Have you heard of General Glubb, Glubb Pasha? A remarkable British soldier who served in World War I and went on to serve and lead the Arab Legion in the 1930s. He continued in this role until the 1950s and the arabization of the Legion's command, he died in 1986. That's by way of background, but when not soldiering Glubb was a scholar and historian who believed the rise and fall of empires followed a sevenfold pattern.
Namely: Outburst, Conquest, Commerce, Affluence, Intellect, Decadence, Collapse. Outburst, Conquest, Commerce and Affluence speak, I think, for themselves, Gilad Sommer describes the following two phases of the imperial trajectory:
The Age of Intellect – affluent young people now aim for the acquisition of knowledge and academic honors leading to new discoveries and technological progress. In a sort of nostalgic reverie, intellectuals begin to look back, document, and write down the history of the empire. A dangerous byproduct of the Age of Intellect is the belief that intellect by itself can solve the problems of the world.
“Any small activity requires for its survival a measure of self-sacrifice and service on the part of its members. (…). The impression that the situation can be saved by mental cleverness, without unselfishness or human self-dedication can only lead to collapse.” (Glubb)
The Age of Decadence – the empire is getting old… Civil dissensions arise. The boat is sinking, and instead of collaborating to repair it or to build a new one, political factions fight each other over the leftovers. Immigrants flood the cities. Memories of old rivalries reappear. In response to the sinking of the empire, the helpless citizens react with aggressiveness or with a mentality of “after me, the flood”, an atmosphere of pessimism and frivolity arises. People live for themselves and for the moment, thus accelerating the breaking apart of the empire.
Thus in the end, through internal decay brought on ironically by success, the empire falls and is replaced. Glubb believed this process took around 250 years, and it's more than a little tempting to see ourselves in his Age of Decadence, the timing's even about right. But the question is, can we cheat the prophets and reverse the trend? That remains to be seen.
SPQR,
LSP
7 comments:
Thanks for the post, which led me to read his article from 1977, "Fate of Empires." His thesis for time spans works for his selected examples, except when it doesn't. The Romanovs lasted, in his article, from 1682-1916 - succeeded by the Soviet Union. Not predicted by Glubb, the Soviet Union lasted only from 1922-1991. Glubb seems to have included the Soviet Union among his pantheon of great nations/empires when he wrote "Some day this phenomenon will doubtless appear in the now apparently monolithic and authoritarian Soviet empire." Glubb's Mameluke Empire example seems to violate his thesis about an energetic people having an "outburst" period. The Mameluke Empire was the result of Circassian slave soldiers seizing power from their local overlords, and doesn't seem to fit his outburst of energy pattern.
I think, Anon, that his timeline's wrong/dodgy but phases? Not so much. Hey, I'm no expert.
Glubb's article is interesting, but it seems to fall short on both the phasing and timeline concepts. As noted above, the Mamelukes fall short on the phasing concept, lacking an outburst of energy initial phase. This single example should be sufficient to invalidate the phasing thesis. Glubb's Ottoman Empire timeline - 1320-1570 makes no sense to me. Jan Sobieski was fighting the Ottomans at the gates of Vienna in 1683. Furthermore, the British Empire fought the Ottoman Empire in the Great War. The Ottoman Empire seems to invalidate the timeline portion of Glubb's thesis. As one more timeline example, Glubb mentions Byzantium in the body or the article, but doesn't include it on his table. With ups and downs, the Byzantine Empire survived for over 1,000 years.
Dear Anon, good detail points. And perhaps we should view Glubb Pasha's thesis as more approximate than not. That said, are we not at the Age of Decadence? Seems pretty clear to me.
You have cataloged many contemporary examples of degeneracy, corruption, and satanic practices in the UK and USA, no doubt. Glubb's treatment of decadence is intangible, unquantifiable, and subjective. It is difficult for me to apply, particularly in light of the contemporary corruption we experience daily in the West. Glubb writes "Decadence is both mental and moral deterioration, produced by the slow decline of the community from which its members cannot escape, as long as they remain in their old surroundings. But transported elsewhere, they soon discard their decadent ways of thought and and prove themselves equal to the other citizens of their adopted country." But the grooming gangs brought their practices to Britain from South Asia, they didn't acquire them in Britain. The NHS has to deal with the the health problems that statistically follow from the marriage of first cousins, a practice brought to Britain from South Asia. So, I don't understand how to apply Glubb's formula, and the formula seems contrary to observed reality. Additionally, Glubb writes "Decadence is a moral and spiritual disease, resulting from too long a period of wealth and power, producing cynicism, decline of religion, pessimism, and frivolity." Glubb must have detected this in Britain between 1930-1950, but that Britain does not resemble the degenerate behavior so common today in the USA. So Britain used up their last gold reserves and lost many young men in its final stage of decadence in order to defeat Germany and Japan. Strange formula.
Good reflection, Anon. I think he was reflecting on the experience of the British Empire, and our own pseudo empire perhaps mirrors this. Without getting down in the weeds, he gives us principles. Do they actually apply to reality? I think in a very general way they do, but his is by no means an exact calculus.
Then there's the quite literal breaking of Britain by the wars and the US. You'll note Glubb retired in '56.
On topic, on my RCB board, a womxn Captain asked us if Suez was in any way relevant (many years ago). I swallowed my deep urge to say "dam your impudence" and uttered something imbecilic like, "Ma'am, quite out of date, you see."
"A Soldier with the Arabs" is an excellent telling of the creation of a modern military force (Jordan). The late Pat Lang spoke highly of the man.
Post a Comment