PDF-file (The same edition. Another cover. 2.2 Mb)

The Formation of the Nation-Unit 375noticeable that both in Europe and Asia there was a commontendency, which we cannot trace to any close interchangeof ideas and must therefore attribute to the operation of thesame natural cause and necessity, towards the evolution of asocial hierarchy based on a division according to four differentsocial activities, — spiritual function, political dominationand the double economic function of mercantile production andinterchange and dependent labour or service. The spirit, formand equipoise worked out were very different in different partsof the world according to the bent of the community and itscircumstances, but the initial principle was almost identical.The motive-force everywhere was the necessity of a large effectiveform of common social life marked by fixity of statusthrough which individual and small communal interests mightbe brought under the yoke of a sufficient religious, political andeconomic unity and likeness. It is notable that Islamic civilisation,with its dominant principle of equality and brotherhood inthe faith and its curious institution of a slavery which did notprevent the slave from rising even to the throne, was never able toevolve such a form of society and failed, in spite of its close contactwith political and progressive Europe, to develop strong andliving, well-organised and conscious nation-units even after thedisruption of the empire of the Caliphs; it is only now under thepressure of modern ideas and conditions that this is being done.But even where this preparatory stage was effectivelybrought into existence, the subsequent stages did not necessarilyfollow. The feudal period of Europe with its four orders of theclergy, the king and nobles, the bourgeoisie and the proletariatehas a sufficiently close resemblance to the Indian fourfoldorder of the sacerdotal, military and mercantile classes andthe Shudras. The Indian system took its characteristic stampfrom a different order of ideas more prominently religious andethical than political, social or economic; but still, practically,the dominant function of the system was social and economicand there seems at first sight to be no reason why it should nothave followed, with whatever differences of detail, the commonevolution. Japan with its great feudal order under the spiritual