emerging from the struggle for territory. We see nations from early
times to the present day increasing in area: the Persian and Roman
Empires were small and mean compared with those of the Russians,
English, and Chinese. Also the states of peoples of a lower grade of
culture are insignificant compared with the states of more advanced
races. The greatest empires of the present day are the youngest;
the smallest--Andorra, Liechtenstein, San Marino, Monaco, appear to
us only as venerable, strange petrifications of an alien time. The
relation of surface to the growth of spheres of commerce and of means
of communication is obvious. Communication is a struggle with area;
and the result of this struggle is the overcoming of the latter. The
process is complicated because, as control is gained over area, one
also acquires possession of its contents: advantages of location,
conformation, fertility, and, by no means least, the inhabitants of
the territory themselves. But the loss in value of all these things,
brought about by their being widely scattered throughout an extensive
area, can be overcome only by a complete control of the region over
which they are spread.
[Sidenote: Traffic Leads to Empire]
The development of commerce is the preliminary history of political
growth. This applies to all races, from Phœnicians to North Americans,
who point out to us a post of the American Fur Company as the germ
from which Nebraska developed. Every colony is a result of traffic;
even in the case of Siberia, merchants from European Russia travelled
thither as far as the Ob about three centuries before its conquest. The
phrase “conquests of the world’s commerce” is perfectly legitimate.
The building of roads is a part of the glory of the founders and
rulers of nations. To-day, tariff unions and railway politics have
taken the place of road-making. It has always been so; both state and
traffic have had the same interest in roads and thoroughfares. Traffic
breaks the way, and the state improves and completes it. It seems to
be certain that the firmly organised state in ancient Peru opened
the roads which were later a service to traffic. In a lower phase of
development we may see commerce leading directly to the establishment
of states; in a higher, to victory in war, arising from commercial and
railway communication. It would be impossible for France to construct
the Sahara Railway without first subjugating the Tuareg and seizing
their country. Highways of traffic as weapons for hostile states, the
important part played by commercial nations and the culture of strictly
industrial and commercial peoples, the endeavour of traffic to be of
service to the policies of states, and, finally, the powerful reactions
caused by the removal and disuse of thoroughfares of commerce to races,
nations, and to entire spheres of civilisation--can only be indicated
here.
[Sidenote: Every Trader Bears his State with him]
Every political movement, whether it be a warlike expedition or a
peaceful emigration, is preceded by movements which are not political.
Inquiries must be made and relations instituted; the object must be
determined, and the road explored. All the while that knowledge of the
world beyond the bounds of a country is being gained, there is also
an imperceptible broadening of the geographical horizon; and this not
only widens out, but becomes clearer. Fabulous tales are circulated as
to the terrors of strange countries; but the fear gradually vanishes
as our knowledge increases, and with the latter a spirit of political
enterprise awakens One can say that every trader who passes the bounds
of his country bears his state with him in his load of merchandise. To
be sure, there are both long preparations made and quick leaps taken
in the processes of commerce. Roman merchants prepared the way to a
knowledge of Gaul and its conquest. But how different the attitude
of the Romans to Gaul before and after the time of Cæsar! What a
difference in the Spanish estimate of the worth of American colonies
before the days of Cortez and Pizarro, and afterward! The broader and
clearer the geographical horizon grows, the greater become political
schemes and standards of policy.
[Sidenote: Causes of National Success and Failure]
The widening of the geographical horizon and the clearing up of
mysteries beyond are invariably a result of the travels of individuals
or of groups for peaceful purposes. The first of these purposes
is commerce; the chase and fishing are also to be taken into
consideration; and the involuntary wanderings of the lost and strayed
are not to be excluded. Europe possessed a Pytheas and a Columbus who
discovered new worlds; and every primitive community had its explorers,
too, who cleared paths from one forest glade to another. If such
pioneers return, they also bring back with them contributions to the
general stock of knowledge of the world without, and it becomes less
difficult for others to follow in their footsteps; finally armies
or fleets may advance, conquering in their tracks. Whenever traffic
makes busy a multitude of men, and employs extensive means by which to
carry on its operations, the truth of the saying, “The flag follows
trade,” is finally established in its broadest sense. With all this
struggling and labouring, territory does not fall to the state simply
as a definite number of square miles. Just as single individuals bring
enlightenment to the state, in the same manner the idea of area arises
in the intelligence of the aggregate.
When we say that an area increases, we must remember that by this we
mean that the intelligence which views it and the will that holds it
together have increased, and naturally, also, that which is requisite
for rendering intelligence and will capable for their work. In this
lies one of the greatest differences that exist between nations, one of
the greatest causes of success and failure in development.
A disposition for expansion that advances boundaries to the farthest
possible limit is a sign of the highest state of civilisation. It is a
result of an increase both of population and of intellectual progress.
[Sidenote: Small States in Fine Situations]
There is something very attractive in the small political models of
early times: those city-states whose development had in definiteness
and in precision a great deal of the lucidity and compactness of
artistic compositions. Lübeck and Venice are more attractive than
Russia. The concentration of the forces of a small community in a
limited, beautifully situated, and protected location, is a source of
a development that takes a deeper hold on all the vital powers of a
people, employing them more extensively, and therefore ending in a more
rapid and definite perfection of historical individuality. Thus small
areas take the lead of large territories in historical development; and
we may see many examples of a slow but sure transference of leadership
from the small area to the large, and of the gradual diffusion of
progress in the latter. Thus Italy followed Greece; Spain, Portugal;
England, Holland.
[Illustration: THE COMMAND OF THE SEAS: GREAT BRITAIN’S MIGHTY
MACHINERY OF DEFENCE
Great Britain’s strength is a proof of the tremendous importance of
the sea as a factor of political power. This is a bird’s-eye view
of the British Navy assembled at Spithead.
]
The opposite of this is precocity in growth: the earlier a state
marks out its limits without consideration for later expansion, the
sooner the completion of its development. The growth in area of Venice
and the Low Countries stood still, while all about them territories
increased in size. The development of small countries flags unless the
increase of population within a limited area leads to that disquiet and
emigration and expulsion of citizens especially characteristic of small
nations: the horizon grows too narrow for the times; patriotism becomes
local pride; and the most important life forces are impaired. Thus
minor nations, through which races are separated into little groups,
develop: the great national economic and religious cohesive forces are
broken up; and even the political advantages of the ground are reduced
in value through disintegration.
[Sidenote: Founding of States by Strangers]
Under such conditions the impulse for new growth must be brought in
from without. The native, who is acquainted with only one home, is
always inferior to the foreigner, who has a knowledge of two lands
at least. It is remarkable how numerous are the traditions of the
establishment of states by strangers. Sometimes these are mighty
hunters, as in Africa; often they are superior bearers of civilisation,
as in Peru; and an especially large number of them have descended
to the earth from heaven. In the face of history which tells of
the foundation of a Manchurian dynasty in China and a Turkish in
Persia, of the establishment of the Russian Empire by wandering North
Germans, and that of the great nations in the West Sudan by the Fulah
shepherds--these mythical accounts, although they may appear decidedly
incredible when taken singly, as a whole are probable enough. The
foundation of the nation of Sarawak in Borneo by Brooke is reality and
corresponds with many of the old legends of the formations of states.
[Sidenote: A Great Turning-point in History]
The broad conception of a state, which acts as a ferment does on
a disrupted mass, is introduced from one neighbouring nation into
another, each sharing in its production. When such territories are
adjacent, the state situated in the most powerful natural region
overgrows the other. The more mobile race brings its influence to
bear on the less mobile, and possibly draws the other along with it.
The more compact, better organised and armed state intrudes on weaker
nations, and forces its organisation upon them. A nation left to itself
has a tendency to split up into small groups, each of which seeks to
support its own life upon its own soil, heedless of the others; and
as such groups increase, they always reproduce in their own images:
families families, and tribes tribes. We find all sorts of measures
taken by some nations to limit an increase in growth that would carry
them beyond their old boundaries and place them under new conditions
of life. Many an otherwise inexplicable custom of taking human life is
a result of this tendency; perhaps, in some cases, even cannibalism
itself. This impulse towards limitation would have rendered the growth
of nations impossible had not the antithetical force of attraction
of one to another led to growth and amalgamation. Truly, the advance
from a condition of isolated, self-dependent communities to one of
traffic between state organisms, which must of necessity lead to ebb
and flow and union of one group with another, is one of the greatest
turning-points in the history of man.
[Sidenote: Nations as Neighbours]
Since the tendency has been for territory to become the exclusive
reward of victory in the competition of nations, balance of territorial
possessions has grown to be one of the chief ends of national
policies. The phrase “balance of power,” which has been so often
heard since the sixteenth century, is no invention of diplomats, but
a necessary result of the struggle for expansion. Hence we find an
active principle of territorial adjustment and balance in all matters
concerning international politics. It is not yet active in the small
and simple states of semi-civilised peoples; such states are much more
uniform, for they have all originated with a uniformly weak capacity
for controlling territory. In addition, the principle of territorial
isolation hinders the action of political competition. As soon,
however, as necessity for increased area leads to the contiguity of
nations, the conditions alter. The state that occupies but a small
region strives to emulate its larger neighbour. It either gains so much
land as is necessary to restore equality, or forces a decrease in the
neighbour’s territory.
[Sidenote: The Balance of Power]
Both alternatives have been of frequent occurrence. Prussia expanded
at the expense of Schleswig and Poland in order to become equal in
territory to the other great Powers. The whole of Europe fought
Napoleon until France had been forced back within such boundaries as
were necessary to international balance. Austria lost provinces in
Italy and replaced them with others in the Balkan Peninsula. This
loss and gain appears to us, in looking over an easily epitomised
history, such as that of France, as an alternation of violent waves
and temporary periods of rest attained whenever a balance is reached.
Therefore it is not owing to chance that the areas of Austria, Germany,
France, and Spain may be respectively designated by 100, 86, 84, and
80, that the area of Holland is to that of Belgium as 100 is to 90, and
that the United States stands to Canada as 100 to 96. To be effective,
such balances must presuppose equal civilisations, similar means for
the acquirement of power. Rome was so superior to her neighbours in
civilisation that she could not permit any territorial balance. Perhaps
the adoption of the River Halys as the boundary between Media and Lydia
was a first attempt to establish a national system on the principle of
balance instead of “world” dominion.
[Sidenote: A New British Empire is not Conceivable]
Our standards for measuring the areas of countries have constantly
increased during the growth of historical territories. The history of
Greece is to us but the history of a small state; and how many years
shall pass before that of Germany, Austria, and France will be but the
history of nations of medium size? England, Russia, China, and the
United States include the better half of the land of the world; and
to-day a British Empire in the other half could not be conceivable.
Development has ever seized on greater and greater areas, and has
united more and more extensive regions into aggregates. Thus it has
always remained an organic movement. The village-state repeats itself
in the city-state, and the family-state in the race-state, the smaller
ever being reproduced in greater forms. The smallest and greatest
nations alike retain the same organic characteristics more or less
closely united to the soil.
[Sidenote: Area Does Not Mean Power]
The surface of a state bears a certain relation to the surface of the
globe, and according to this standard is the land measured upon which
the inhabitants of a nation live, move, and labour. Thus it may be said
that the 208,687 square miles of the German Empire represent about
1/940 of the entire surface of the earth; further, that the empire
has a population of 60,500,000, from which the ratio of 5·45 acres to
each individual follows. Although it is true that wholly uninhabited
or very thinly populated regions, high mountains, forests, deserts,
etc., may be valuable from a political point of view, nevertheless the
whole course of the world’s history shows us that, as a general rule,
the value of territory increases with the number of inhabitants that
dwell upon it. Thus, before their disunion, Norway-Sweden, with an area
of 297,000 square miles--two-fifths greater than that of the German
Empire--but with a population of 6,800,000, cannot be looked upon as a
first-class Power; while Germany closely approaches the Russian Empire
in strength, for although its area is but 1/43 that of the latter, its
population is only one-half less. Thus area alone is never the deciding
factor of political power. In the non-recognition of this fact lies the
source of the greatest errors which have been made by conquerors and
statesmen. The powerful influence that small states, such as Athens,
Palestine, and Venice, have exerted on the history of the world proves
that a great expanse of territory is by no means indispensable to great
historical actions. The unequal distribution of mankind over a definite
area is a much more probable source of political and economic progress.
Civilisation and political superiority have always attended the
thickly populated districts. Thus the whole of development has been a
progression from small populations dwelling in extensive regions to
large populations concentrated in more limited areas. Progress first
awoke when division of labour began to organise and differentiate among
heaped-up aggregates, and to create discrepancies promoting life and
development. A simple increase of bodies and souls only strengthens
that which is already in existence by augmenting the mass. In China,
India, and Egypt, population has increased for a long time; but
development of civilisation and of political power has been unable to
keep pace with it.
[Illustration: THE MAKING OF THE NATIONS--V
Professor FREDERICK RATZEL]
THE FUTURE HISTORY OF MAN
[Sidenote: Man and the Universe]
Looking back upon the history of man, it appears to us the history of
the human race as a life phenomenon bound and confined to this planet
alone. We are thus unable to form any conception of progress into the
infinite, for every tellurian life-development is dependent upon the
earth, and must always return to it again. New life must follow old
roads. Cosmic influences may broaden or narrow the districts within
which man is able to exist. This was experienced by the human race
during the Glacial Period, when the ice sheet first drove men toward
the equator, and later, receding, enabled them once more to spread out
to the north. The limits of world life in general depend upon earthly
influences; and thus, for mankind, progress limited by both time and
space is alone possible.
Perhaps it would be well, for the elucidation of the question of
development, were geography to designate as progress only that which
from sufficient data may be established as such beyond all doubt. Thus,
to begin with, we have learned to know of a progress in space--man’s
diffusion over the earth--which proceeds in two directions. The
expansion of the human race signifies not only an extension of the
boundaries of inhabited land far into the Polar regions, but also the
growth of an intellectual conception of the whole world.
[Sidenote: Manifold Growth of Mankind]
Together with this progress there have been countless expansions
of economic and political horizons, of commercial routes, of the
territories of races and of nations--an extraordinarily manifold
growth that is continually advancing. Increase of population and of
the nearness of approach of peoples to one another goes hand in hand
with progressing space. Mankind cannot become diffused uniformly over
new areas without becoming more and more familiar with the old. New
qualities of the soil and new treasures have been discovered, and thus
the human race has constantly been made richer. While these gifts
enriched both intellect and will, new possibilities were all the while
arising, enabling men to dwell together in communities; the population
of the earth increased, and the densely inhabited regions, at first but
small, constantly grew larger and larger.
[Sidenote: History is the Growth of Differences]
With this increase in number, latent abilities came to life; races
approached one another; competition was entered into; interpenetration
and mingling of peoples followed. Some races acted mutually in
powerfully developing one another’s characteristics; others receded
and were lost, unless the earth offered them a possibility of
diffusion over better protected regions. Already we see in these
struggles the fundamental motive of the battle for area; and at the
same time, on surveying this progress, we may also see the limit set
to it--that increase in population is unfavourable to the progress of
civilisation in any definite area, if the number of inhabitants become
disproportionately large in respect to the territory occupied. Many
regions are already over-populated; and the numbers of mankind will
always be restricted by the limits of the habitable world.
Already in the differences in population of different regions lie
motives for the internal progress of man; but yet more powerful
are those incentives to the development of internal differences in
races furnished by the earth itself through the manifoldness of its
conformation.
The entire history of the world has thus become an uninterrupted
process of differentiation. At first arose the difference between
habitable and uninhabitable regions, and then within the habitable
areas occurs the action brought about by variations in zones, divisions
of land, seas, mountains, plains, steppes, deserts, forests--the whole
vast multitude of formations, taken both separately and in combination.
Through these influences arise the differences which must at first
develop to a certain extent in isolation before it is possible for
them to act upon one another, and to alter, either favourably or
unfavourably, the original characteristics of men.
[Sidenote: Earth’s Variety Reflected in its Peoples]
All the variations in race and in civilisation shown by different
peoples of the world, and the differences in power shown by states, may
be traced to the ultimate processes of differentiation occasioned by
variations in situation, climate, and soil, and to which the constantly
increasing mingling of races, that becomes more and more complex with
the diffusion of mankind over the globe, has also contributed. The
birth of Roman daughter states, and the rise of Hispano-Americans
and Lusitano-Americans from some of these very daughter nations, are
evidences of a development that ever strives for separation, for
diffusion over space, which may be compared only to the trunk of a
tree developing, and putting forth branches and twigs. But the bole
that has sent forth so many branches and twigs was certainly a twig
itself at one time; and thus the process of differentiation is repeated
over and over again. Progress in respect to population and to occupied
area is undoubted; but can these daughter nations be compared to Rome
in other respects? They have shown great powers of assimilation and
great tenacity, for they have held their ground. Nevertheless, their
greatest achievement has been to have clung fast to the earth; in other
words, to have persisted. Certainly this is far more important than the
internal progress in which the branches might perhaps have been able to
surpass the older nation.
[Sidenote: Decisive Element in a Nation]
It is an important principle that since all life is and must be closely
attached to the soil, no superiority may exist permanently unless it be
able to obtain and to maintain ground. In the long run, the decisive
element of every historical force is its relation to the land. Thus
great forces may be seen to weaken in the course of a long struggle
with lesser forces whose sole advantage consists in their being more
firmly rooted in the soil. The warlike, progressive, on-marching
Mongols and Manchus conquered China, it is true, but they have been
absorbed into the dense native population and have assumed the native
customs. The same illustration applies to the founding of nations by
all nomadic races, especially in the case of the Southern European
German states that arose at the time of the migration of Germanic
peoples. The health and promise of the English Colonies in Australia
present a striking contrast to the gloom that reigns over India, of
which the significance lies only in a weary governing, conserving, and
exploiting of three hundred millions of human beings. In Australia the
soil is acquired; in India only the people have been conquered. Will
a time ever come when all fertile lands will be as densely populated
as India and China? Then the most civilised, evolved nation will have
no more space in which to develop, maintain, and root its better
characteristics; and the success of a state will not result from the
possession of active forces, but from vegetative endowments--freedom
from wants, longevity, and fertility.
[Sidenote: The Goal of the Nations]
Even though the future may bring with it a union of all nations in the
world into the one great community already spoken of in the Gospel of
John, growth may take place only through differentiation. And thus
there is no necessity for our sharing the fear that a world-state would
swallow up all national and racial differences, and all variations in
civilisation.