SUMMARY AND APPLICATIONS
The science of geography attains its highest usefulness when called
into the service of man. Having in mind the influence of regional
environment upon human societies and particularly upon language
and nationality as shown in the foregoing chapters, let us next
look at the bearing of our conclusions on the determination of
international frontiers. The problem consists in ascertaining the
logical or natural limit of the spread of language and nationality.
Growing at first in listless response to environment, natural
frontiers eventually attain a stage where intelligent conformity to
the same environment becomes necessary. Here the linguistic factor
based on a sound geographical foundation acquires practical value
though it is not necessarily the only determining element.
The spirit of nationality represents the highest development of
the idea of self-preservation. Its growth can be traced from the
individual to the family, thence to the tribe and city, until the
formation of the political state is obtained. In the last stages of
this process, nationality attains perfection through homogeneity
of its component individuals. The men who compose a single nation
must think together. Their ideals and aims must be one and they
must be conscious of a common destiny. Language, as the currency of
thought, naturally becomes the unifier. To a notable degree areas
of homogeneous language in Europe have been spared the havoc of
battle or siege. On the other hand, linguistic borderlands have
always been scenes of armed struggle and destruction.
Community of origin is not essential among members of the same
nation. The bond of language and identity of historical destiny
suffice for the creation of nationality. An English-speaking
immigrant on United States soil, imbued with the spirit of the
principles on which the country’s independence is founded, finds
himself in a state of response to the idea of American nationality.
And yet, the idea of nationality is no mere integration of
historical associations. It stands enthroned in the land. The poet
touches his compatriot’s heart by recalling the murmur of the
forest or by a picture of the winding shore. Through the charm
of living green enshrined in circling hills, at times through an
appreciation of the solemn peak rising heavenward, man found love
of homeland. A strong tie between humanity and the land was created
by these relations.
Nationality cannot depend on language alone, for it is founded
on geographical unity. The past thousand years of European
history contain sufficient proof of the fact. The three southern
peninsulas Spain, Italy and Greece are homelands of an equal number
of nations. A single language is current in each. To the north
a similar differentiation of nations adapts itself to regional
divisions. Plains, mountains and seas have limited European
nationalities to definite number and extension.
Thus every people acquires a peculiar genius which expresses itself
in characteristic fashion and cannot be made to assume a guise
alien to its own spirit. It absorbs the idealism of its captors
and molds it into its own form. The poet’s intuition rarely echoed
deeper truth than in the oft-quoted passage which immortalized the
spirit of Hellas:
Graecia capta ferum victorem cepit, et artes
Intulit agresti Latio.
Europe was stirred to the consciousness of nationality by the
French Revolution. Nations began finding themselves when the
doctrine of man’s equality, proclaimed on French soil, found
responsive welcome among the peoples of the continent. But the
new spirit caused dismay in every court circle. The inevitable
reaction that followed was reflected in the treaty of Vienna of
1815, when national aspirations were ignominiously ignored and
peoples beheld themselves bartered as chattels. The delegates in
attendance sat as representatives of dynastic interests. Their
interest in remodeling the political map of Europe was absorbed
wholly by the idea of securing compensation for the spoliation of
the territorial property of their sovereigns. Their labors meant
triumph for autocratic rule. Popular clamor for national grouping
was unheeded. Instead of quieting Europe, the treaty of Vienna was
a virtual admission on the part of less than three dozen men that
Europeans were incapable of bearing the glorious burden of their
own destinies. The tares of monarchical despotism were left to
stain the field of popular freedom.
But the seed sown by the great act of the French Revolution was
hardy. It was too late to eradicate liberal spirit from European
society. A mighty struggle of ideas ushered in the revolts of 1830
and 1848. Twenty odd years more, and for the first time in its
history western Europe was parceled into linguistic nations. The
birth of Germany during this period was significantly heralded by
an outburst of patriotic literature which for fire and enthusiasm
was unprecedented. Geibel’s demand for a united Germany in
Heroldsrufe was but the echo of the aspirations of millions of
his countrymen. France emerged out of these ordeals without loss
of her linguistic territory. The area of German speech received
marked attention. In truth the morning of modern German nationality
may be said to have broken in 1815. A year prior to this historic
date, the decision had been reached at the treaty of Paris (March
30, 1814) to unite the German states into a single confederation.
The dominating thought of European diplomacy, at the time, was to
prevent a recurrence of Napoleonic disturbances.
With their restricted territories, as well as by the jealousies
which animated their rulers, the German states lay, an easy
prey, at the mercy of any ambitious foreign leader. In their
union, Europe hoped to lay the foundations of continental peace.
Such a federation, it was thought, would safeguard the other
European countries from a concerted German attack, as it seemed
highly improbable that the entire confederacy would join in
a war undertaken by any one of its members for purposes of
self-aggrandizement. By this arrangement provision was made for the
strengthening of a number of weak states without the creation of a
new powerful unit in the group of European nations. Thirty million
Germans, comprising by far the majority of the German-speaking
inhabitants of the period, were thus politically welded for the
first time in modern history.
The idea of nationality had received scant attention in Germany
before the nineteenth century. Kant, Fichte and Hegel contributed
powerfully to its awakening. Hardly had the concept become familiar
to German thought before its relation with language became
established. The trend of feeling on the subject is best expressed
by Arndt about half a century before the fruition of Bismarck’s
life project at Versailles:
Was ist das deutsche Vaterland?
So nenne endlich mir das Land!
So weit die deutsche Zunge klingt
Und Gott im Himmel Lieder singt,
Dass soll es sein, dass soll es sein,
Das ganze Deutschland soll es sein.[264]
A literary history of a country is, in great measure, the mirror
of its political growth. The development of social aptitudes,
of intellectual faculties or of material wants within a given
area is, in the last resort, an expansion of the living forces
which make for nationality and which, ultimately, find their way
to literary records. Nationality and literature are thus bound
together by geography and history. Whatever be the period under
observation, the spirit of the day pervades them both. A striking
example of this relation is observable in medieval France, where
the troubadours personified the feudal conditions which prevailed
in the country. And furthermore literature, as a human product,
partakes of all the limitations which are subtly imposed by the
land on the fancy. It varies therefore, according to region, in
mental temperament, tastes and emotions or modes of thought.
So because it is part of life and a living influence, literature
has always consolidated the nation-forming power of language.
Poetry, especially, is often an intensified reflection of national
thought and life. In the words of Irving, “Poets always breathe the
feeling of a nation.” The cultivation of literature serves national
ends. In the very child, love of country is instilled through
the medium of doggerel--sometimes through lines of exquisite
simplicity. In thus strengthening the idea of nationality,
literature may be compared to the statue hewn from the marble of
language by patriotic and artistic thought.
Belgian writers, in this respect, occupy a place of their own in
European literature. Verhaeren and Maeterlinck voice the depth
of their sincerity in the language of their Walloon colleague
Lemonnier. Love of country in Spaak, a Fleming, is sung in French
verse:
Oui, sois de ton pays. Connais l’idolâtrie
De la terre natale! Et porte en toi l’orgueil
Et le tourment de ses jours de gloire et de deuil.
Antoine Clesse, the poet of Mons, likewise expresses popular
feeling in French:
Flamands, Wallons,
Ne sont que des prénoms
Belge est notre nom de famille.
No matter how the works of these poets are analyzed, in the inmost
souls of these writers it is the land that speaks. Belgium is
fathomed in their hearts. Their eyes lingered lovingly on the
scenery in the midst of which they lived. Flat roads winding
interminably over flat lands, chimes whose tones mellow with
age ring from the crumbling tops of old towers, rustic feasts
enlivened by the roaring mirth and joviality celebrated by Flemish
painters, these are the visions which are evoked by the French
words assembled by Belgian writers in their compositions. One
would seek in vain, however, for these Belgian scenes in French
literature. Like the Belgicisms which abound delightfully in every
Belgian writer’s works, they portray the soul of Belgian poetry as
sincerely as they afford genuine glimpses of Belgian lands. The
same subtle sensation of the living earth has been felt on the
troubled surface of mountainous Switzerland. For of Swiss lands and
life few descriptions will ever combine the charm and faithfulness
which characterize the works of Gottfried Keller, foremost among
the country’s writers who drew on the joint inspiration of flaming
patriotism and the incomparable beauty of Swiss landscape.
And how often has the written or spoken word fanned the flame
of nationality among downtrodden peoples! The story is the same
from land to land and age to age. The soul of a nation in bondage
is wrapped around its patriotic literature. Generation after
generation of Bohemians, Finns or Poles have drunk at the national
fount of poem and song. Within the peasant’s thatched home as in
the city abode, the well-worn volume, pregnant with past glory,
becomes the beacon of hope. It lights the darkness of oppression’s
heaviest hours. For men of feeling, destiny will ever be hailed in
the word that stirs. The harvest reaped by Cavour was of Dante’s
sowing.
In the bitter linguistic struggles waged in Europe two gratifying
facts are discernible. The dominance of the majority by an
intellectually gifted minority prevails in every country and age.
Furthermore, the survival of oppressed minorities in the midst of
oppressing majorities appears to be general. The one is the reward
of competence; the other is the triumph of right over might. Both
are victories of the human will. Both have been purchased by dint
of hard struggle. Humanity is the better for them.
Neither has conquest always been able to introduce a new language.
The widening sphere of Roman influence carried the original
dialect of the capital to the confines of the world. But it is
unlikely that Latin was spoken in the Nubian provinces or other
outlying districts to a greater degree than English is spoken in
India today. It was only the language of the dominant element and
the one in which official transactions were recorded. As a rule the
oldest language of a country is spoken by its peasants. The tillers
of the soil usually represent the oldest stratum in the population
of a region. The principle holds in territories which have borne
the brunt of successive invasions. It is the same in Macedonia,
Poland or Transylvania. On the other hand, the land-owning class is
generally recruited from among past invaders.
The value of language as a national asset was shown in France
during the trying days of war when the very existence of the
country was at stake. Respect for the mother-tongue is deeply
immured in every Frenchman’s heart. In no other country does
the feeling reach the same pitch. The French educational system
provides ample facilities for the early initiation of students to
the beauties of their vernacular. The clear and connected thought
for which French writing stands preëminent, its capacity for
expressing the most subtle shades of meaning, are largely results
of literary discipline.
A perusal of war-time literature cannot sufficiently indicate
the part played by French language in periods of stress. One
must preferably have had the privilege of acquaintance with
correspondence exchanged between relatives and intimates.
Patriotism pours unfaltering from the artless lines never intended
for strangers’ eyes. It is as if the crowded consciousness of
French nationality found constant release through its language.
Every observant foreigner in France has been struck by this fact.
In some instances where perception was more than usually attentive
we find, as in E. Wharton’s “Fighting France,” that:
“It is not too much to say that the French are at this moment
drawing a part of their national strength from their language.
The piety with which they have cherished and cultivated it has
made it a precious instrument in their hands. It can say so
beautifully what they feel that they find strength and renovation
in using it; and the word once uttered is passed on, and carries
the same help to others. Countless instances of such happy
expression could be cited by any one who has lived the last year
(1915) in France. On the bodies of young soldiers have been found
letters of farewell to their parents that made one think of some
heroic Elizabethan verse; and the mothers robbed of these sons
have sent them an answering cry of courage.”
One of the most remarkable instances of the influence of poetry
on national destiny is found in Serbian nationality, which has
been cast altogether in the mold of the country’s epic ballads or
“pjesmes.” Although primarily inspired by the valorous deeds of
legendary heroes, these indigenous compositions describe Serbian
life and nature with extraordinary verisimilitude and beauty. They
are national in a significant sense, not merely because the very
soul of the Serbian people is displayed in their lines, but also
because they have perpetuated Serbian history and language. The
purity of the Serbian tongue, its freedom from alien words, no
less than the maintenance of historical continuity in Serbia are
due, in a large measure, to the wandering of native minstrels--the
guzlars--who went to and fro reciting or singing the wonderful
exploits of their noted countrymen. Their unconscious, though
passionate insistence provided the Serbian with the only schooling
in national sentiment which he has undergone for generations
beginning with half-mythical times. However slow, the method was
effective, for it prevented atrophy of national hopes. Without
this influence the Serbians would probably have degenerated into a
people listless and inert to the call of nationality. The very name
of Serbia might never have been recorded in modern history.
The guzlars were therefore peddlers of nationality. The most
convincing evidence of their vital contribution to the formation
of the modern Serbian state is found during the five hundred years
in which the Turk’s benumbing rule was felt in the land. Marko
Kraljevitch, the popular hero-knight, feudal lord and outlaw,
according as occasion demanded, embodies Serbian resistance and
Serbian revolt against Moslem invaders. The stirring accents
in which tales of his deep attachment to Serbia were recounted
awakened exultant delight in the heart and brain of listeners and
inspired them to the hope of liberation from the hated yoke. Serbia
was prepared for the day of national independence by means of this
slow and century-long propaganda.
Replete with the glow and color of Serbian lands, the pjesme voices
Serbia’s national aspirations once more in the storm and stress of
new afflictions. Its accents ring so true that the geographer, in
search of Serbian boundaries, tries in vain to discover a surer
guide to delimitation. For Serbia extends as far as her folk-songs
are heard. From the Adriatic to the western walls of Balkan ranges,
from Croatia to Macedonia, the guzlar’s ballad is the symbol of
national solidarity. His tunes live within the heart and upon
the lips of every Serbian. The pjesme may therefore be fittingly
considered the measure and index of a nationality whose fiber it
has stirred. To make Serbian territory coincide with the regional
extension of the pjesme implies defining of the Serbian national
area. And Serbia is only one among many countries to which this
method of delimitation is applicable.
In Finland, nationality is embodied in the heartening lines of
the “Kalevala,” that Iliad of the north which takes its coloring
from nature with no less delightful sensitiveness than the Homeric
masterpiece. The lines of the poem define this Finnish epic as:
Songs of ancient wit and wisdom,
Legends they that once were taken
* * * * *
From the pastures of the Northland,
From the meads of Kalevala.
* * * * *
In this poem the beauty and color of Finland’s inland seas and the
bleakness of surrounding plains are painted in bold strokes and
with loving effusiveness. The Finn finds in its lines a reminder
of the scenes among which he has been reared and the link which
binds him to his past and to his land. As a mosaic of national
life pieced together by patriotism the Kalevala occupies a unique
position among literary productions of northern countries. Even a
note of Asiatic melancholy pervades its verses as if to recall the
share of Asia in the formation of Finnish national life.
The lyrics and songs collected in the Kalevala were brought
together in the beginning of the nineteenth century at a critical
period of Finnish history when national feeling had sunk to its
lowest ebb. Swedes and Russians vied with one another in their
efforts to denationalize Finland and bring the peninsula within the
sphere of their respective influence. No sooner was the Kalevala
published, however, than Finnish nationality asserted itself with
renewed vigor. Today after the lapse of almost a century since this
revival, Finland’s spirit of national independence is diffused more
widely than ever among its people. Such was the influence of a
literary echo of their land.
Among the peoples of Turkey, nationality and literature become
largely expressions of religious feeling. It could not be otherwise
in a country in which creed is the only medium of intellectual
progress. The oppressed native found refuge from the tyranny of his
Turkish masters in his church. His natural yearning for a higher
life found solace only within the sanctuaries of his faith. All
the education he received was obtained in schools attached to the
churches.
But to unravel the hopeless confusion which, at first glance,
seems to permeate human groupings in Turkey is, in the main, a
problem of geography. The region consists of a mountainous core
and a series of marginal lowlands. Its elevated area is a link in
the central belt of mountains which extends uninterruptedly from
Asia into Europe. This long chain of uplifts is the original seat
of an important race of highlanders collectively known as _Homo
alpinus_.[265] As far as is ascertainable to date, the mountaineers
of Turkey have all the anatomical characteristics pertaining to
this branch of the human family. Their religion and language may
differ but the physical type remains unchanged. Basing themselves
on this relation, anthropologists have assumed that Asiatic
Turkey is the brood-home of a sub-species of _Homo alpinus_
which is gradually acquiring recognition as a primordial Armenoid
element.[266] This type exists in its greatest purity today among
the Mohammedan dissenters of the Anatolian table-land as well as
among the Druzes and Maronites of Syria.
By geographical position, Asiatic Turkey is the junction of land
thoroughfares which trend from south to north as well as from east
to west. Its aboriginal population came inevitably into contact
with the races whose migrations are known to have begun about 4,000
B.C. A second group of peoples is thus obtained in which the old
strain is considerably modified. Armenians, Turks, upland Greeks,
Jacobites, Nestorians and most of the Kurds represent this mixed
element. A third group consists of lowlanders who never made the
ascent of Turkish mountains and consequently carry no traces of
Hittite ancestry. Maritime Greek populations and Arabs fall under
this classification.
In the main we see that the mountain bears in its central part a
homogeneous and coherent people. Distance from the core has slight
effect upon the physical characteristics of the mountaineers, as
long as they do not forsake the upland for the lowland. Their
ideas, however, undergo modifications which can be interpreted as
concessions to the views of more powerful peoples with whom contact
is established. Customs, however, generally remain unchanged even
if they have to be maintained in secrecy.
Nevertheless, relief alone cannot account for the variety of
peoples and religions in Asiatic Turkey. The easternmost fringe of
Christianity emerging sporadically out of an ocean of Mohammedanism
discloses, by the variety of its discordant elements, the extent to
which distance from Constantinople, the religious capital of the
eastern church, had weakened the power of ecclesiastical authority.
Armenians, Nestorians, Chaldeans, Jacobites and Maronites, one
and all heretics in the eyes of Orthodox prelates, were merely
independent thinkers who relied on the remoteness of their native
districts in order to protest, without peril to themselves, against
the innovations of Byzantine theologians, or to stand firm on the
basis of the rites and doctrines of early Christianity.
From the social standpoint the eastern half of Asiatic Turkey
deserves investigation as the seat of an immemorial conflict
between nomadism and sedentary life. Every stage of the transition
between the two conditions may be observed. The feuds which set
community against community in Turkey often originate in the
divergent interests of nomad and settled inhabitant, and are
enforced by economic factors. As an example the Kurds of the
Armenian highlands may be mentioned. The perpetuation of nomadism
in their case is the result of extensive horse-breeding[267]--their
chief source of revenue--which compels them to seek low ground in
winter.
Viewed as a whole, Asiatic Turkey has changed from an ideal nursery
of hardy men to a land of meeting between races and peoples as
well as between their ideals. It may be safely predicted that the
future of its inhabitants bids fair to be as intimately affected
as their past by the remarkable situation of the country and its
physical features. One can only hope, for their sake, that a
thorough invasion of highland and lowland by the spirit of the west
will not be delayed much longer. This much may be said now, that
the establishment of Christian rule in the land would probably be
attended by wholesale conversions to Christianity in many so-called
Mohammedan communities, where observance of Islamic rites has been
dictated by policy, rather than by faith.
In dealing with the varied influences which engage attention in a
study of linguistic areas the student is frequently compelled to
pause before the importance of economic relations. Inspection of a
map of Europe suggests strikingly that zones of linguistic contact
were destined by their very location to become meeting-places for
men speaking different languages. They correspond to the areas of
circulation defined by Ratzel.[268] The confusion of languages
on their site is in almost every instance the result of human
intercourse determined by economic causes. Necessity, far more than
the thought of lucre, compels men to resort to intercourse with
strangers. In Belgium, after the Norman conquest, the burghers of
Flanders were able to draw on English markets for the wool which
they converted into the cloth that gave their country fame in the
fairs of Picardy and Champagne.[269] We have here a typical example
of Ratzel’s “Stapelländern” or “transit regions.”
In very small localities the spread of language brought about
by economic changes has occasionally come under the scrutiny of
modern observers. At Grimault, in the ancient land of Burgundy,
the deterioration of the local patois due to intensive working of
quarries between 1860 and 1880 has been studied by E. Blin.[270]
Laborers from remote districts were attracted by the prospect
of work. Some intermarried with the natives. The influx of the
foreign element was followed by the replacement of the locality’s
vernacular by French.
In west-central Europe the line of traffic along the Rhine at
the end of the twelfth century ran from Cologne to Bruges along
the divide between French and Flemish. Lorraine, a region of
depression between the Archean piles of the Ardennes and Vosges,
invited access from east and west and was known to historians as a
Gallo-Romanic market place of considerable importance.[271]
In our time the river trade between Holland and Germany along the
Rhine has caused expansion of Dutch into German territory as far
as Wesel and Crefeld. The intruding language, however, yields to
German wherever the latter is present.[272] Prevalence of French
in parts of Switzerland is generally ascribed to travel through
certain Alpine passes.[273] The area of human circulation between
Lake Constance and Lake Geneva has endowed Switzerland with 35
different dialects of German, 16 of French, 8 of Italian and 5
of Romansh.[274] The penetration of German into the Trentino has
already been explained. In Austria the entire valley of the Danube
has provided continental trade with one of its most important
avenues. Attention is called elsewhere to the Balkan peninsula as
an intercontinental highway. In a word, language always followed in
the wake of trade and Babel-like confusion prevailed along channels
wherein men and their marketable commodities flowed.
This retrospect also leads to the conclusion that the influence
of physical features in the formation of European nationalities
has been exerted with maximum intensity in the early periods of
their history. This was at the time when man’s adaptation to
environment was largely blind and unconditioned by his own will.
Freedom from this physical thralldom is attained only through man’s
practical knowledge of human necessities and a sound vision of the
welfare of his descendants. Manifestations of nature can then be
made subservient to the human will. In this regard historians may
eventually be induced to divide their favorite study into two main
periods characterized respectively by man’s submission to, or his
intelligent control of, environment. A proper understanding of
this conception may contribute to the establishment of frontiers
with a view to eliminating conflicts due to relics of national or
historical incompatibility.
The development of modern boundaries should be regarded as a
process originating in barriers first provided by nature and
subsequently elaborated by the human will for its purposes.
Gradually however natural features of the land lose value as
national boundaries. This is the result of man’s progress, of the
development of railways or wireless stations. It is the removal of
natural obstacles; the conquest of distance by speed. All these
advances tend to promote intercourse. They are opening the vista
of a day when an international boundary will have no greater
importance in world affairs than the limiting line of a city plot.
National frontiers, at best, become established by virtue of
historical accidents. At given times and in order to promote
fellowship among nations it becomes necessary to define the areas
over which certain principles of political jurisdiction are
recognized as valid by a given body of men. A national frontier
in the strictest sense of the term cannot, therefore, be limited
by the surface feature which has shaped its development. It has
generally outgrown this phase of its extension together with the
constantly increasing range of activity of the peoples it once
inclosed. Factors of an ethnological, economic or linguistic nature
must, therefore, be considered. Then only will the new delimitation
be entitled to be qualified as natural.
The preëminence of the linguistic factor set forth in these pages
may be illustrated concisely by the accepted recognition of the
“langue d’oïl” as the national language of France by all Frenchmen
of the present day, although this would have been impossible five
centuries ago. Adoption of the linguistic criterion in boundary
delimitation becomes, therefore, a mere matter of expediency. Its
worth is not due to any assumed abstract value of language. It
is merely a practical manner of settling divergences regarding
national ownership of border territories. It is of value because
the guiding consideration in boundary delimitation or revision is
to eliminate future sources of conflict.
The European war is no exception to the fact that almost every
conflict of magnitude has been due, in part, to ill-adjusted
frontier lines. Slight regard for national aspirations seems
to have prevailed in the delimitations determined upon by the
signatory powers of every important treaty. The seed of ulterior
fighting was thus sown, for one of the main features of modern
history is the growth of national feeling as a dominating force in
human affairs.
With Europe rid of Napoleon, the treaty of Vienna was framed by
his allied foes in 1815 for the purpose of recasting the political
map. No heed was paid, however, to the legitimate desire of
smaller European nations to rule themselves. An instance of some
of the gross blunders committed then was the merging of Belgium
and Holland into one nationality in spite of the protests of their
representatives. Feelings of the bitterest nature between Belgians
and Dutch engendered by this act ultimately forced a war between
the two countries in 1830. It was only after their separation
that the enmity of the two peoples gave way to cordial relations.
Subsequent history has shown that these two nations have often been
of greater help to each other while retaining separate political
entity than under forced union. In Italy also the progress made
towards union by Italian-speaking peoples was checked by this
treaty and the country split once more into a number of small
independent states. The assignation of Lombardy and Venetia to
Austria led eventually to the war of 1859.
In contrast with these cases, Germany’s rise to power with
unprecedented rapidity in the history of the world is a striking
instance of the splendid development attainable within boundaries
peopled by inhabitants of the same speech. With language and an
efficient army in control Prussia only needed a leader to direct
the gravitation of other German-speaking states within its own
orbit. Bismarck stepped in, the right man at the right time. In
1864 he hurled the Prussian fighting machine against Denmark and
wrenched the provinces of Schleswig-Holstein from that country. Two
years later he turned on Austria and imposed Prussian leadership
on the German-speaking world. These warlike moves gave Prussia
the ascendency in the North German Confederation. Only the states
of southern Germany were now needed to form the German Empire his
patriotic mind had conceived. To enlist their sympathies he found
it necessary to strike at France. His task was accomplished when a
united Germany annexed Alsace-Lorraine.
Bismarck’s work was flawless as long as he added Germans to the
empire of his creation. He erred grievously, however, in including
a small number of Frenchmen with Alsace-Lorraine. Had linguistic
boundaries been respected at the treaty of Frankfort, and the
French districts of the conquered provinces left to France, it is
safe to say that Franco-German relations would not have been marked
by the lack of cordiality which has characterized them since 1871.
From whatever standpoint the subject be approached, the inclusion
of a handful of Frenchmen within German territory was neither
politic nor economic. Today Germans may well ask themselves whether
the move was desirable.
The task of uniting all Germans under a single scepter was not
completed by Bismarck. Ten million Germans are still subjects of
the Austrian Emperor. But Austria as a political unit stands on
exceedingly shaky foundations. This is due to the inclusion within
its boundaries of 10 million Hungarians, 20 million Slavs and
several million peoples of Romance speech. As a result, Austria is
likely to be split into a number of independent states. Should this
dissolution come about, the natural desire of Germans is to witness
the crumbling of Austria’s pieces into Germany’s lap. The union
of all German-speaking inhabitants of Europe into a single nation
would then become an accomplished fact.
Considered from the broad standpoint of human migrations England,
France and Italy may be regarded as understudies in the drama
staged on the old continent. The star performers are Russia and
Germany, and the issue is between these two nations. The grouping
of European nations with Russia is a mere result of Germany’s
preponderant strength. The end of the conflict will necessarily
witness the recasting of alliances along with changes of frontier
lines.
For at the bottom of it all the fight is between Slav and Teuton.
It is a grim and unrelenting struggle for existence that is shaping
itself into one of the world’s fiercest racial contests. The Slavic
peoples are steadily pressing in from the east though not with the
barbarity which characterized their earlier onslaughts. It is the
turn of Russians, Poles, Bohemians, Slovenes, Serbians and Croats,
slowly to crowd on the descendants of the blue-eyed flaxen-haired
barbarians, representing Germanic peoples.
This Slavonic westerly push has always been blocked by the leading
power in the west. France opposed it in the Napoleonic period.
Great Britain checked it in the latter half of the nineteenth
century. Today it is Germany’s turn to stand the brunt of its
pressure. As matters stand both Germany and Russia are vigorous,
young and fast-growing. The two peoples have taken root on adjacent
land like two sturdy oaks. They are now in the stage at which
the soil’s nourishment at the border suffices only for one. The
weaker must wither. The Teuton is expanding eastward, the Slav is
spreading westward. Their main clashing-zone happens to be the
Balkan peninsula. The ceaseless agitation in this area and its
menace to the world’s peace is a consequence of the antagonism
between the Pan-Slavic Colossus and the Pan-German Titan.
Germany’s expansion is a natural phenomenon. The country is
overpopulated. It must expand. The sea is a barrier to its westerly
expansion. The north is uninviting. The south is being drained of
its resources by active and intelligent inhabitants. The “Drang
nach Osten” of German Imperialism is therefore inevitable. The line
of least resistance points to the east, where fertile territory
awaits development.
Little wonder, then, that the attention of Germany’s far-seeing
statesmen has been directed toward oriental countries, whose wealth
of natural resources and genial climate combine to render them
ideally attractive. The verdant vales and forest-clad mountains of
Serbia, Greece and Bulgaria abound with raw material needed for
Germany’s increasing industries. Beyond the narrow watercourse,
intervening between Europe and Asia, at the Dardanelles and
Bosporus lies Asia Minor, a land marvelously rich in minerals
and susceptible of great agricultural development. Farther east
the exceedingly fertile Mesopotamian valley, once the granary of
the civilized world, stretches between the western Euphrates and
Tigris, and bids fair to provide humanity anew with vast supplies
of cereals.
This is the vision which has floated alluringly before the minds of
German and Austrian statesmen, working hand in hand, Austria paving
the way in the Balkans, Germany forcing herself successfully in
the control of Asia Minor, which today is a German colony in all
but name. By their joint efforts, the Teuton brothers have laid
the foundation of an empire whose northern shore is washed by
the Baltic and whose southern boundary may extend to the Persian
Gulf. The great obstacle to this scheme of German expansion is
constituted by the neighborhood of Russia and the predominance
of the Slavic element in the population of the Balkan peninsula.
Montenegrins, Serbians, Macedonians and even Bulgarians dread
annexation by Germany.
At the end of the Balkan wars, Russia had scored heavily against
Germany. An enlarged Serbia had been constituted directly in the
path of Teutonic advance. In addition to this Slavic victory,
every Balkan country had been strengthened considerably by the
new delimitation of their frontiers. For the first time in their
history, Greeks, Bulgarians and Serbians found that their national
border could be made to coincide with their linguistic boundary.
This national sifting is by no means complete in the Balkan
peninsula. But there is no question that notable progress in the
recognition of patriotic aspirations was made as soon as the region
was rid of its Turkish masters.
With the history of the past hundred years in mind, statesmen
engaged in the task of framing peace treaties may well heed the
lessons taught by political geography. They might conclude then
that greater possibilities of enduring peace exist whenever
the delimitation of new frontiers is undertaken with a view to
segregating linguistic areas within separate national borders.
Commerce and industry will overcome ultimately these barriers and
pave the way to friendly international intercourse. These are the
lines along which intelligent statecraft will earn its reputation
in the future.
The practical value of linguistic frontiers as national boundaries
is due to their geographical growth. They are natural because
they are the result of human intercourse based largely on
economic needs. Having developed naturally, they correspond to
national aspirations. Such being the case, the task of frontier
delimitation can be made to assume a scientific form. Only in
the case of uninhabited or sparsely populated regions will an
artificial boundary--say, of the straight line type--prove
adequate. But in tenanted portions of the earth’s surface where
human wills and desires come into play the problem cannot be
dismissed so lightly. The ordinary laws of science must then be
applied. This, after all, merely implies drawing on the stock of
common sense accumulated by the human race in the course of its
development. The clear duty of statesmen engaged in a revision of
boundaries is to put the varied interests at stake into harmony
with the facts of nature as they are revealed by geography. This is
possible because the science deals with the surface of the earth
considered as the field of man’s activity. Its data can be drawn
upon just as successfully as the engineer draws upon the energy of
a waterfall or a ton of coal. Soundness and permanency of the labor
of delimitation can thus be insured.
The preceding remarks should not be considered as implying that
a mountain, or a river, or even the sea are to be arbitrarily
regarded as frontiers. Lines of water-parting deserve particular
mention as having provided satisfactory national borders in
history. But in boundaries each case should be treated upon its own
merits. There was a time when, in Cowper’s words:
Mountains interposed
Make enemies of nations who had else
Like kindred drops been mingled into one.
And yet the passes of the Alps refute the poet’s statement. Their
uniting function eventually overcame their estranging power. The
easterly spread of French language over the Vosges concurs in the
same trend of testimony. The imposing mass of the Urals is no more
of a parting than are the Appalachians. To be pertinent, it will
be necessary, in each instance, to consider the complex operations
of natural laws and the process of fusing and building up of
nationality brought about by their agency.
The value of mountains in the scheme of useful boundary demarcation
has been attested in the European war. Towns and villages sheltered
behind rocky uplifts have suffered relatively little from the
devastation which has marked the struggle in lowlands and plains.
The fact is true for the Vosges mountains, the Trentino uplands
and the Carpathian region. Although fighting of an exceedingly
bitter character was maintained in each of these areas, the loss in
property was never extreme. This is one of the many instances where
land configuration lends itself advantageously to delimitation
work. The need of trustworthy geographical information in
partitioning and dividing up territory is obvious. Upon this basis
only can boundary revision be satisfactorily pursued.
The long borderland of the French language which marks the northern
and eastern boundary of French lands from the English Channel
to the Mediterranean, lies unruffled by political agitation
in its southeastern stretch, where Italian and French become
interchangeable languages. Modifications in this section of the
political frontier hardly need be considered. Their occurrence,
if any, will probably come as peaceful adjustments dictated by
economic reasons. To the north, however, the line has a history
tainted by deeds of violence. In this stretch it forms the divide
between two civilizations, the French and the German. These,
although having flourished side by side, are distinctly opposed
in spirit and method. Here, beginning north of the Swiss border,
frontier changes appear inevitable.
In the Vosges uplift, certain facts of geographical import have
direct bearing on the international boundary problem. The very
occurrence of a mountain in this zone of secular conflict has a
significance of its own. Aggression has generally made its way
up the steep slope and, since the treaty of Frankfort of 1871,
strategic advantages lie on the German side. Moreover the crest
line shows French linguistic predominance.
[Illustration:
_The American Geographical Society of New York_
_Frontiers of Language and Nationality in Europe, 1917, Pl. IX_
PART OF EUROPE SHOWING LANGUAGES having political significance.]
In Lorraine, the steady expansion of French over German territory
reveals the assimilative capacity of French civilization. France,
unable to send forth colonists because of her lack of numbers,
nevertheless contains within herself by virtue of superior
civilization the ability to absorb the foreigner. Of this, evidence
is to be found in the Alsatian’s sympathy for France no less
than in the unanimous verdict of impartial foreigners. Belgium’s
unhesitating rally to the French cause in the present war was
also the spontaneous response to the greater cultural appeal
emanating from France. The fact is attested by history since the
earliest times, for much of the civilization of Germanic peoples
has invariably taken its source in the inspiring ideals of the
wonderfully endowed inhabitants of French territory.
Upon this historical basis, the intermediate zone between
French and German languages might be converted into a number
of buffer-states which, from the Alps to the North Sea, would
represent the borderland of the central mountain zone and the
northern plain. Switzerland, Alsace-Lorraine, Luxemburg and
Belgium have been weak spots of European diplomacy on account of
geographical circumstances. A just appreciation of this fact alone
can provide against a continuance of past weakness.
Whatever the result of the present war, boundary rectifications
from the easternmost wedge of Switzerland to the head of the
Adriatic may be expected. They were the subject of negotiations
between Austria and Italy prior to the latter country’s entry into
the war in 1915. Austria at that time proposed to cede to Italy a
portion of the Trentino or “Süd-Tirol” as it is illogically called
by the Germans. The territory which Austria was willing to abandon
to prevent Italy from joining the Allies coincided roughly with
the extension of Italian language north of the Italian frontier.
Italian demands presented then were based, however, upon strategic
necessities as well as linguistic considerations. Italy therefore
outlined a frontier much nearer to the Adriatic watershed.
The Italian claims may be summarized as follows:[275] From
Switzerland the present boundary line is to be maintained to Mount
Cevedale, whence it is to strike east to Illmenspitze and thence
northeast to Klausen passing through Gargazon. From Klausen the
line leads to the south until latitude 46° 30′ is reached, after
which it resumes its easterly course, passes through Tofana and
reaches the old boundary at about 4 miles northeast of Cortina
d’Ampezzo. The population of the last-named district, formerly
Ladin, is now Italian. This boundary revision will give political
validity to the Italian Alps, a region which is geographically
Italian.
[Illustration:
FIG. 67--Sketch map showing proposed changes in the
Austro-Italian frontier according to Austrian and Italian views.]
Through this line the transfer of the command of the passes to
Italy would become an accomplished fact. It would mean that the
entrance to the Vintschgau, the valley of the Upper Adige and of
the gorge of the Eisack at Klausen with the issue of the Brenner
and Pustherthal railways would be controlled by Italy. Moreover the
frontier has the merit of being identical with the old bishopric
boundary maintained from 1106 A.D. to the Reformation. The flaw, if
any, in such an eventual settlement might be found in the fact that
the Botzen district, although economically Italian, is Teutonic
in speech and feeling. The rest of the population in the Trentino
favors annexation to Italy.
The Austrian offer to Italy diverges from the Italian project at
Illmenspitze[276] and strikes south, carefully avoiding abandonment
of territory of German speech to Italy. In doing this, however, it
leaves some of the Italian-speaking northeastern districts of the
Noce valley in Austrian territory. All the mountain outlets which
open into the Adige valley are retained by Austria. This from the
Italian standpoint is inadmissible, as it would leave the southern
country exposed to aggression from the north. On the basis of the
Austrian census for 1910 the changes in population consequent upon
such a boundary revision are as follows:
Italians and
Ladins Germans
In territory offered by Austria 366,837 13,892
In territory retained by Austria 18,863 511,222
In case the Italian claim is granted the following changes will
result:
Italians and
Ladins Germans
In new Italian territory 371,477 74,000
In territory retained by Austria 14,229 440,805
A margin of coastland along the eastern Adriatic is mainly Serbian
in nationality though Italian in culture. It was once the nest of
pirates who terrorized the Adriatic and Mediterranean. We catch
historical glimpses of their retreats to the admirable shelters
teeming along the coastland which skirts the Dalmatian mountains.
The fringe of long islands deployed like a protecting screen
enabled their vessels to evade capture. This feature of the region
still exercises its influence, for a strong naval power in control
of such a base might easily dominate the Mediterranean lane of
traffic between east and west. The political fate of the eastern
shores of the Adriatic cannot therefore be sundered from their
geographical aspect.
The Italians have been exhibited elsewhere in these pages as a
vanishing minority throughout this Dalmatian coast. We are in
the presence of Serbians, disguised under various appellations,
among which the most familiar are Croatians, Slavonians, Bosnians,
Herzegovinians, Montenegrins, Dalmatians and Illyrians. All these
elements were susceptible of being strongly knit into a single
nationality. The inclusion of a sympathizing, though numerically
small, Slovene group could only introduce wholesome competition
among them.
Nationalism in this region was awakened by French achievements and
influences at the time of its conquest by Napoleon’s armies. The
French provinces of Illyria, which included Slovene territory on
the north and extended as far south as Montenegro, were converted
in 1816 into a kingdom of the same name which survived, up to 1846,
as part of the Austrian Empire. The taste of political independence
acquired by southern Slavs in that interval of time never lost
its savor. Schemes for the formation of an independent Jugoslavia
were naturally thrown into sharper relief through the medium of
linguistic unity.
Such a south Slavic political entity must necessarily be identified
with Serbia. Its extent is admirably defined by geographical,
ethnographical and linguistic lines all of which coincide, thereby
pointing irrefutably to national unity. The Drave, Morava, Drina
and Lim rivers, with the Adriatic Sea, encircle this genuine
Serbian area. It comprises the entire system of parallel ranges
which form the mountainous rearland of the Adriatic. Because of
its arduous character the region was never thoroughly mastered by
foreigners. Invaders established themselves in force only along the
sections of international highways which cross the land. The rest
remained accessible to the Serbian natives only.
The defining of an independent Hungary presents little confusion if
approached from the main highway of geography. Agreement between
the land and its inhabitants appears to exist here, for the Magyar
is, in the first place, a lowlander accustomed to live within the
precincts of a fertile plain. He has always shunned the mountain
and is rarely to be met above the 600-foot contour. As soon as the
hills to the north of the vast field of his birth are attained
he disappears, leaving a few officials to represent him. Slovak,
Rumanian and Ruthenian hillmen then come upon the scene. On the
western side, west of the Raab, the heights drained by the river
are peopled by Germans and, in spite of a complex boundary zone,
a convenient line of demarcation could be drawn upon the basis
of elevation. Southward the old-time utility of the Drave as the
dividing line between Croat and Hungarian remains unimpaired to
this day. In the east, however, around the confluence of this river
with the Danube and towards the Theiss valley the swamp lands have
repelled the ease-loving Hungarian as effectively as the mountains
to the east and north. The Serb, less particular in his choice of
residence, advanced northward as far as the swampy land extends. In
this section any physical map contains the data for a territorial
division.
With regard to Transylvania, conditions may be summarized as
follows: the region is scantily populated, valleys constituting
centers of human habitation almost exclusively. The inhabitants are
overwhelmingly Rumanians.[277] The dominating Hungarian element
inhabits isolated communities in their midst. This separation of
the rival peoples is of the utmost interest in boundary revision,
for which it provides a reliable geographical basis. Wallis has
ingeniously shown[278] that a line separating the majority of
Hungarians from Rumanians can be obtained by taking language as
a guide and that this is possible because there exists no mixing
of peoples in the eastern borderland of Hungarian language. In
reality, throughout Hungary the only element that has insinuated
itself in the midst of Hungarian, Rumanian or Slav populations is
the German. This element is generally absorbed except where present
in large numbers. The Magyar, however, has never mingled with his
neighbors. One is almost led to seek the reason for his aloofness
in his Asiatic origin.
Poland also has its natural place in the European political
system. The majority of Poles live in Russian Poland. Out of a
total of over 20,000,000 Poles about 12,000,000 are found in the
“governments” or administrative districts created by Russia in the
sections of Poland within Russia’s boundaries. These districts
are ten in number and adjoin each other. Geographically they form
a unit--the westernmost appendage of the vast united Russian
territory which aggregates between one-sixth or one-seventh of
the total land surface of the world. Detachment of this Polish
section from Russia and its creation into part of an autonomous
Poland is practicable without serious loss to Russian unity. Slavic
solidarity would in fact be consolidated if Poland were constituted
a sovereign state.
To Germany, however, an autonomous Poland which would encompass the
million Poles living in the Kaiser’s empire implies abandonment
of a territory which reaches far into the heart of the country.
The Polish strip ends less than a hundred miles east of Berlin.
The province of Posen, a considerable portion of Silesia, a narrow
strip of West Prussia reaching the Baltic west of Danzig and the
Masurian Lakes district are peopled by Poles. Furthermore, and this
is of capital importance in German eyes, East Prussia which is
German by language and tradition, as well as Prussian to the core,
would become isolated from the main mass of the German-speaking
people. It is improbable that such a cession of territory will take
place as long as Germany has the power to prevent it. It need only
be remembered that the first partition of Poland was engineered by
Frederick the Great merely to join East Prussia to the rest of his
kingdom. Against this last fact, however, the imperative necessity
for an independent Poland to obtain an outlet on the Baltic will
always prevail in anti-German circles.
Nature therefore points to the existence of a real German menace
to Polish autonomy. It is needless to minimize the significance
of the points at issue. Prussia, the dominant state in the German
nation, will never consent to the impairment of her territorial
unity by the surrender of her Polish sections. On the other hand
the reconstruction of Poland must be complete if the creation
of a Balkanic state of affairs west of the Gulf of Danzig is to
be avoided. A partial reunion of Polish-speaking groups under
an autonomous government would be the prelude to irredentist
questions. This however is precisely what an enlightened world is
seeking to prevent.
In reality the German nation would be the gainer by the creation
of a reunited Polish state. No better barrier to Russia’s
westerly advance in Europe could be devised. Conversely Teutonic
encroachments on Slavic territory--bound as they inevitably are to
be attended by bloodshed--would be effectively arrested. A buffer
state between Russia and Germany is the safest guarantee of peace
between the two nations. All the inextricable tangles in which
Europe has been involved by Polish problems can be unraveled by
the restoration of Polish national entity. The problem requires
solution for the sake of the peace of the world.
The problems arising along the remaining linguistic boundaries have
been exhibited in earlier chapters and require but little mention
here. In Schleswig an extension of Denmark’s political frontier
as far south as the Danish language prevails would be welcomed as
the harbinger of lasting harmony between Danes and Germans. The
historical frontier between the Danish duchy and Holstein could be
utilized to advantage in this change. In this, as in other cases,
the principles of geography, modified by national aspirations and
economic needs, must in the last resort be recognized as practical
and applicable. Bohemia, which has been shown to be splendidly laid
off on a physical map, deserves political independence because it
is endowed with geographic individuality. This method of solving
the problems which for centuries have burdened Europe with strife
would, like the splitting of Austria into national fragments, mark
an improvement in the lot of a notable proportion of the population
of Europe. New impetus would be granted to the development of
national sentiment. Humanity owes much to the free play of this
feeling. The claims of world brotherhood have received greater
attention through its existence. The energies of submerged
nationalities have hitherto been absorbed by the struggle for
survival. Relief from this stress will be accompanied by respect
for alien rights instead of hatred of the oppressor.
Throughout the nineteenth century, as well as in the beginning of
the twentieth, reconstruction of nationalities was effected on a
linguistic basis. The part played by language during that period is
of tantamount importance to the religious feeling which formerly
caused many a destructive war. Practically all the wars of the last
hundred years are the outcome of three great constructive movements
which led to the unification of Germany and of Italy as well as to
the disentanglement of Balkan nationalities. These were outward and
visible signs of the progress of democratic ideals. The Congress of
Vienna failed to provide Europe with political stability because
popular claims were ignored during the deliberations. At present,
inhabitants of linguistic areas under alien rule are clamoring for
the right to govern themselves. The carrying out of plebiscites
under international supervision can often be relied upon to satisfy
their aspirations and serve as a guide to frontier rearrangements.
All told, the growing coincidence of linguistic and political
boundaries must be regarded as a normal development. It is a form
of order evolved out of the chaos characterizing the origin of
human institutions. The delimitation of international frontiers is
as necessary as the determination of administrative boundaries or
city lines. Human organization requires it and there is no reason
why it should not be undertaken with fair regard to the wishes and
feelings of all affected. For nations, like individuals, are at
their best only when they are free, that is to say when the mastery
of their destiny is in their own hands.
FOOTNOTES:
[264]
What is the German’s Fatherland?
O name at length this mighty land!
As wide as sounds the German tongue,
And Germans hymns to heaven are sung,
That is the land;
That, German, is thy Fatherland.
[Translation from J. F. Chamberlain’s Literary Selections as an Aid
in Teaching Geography, _Journ. of Geogr._, Sept. 1916, p. 12.]
[265] J. L. Myres: The Alpine Races in Europe, _Geogr. Journ._,
Vol. 28, 1906, No. 6, pp. 537-553.
[266] F. von Luschan: The Early Inhabitants of Western Asia, _Ann.
Rept. Smithsonian Inst._ for 1914, p. 577.
[267] D. G. Hogarth: The Nearer East, New York, 1902, pp. 198-199.
[268] F. Ratzel: Politische Geographie, 2nd ed., Munich, 1903. Cf.
Chap. 16, “Der Verkehr als Raumbewältiger,” pp. 447-534.
[269] R. Blanchard: La Flandre, Paris, 1906.
[270] _Bull. Com. Trav. Hist. et Scien., Sec. Géogr._, Vol. 29,
1914, p. xli.
[271] J. Vidal de la Blache: Étude sur la Vallée Lorraine de la
Meuse, Paris, 1908, pp. 165-180.
[272] Cf. inset on pp. 63-64, Andree’s Handatlas, 6th ed., 1915.
[273] J. Brunhes: _La Géographie humaine_, Paris, 1912, pp. 598-599.
[274] L. W. Lyde: The Continent of Europe, London, 1913, p. 383.
[275] D. W. Freshfield: The Southern Frontiers of Austria, _Geogr.
Journ._, Vol. 46, 1915, pp. 414-436.
[276] R. von Pfaundler: Österreichisch-italienische Grenzfragen,
_Pet. Mitt._, Vol. 61, 1915, pp. 217-223.
[277] B. C. Wallis: Distribution of Nationalities in Hungary,
_Geogr. Journ._, Vol. 52, 1916, No. 3, pp. 177-189.
[278] Loc. cit.
APPENDIX A
GERMAN SETTLEMENTS IN RUSSIA
Colonies of Germans in Russia are found mainly in the Baltic
provinces and around the banks of the Volga. According to the
census of 1897 the German residents of the governments of Livonia,
Kurland, Esthonia and St. Petersburg numbered 229,084. The majority
of this northern element is distributed along the shores of the
Gulf of Riga.
The banks of the Volga were first colonized by Germans in 1763
after a proclamation issued by Empress Catherine II inviting
foreigners to settle on either side of the river in the environs
of Saratoff and Samara and as far as Tzaritzin. The distress
that followed the Seven Years’ War in Germany determined a
number of families of the afflicted provinces to seek a better
lot on Russian soil. By the year 1768 there had been founded
102 German settlements containing a total population of 27,000
inhabitants.[279] The newcomers had to face considerable hardships.
Many of them were neither farmers nor peasants. Their endurance was
taxed by the rigor of the climate. Insecurity of life and property
prevailed as badly as in their devastated motherland. In 1774
rebel bands led by Jemelian Pontgatcheff wrought havoc and ruin in
the new districts. Two years later hordes of Kirghiz nomads laid
waste the land again and carried off a number of the emigrants as
slaves. This state of affairs lasted until the last decades of the
nineteenth century. The Tatar raiders were attracted mainly by the
cattle of the colonists. The value of horses, camels and cattle
stolen between 1875 and 1882 is estimated at 330,000 rubles.[280]
It is estimated that fully five million rubles were spent by
the Russian government to plant these foreign colonies. But no
onerous terms were imposed on the settlers. A head tax of three
rubles constituted their only pecuniary obligation to the state.
Furthermore, a liberal administration was provided for their
settlements. Each village was ruled by an assembly recruited from
among its inhabitants.
Unfortunately for the development of these communities the Russian
system of collective ownership known as the “mir” was instituted.
Under this form of tenure all land becomes the property of the
village. Each male inhabitant is temporarily entitled to a share
of the whole area and an exchange of plots is made every ten
years. Each village then receives a new fraction and fresh lots
are apportioned to those who have come of age during the decade.
This method of ownership does not lead to development and generally
retards rather than promotes agricultural progress.
Furthermore the land is none too fertile. Uncertainty therefore
is today the common lot of many of the descendants of the old
German settlers. Many prefer to engage in trade rather than in
agriculture. The natural increase of the population has brought
a certain amount of congestion which has resulted in emigration.
Effort is made by German missionary societies to induce these
Russian Germans to return to the land of their fathers. The Russian
government on the other hand provides them with ample facilities
and inducements to settle in Siberia. The region around Tomsk
contains a number of villages built up by this emigration. Many
however prefer to emigrate to the United States where they find a
happier lot. Settlements composed entirely of Volga Germans exist
in Wisconsin.
The old German settlers had held steadfastly to their religion.
Their descendants have also clung to the faith of their fathers,
thus creating a totally separate community in the midst of Orthodox
Russia. Their earliest schools had been founded as annexes of their
churches and education had been a great factor in the maintenance
of language and religion. In 1891 the use of Russian was rendered
obligatory in all educational institutions of the Empire.
Nevertheless this measure cannot be said to have contributed to
weaken the German character of the communities. From Germany itself
manifestations of interest towards these faraway centers of German
custom have always been keen. Neither has support been lacking.
According to recent statistics the Germans inhabiting the banks
of the Volga number close to half a million, distributed equally
on both banks of the great inland river. The ethnic type of these
Germans has been maintained with remarkable purity and their
language contains obsolete forms dating from the eighteenth
century. The names of the largest communities and the number of
their inhabitants are as follows:
Saratoff 12,500
Norka 13,416
Frank 11,700
Grimm or Lesnoi Karamish 10,761
Baltzer Katharinenstadt or Baronsk 10,134
FOOTNOTES:
[279] P. Clerget: Les Colonies Allemandes de la Volga, _La Géogr._,
Feb. 1909.
[280] H. Pokorny: Die Deutschen an der Volga, _Deutsche Erde_,
1908, No. 4, pp. 138-144.
APPENDIX B
THE BALKAN STATES BEFORE AND AFTER THE WARS OF 1912-13[281]
_AREAS_ (_in square miles_)
Percentage of
Former New Increase or
State area area Decrease
Montenegro 3,506 5,600 + 60%
Albania -- 10,900 --
Serbia 18,650 33,600 + 80%
Rumania 50,720 54,300 + 7%
Bulgaria 37,201 43,300 + 16%
Greece 24,966 46,600 + 87%
Turkey in Europe 65,370 9,700 - 85%
_POPULATION_
Prior to After the
State War War
Montenegro 285,000 500,000
Albania -- 900,000
Serbia 2,960,000 4,300,000
Rumania 7,250,000 7,400,000
Bulgaria 4,340,000 4,800,000
Greece 2,670,000 4,600,000
Turkey in Europe 6,130,000 1,600,000
FOOTNOTE:
[281] Joerg, W. L. G.: The New Boundaries of the Balkan States and
their Significance, _Bull. of Amer. Geogr. Soc._, Vol. 45, 1913, p.
819.
APPENDIX C
CLASSIFICATION OF LANGUAGES SPOKEN IN EUROPE
Group Branches Languages
A. CELTIC 1. Gaelic
a. Irish
b. Highland Scotch
c. Manx
2. Cymric
a. Welsh
b. Low Breton
B. ROMANIC 1. French
2. Italian
3. Spanish
4. Provençal
5. Portuguese
6. Romansh or Churwaelsh
7. Rumanian
C. GERMANIC Scandinavian 1. Swedish
2. Danish
3. Icelandic
Germanic 1. High German
2. Low German
3. Dutch, including Flemish
4. Frisian
5. English
D. SLAVIC Western 1. Polish
2. Bohemian
3. Wend
Eastern 1. Russian, including Ruthenian
2. Bulgarian
3. Serbian, including Croatian
E. LETTIC 1. Lettish
2. Lithuanian
F. HELLENIC Greek
G. ILLYRIC Albanian
H. INDIC Gipsy or Romany
In addition to the above the following non-Indo-European languages
are spoken in Europe:
Family Group Branch Language
TURANIAN FINNIC Tchudic 1. Finnic
2. Esthonian
3. Tchud
4. Lapp
5. Voth
6. Livonian
Permian 1. Votiak
2. Sirian
3. Permiak
Volgaic 1. Tchuvash
2. Mordoin
3. Cheremiss
Ugric 1. Hungarian
2. Samoyed
TATARIC Turkish
CAUCASIAN 1. Lesghian
2. Circassian
BASQUE Basque or Euskara
APPENDIX D
A SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY
Aïtoff, D. Peuples et langues de la Russie. _Ann. de Géogr._,
Vol. 15, 1909, pp. 92-5.
André, L. _See_ Bourgeois, E.
Andree, R. Nationalitätsverhältnisse und Sprachgrenze in Böhmen.
_Ver. Erdk._, Leipzig, 1869, pp. 51-88.
Andree, R. Die Grenzen der niederdeutschen Sprache. _Globus_,
Vol. 59, 1891, pp. 29-31, 41-43.
Andree, R. Die Völkergrenzen in Frankreich. _Globus_, Vol. 36,
1879, pp. 6-10, 25-29.
Andree, R. Das Sprachgebiet der Lausitzer Wenden. 1550-1872.
_Pet. Mitt._, 1873, map 17.
Andrié, A. Geschichte des Fürstentums Montenegro. Vienna, 1853.
Annuaire International de Statistique, I: État de la Population
(Europe). _Office Permanent de l’Institut International de
Statistique._ The Hague, 1916.
Ascoli, G. I. Saggi ladini. _Archivio glottologico italiano._
Rome, 1873.
Auerbach, B. Les Races et les Nationalités en Autriche-Hongrie.
Paris, 1898.
Auerbach, B. La Germanisation de la Pologne Prussienne. La loi
d’expropriation. _Rev. Politique et Parlementaire_, Vol. 57,
juillet 1908, pp. 109-125.
Babelon, E. La grande Question d’Occident. Le Rhin dans
l’histoire, Vols. 1 and 2, Paris, 1915.
Bain, R. N. Scandinavia, A Political History of Denmark, Norway
and Sweden, 1513-1900. Cambridge, 1905.
Balkan Wars, Causes and Conduct of the, Report of the
International Commission to inquire into the. _Carnegie Endowment
for International Peace_, Publ. No. 4, Washington, 1914.
Baragiola, A. La Casa Villereccia delle colonie tedesche del
gruppo Carnico. Sappada, Sauris e Timau con raffronti delle
zone contermini italiana ed austriaca Carnia, Cadore, Zoldano,
Agordino, Carintia e Tirolo. Peregrazioni folkloriche. Padua,
1915.
Barker, J. Ellis. The Foundations of Germany. London, 1916.
Battisti, C. Il Trentino. Novara, 1915.
Beauvois, E. La nationalité du Slesvig. Paris, 1864.
Bernhard, L. Das polnische Gemeinwesen im preussischen Staat. Die
Polenfrage, Leipzig, 1910.
Bidermann, W. Die Nationalitäten in Tirol und die wechselnden
Schicksale ihrer Verbreitung. _Forsch. z. deuts. Landes- und
Volkskande._ Vol. 1.
Bielenstein, A. J. G. Die Grenzen des lettischen Volksstammes und
der lettischen Sprache. Petrograd, 1892.
Blanchard, R. La Flandre. Paris, 1906.
Blocher, E., u. E. Garraux. Die deutschen Ortsnamenformen der
Westschweiz. _Deutsche Erde_, Vol. 5, 1906, p. 170.
Block, M. L’Ile de France. (Les pays autours de Paris.) Paris,
1913.
Boeckh, R. Die Sprachgrenze in Belgien. _Zeits. für allgemeine
Erdkunde_, Berlin, Vol. 3, 1882, pp. 80-97.
Bonmariage, A. La Russie d’Europe. Brussels, 1903.
Boué, A. Ethnographische Karte des Osmanischen Reichs,
1:3,800,000. Gotha, 1847 and 1855.
Boulger, Demetrius C. A History of Belgium. 2 vols. London,
1902-1909.
Bourgeois, E., et André, L. Les sources de l’histoire de France
XVII^{me} siècle (1610-1715), Vol. 1. Géographie et histoire
générale. Paris, 1913.
Bourgoing, P. de. Les guerres d’idiome et de nationalité. Paris,
1849.
Bourlier, L. Les Tchèques et la Bohême contemporaine. Paris, 1897.
Bowley, A. L. The Nature and Purpose of the Measurement of Social
Phenomena. London, 1915.
Braemer, K. Nationalität und Sprache im Königreiche Belgien.
_Forsch. z. deuts. Landes- und Volkskunde._ Vol. 2, 1887.
Brancoff, D. M. La Macédoine et sa population Chrétienne. Paris,
1905.
Brilliant, O. Roumania. New York, 1915.
Bringuier, O., et De Tourloulon, Ch. Étude sur la limite
géographique de la langue d’oc et de la langue d’oïl. Paris, 1876.
Brunhes, J. La Géographie humaine. Paris, 1912.
Bürchner, L. Die neue griechisch-albanische Grenze in Nordepirus.
_Pet. Mitt._, Vol. 61, 1915, pp. 68-69.
Burileanu. Romînĭ din trumghiul Vallona-Ardenita-Berat. _Bull.
Soc. Geogr. Româńă_, Vol. 27, 1906, pp. 39-63.
Cambridge Modern History, Vol. XI, The Growth of Nationalities.
Cambridge, 1909.
Chamberlain, H. S. The Foundations of the XIXth Century. London,
1915.
Chantre, E. Les Kurdes, esquisse historique et ethnographique.
_Bull. Soc. Anthropol._, Lyon, 1897.
Charriaut, H. La Belgique Moderne. Paris, 1910. (Chap. III, La
situation respective des langues.)
Cherubim, C. Flüsse als Grenzen von Staaten und Nationen in
Mitteleuropa. Halle, 1897.
Chervin, A. L’Autriche et la Hongrie de demain. Paris, 1915.
Choroszewski, W. Mapa jezykowa i wyznaniowa Galicji. Lemberg,
1911.
Clare, C. L. The Brenner Pass. London, 1912.
Clerget, P. La Suisse au XXI^{me} siècle. Paris, 1908.
Clerget, P. Le Peuplement de la Suisse. _Bull. Soc. Roy. Belge de
Géogr._, Vol. 30, 1906, pp. 73-97.
Colleoni, C. Cima Dodici. Vicenza, 1910.
Coussange, Jacques. La Scandinavie, le nationalisme scandinave.
Paris, 1914.
Cromer, Earl. Political and Literary Essays. London, 1916.
Cumont, F. Comment la Belgique fut romanisée. Brussels, 1914.
Cunningham, W. Western Civilization in its Economic Aspects.
Vols. 1 and 2. Cambridge, 1913.
Curzon, Lord. Frontiers--The Romanes Lecture. Oxford, 1907.
Cust, R. N. Linguistic and Oriental Essays. London, 1891.
Cvijić, J. L’annexion de la Bosnie et la Question Serbe. Paris,
1909.
Cvijić, J. Remarques sur l’ethnographie de la Macédoine. _Ann. de
Géogr._, Vol. 15, 1906.
Dascovici, N. La Question du Bosphore et des Dardanelles. Geneva,
1915.
De Backer, L. La Langue flamande en France. Ghent, 1893.
Dedijer, Jevto. La Transhumance dans les pays dinariques. _Ann.
de Géogr._, Vol. 26, 1916, pp. 347-365.
De Gourmont, R. La Belgique Littéraire. Paris, 1916.
De Launay, L. La Bulgarie d’hier et de demain. Paris, 1912.
De Lucchi, G. Trentino e Tirolo. _Bull. No. 16, Ministero d.
Affari Esteri_, Rome, 1915.
Demartean. Le Flamand, le Wallon, etc., Liége, 1889.
De Martonne, E. La Valachie. Paris, 1902.
De Martonne, E. Recherches sur la Distribution Géographique de la
population en Valachie. _Bull. Soc. Geogr. Rom._, Vol. 23, 1902.
La Roumanie et son rôle dans l’Europe Orientale. _La Géogr._,
Vol. 30, 1914-1915.
Denecke, T. Belgien und Nordfrankreich. Hamburg, 1915.
De Romanet, le Vicomte. Les Provinces de la France. Paris, 1913.
De Tourloulon, Ch., et Bringuier, O. Étude sur la limite
géographique de la langue d’oc et de la langue d’oïl. Paris, 1876.
Diamandy, V. Statistica comunelor românesti din Turcia. _Bull.
Soc. Geogr. Rom._, Vol. 25, 1904, pp. 136-147.
Drachmann, P. The Industrial Development and Commercial Policies
of the Three Scandinavian Countries. Oxford, 1915.
Ensor, R. C. K. Belgium. New York, 1915.
Erdeljanović, J. Broj Srba i Khrvata. Belgrade, 1911.
Evans, A. The Adriatic Slavs and the Overland Route to
Constantinople. _Geogr. Journ._, Vol. 47, 1916, pp. 241-265.
Eversley, Lord. The Partition of Poland. New York, 1915.
Fayle, C. E. The Great Settlement. London, 1915.
Fedortchouk, Y. Memorandum on the Ukrainian Question in its
National Aspect. London, 1914.
Flodströf, I. Till frågån om rasskillnader inom Sverifes
befolkning. _Ymer_, 1915, pp. 213-266.
Forbes, Nevill. The Balkans, a History of Bulgaria, Serbia,
Greece, Rumania, Turkey. By Nevill Forbes, Arnold J. Toynbee, D.
Mitrany, D. G. Hogarth. Oxford, 1915.
Franchi, A. Cittá Sorelle. Milan, 1916.
Freeman, E. A. The Historical Geography of Europe. London, 1903.
Historical Essays. London, 1871.
Freshfield, D. W. The Southern Frontiers of Austria. _Geogr.
Journ._, Dec. 1915.
Friederichsen, Prof. Dr. Max. Die Grenzmarken des Europäischen
Russlands. Hamburg, 1915.
Galanti, A. I Tedeschi Sul versante meridionale delle Alpi. Rome,
1885.
Garnier, Ch. Note sur la répartition des langues dans les Alpes
occidentales. _Rev. de Géogr._, Vol. 40, 1897, pp. 6-12.
Gasselin, L. La Question du Schleswig-Holstein. Paris, 1909.
Gayda, V. Modern Austria, Her Racial and Social Problems. New
York, 1915.
Geiser, Alfred. Deutsches Reich u. Volk. Munich, 1910.
Gerland, G. Atlas der Völkerkunde. Gotha.
Gibert, F. Les pays d’Albanie et leur histoire. Paris, 1914.
Gillieron et Edmont. Atlas Linguistique de la France. Paris.
Gjerset, K. History of the Norwegian People. New York, 1915.
Gonzaga, C. V. A. La questione delle Lingue in Austria. _Boll.
del Ministro degli Affari Esteri._ Rome, 1900.
Grant, M. The Passing of the Great Race. New York, 1916.
Gröber, G. Grundriss der Romanischen Philologie. Strassburg,
1904-1906.
Guérard, Albert Léon. French Civilization in the Nineteenth
Century. New York, 1914.
Guizot, M. Histoire de la Civilisation en Europe. Paris, 1866.
Guttry, A. Die Polen und der Weltkrieg. Munich, 1915.
Guyot, Y. The Causes and Consequences of the War. London, 1916.
Guyot, Y. La Province Rhénane et la Westphalie. Paris, 1915.
Hanotaux, G. Contemporary France. Vols. 1-4. New York.
Hansen, R. Die Sprachgrenzen in Schleswig. _Globus_, Vol. 61,
1892, pp. 376-380.
Hayes, C. A Political and Social History of Modern Europe. Vols.
1 and 2. New York, 1916.
Heinz, Wilhelm. Das Ansiedlungsgebiet des Vereines Südmark.
_Deutsche Erde_, 1914-1915, pp. 110-131.
Henry, R. La frontière linguistique en Alsace-Lorraine. _Les
Marches de l’Est_, 1911-1912, pp. 60-71.
Hertslet, E. The Map of Europe by Treaty. London, 1875.
Hill, N. Poland and the Polish Question. London, 1915.
Hills, Major E. H. The Geography of International Frontiers.
_Geogr. Journ._, Vol. 28, 1906, p. 145.
Himly. Formation territoriale des États de l’Europe centrale.
Vols. 1 and 2. Paris, 1894.
Hodgkin, T. Italy and her Invaders. Vols. 1-8. Oxford, 1880-1899.
Hogarth, D. G. The Balkans, a History of Bulgaria, Serbia,
Greece, Rumania, Turkey. By Nevill Forbes, Arnold J. Toynbee, D.
Mitrany, D. G. Hogarth. Oxford, 1915.
Holdrich, T. H. Political Frontiers and Boundary Making. London,
1916.
Howe, E. S. A Thousand Years of Russian History. Philadelphia,
1915.
Hunfalvy, P. Die Ungern oder Magyaren. Vienna, 1881.
Huntington, E. Palestine and its Transformation. New York, 1911.
Iorga, N. Histoire des Roumains de Transylvanie et de Hongrie.
Bucarest, 1915. Histoire des états balcaniques à l’époque
moderne. Bucarest, 1914.
Italian Green Book, The. London, 1915.
Jalla, J. Les Vallées vaudoises sous le règne de Charles Emanuel.
1º jusqu’à l’Édit de Nantes et au Traité de Vervins, 1580-1598.
Torre Pellice, 1916.
Jansen, C., u. Samwer, K. Schleswig-Holsteins Befreiung.
Wiesbaden, 1897.
Jastrow, Jr., Morris. The Civilization of Babylonia and Assyria.
Philadelphia, 1915.
Jessen, F. de. La Question du Sleswig. 1906.
Joerg, W. L. G. The New Boundaries of the Balkan States and their
Significance. _Bull. Am. Geogr. Soc._, Vol. 45, 1913, pp. 819-830.
Jonquière, A. de la. Histoire de l’Empire Ottoman. Paris, 1914.
Jorgenson. La Question dano-allemande. Copenhagen, 1900.
Kalken, F. V. Histoire du Royaume des Pays-Bas et de la
Révolution Belge de 1830. Brussels, 1914.
Keane, A. H. Man, Past and Present. Cambridge, 1899.
Kluchevsky, V. O. A History of Russia. Translated by C. J.
Hogarth. New York, 1911.
Koch, C. G. de. Histoire abrégée des Traités de Paix entre les
Puissances de l’Europe depuis la Paix de Westphalia. Brussels,
1837.
Krehbiel, E. B. Nationalism, War and Society. New York, 1916.
Kurth, G. La Frontière linguistique en Belgique et dans le
Nord de la France. Mém. couronnés. _Acad. R. Sci. Lettres et
Beaux-Arts de Belgique_, Vol. 48, Brussels, 1895-1898.
Kurth, G. La nationalité belge. Brussels, 1913.
Lambrecht, N. Preussische Wallonie. Essen a. Ruhr, 1909.
Lamy, Étienne. La France du Levant. Paris, 1900.
Langenbeck, R. Die Burgundische Pforte. _Pet. Mitt._, Vol. 61,
1915, pp. 49-55.
Larmeroux, J. L’Autriche-Hongrie au Congrès de Berlin, 1878.
Paris, 1915.
Latham, R. G. Nationalities of Europe. London, 1863.
Lavisse, E., et Rambaud, A. Histoire générale du IV^{me} siècle
jusqu’à nos jours. Paris, 1896.
Lazar, V. Die Südrumänen der Turkei und der angrenzenden Länder.
Bucarest, 1910.
Leaf, W. Troy, a Study in Homeric Geography. London, 1912.
Leclercq, Jules. La Finlande aux mille Lacs. Paris, 1914.
Lefeuvre-Méaulle, H. La Grèce économique et financière. Paris,
1916.
Lefèvre, A. Germains et Slaves. Paris, 1903.
Lessiak, Dr. Primus. Zwei deutsche Sprachinseln in Friaul: Bladen
und die Jahre. _Deutsche Erde_, 1914-1915, pp. 110-131.
Lethbridge, Alan. The New Russia. New York, 1916.
Lippmann, W. Stakes of Diplomacy. New York, 1915.
Löffler, E. Dänemarks Natur und Volk. Copenhagen, 1905.
Longnon, A. Origines et formation de la Nationalité française.
Paris.
Louis-Jarau, G. L’Albanie Inconnue. Paris, 1913.
Lowell, A. L. Governments and Parties in Continental Europe.
Cambridge, 1915.
Lyde, L. W. The Continent of Europe. London, 1913. Some Frontiers
of Tomorrow, an Aspiration for Europe. London, 1915.
MacDonnell, J. de C. Belgium, Her Kings, Kingdom and People.
London, 1914.
Maranelli, Carlo. Dizionario Geografico dell’ alto del Trentino,
della Venezia Giulia e della Dalmazia. Bari, 1915.
Marriott, J. A. R., and Roberston, C. G. The Evolution of
Prussia: the Making of an Empire. Oxford, 1915.
Massart, J. Belgians under the German Eagle. London, 1916.
Mavor, James. An Economic History of Russia. New York, 1916.
May, G. Le Traité de Francfort. Paris, 1910.
Mazere, N. Harta etnografica a Transilvaniei. 1:340,000. Iasi,
1909. Supliment la harta Transilvaniei. Iasi, 1909.
Meillet, A. Le Problème de la Parenté des Langues. Bologna, 1914.
Meillet, A. De la Légitimité de la Linguistique Historique.
Bologna, 1913.
Meillet, A. Introduction à l’Étude Comparative des Langues
Indo-Européennes. Paris, 1915.
Meillet, A. Les Langues et les Nationalités. _Scientia._ Sept.
1915.
Mellor, E. W. The Wendish Baltic Ports of the Hanseatic League.
_Journ. Manchester Geogr. Soc._, Vol. 19, 1903, pp. 125-150.
Menant, J. Les Yézidis. Paris, 1892.
Meyer, C. Geschichte des Landes Posen. Posen, 1881.
Mitrany, D. The Balkans, a History of Bulgaria, Serbia, Greece,
Rumania, Turkey. By Nevill Forbes, Arnold J. Toynbee, D. Mitrany,
D. G. Hogarth. Oxford, 1915.
Morf, H. Deutsche und Romanen in der Schweiz. Zürich, 1901.
Morgan, J. de. Les Premières Civilisations. Paris, 1909.
Moysset, H. La Politique de la Prusse et les Polonais. _Rev. des
Deux Mondes_, Vol. 48, 1908, pp. 108-138; and pp. 519-550.
Müller, M. Biographies of Words and the Home of the Aryas.
London, 1888.
Nabert, H. Verbreitung der Deutschen in Europa. 1:925,000. Glogau.
Newbigin, M. I. Geographical Aspects of Balkan Problems in their
Relation to the Great European War. London, 1915.
Newbigin, M. I. Italy and the Adriatic. _The Scot. Geogr. Mag._,
Oct. 1916, pp. 466-477.
Niederle, L. La Race Slave. Paris, 1911. Slovansky Svet. Prague,
1910.
Nitsch, C. Dialectology of Polish Languages. Polish Encyclopædia,
Vol. 3. Cracow, 1915.
Norges Land og Folk, topografisk statistik beskrevet.
Christiania, 1898-1915.
Oestreich, Karl. Die Bevölkerung von Makedonien. _Sonderabdruck
aus der Geographischen Zeitschrift._
Osborne, H. F. Men of the Old Stone Age. New York, 1916.
Otlet, Paul. Les Problèmes internationaux et la Guerre. Paris,
1916.
Pais, E. Ancient Italy. Chicago, 1908.
Partsch, J. Schlesien. Breslau, 1896.
Pernice, A. Origine ed evoluzione storica delle Nazioni
balcaniche. Milan, 1915.
Perrier, E. France et Allemagne. Paris, 1915.
Petrovich, W. M. Serbia: Her People, History and Aspirations.
London, 1915.
Pfaundler, R. von. Oesterreichisch-Italienische Grenzfragen.
_Pet. Mitt._, June 1915.
Pfister, Ch. La limite de la langue française et de la langue
allemande en Alsace-Lorraine. Considérations historiques. _Bull.
Soc. Géogr. de l’Est_, Vol. 12, 1890.
Phillips, W. A. Poland. New York, 1916.
Pirenne, H. Belgian Democracy: Its Early History. Manchester,
1915.
Pirenne, H. Bibliographie de l’histoire de Belgique. Brussels,
1902.
Pirenne, H. Histoire de Belgique. Vols. 1-4. Brussels, 1900-1911.
Pittard, E. Les Peuples de la Péninsule des Balkans. _Rev. Gen.
des Sciences_, 1915, pp. 665-675.
Pittard, E. Dans la Dobrodja. Geneva, 1902.
Plazanet, Gal. Essai d’une Carte des Patois du Midi. _Rev. Soc.
Géogr. Comm._, Vol. 39, Bordeaux, 1913.
Prontuario dei nomi locali dell’ Alto Adige. _Mem. Real. Soc.
Geogr. Italiana_, Vol. 15, Part I, Rome, 1916.
Rambaud, A. Histoire de la Russie depuis les origines jusqu’à nos
jours. Paris, 1914.
Ranke, L. Weltgeschichte. Leipsig, 1881-1888.
Ratzel, F. Politische Geographie. Munich, 1903.
Rauchberg, H. Sprachenkarte von Böhmen. Vienna, 1905.
Reade, A. Finland and the Finns. New York, 1915.
Revelli, P. L’Adriatico e il dominio del Mediterraneo Orientale.
_Riv. Geogr. Ital._, Feb.-March 1916, pp. 91-113.
Reyman, E. J. Die Weichsel als Wasserstrasse. Warsaw, 1912.
Reynard, L. Histoire Générale de l’influence française en
Allemagne. Paris, 1915.
Richardson, R. The Ethnology of Austria-Hungary. _Scot. Geogr.
Mag._, Vol. 22, 1906, pp. 1-9.
Rieden, J. Das Schwäbische Bauernhaus. _Deut. Alpenzeitung_, Nov.
1915.
Rignano, E. Les Facteurs de la Guerre et le Problème de la Paix.
_Scientia._ Vol. 18, 1915, pp. 1-47.
Ripley, W. Z. The Races of Europe. New York, 1899.
Robertson, C. G. _See_ Marriott.
Roquette-Buisson (de). Du principe des nationalités. Paris, 1895.
Rosen, Dr. H. Die ethnographischen Verhältnisse in den baltischen
Provinzen und in Litauen. _Pet. Mitt._, 1915, pp. 329-333.
Rosendal, G. Snderjylland. 11 Kort. Odense, 1912.
Rose, J. H. The Future of Europe. _Scientia_, Vol. 19, 1916, pp.
1-11.
Rosi, M. Storia politica d’Europa dopo la pace di Vienna. Milan,
1914-1916.
Sach, L. Das Herzogtum Schleswig-Holstein in seiner
ethnographischen und nationalen Entwicklung. Halle, 1896.
Samassa, P. Deutsche u. Windische in Sudösterreich. _Deutsche
Erde_, Vol. 2, 1903, pp. 39-41.
Sands, B. The Ukraine. London, 1914.
Saxen, R. Répartition des langues. _Fennia_, Vol. 30, 1910-1911.
Atlas de Finlande, Carte No. 46. Helsingfors, 1911.
Schlesinger. Das Deutsch-böhmische Sprachgebiet nach der letzten
Volkszählung. Vienna, 1894.
Schlüter, O. Die Siedelungen in nordöstlicher Thüringen. Berlin,
1903.
Schneller. Deutsche und Romanen in Südtirol u. Venetien. _Pet.
Mitt._, 1877, pp. 365-385.
Schrader, F., F. Prudent et E. Anthoine. Atlas de Géographie
Moderne. Paris, 1908.
Semple, E. C. Influences of Geographic Environment. New York,
1911.
Sergi, G. Europa--L’origine dei popoli europei e loro relazioni
coi popoli d’Africa, d’Asia e d’Oceania. Rome, 1908.
Seymour, C. The Diplomatic Background of the War 1870-1914. New
Haven, 1916.
Shedd, Wm. A. The Syrians of Persia and Turkey. _Bull. Amer.
Geogr. Soc._, Vol. 35, 1903.
Sirianu, R. La Question de Transylvanie et l’Unité Politique
Roumaine. Paris, 1916.
Smirnov, J. Les Populations Finnoises des Bassins de la Volga et
de la Kama. Paris, 1898.
Songeon, R. P. Guérin. Histoire de la Bulgarie. Paris, 1913.
Stade, Paul. Das Deutschtum gegenüber den Polen in Ost- und
Westpreussen nach den Sprachzählungen von 1861, 1890 und 1900.
Berlin, 1908.
Statistique de la Belgique. Recensement général de 1910, Vol. 2
(1912), Vol. 3 (1913), Brussels.
Stephen, H. M. Nationality and History. _The Amer. Hist. Rev._,
Jan. 1916.
Stourdza, A. La Terre et la Race Roumaines. Paris, 1904. La
Roumanie et les Roumains. Paris, 1910.
Supan, A. Die Bevölkerung der Erde: Europa. _Ergänzungsh._ No.
163 zu _Pet. Mitt._, Gotha, 1909.
Switzerland. Atlas graphique et statistique de la Suisse.
Département Fédéral de l’Intérieur. Berne, 1914.
Sybel, H. von. Die Begründung des deutschen Reiches durch Wilhelm
I. Oldenbourg, 1895.
Sykes, M. The Caliph’s Last Heritage: a Short History of the
Turkish Empire. London, 1915.
Sykes, P. M. A History of Persia. London, 1915.
Szinnyei, J. Finnisch-ugrische Sprachwissenschaft. 1910.
Tabbé, P. La Vivante Roumanie. Paris, 1913.
Talko-Hryncewicz, J. Polacy Królestwa Polskiego w świetle
dotychczasowych badau. _B. int. Ac. Sc. Cracovie, Classe des Sc.
math. et nat., B. Sc. nat._, 1912, pp. 574-584.
Teutsch, F. Die Art der Ansiedelung der Siebenbürger Sachsen.
_Forsch. z. deuts. Landes- u. Volkskunde_, Vol. 9, 1896, pp. 1-22.
This, G. Die deutsch-französische Sprachgrenze in Lothringen.
_Beiträge z. Landes- und Volkskunde von Elsass-Lothringen_, Vol.
1, Strassburg, 1887;--Die deutsch-französische Sprachgrenze in
Elsass, _Ibid._, 1888.
Touchard, G. Les langues parlées en Belgique. _Le Mouv. Géogr._,
1913, pp. 226-229.
Toynbee, Arnold J. The Balkans, a History of Bulgaria, Serbia,
Greece, Rumania, Turkey. By Nevill Forbes, Arnold J. Toynbee, D.
Mitrany, D. G. Hogarth. Oxford, 1915.
Troïnitsky, N. Premier recensement général de population de
l’Empire de la Russie 1897. Petrograd, 1905.
Tsanoff, R. A. Bulgaria’s Rôle in the Balkans. _Journ. of Race
Development_, Jan. 1915.
Vallaux, Camille. Le Sol et l’État, Géographie Sociale. Paris,
1911.
Van der Essen, L. A Short History of Belgium. Chicago, 1915.
Veress, A. Acta et Epistolae Relationum Transylvaniae
Hungariaeque cum Moldavia et Valachia. Vienna, 1915.
Vidal de la Blache, P. États et Nations de l’Europe. Paris, 1889.
Vidal de la Blache, P. Évolution de la population en
Alsace-Lorraine et dans les départements limitrophes. _Ann. de
Géogr._, Vol. 25, 1916, pp. 97-115.
Vidal de la Blache, P. La France, Tableau géographique. Paris,
1908.
Vinogradoff, Paul. Self-Government in Russia. New York, 1916.
Wace, A. J. B., and Thompson, M. S. The Nomads of the Balkans.
London, 1914.
Wallis, B. C. Distribution of Nationalities in Hungary. _Geogr.
Journ._, Vol. 47, 1916, pp. 177-189.
Ward, A. W. Germany: 1815-1890, Vol. 1. 1815-1852. Cambridge,
1916.
Warker, Nikolaus. Die deutschen Orts- und Gewässernamen der
belgischen Provinz Luxemburg. _Deutsche Erde_, Vol. 8, 1909, pp.
99-104.
Waultrin, M. R. Le rapprochement Dano-Allemand et la question du
Schleswig. _Ann. Sc. Pol._, 1903.
Weigand. Linguistischer Atlas. Leipzig, 1909.
Weill, G. L’Alsace Française de 1789 à 1870. Paris, 1916.
Whitney, W. D. Language and the Study of Language. New York, 1867.
Whitney, W. D. Oriental and Linguistic Studies. New York, 1873.
Wichdorff, H. V. Masuren. Berlin, 1915.
Wiklund, K. B. Språken i Finland, 1880-1900. _Ymer_, 1905, pp.
132-149.
Wissocq, E. de. L’âme Flamande. _Bull. Soc. Normande de
Géographie_, 1912, pp. 97-135.
Witte, Hans. Das deutsche Sprachgebiet Lothringens und seine
Wandelungen von der Feststellung der Sprachgrenze bis zum Ausgang
des 16. Jahrhunderts. _Forsch. z. deuts. Landes- und Volkskunde_,
Vol. 8, 1894.--Zur Geschichte des Deutschtums im Elsass und im
Vogesengebiet, _Ibid._, Vol. 19, 1897.
Witte, H. Wendische Bevölkerungsreste in Mecklenburg. _Forsch. z.
deuts. Landes- und Volkskunde_, Vol. 16, 1905, p. 124.
Woods, H. C. Communications in the Balkans. _Geogr. Journ._, Vol.
47, 1916, pp. 265-293.
Wutte, M. Das Deutschtum im Österreichischen Küstenland.
_Deutsche Erde_, Vol. 8, 1909, pp. 202, 229.
Xénopol, A. D. Les Roumains au Moyen-Âge. Paris, 1885. Histoire
des Roumains de la Dacie Trajane. Paris, 1896.
Zaborowski, S. Les Peuples aryens d’Asie et d’Europe. Paris, 1908.
Zemmrich, J. Deutschen und Slawen in den österreichischen
Südetenländern. _Deutsche Erde_, Vol. 2, 1903, pp. 1-4.
Zemmrich, J. Sprachgrenze und Deutschtum in Böhmen. Brunswick,
1902.
Zimmerli, J. Die deutsch-französische Sprachgrenze in der
Schweiz; I. Teil, Die Schweiz. _Forsch. z. deuts. Landes- und
Volkskunde_, Vol. 8, 1894.
Zimmerli, J. Die deutsch-französische Sprachgrenze in der
Schweiz; I. Teil, Die Sprachgrenze im Jura. Basel, 1891. II.
Teil, Die Sprachgrenze im Mittellande, in den Freiburger,
Waadtländer und Berner Alpen, _Ibid._, 1895. III. Teil, Die
Sprachgrenze im Wallis, _Ibid._, 1899.
Zsigmond, B. A Magyar Szentkorona országainak néprajzi iskolai
fali Térképe. 1:600,000. Budapest, 1909.
APPENDIX E
KEY TO PLACE NAMES
Aa, river, lat. 51°, Pl. I.
Abanj, town, lat. 48° 50′, Fig. 48.
Abbateggio, town, lat. 42° 14′, Fig. 33.
Abruzzi, province, lat. 42°, Fig. 33.
Abullonia, lake, south of Moudania, lat. 40° 12′, Pl. VII.
Acquaviva, town, lat. 40° 53′, Fig. 33.
Ada Bazar, town, lat. 40° 45′, Pl. VII.
Adalia, town and bay, lat. 36° 53′, Pl. V.
Adana, town, lat. 37°, Pl. V.
Aden, gulf of, lat. 12° 46′. _See_ inset map:
“Extension of the Hejaz line toward Mecca.” Pl. V.
Adige, valley, lat. 45° 40′, Figs. 30, 67.
Adrianople, town, lat. 41° 41′, Fig. 47.
Adriatic, sea, Pl. IX. See also Figs. 47, 48.
Ægean, sea, Pl. V.
Agaro, district, lat. 46° 15′, Fig. 22.
Aidin, town, lat. 37° 48′, Pl. V.
Aire, town, lat. 50° 38′, Pl. I.
Ala, town, lat. 45° 50′, Fig. 30.
Alagna, village, lat. 45° 52′, Fig. 22.
Aland, isds., lat. 60° 15′, Pl. IX.
Albania, state, lat. 41°, Fig. 53.
Albula, river, lat. 46° 40′, Fig. 67.
Aleppo, town, lat. 36° 10′, Pl. V, VI, VII.
Alexandretta, town, lat. 36° 35′, Pl. V, VI, VII.
Alghero, town, lat. 40° 40′, Fig. 43.
Allenstein, town, lat. 53° 45′, Fig. 38.
Alpes-Maritimes, dept., lat. 43° 45′, Fig. 22.
Alsace, province, lat. 48° 50′, Pl. II, IX.
Amasia, town, lat. 40° 39′, Pl. VII.
Anderlecht (Brussels), lat. 50° 51′, Fig. 14.
Andermatten, village (Italian: La Chiesa), lat. 46° 20′, Fig. 22.
Andreasfalva, town, lat. 47° 50′, Fig. 44.
Angeln, mts., 54° 35′, Fig. 35.
Angora, town, lat. 39° 56′, Pl. V, VII.
Anniviers, valley, lat. 46° 15′, Fig. 18.
Antigorio, val., lat. 46° 10′, Fig. 22.
Antioch, town, lat. 36° 10′ Pl. VII.
Antivari, town, lat. 42° 8′, Fig. 53.
Aosta, town, lat. 45° 44′, Pl. IX, Fig. 22.
Aquitaine, region, lat. 44° 50′, Fig. 3.
Arad, town, lat. 46° 13′, Fig. 48.
Arax, river, lat. 39° 27′, Pl. VII.
Arghana, town, lat. 38° 25′, Pl. V.
Argyrocastro, district, lat. 40° 7′, Fig. 53.
Arlon, town, lat. 49° 42′, Pl. I.
Armenia, province, Pl. VII, VIII.
Armentières, town, lat. 50° 43′, Pl. I.
Armorica, region, lat. 48° 10′, Fig. 3.
Arnfels, town, lat. 46° 42′, Fig. 31.
Arnsberg, town, lat. 51° 24′, Fig. 7.
Arta, river, lat. 39° 20′, Fig. 53.
Asiago, town, lat. 45° 52′, Fig. 30.
Aspropotamos, river, lat. 39° 22′, Fig. 53.
Astico, river, lat. 45° 40′, Fig. 25.
Augsburg, town, lat. 48° 52′, Pl. IX, Fig. 30.
Augustow, town, lat. 53° 30′, Fig. 38.
Baden, grand duchy, lat. 48° 30′, Fig. 7.
Bagdad, town, lat. 33° 21′, Pl. V.
Balearic, isds., lat. 39°, Fig. 43.
Banat, province, lat. 45° 53′, Fig. 38.
Bären Kopf, mt., lat. 47° 47′, Pl. II.
Bars, town, lat. 48° 15′, Fig. 48.
Basra, town, lat. 30° 30′, Pl. V.
Bautzen, town, lat. 51° 11′, Fig. 41.
Bavaria, kingdom, lat. 49°, Fig. 7.
Beaulard, town, lat. 45° 3′, Fig. 21.
Becherek, town, lat. 45° 27′, Fig. 48.
Beirut, town, lat. 33° 54′, Pl. V.
Belcamen, town, lat. 40° 40′, Fig. 53.
Belfort, town, lat. 47° 38′, Pl. II, Fig. 18.
Belgrade, town, lat. 44° 47′, Pl. IX.
Belluno, town, lat. 46° 8′, Fig. 67.
Benkovac, town, lat. 44° 2′, Fig. 48.
Berane, town, lat. 42° 47′, Fig. 53.
Berat, town, lat. 40° 43′, Fig. 53.
Bereg, town, lat. 47°, Fig. 38.
Beskid, mts., lat. 49° 30′, Pl. IV.
Bessarabia, province, lat. 47° 20′, Pl. III.
Bévéra, valley, lat. 43° 50′, Fig. 22.
Bielostok, town, lat. 53° 10′, Pl. IV.
Bielsk, town, lat. 52° 50′, Pl. IV.
Bienne, town, lat. 47° 9′, Fig. 18.
Birnbaum, town, lat. 52° 37′, Pl. IV.
Bistritza, valley, lat. 40° 30′, Fig. 53.
Black Drin, river, lat. 42°, Fig. 53.
Black Forest, mountain region, lat. 48° 20′, Fig. 7.
Blatza, town, lat. 40° 31′, Fig. 53.
Böhmerwald, mt., lat. 49° 0′, Fig. 48.
Bohtan, river, lat. 38°, Pl. VII.
Boitsfort, town, lat. 50° 48′, Fig. 14.
Bolchen, town, lat. 49° 10′, Pl. II.
Boli, town, lat. 40° 45′, Pl. V.
Bolzano, (Bozen), town, lat. 46° 30′, Figs. 30, 67.
Bomst, town, lat. 52° 12′, Pl. IV.
Bosnia, province, lat. 44° 20′, Fig. 48.
Bothnia, gulf, lat. 62°, Fig. 38.
Botzen, (Bozen), town, lat. 46° 30′, Figs. 30, 67.
Boulogne, town, lat. 50° 43′, Pl. I.
Bousson, town, lat. 44° 55′, Fig. 21.
Boyana, river, lat. 41° 52′, Fig. 53.
Brandenburg, province, lat. 52° 26′, Fig. 7.
Branjevo, town, lat. 44° 40′, Fig. 48.
Bredizza, town, lat. 41° 50′, Fig. 53.
Brenner, pass, lat. 47° 3′, Fig. 30.
Brenta, river, lat. 45° 26′, Fig. 25.
Breslau, town, lat. 51° 6′, Pl. IV.
Bressanone, town, _see_ Brixen.
Briançon, town, lat. 44° 50′, Fig. 21.
Brieg, town, lat. 50° 50′, Pl. IV.
Brittany, province, lat. 48° 20′, Fig. 3.
Brixen, town, lat. 46° 41′, Fig. 30.
Bromberg, town, lat. 53° 7′, Pl. IV.
Broye, river, lat. 46° 45′, Fig. 18.
Bruche, river, lat. 48° 30′, Pl. II.
Bruneco, town, lat. 46° 51′, Fig. 30.
Brusa, town, lat. 40° 11′, Pl. V.
Brüx, town, lat. 50° 33′, Fig. 48.
Buccari, bay, lat. 45° 18′, Fig. 48.
Budapest, lat. 47° 29′, Pl. IX.
Bukovina, province, lat. 48° 0′, Fig. 44.
Bukschoja, town, lat. 47° 37′, Fig. 44.
Burgundian lands, (_see_ Burgundy), lat. 47°, Fig. 3.
Busi, is., lat. 43° 8′, Fig. 48.
Cairo, city, lat. 30° 2′, Pl. V.
Calliano, town, lat. 45° 56′, Fig. 30.
Canza, village, lat. 46° 25′, Fig. 22.
Carinthia, lat. 47°, Pl. III.
Carniola, province, lat. 45° 58′, Fig. 48, Pl. III.
Carpathian Mts., lat. 48° 30′, Pl. IV.
Cascanditella, town, lat. 42° 16′, Fig. 33.
Casotto, town, lat. 45° 53′, Fig. 67.
Cattaro, town, lat. 42° 23′, Fig. 48.
Caucasus, region, lat. 44°, Fig. 38.
Cazza, is., lat. 42° 55′, Fig. 48.
Cesane, town, lat. 44° 57′, Fig. 21.
Cevedale, mt., lat. 46° 29′, Fig. 67.
Chalcydic peninsula, lat. 40° 25′, Fig. 53.
Champlas du Col, town, lat. 44° 56′, Fig. 21.
Chanak, town, lat. 40° 9′, Pl. VI.
Charmoille, town, lat. 47° 20′, Fig. 18.
Chernikov, city, lat. 51° 29′, Fig. 38.
Chorlu, river, lat. 41° 12′, Fig. 47.
Cilician Gate, lat. 37° 30′, Pl. VII, _see_ inset:
“Western Asia showing direction of Main Mountain Ranges.”
Clabecq, lat. 50° 40′, Fig. 14.
Clavières, town, lat. 44° 55′, Figs. 21, 22.
Clementi, pass, lat. 42° 30′, Fig. 53.
Collecroce, town, lat. 41° 45′, Fig. 33.
Colmar, town, lat. 48° 6′, Pl. II.
Cologne, town, lat. 50° 56′, Pl. IX.
Constantinople, city, lat. 41°, Pl. VII.
Corfu, is., lat. 39° 37′, Fig. 53, Pl. V, VI.
Cormons, town, lat. 45° 57′, Fig. 31.
Cortina d’Ampezzo, pass, lat. 46° 31′, Fig. 67.
Courtaron, town, lat. 47° 28′, Fig. 18.
Cracow, town, lat. 50° 4′, Pl. IV.
Crasna, lat. 48° 2′, Fig. 44.
Crefeld, town, lat. 51° 21′, Pl. IX.
Cremnitza, river, lat. 40°, Fig. 53.
Crete, is., lat. 35° 15′, Pl. V.
Croatia, province, lat. 45° 40′, Fig. 48.
Cupello, town, lat. 42° 5′, Fig. 33.
Curzola, is., lat. 43°, Fig. 48.
Czernowitz, town, lat. 48° 17′, Fig. 44.
Dalmatia, province, lat. 44°, Fig. 48.
Damascus, city, lat. 33° 30′, Pl. V, VII.
Dangli, mts., lat. 40° 30′, Fig. 53.
Danzig, town, lat. 54° 35′, Pl. IV.
Dedeagatch, town, lat. 40° 55′, Fig. 47.
Delémont, town, lat. 47° 25′, Fig. 18.
Delvino, town, lat. 40°, Fig. 53.
Demir-Hissar, district, lat. 41° 12′, Fig. 53.
Dent d’Hérens, mt., lat. 45° 59′, Fig. 22.
Deutsche-Oth, town, lat. 49° 28′, Pl. II.
Devinska Novaves, town, lat. 48° 18′, Fig. 48.
Devoli, river, lat. 40° 55′, Fig. 53.
Diex, town, lat. 46° 48′, Fig. 31.
Dinaric Alps, mts., lat. 44°, Fig. 48.
Dineir, town, lat. 38° 5′, Pl. V.
Dirschen, (Dirschau or Terzew), lat. 54° 9′, Pl. IV.
Dnieper, river, lat. 49°, Fig. 38.
Dobrac, town, lat. 46° 45′, Fig. 31.
Dobrudja, province, lat. 44° 20′, Fig. 47.
Dodecanesia, isds., lat. 36°, Pl. V.
Doire Baltée, river, lat. 45° 15′, Fig. 22.
Doire Ripaire, river, lat. 45° 10′, Figs. 21, 22.
Doliano, town, lat. 40° 2′, Fig. 53.
Dolomite Alps, mts., lat. 46° 25′, Fig. 67.
Domodossola, town, lat. 46° 8′, Fig. 22.
Don, river, lat. 47° 30′, Fig. 38.
Dorpat, town, lat. 58° 17′, Fig. 38.
Dortmund, town, lat. 51° 31′, Fig. 7.
Douane, town, lat. 47° 10′, Fig. 18.
Drama, basin, lat. 41° 6′, Fig. 47.
Drave, river, lat. 45° 50′, Fig. 48.
Drin, river, lat. 41° 50′, Fig. 53.
Drinissa, river, lat. 42° 12′, Fig. 53.
Drino, gulf, lat. 41° 50′, Fig. 53.
Dugopolje, town, lat. 45° 10′, Fig. 48.
Duino, town, lat. 45° 50′, Fig. 31.
Duisburg, town, lat. 51° 26′, Fig. 7.
Dukla, town, lat. 49° 26′, Pl. IV.
Dulcigno, town, lat. 41° 54′, Fig. 53.
Dunkirk, town, lat. 51° 7′, Pl. I.
Durazzo, cape and town, lat. 41° 18′, Fig. 53.
Düsseldorf, town, lat. 51° 13′, Fig. 7.
Dux, town, lat. 50° 47′, Fig. 48.
East Prussia, province, lat. 34°, Pl. IV.
Eisack, valley, lat. 46° 30′, Fig. 67.
Eisenau, town, lat. 47° 38′, Fig. 44.
Elbassan, town, lat. 41° 6′, Fig. 53.
Elbe, river, lat. 53°, Pl. IX.
Emscher, valley, lat. 51° 30′, Fig. 7.
Enego, town, lat. 45° 57′, Fig. 25.
Engadine, district, lat. 46° 40′, Fig. 67.
Epirus, province, lat. 40°, Fig. 53.
Erzerum, town, lat. 39° 57′, Pl. VIII.
Erzgebirge, mt., lat. 50° 30′, Fig. 48.
Erzingian, town, lat. 39° 38′, Pl. V.
Eskishehir, town, lat. 39° 44′, Pl. V.
Esthonia, province, lat. 59° 15′, Fig. 38.
Esztergom or Gran-Esztergom, comitat, lat. 47° 47′, Fig. 48.
Etsch, river, lat. 46° 16′, Fig. 30.
Etterbeck, (Brussels), Fig. 14.
Euphrates, river, lat. 37° 50′, Pl. VIII.
Fellin, town, lat. 58°, Fig. 38.
Fenils, town, lat. 44° 59′, Fig. 21.
Fersina, town, lat. 46° 8′, Fig. 30.
Filiates, town, lat. 39° 42′, Fig. 53.
Fiume, town, lat. 45° 19′, Fig. 48.
Fleims, valley, lat. 46° 20′, Fig. 30.
Flensborg, town, lat. 54° 46′, Fig. 35.
Florina, town, lat. 40° 50′, Fig. 53.
Fogaras, town, lat. 45° 47′, Pl. III.
Foppiano, town, lat. 46° 20′, Fig. 22.
Formazza, valley, lat. 46° 15′, Fig. 22.
Franconia, district, lat. 50°, Fig. 7.
Frasheri, town, lat. 40° 25′, Fig. 53.
Freudenthal, town, lat. 47° 45′, Fig. 44.
Fribourg, town, lat. 46° 48′, Fig. 18.
Friuli, district, (_see_ area of Friulian language),
lat. 46° 18′, Fig. 43.
Fruttwald, or Canza, village, lat. 46° 25′, Fig. 22.
Frydland, town, lat. 49° 45′, Fig. 48.
Fünfkirchen, town, lat. 46° 6′, Pl. III.