ORIENTAL PATRIOTISM.
WE know of no subject upon which the opinion of experts in Asiatic affairs is so hopelessly divided as that of • Oriental Patriotism. A great number of the keenest of them, and especially of the men whose experience is entitled to re- spect, say that such a feeling as patriotism does not exist in any Asiatic. He can and will die for his creed, or for his tribe, or caste, or for his dynasty; but of patriotism he has no conception. He very rarely or never has a word in his language to express the virtue, his public opinion does not require it as a condition of political life, and under temptation he never finds in it any source of strength. An Asiatic, such observers say, can be very loyal to a ruler, or to an ally, or to an idea, but his loyalty to what we term his " country " is of the feeblest character. He may speak of patriotism in words, especially when talking to Europeans ; but his impelling motive is always either ambition, or pride, or fanaticism, and not, especially under temptation, love of country. He will sell his country in order to rule it, and sometimes for mere lucre, especially when he is out of spirits, and thinks Destiny has declared against the Virtues. Those observers who think thus believe in their own. view very firmly, point to the case of Tej Singh, who sold victory, as General Cunningham reports, for £:220,000, and ridicule the notion that a man like Arabi Pasha can be governed by anything like " nationalist " feeling. He may be, they admit, a Mussulman fanatic, or a devotee of the Khalifate—which is not quite the same thing—or even an " Asiatic," that is, a man who loathes European ascendancy ; but he cannot care enough for Egypt to make Egyptian interest, as he conceives it, the guiding-star of his policy,—cannot, in fact, be in any sense a patriot.
We should say that, on the whole, this was the more general opinion, especially among those experts who have come much in contact with prominent Asiatic statesmen, the men, that is, who are not Sovereigns, but have risen either by serving or by opposing Sovereigns. At the same time, a minority of observers equally experienced, and we think, as a rule, possessed of more sympathy and insight, though not of greater force, utterly reject this view. They say that Asiatics not only can feel, but do feel the sentiment of patriotism as strongly as Europeans; that the want of a word to express the idea is an accident, which, curiously enough, is reproduced iu England, where, though every one understands "love of country," the only single word which expresses that sentiment is borrowed from the French ; and that an Arab, a native of India, or a Chinaman, when a good man, is as strongly moved by the idea of "country," and all which it implies, as an Englishman or an American. He is more likely to be deficient in that virtue than a European, as he is more likely to be deficient in any other of the active virtues, his whole nature being feebler, and, so to
speak, more feminine ; yet he not only recognises, but, unless overpowered by strong temptation, acts on it. He very often, for example, submits to invasion when a European would resist, but he never submits willingly, still less permanently. He 'lever adopts the invader, never forgets that his own country is separate, and never ceases to hope that in God's good time the invader will be compelled to depart, or, if such extreme good- fortune may be, will be slaughtered out. As to self-sacri- fice for his country, he tills up the national army readily enough, and this in countries like Afghanistan, which have no conscription ; he serves as a soldier, say, in Turkey, with wonderful self-suppression ; and he will, and does constantly, risk his fortune, rather than give an advantage to the national enemy. No foreign Government in an Asiatic State is ever
able quite to trust the people, while it is a universal experience that if a rising occurs, the people enter into a silent conspiracy to give it aid. They may not rise, but the foreigner hears nothing of the plot till it explodes, finds no one to betray the leaders, and is conscious of living in an atmosphere of deadly hostility. In the exceptional case of small States separated by any cause from their neighbours, like that of the Albanians, the Afghans, the Burmese, or the Druses, patriotism is a burning passion, to be as fully relied on as the same passion in any European country. Men who think thus declare that Arabi Pasha, though governed by. mixed motives, still does feel the nationalist feeling ; that his followers, though moved by many emotions, still do seek the independence of Egypt; and that a good many of those whom we consider dangerous fools, actuated by bloodthirsty race-hatred, honestly believe that in rioting they are risking life in order to be rid of enemies to their country.
We confess we agree with the second party, though it is needful to make a reserve. We do not believe that, as a rale, patriotism is as strong in Asia as in Europe. Its influence there has been superseded in part by other ideas; by the claims of religion—fervent Ultramontanes are, even in Europe, seldom patriots before all things—by the feeling of race, which is as strong almost everywhere in Asia as in Ireland ; and by the passion of " loyalty " in the technical sense, which constantly leads Asiatios to postpone everything, even independence, to the interests of a dynasty; but it exists almost precisely in the degree and form in which it existed among Europeans in the Middle Ages. The people of an Asiatic State like their country, and are proud of it ; are prepared to do something, though not very much, in its defence ; and are passively, but implacably and permanently, hostile to the foreigner who invades it. They are not, outside some portions of Arabia, Democrats in any sense, but they are universally "Nationalists," and prefer, distinctly prefer, bad government by themselves and through themselves, to good government by the foreigner. They may prefer one foreigner to another, as the Bengalees undoubtedly prefer Englishmen to Sikhs, and the Pegasus prefer them to Burmese ; but if they had the choice, they would prefer each other to anybody else. Nobody, we suppose, -doubts this about Armenians, who, though white, are recognised throughout the continent, from Shanghai to the Bosphorus, as true Asiatics, and can go in safety where no European would be spared; or about Afghans, or about Arabs, or about Chinese; and it is true of far feebler races. There is not a Bengalee who is not proud of the old glories of Gour, or gratified when a European acknowledges the intellectual capacity of his country- men, or sad when he admits that his desk—i.e., patria, as well as land—has constantly been conquered. There was not an Indian on the vast continent who did not consider the Sepoys Nationalists, and did not, even if he dreaded their success, feel proud of their few victories. An old Hindoo scholar, definitely and openly on the English side, actually cried with rage and pain, in the writer's presence, over a report that Delhi was to be razed. He had never seen Delhi, but to him it was "our beautiful city, such a possession for our country." The Egyptians are not a strong people, but it is quite useless to tell an Egyptian that the Europeans bring him prosperity and light taxes, as useless as to tell a true Irish Nationalist the same thing about the English. He does not trouble himself to deny the facts, nay, very often believes them ; but, all the same, he wants the intruders gone, if wealth and comfort go with them. It is true the feeling is not acute, and does not take the European form. The Asiatic's mind is full of bewildering cross- lights, of feelings about his creed, and his history, and his hates, and his personal interests, which, if they conflict with patriotism, often prove the stronger ; but to say that is to say he is morally weak or intellectually crotchetty, not to say he is unpatriotic. He knows what he is selling when he sells his country well enough, and if anybody else sells it will pour mental vitriol on his head. A "traitor," in the English sense, has not in Asia a pleasant time of it with posterity. Patriotism with him is not an overmastering idea. He has too many notions about destiny, and about the sanctity of power as granted by God, and about the necessity of obedience when extorted by adequate force, to be a Washington, or anything like a Wash- ington; but his country has his sympathies, nevertheless, which, whenever there is a chance for their display, have to be reckoned with by politicians. The Egyptians have always obeyed foreigners, and, if the English conquered them, would be very fair subjects ; but we have no doubt that the majority of them, though quiescent, would much rather that Egyptians succeeded in this struggle than that Europe did, and a little rather that Egyptians conquered than that Turks did. The Turk is a foreigner, but he is a Mussulman and an Asiatic. It may be said that the emotion is only one of hate, and, indeed, this is almost always said by the makers of telegrams, but it is not strictly true. The hatred exists, like the hatred for England in Ireland, but it is in great part the result of a feeling indis- tinguishable, at all events, from patriotism, a feeling com- pounded of national pride, national exclusiveness, and desire for national independence. If the Egyptian were a fighting man, like the Afghan, we should all understand him, but the possi- bility of sentiments or virtues in a passive state is always more or less incredible to the Englishman. Such sentiments exist, nevertheless, as the Englishman would remember, if he ever bethought himself that he himself holds it part of his duty to turn his cheek to the smiter—honestly and sincerely holds it —though, when the hour comes, he turns his fist, instead.
Previous page
