The Nation: Myth or Reality?

Keith Cameron

In a Europe which in the last few years has seen the emergence of a stronger and more closely-knit community and the demise of totalitarian regimes with a subsequent splintering up into new states, the concept of nationhood and what it really signifies has become one of burning relevance. Britons, Bosnians, Ukrainians and Russians have at least one thing in common, their wish to keep their distinct identity and to distance themselves from those of another nation. The British while wishing for closer ties between the member states of the European Community are still anxious not to lose their sovereignty.

The word nation is bandied about considerably; we talk of the French nation, the Spanish nation, etc. In many continental countries the concept of the 'patrie' is part of their cultural heritage. President de Gaulle when addressing the nation, would virtually always allude, in the course of his allocution, to 'Francaises, Francais', thereby reminding his listeners of their national affiliation. How many countries have allusions to common national origins in their national anthems? e.g. 'Land of my fathers', 'Enfants de la patrie', 'Deutschland uber alles'. Yet what constitutes a nation? Is it an ethnic division? Is it a political one? a geographical one? a linguistic one? a combination of all these?

Within the larger confines of a political state, all its inhabitants can share the same nationality, yet that same state can be divided up into subdivisions, each of which will often have its own ethnic identity, language, etc. Many people have a similar problem to that of my own children. They have a British father ( further complicated by the fact that although of paternal Scottish descent he was born and raised in South Wales) and a French mother who claims to be a Breton. One of the children was born in France, another in Scotland and the third in England. They have spent most of their lives in England where they have always spoken French in the home and English elsewhere. Can their nation be anything but an arbitrary feeling of 'belonging' more to one group than to another? It is also true, I believe, that their feelings have changed emphasis as they have aged. What then is their true nation? Do they belong to France, Wales, Scotland or England? to all four? to Europe?

In spite of what may appear to be obvious real obstacles to an absolute definition of a nation, the term is loaded with political force. In times of threat, when a group of individuals feels in danger from another, then it would seem that the spirit of the nation is revived and fomented as a unifying factor of defence. Since time immemorial, ancestors have been invoked as an encouragement to the living. Where no knowledge of ancestors has existed then leaders or would-be leaders have not hesitated to invent them. During the Renaissance in Europe families employed men of letters to invent a genealogy for them and their followers, a legacy from the Emperor Augustus who found a worthy singer of Rome's past in Virgil.

There is a strong correlation between political demands made by minority groups and their economic and political standing within the greater community. Linguistic autonomy or rather movements which have as their avowed aim the maintenance of a minority language are often associated with political ambitions which once they are achieved or palliated can lead to minority languages being left to fend for themselves and, ironically, to perish. In the former Soviet Union, Stalin realised the unifying factor of a single language and tried to impose Russian upon the whole country to the detriment of local languages. This led to the right to speak one's own language becoming one of the proclaimed aims of the emergent independent states. It will be interesting to see how they fare in the future. Should we be like Dr Johnson and feel 'sorry when any language is lost, because languages are the pedigree of nations'?

As Europe is composed of so many 'nations', it is appropriate that this first number of Europa should be devoted to an examination of certain aspects of nationhood within the European context, and to try and establish whether the nation is a myth or a reality.

The articles consider the language problem both as regards 'nationality' and as a barrier to international relations and understanding- even translation reveals cultural and national choices. Tales about the founders of our nation which are apparently based on historical fact, how accurate and how reliable are they? Those characteristics we associate with certain nations, do they stand up to close scrutiny? Our own British characteristics are they a result of our society or part of a pattern which has been imposed on us? The boundaries of a nation, can they be justified? Or are they the result of political activity which subsequently tries to provide a raison d'etre for their existence? The examples taken range through past and present and provide considerable food for thought and discussion.

Even though the findings may show that definitions of the term are inaccurate and concepts of a given nation are based upon myth rather than reality, the paradox is that we all believe that it exists!