may be thrown back by the conquest of many very rude men over a few
less rude men. But the first elements of civilisation are great
military advantages, and, roughly, it is a rule of the first times
that you can infer merit from conquest, and that progress is
promoted by the competitive examination of constant war.

This principle explains at once why the 'protected' regions of the
world--the interior of continents like Africa, outlying islands like
Australia or New Zealand--are of necessity backward. They are still
in the preparatory school; they have not been taken on class by
class, as No. II., being a little better, routed effaced No. I.; and
as No. III., being a little better still, routed and effaced No. II.
And it explains why Western Europe was early in advance of other
countries, because there the contest of races was exceedingly
severe. Unlike most regions, it was a tempting part of the world,
and yet not a corrupting part; those who did not possess it wanted
it, and those who had it, not being enervated, could struggle hard
to keep it. The conflict of nations is at first a main force in the
improvement of nations.

But what ARE nations? What are these groups which are so familiar to
us, and yet, if we stop to think, so strange; which are as old as
history; which Herodotus found in almost as great numbers and with
quite as marked distinctions as we see them now? What breaks the
human race up into fragments so unlike one another, and yet each in
its interior so monotonous? The question is most puzzling, though
the fact is so familiar, and I would not venture to say that I can
answer it completely, though I can advance some considerations
which, as it seems to me, go a certain way towards answering it.
Perhaps these same considerations throw some light, too, on the