| View previous topic :: View next topic |
Hatty
Site Admin
In: Berkshire
|
|
 |
|
| Use an old Applied Epistemological trick. Posit an imaginary world, let's call it Harperium. This has seventy one per cent ocean to twenty-nine per cent land. The land is divided up into half a dozen landmasses varying in size according to the proper mathematical whatsit. Stick intelligent life on it and wait a bit. Now, knowing what you know now, say where nation-states will first emerge and how they will subsequently spread. |
The earliest settlers would find an area which fulfilled their needs and lay claim to it, possibly having to fight for it first, then mark it out as theirs. In order to keep it safe from attack they'd have to construct defences or use natural ones if such existed and either intimidate, or reach an amicable mutual non-aggressive pact with, their neighbours. Those on the periphery would want a piece of the action so, smug in the knowledge that no-one else is going to invade their out-of-the-way patch, they would make themselves useful by providing goods or services or safe-havens or play one lot off against the other.
[Switzerland may be surrounded on all sides but nevertheless it's tantamount to a mountain fortress - and made itself useful by providing the rest of Europe with mercenaries. It hardly needed an army of its own to defend its mountains.]
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
Mick Harper
Site Admin
In: London
|
|
|
|
|
What's all this bollocks about "early settlers". We're already at 1250 AD remember.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
AJMorton
|
|
|
|
| Mick Harper wrote: | | What's all this bollocks about "early settlers". |
From here perhaps:
| Stick intelligent life on it and wait a bit. |
Any word on the difficulty of expansion of Scotland? Since she isn't bordering very much at all (just England and a rocky coast) she couldn't expand her borders the way continental countries can.
From which we would surely get well defined and rather old borders.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Hatty
Site Admin
In: Berkshire
|
|
|
|
|
Despite their relative smallness, these countries have potential nuisance value, they're all at the back door of another, more powerful country. They don't need a massive fighting force to inflict damage on the larger nation, they can form alliances with people who do have military might. In fact, they would have to have outside protection in order to ensure the stronger nation doesn't invade them.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Hatty
Site Admin
In: Berkshire
|
|
|
|
|
Their position also ensures they're protected from the fortunes of war - look at how many times Poland's borders have changed - and the consequences of victories/defeats. Empires expand or contract and smaller countries in the way get overrun or even disappear entirely but the 'spectator' nations retain their stability or nationhood whoever is in the ascendancy.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Mick Harper
Site Admin
In: London
|
|
|
|
|
All of you are obsessed with detail. This is a systems programme. I do not want to hear the name of a single country until you (or somebody) says where and why the first nation-state will appear in Harperium.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
AJMorton
|
|
|
|
Where: In the smallest of the half-dozen land masses.
Why: The borders, being small, have the least invadable or debatable points.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Hatty
Site Admin
In: Berkshire
|
|
|
|
| I do not want to hear the name of a single country until you (or somebody) says where and why the first nation-state will appear in Harperium. |
In Harperium there's relatively little land compared to sea so the nations inhabiting this world will have acquired navigational skills early on in order to explore their environment. The first nation-state in Harperium will arise on one of the extremities of one of the landmasses because that's the furthest point anyone could reach. Why? Because it's not worth the effort to invade them, their country isn't in anyone's way and they don't pose a threat.
The people in this far-off region can't return whence they came, as others will have occupied the intervening land; in time they secure their position on the edge so that, even though they'll get occasional outsiders settling in their territory, they can absorb external influences and still remain independent of the countries dominating the landmass.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Hatty
Site Admin
In: Berkshire
|
|
|
|
| All of you are obsessed with detail. This is a systems programme. |
Just looked up systems programme and I learn that Systems programs are those that control the operation of the computer.
So we're supposed to look for a pattern right? Some kind of system of checks and balances so that no one power gains total control perhaps. For instance, Portugal was on the fringes but consolidated its borders while Spain was occupied vanquishing the Moors, its heyday coincided exactly with Spanish hegemony (Austro-Habsburg empire), they divided up the world between them in effect. Scotland's borders were defined while its nearest neighbour was busy fighting the French and subduing Wales, its age of enlightenment followed hard on the heels of the Act of Union with England and the beginning of the British Empire. I expect Japan followed the same pattern while China was engaged in fighting the Mongols.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Mick Harper
Site Admin
In: London
|
|
|
|
| Where: In the smallest of the half-dozen land masses. |
So why in the Harperium we know do all the early nation-states pop up on the largest landmass?
| Why: The borders, being small, have the least invadable or debatable points. |
Nothing much has been said about borders being large or small.
| In Harperium there's relatively little land compared to sea |
The land/sea ratio is exactly the same as on earth.
| so the nations inhabiting this world will have acquired navigational skills early on in order to explore their environment. |
This obsession you have with 'early on' is bizarre. Nation-states are a very late-flowering phenomenon.
| The first nation-state in Harperium will arise on one of the extremities of one of the landmasses because that's the furthest point anyone could reach. |
Scotland, Portugal, Japan and Korea are not specially difficult to reach -- compared to Kamchatka, Finland, Cape of Good Hope etc.
| Why? Because it's not worth the effort to invade them, their country isn't in anyone's way and they don't pose a threat. |
Does this follow? Does one invade somewhere that's a threat or not a threat? What is in one's way to where exactly? Is Spain more likely to invade France because it's on the way to Germany or invade Portugal because...it's there. The rest of your answer, Hatty, was quite good but jumps the gun somewhat. Let's keep things brutally simple for now.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Hatty
Site Admin
In: Berkshire
|
|
|
|
|
If a smallish, rather remote country has only one point of contact which is closed off due to its neighbour's numerical and military superiority, it is a closed society to all intents and purposes, so it's got to pull its disparate elements together and will eventually set out to develop contact(s) with other countries as a nation, whereas a country which has access to or is courted by various outside countries has the problem of preventing its disgruntled components from forming external alliances and promoting power struggles.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
AJMorton
|
|
|
|
|
You put it much better than I did, Hatty.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Mick Harper
Site Admin
In: London
|
|
|
|
| I was thinking about Scotland as well as Harperium. I reckoned the first nation state in Harperium would appear in the smallest of the half dozen components which comprise your invented land because it would be the easiest and quickest to develop. |
Well, don't think -- look. Scotland is on the very furthermost edge of the largest landmass, so is Portugal, so is Japan, so is Korea, so is England, so is Spain -- Blimey O'Reilly, you can lead a horse to water but by God you can't make it see it's water.
Nothing much has been said about borders being large or small.
I know. That came from me. The length of Scotland's border is minuscule. It is therefore extremely easy to protect. That did have consequences. |
I don't want to get too technical but borders are fractals and can't be measured by length. However, even by your own reckoning Portugal has a very long border compared to its size. So has Korea.
Does this follow? Does one invade somewhere that's a threat or not a threat? What is in one's way to where exactly? Is Spain more likely to invade France because it's on the way to Germany or invade Portugal because...it's there.
It does follow actually. A brief look at the history of the Mongolian Empire would suggest that some invaders follow these thoughts exactly. To invade because 'it's there' is unfortunately a common reason throughout history to invade another country. |
Precisely so. You support my point not yours. The Mongols didn't invade China to get to Japan or the Khmer Empire. In fact they just invaded...anywhere, anytime, anyplace...that's Mongolia.
| If a smallish, rather remote country has only one point of contact which is closed off due to its neighbour's numerical and military superiority, it is a closed society to all intents and purposes, so it's got to pull its disparate elements together and will eventually set out to develop contact(s) with other countries as a nation, whereas a country which has access to or is courted by various outside countries has the problem of preventing its disgruntled components from forming external alliances and promoting power struggles. |
Well, OK, but now develop this into a system.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
AJMorton
|
|
|
|
| Mick Harper wrote: | | Well, don't think -- look. Scotland is on the very furthermost edge of the largest landmass, so is Portugal, so is Japan, so is Korea, so is England, so is Spain -- Blimey O'Reilly, you can lead a horse to water but by God you can't make it see it's water. |
Hatty and I have already said this though. AJ puzzled.
One question. Is England on the very furthermost edge? Last time I looked it was a little behind that edge.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Hatty
Site Admin
In: Berkshire
|
|
|
|
| Well, OK, but now develop this into a system. |
The nation-state that has been forming behind closed doors, or rather time-honoured though not yet officially declared borders, eventually has a decisive encounter or drawn-out struggle with the nearby country (China failed to defeat Japan, England unsuccessfully tried to invade Scotland) which leads to the formal recognition of its sovereignty and cessation of hostilities.
The repulsed, larger country has learnt from first-hand experience the advantages that a unified state has over disorganised, hotch-potch invasion attempts. Now, in its turn, it too has a "wall" behind it - and so the process starts again... a large, relatively remote country unable to expand in a certain direction develops into a cohesive entity with a defined territory and successfully defends its de facto borders leading to a treaty with another neighbour. Thus, England becomes a nation-state after establishing its northern border in perpetuity.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
The Library Index 
FAQ 
Search
Register
Profile 
Log in to check your private messages 
Log in 
