# The Science of History and the Hope of Mankind/Chapter 5

SECTION V
INTERNATIONAL POLITICS AND NATIONAL ADVANCEMENTS IN MODERN TIMES
IT is also a fact that the fortunes of all those peoples who in modern times have contributed to the glory and wealth of human civilisation by winning their independence and autonomy from the grasp of foreign rulers, or by limiting the rights and powers of the sovereigns, were not made by their own efforts alone, but were mainly directed by the conjuncture of circumstances and the environment of forces and opportunities that were created by the mutual alliance and rivalry of the other nations.
​Take, for example, the declaration of Dutch Independence, which towards the close of the sixteenth century threw a new power into European politics.
The power and prestige of the Spanish Habsburgs, the rulers of the Netherlands, had for a long time been on the wane. The monarchs of France, having consolidated their kingdom, were extending their arms of conquest and expansion, and so came into natural conflict with the Spanish Emperor, over whose dominions the sun never set. The Holy Roman Emperor was a Habsburg, and hence his relative, but had no sympathy with the proselytising Catholicism of the Spanish autocrat. The diplomatic Elizabeth of England also pursued a religious policy which ran directly ​counter to the Catholic Emperor's system of persecution.
In the meantime the Inquisition, set up by Philip II. to establish religious uniformity and centralise both politics and religion, had the baneful effect of crushing the national industries, by compelling the Protestant and Moorish artisans to seek refuge in the hospitable anti-Catholic countries. Economic resources having been thus hollowed out by the expulsion of the skilled labourers and organisers, the finances of the Empire presented a miserable condition. Thus just at the time when the people of the Netherlands, unable to bear the political and religious tyranny, were organised for war under the most patriotic and desperate leaders, the despot's sinews of war had become effete and inefficient.
​Add to this the division of energy that was necessitated by the simultaneous conflict with England and the possibility of a breach with France, and we get an idea of the manner in which the decay of Spain, and the political ascendancy of France, industrial and commercial developments of Protestant countries, and the political and religious independence of the Dutch Republic, came about as the joint products of the same system of European politics. We cannot explain the rise of one people without reference to the fall of another, or the economic prosperity of one if we neglect the political triumph of another.
Just as the interests of the whole of Europe were involved in the continental affairs that ultimately led to the absolute autonomy of the ​lands and the decadence of the Spanish Habsburgs, so also the Revolution of 1688 which led to the dethronement of James II. and the establishment of constitutional monarchy in England was only one of the indirect and accidental consequences of those series of European movements which were organised against the absolute Cæsaropapism of Louis XIV., le grand monarque of France, through the instrumentality of his personal rival, William Prince of Orange.
This "glorious Revolution" was not effected in England in the interest of herself and through the heroism of Englishmen alone, but was simply a means to the ends of a foreign hero. The European situation had come to such a pass that even the Pope of Rome had to accept liberal tendencies ​and sympathise with the Protestant movements. Louis' policy of religious centralisation had been rapidly robbing the Pope of his secular and political influence, and so the head of the Roman Catholic Church found it expedient to side with the Calvinistic William, as the champion of European liberties, and even oppose James II., the most extreme of all the advocates of Catholicism.
As the German Emperor had for a long time been involved in Turkish politics, and Spain had become paralysed, the hope of Europe for deliverance from the all-seizing ambition of the Grand Monarch rested on the national resources of England and the heroism and organising ability of the Prince of Orange. But England could not be made to take part in the ​general European conflict until the constitutional struggle between the King and the people was brought to a satisfactory close, and the miserable policy of the later Stuart kings of seeking subsidy and help from the French monarch was abolished and replaced by the practice of receiving grants from the Parliament by timely concessions.
One of the first tasks of William's life-work was, therefore, the accomplishment of the English Revolution. It was thus only a stepping-stone to the grand European mission of his life; at once a concomitant and a means to the general continental movements of the time.
Martin Luther started his scheme of religious reformation in the sixteenth century; it took about a century and a ​half to bring the religious disputes of Europe to an end. But the wars of Religion were not solely the outcome of the spiritual needs of humanity. These contests were inspired and directed by the needs of political and economic advancement which the various princes and peoples of Europe wanted to secure from the secular ambitions of the head of the Roman Church.
Thus the arrangement of the several powers into neutrals, allies, and belligerents was dictated not simply by religious considerations but by their financial, industrial, and political interests. The Reformation was, in fact, a political necessity, and national churches were the inevitable counterparts of nation-states. Consequently lovers of economic independence and ​national unity began to range themselves on the side of religious toleration and freedom of conscience; and so not only theologians and religious leaders, but statesmen and politicians, educationists and literary men as well, regulated the movements of the times. And so the Peace of Westphalia settled not only the religious disputes, but solved also some of the political problems of the age and determined the boundaries of Spain, France, Prussia, Sweden, and Holland.
The ascendancy of Sweden during the Thirty Years' War, and her gradual decadence in later times, as well as the development of Russia and Prussia as independent powers in the state-system of modern Europe, were due to circumstances created by the ​international relations of all states. The rivalry of the French monarchs with the Austro-Spanish Habsburgs, the predominance of France as the power in Europe and dictator in European politics, and the conflicts of the German Emperors with the Turks, gave the Markgrafs of the borderlands of the Empire and the Slavs of the outlying regions opportunities to acquire an independent status in international diplomacy. The rising into importance of these puisne states necessarily limited the range of the ambition of the older peoples and circumscribed the field of their activity. In this way the decay of Sweden, Austria, and Turkey, the humiliation of the Emperor, wars of the Reformation, and the rise and development of new powers were due to the mutual influences upon one ​another, and hence the combined results of the same set of conditions.
So also the recent liberation of Greece from the suzerainty of Turkey, and the revolutions that have led to the establishment of the modern German Empire as well as the unification of Italy into one nation, are not at all due to the unassisted and unhindered enterprise of the peoples concerned, but were the consequences of the numerous favourable and unfavourable circumstances produced by the complexities of European politics.
The peculiar international diplomacy of England, Russia, France, and Turkey, by which each was pursuing its own interests according to opportunities, gave rise to such an arrangement of the political forces, and such a distribution of the powers ​of Europe into foes, friends, and neutrals, as led inevitably to the freedom of Greece and revolutions in France, Germany, and Italy.
The gradual acquisition of privileges by the Hungarians from the German Emperors, and their ultimate achievement of national autonomy and self-rule, cannot be explained solely by the patriotism and martyrdom of heroes like Tokoli and his successors. Hungarian independence was, in later times, the result of the same forces and processes that had previously led to the formation and recognition of Prussian monarchy as an independent power in German history and general European politics. The eternal conflict of the German Empire with Turkey, and subsequently with Russia, as well as the secession of Prussia ​from its jurisdiction, and the consequent weakening of the Holy Roman Emperors, are the causes of that shifting of the centre of gravity in the oldest empire of the world, which is responsible for the new species of European polity, viz., the Dual Monarchy of Austro-Hungary. The expulsion of Austria from the German political system, and its co-ordination with Hungary, one of its foremost dependencies, are thus inextricably bound up with Prussian and Turkish politics.
The fact that Turkey, though infidel, is still an independent unit in modern European politics is not to be explained by the innate strength of the Moslem national character. It is rather due to the change in the viewpoint of European politics that dreads ​Slavonian ambition more than the pagan's intolerance. The conflict between the East and the West, the hatred of the European towards the Asiatic, the spirit of crusade against the Oriental religion, which were the mediæval reproductions of the classical anti-Persian enthusiasm, have in recent times given place to the desire for security and protection of the national autonomies of European powers against the encroachments of modern Russia, and the recognition of the safety of Turkey as the concern of combined Europe.
In fact, most of the non-Christian and Asiatic states that have been still preserving their independence in modern times are to be regarded as buffer-states; and the expediency of extending helping hands to the ​pagan nations, or of maintaining studied neutrality against Russian politics, is paralleled by the policy of the Pope, who in pursuance of his secular and political interests never scrupled to ally himself with Protestant princes and peoples, even against the greatest champions of his own religious system.
The fact is that just as it is impossible for man to preserve his existence solely on the strength of his own psycho-physical system, but he has every moment to depend on the non-self for the forces and materials that supply food to his mind and body, and hence he can maintain his life and individuality so long as he is fit enough to utilise the environment in his own way; so also nations can maintain their existence and peculiar national ​character only so long as they are fit enough to profit by the thousand and one physical and social influences that constitute the environment of nations in the world. It is impossible that a people should develop its life and liberty by ignoring or neglecting the mutual alliances and enmities between the several peoples of the human society. It is impossible that a nation should be able to acquire or preserve freedom and prestige solely on the strength of its own resources in national wealth and character. Every people has to settle its policy and course of action by a careful study of the disposition of the world-forces, and the situation of the political centre of gravity at the time.
It is this development of nations through international relations, and ​the dependence of national destiny on the character of the surroundings, that explain why so many things in the history of the world seem to be accidental, strange, and sudden. In reality, these accidents in the phenomena of national rise and fall, as well as the variations of national character, are regulated by laws and are interconnected as causes and effects, whether remote or direct, both in space and time.