Nationalism and La Marseillaise

Nationalism, according to Halsall, is the “most successful political philosophy of the modern era”. In order to be considered a nation, a state or group of states must have a language, tradition, or common history that binds the people, which, as stated by von Herder, must be honored by the ruler. Also, a nation is considered more legitimate in its basis than other forms of government labeled “theocracies”, “empires”, and “dynastic rights”. As a German himself, von Herder recognizes Germany’s characteristics to compile those which resemble a nation, but discerns that they are unique, “peculiar”, and different from typical attributes of a nation. Von Herder takes pride in the distinct character of his country, and believes that Germany is unparalleled in its originality and its archetype.

France distinguishes itself as a nation in a manner different from Germany. At the time of the French Revolution, nationalism is powerful in France. After having overthrown the monarchy and establishing more rights and freedoms for its people, France’s pride is at an all-time high. The French Revolution inspires the poem and national anthem “La Marseillaise”, which can be considered the embodiment of France’s status as a true nation. Through the writing of this poem, and later, France’s adoption of it as its national anthem, a type of patriotism is born. Written in French with lyrics speaking of a common history of the people, de Lisle legitimizes France as a nation. However, the national anthem is not the only factor that validates France’s standing as a nation. When Napoleon Bonaparte takes control of France, he establishes a strong and powerful army. With the foundation of an army, a nation becomes more legitimate. It can wield more power and express its character through its actions. Furthermore, the unification of a large group such as an army creates a strong identity for a country. Although he did not willingly leave his position as military leader, Napoleon strengthened France’s identity among the European nations and increased its status as a nation.

Questions to consider: Because Napoleon’s conquests were spread so far and wide, did it delegitimize France’s status as a nation? In order to be considered a nation, does a country’s population and/or geographic size need to be under a certain limit? As a nation increases in size, does it lose its identity, its respect for common history? Do greater populations result in more dialects and languages, eliminating the common language that binds a nation’s people?

 

3 thoughts on “Nationalism and La Marseillaise

  1. I believe a large factor in the unity of a nation is the amount of time in which it was formed. Large nations formed quickly are likely to lack unity and eventually separate. Other factors include the political climate of surrounding nations which in turn influences the form of government in a nation.

  2. I would argue that agriculture more than anything language relation increases the density of a nations population, not language. Napoleons expansion which swallowed many nations and cultures did not make the French identity any less legitimate, as you cannot expect a hasty adaptation to another culture and language during a sixteen year period of expansion.

  3. I think that as a nation grows in size, there is a greater chance for a loss of shared identity and common history. The farther spread out a population is, the more likely a certain group is to find unity among the people closest to them, who share many of the same situations. This could create a divide between different geographic areas of a nation, thus lessening the feeling of a unified nation.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *