The Washington herald., 1914-08-25
NationaI Units.
~ FRANZ BOAs,

Professor OF Anthropology IN Celumbia University.
The history of mankind shows the grand spec
tacIe of the grouping of man in units of ever-n-
creasng size that live together in peace and that are
ready to go to war only with other groups outside
of their own limits Notwithstanding all temporary
revolutions and the shattering of larger units for
the time being the progress in the direction of unh-
cation has been so regular and so marked that we
must needs conclude that the tendencies which have
swayed this development in the past will govern our
history in the future.
The concept of nationalities of the size of our
modern nations would have been just as inconceiv-
able in early times of the history of mankind, APP
pears now the concept of unity of interests of all
the peoples of the world at least of all those who
share the same type of civilization and are subject to
the same economical conditions. The historical de-
velopment shows, however, that such feeling OF op-
position of one group toward another is solely an
expression of existing conditions, and does not by
any means indicate permanence of these conditions
The practical difficulties that seem to stand in the
way of the formation of still larger units count for
naught before the inexorable laws of history. The
reasons that have kept political units manifold
but none of them have resisted the attacks of chang
ing conditions In modern times that adherence of
members of strange horde which sprang from the
idea that they are specifically different is the point
of vanishing We still find it in the so-caled race
instincts of the whites so opposed to the negro and
Asiatic and in the anti-Semtc movement, but in
most of these cases rather element OF internal
strife than as one that leads to war.
Thus it appears that it is not any rational cause
that forms opposing groups, but solely the emotional
value of an idea that holds together the members of
each group and exalts their feeling Of solidarity and
greatness to such extent that compromise with
other groups become impossible. In this mental atti
tude may readily recognize the survival of the
feeling of specific difference between the hordes
transferred in part from the feeling of physical diff
ferences to that of mental differences. The modern
enthusiasm the superiority of the socaled "Ayan
race" of the "Teutonic race" the pan-German and
the panSlavish ideals only be understood in this
light 1t is the old feeling of specific differences be-
tween social groups in a new disguise,
1t is easy to show that this feeling is not based
on any racial or other relationship, but that it is
merely expression of strong emotion that is
nected with vague idea of supposed relationship.
Recent investigations of anthropologsts have
demonstrated that no such thing as an "Aryan race
exists but that the people of Europe related by
descent, no matter what language they speak; and
that Firms, Hungarians Turks. and Basques must be
included in the family of the European race. Still
less can any of the existing nations of Europe claim
a homogeneous descent.
The North French are quite different in appear
ance from the Central French and then again from
the South French; while the North French resemble
the inhabitants of parts of Northern Germany, the
Central French those of Southern Germany. The
Germans east of the Elbe are largely descendants
of Slavic people whom they still resemble in ap-
pearance.
Students of anthropology are unanimous in dis
cardng the idea of the unity OF descent OF each
nation and of the pride in the purity Of descent of
any particular type which gives to the indivdu-
ais representing that type the right 10 place them
selves plane high over that occupied by ai other
members of mankind. The lack of an objective basis
of unity becomes clearest when the inerreationshp
of all blondes or of all the brunettes is claimed,
which is obviously not accompanied by any true feel
ing of kinshp.
1t seems, however, that in our present period,
community of language is strong bond that holds
nations together
When there is a great difference of languages as
in Austria, the national unity seems to US feeble.
One of the few exceptions in which language is not
the controlling bond OF the members OF a national
ity is Switzerland
Nevertheless, We may recognize thai unity OF Ian
guage is also more an ideal than real bond; not
only that divergence of dialects makes communica-
ton difficult, but community of thought among the
members of different social classes is also so slight
that communication Of deeper thought and feeling
is possible.
Thus it appears that the feeling of solidarity
among the members OF each nation is not based by
any means objective traits common to all of them
although the manner of thinking and living may
impose certain mental forms upon each community
but upon subjective ideals that possess strong emo
tional value.
From primitive times on such ideals have existed,
but in ever changing form. Now one idea has been
the center OF public sentiment then another With
them the political groupings of mankind have
changed All have had the power to create passions
that have led each community to defend what it be-
eved to be ideal against foreign attacks or even in
dorsed the attempt to force it upon the unwilling
neighbors.
Thus the study of all types of people, primitive
as well as advanced, shows two peculiar traits-the
the constant increase in size of the social units
that believe in the ideal the other the constant
variation of these ideals. Shus we are led to the
conclusion that neither the belief is justified
that the modern nations represent the largest attain