DEFENCE
Great Britain’s strength is a proof of the tremendous importance of the sea as a factor of political power. This is a bird’s-eye view of the British Navy assembled at Spithead.
LARGER IMAGE
The opposite of this is precocity in growth: the earlier a state marks out its limits without consideration for later expansion, the sooner the completion of its development. The growth in area of Venice and the Low Countries stood still, while all about them territories increased in size. The development of small countries flags unless the increase of population within a limited area leads to that disquiet and emigration and expulsion of citizens especially characteristic of small nations: the horizon grows too narrow for the times; patriotism becomes local pride; and the most important life forces are impaired. Thus minor nations, through which races are separated into little groups, develop: the great national economic and religious cohesive forces are broken up; and even the political advantages of the ground are reduced in value through disintegration.
Founding of States by Strangers
Under such conditions the impulse for new growth must be brought in from without. The native, who is acquainted with only one home, is always inferior to the foreigner, who has a knowledge of two lands at least. It is remarkable how numerous are the traditions of the establishment of states by strangers. Sometimes these are mighty hunters, as in Africa; often they are superior bearers of civilisation, as in Peru; and an especially large number of them have descended to the earth from heaven. In the face of history which tells of the foundation of a Manchurian dynasty in China and a Turkish in Persia, of the establishment of the Russian Empire by wandering North Germans, and that of the great nations in the West Sudan by the Fulah shepherds—these mythical accounts, although they may appear decidedly incredible when taken singly, as a whole are probable enough. The foundation of the nation of Sarawak in Borneo by Brooke is reality and corresponds with many of the old legends of the formations of states.
A Great Turning-point in History
The broad conception of a state, which acts as a ferment does on a disrupted mass, is introduced from one neighbouring nation into another, each sharing in its production. When such territories are adjacent, the state situated in the most powerful natural region overgrows the other. The more mobile race brings its influence to bear on the less mobile, and possibly draws the other along with it. The more compact, better organised and armed state intrudes on weaker nations, and forces its organisation upon them. A nation left to itself has a tendency to split up into small groups, each of which seeks to support its own life upon its own soil, heedless of the others; and as such groups increase, they always reproduce in their own images: families families, and tribes tribes. We find all sorts of measures taken by some nations to limit an increase in growth that would carry them beyond their old boundaries and place them under new conditions of life. Many an otherwise inexplicable custom of taking human life is a result of this tendency; perhaps, in some cases, even cannibalism itself. This impulse towards limitation would have rendered the growth of nations impossible had not the antithetical force of attraction of one to another led to growth and amalgamation. Truly, the advance from a condition of isolated, self-dependent communities to one of traffic between state organisms, which must of necessity lead to ebb and flow and union of one group with another, is one of the greatest turning-points in the history of man.
Nations as Neighbours
Since the tendency has been for territory to become the exclusive reward of victory in the competition of nations, balance of territorial possessions has grown to be one of the chief ends of national policies. The phrase “balance of power,” which has been so often heard since the sixteenth century, is no invention of diplomats, but a necessary result of the struggle for expansion. Hence we find an active principle of territorial adjustment and balance in all matters concerning international politics. It is not yet active in the small and simple states of semi-civilised peoples; such states are much more uniform, for they have all originated with a uniformly weak capacity for controlling territory. In addition, the principle of territorial isolation hinders the action of political competition. As soon, however, as necessity for increased area leads to the contiguity of nations, the conditions alter. The state that occupies but a small region strives to emulate its larger neighbour. It either gains so much land as is necessary to restore equality, or forces a decrease in the neighbour’s territory.
The Balance of Power
Both alternatives have been of frequent occurrence. Prussia expanded at the expense of Schleswig and Poland in order to become equal in territory to the other great Powers. The whole of Europe fought Napoleon until France had been forced back within such boundaries as were necessary to international balance. Austria lost provinces in Italy and replaced them with others in the Balkan Peninsula. This loss and gain appears to us, in looking over an easily epitomised history, such as that of France, as an alternation of violent waves and temporary periods of rest attained whenever a balance is reached. Therefore it is not owing to chance that the areas of Austria, Germany, France, and Spain may be respectively designated by 100, 86, 84, and 80, that the area of Holland is to that of Belgium as 100 is to 90, and that the United States stands to Canada as 100 to 96. To be effective, such balances must presuppose equal civilisations, similar means for the acquirement of power. Rome was so superior to her neighbours in civilisation that she could not permit any territorial balance. Perhaps the adoption of the River Halys as the boundary between Media and Lydia was a first attempt to establish a national system on the principle of balance instead of “world” dominion.
A New British Empire is not Conceivable
Our standards for measuring the areas of countries have constantly increased during the growth of historical territories. The history of Greece is to us but the history of a small state; and how many years shall pass before that of Germany, Austria, and France will be but the history of nations of medium size? England, Russia, China, and the United States include the better half of the land of the world; and to-day a British Empire in the other half could not be conceivable. Development has ever seized on greater and greater areas, and has united more and more extensive regions into aggregates. Thus it has always remained an organic movement. The village-state repeats itself in the city-state, and the family-state in the race-state, the smaller ever being reproduced in greater forms. The smallest and greatest nations alike retain the same organic characteristics more or less closely united to the soil.
Area Does Not Mean Power
The surface of a state bears a certain relation to the surface of the globe, and according to this standard is the land measured upon which the inhabitants of a nation live, move, and labour. Thus it may be said that the 208,687 square miles of the German Empire represent about1⁄940of the entire surface of the earth; further, that the empire has a population of 60,500,000, from which the ratio of 5·45 acres to each individual follows. Although it is true that wholly uninhabited or very thinly populated regions, high mountains, forests, deserts, etc., may be valuable from a political point of view, nevertheless the whole course of the world’s history shows us that, as a general rule, the value of territory increases with the number of inhabitants that dwell upon it. Thus, before their disunion, Norway-Sweden, with an area of 297,000 square miles—two-fifths greater than that of the German Empire—but with a population of 6,800,000, cannot be looked upon as a first-class Power; while Germany closely approaches the Russian Empire in strength, for although its area is but1⁄43that of the latter, its population is only one-half less. Thus area alone is never the deciding factor of political power. In the non-recognition of this fact lies the source of the greatest errors which have been made by conquerors and statesmen. The powerful influence that small states, such as Athens, Palestine, and Venice, have exerted on the history of the world proves that a great expanse of territory is by no means indispensable to great historical actions. The unequal distribution of mankind over a definite area is a much more probable source of political and economic progress.
Civilisation and political superiority have always attended the thickly populated districts. Thus the whole of development has been a progression from small populations dwelling in extensive regions to large populations concentrated in more limited areas. Progress first awoke when division of labour began to organise and differentiate among heaped-up aggregates, and to create discrepancies promoting life and development. A simple increase of bodies and souls only strengthens that which is already in existence by augmenting the mass. In China, India, and Egypt, population has increased for a long time; but development of civilisation and of political power has been unable to keep pace with it.