Abstract
WHAT constitutes a nationality is as hard a question to answer as the allied one of what is denoted by the word race. J. R. Swanton, in Smithsonian Institution War Background Studies, No. 2, has presented the problem clearly in a manner the nonexpert can readily grasp. Obviously many factors go to the formation of a nation: common physical type, geographical background, governmental unity, language, religion, economics, etc. But when the major cultures of the world, both past and present, are considered it will be found that no one of these is a dominant factor. There are true nations where the physical types are hopelessly mixed, as well as other factors which one would have thought vital to unity. On the other hand, even one of the more important criteria, namely, language, can fail to be a binding element-as witness England and the United States. Here, though the language is the same, no one can deny that there are two distinct nations. On the whole, the author seems to be driven back to the idea of the importance of voluntary associations of folk living under a government desired by the majority. This is, of course, difficult to test in the case of past civilizations, but seems to be applicable to modern nations. But if so it cannot be too much stressed, indeed it is the keystone of the theory, that what one nation may desire, in fact what may be the cement that makes it a nation, may not be at all what appeals to other agglomerations of men and women whose nationality will be determined by a totally different outlook on life.
Article PDF
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
What Constitutes a Nation?. Nature 150, 286 (1942). https://doi.org/10.1038/150286a0
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/150286a0