rogercooper.com

States emerged gradually from loose tribal entities. In most locations, this process is poorly documented as the invention of writing tends to occur at around the same time as states.

In general, I am giving proto-states the benefit of the doubt, as I think it more useful to include something instead of “None”. For example, the Iroquois Confederacy had no governmental structures outside the “Council of 50”. It still seems appropriate to record this tribal alliance and ask how big its population was. I will also count the alliance created by Vercingetorix in Gaul.

I have noticed that geographical sources like Geacron tend to ignore proto-states and even fully functional kingdoms, especially in Africa.

Sometimes the iconography of a state continues but the state itself does not actually control its territory or a significant part of its territory. This is often in the context of a civil war, but not always. Somalia, Congo and Haiti are current examples of failed states. Historically the Holy Roman Empire and the interregnum and Sengoku Era Japan are examples of states do not actually control their territory.

Whenever possible, I try to show the actual situation on the ground.

Civil wars are common throughout history. They may be efforts an area to secede from existing state (American Revolution, American Civil War), to take control of an existing state (English Civil War, Chinese Civil War) or both (Russian Civil War).

Most geographical sources neglect these events. Geacron does not show the United State until 1784. Centennia does not show the Russian or English Civil Wars.

Given the frequency of civil wars, I can’t try to show them all. For me to show a civil war the following must be true.

1. The war must last more than a year
2. Each side must control at least one major city

Civil wars are often waged by loose alliances of disparate groups. If the alliance is coordinating military operations, I am considering to be a state, even if it does not meet other definitions of a state. I think that is more useful to provide information on the whole alliance, so the user can the see resources available. Separatists I will usually list separately even if they are allied with groups trying to takeover the whole country. This can be quite complex e.g. the Russian Civil War.

During wars, enemy territory (or even liberated allied territory) is often occupied without annexation. This is usually a temporary measure.

I consider that occupied territory belongs to the occupier until withdrawal or local administration is restored. It is common for an independent country to have foreign troops as occupiers become allies. Today, the US maintains substantial military presence in Germany, Japan & South Korea but they clearly American allies not colonies.

In a colony, the colonial power controls territory without integrating into hegemon’s nation. The colony may have its own administration and military, but they under the control of the colonial power.

This can be significant. For example the Wikipedia shows for 1870 (using the work of Angus Maddison)

1870	China 189,470	India 134,882[q]	UK 100,180[r]	U.S. 98,374	Russian Empire 83,646	German Empire 72,149[s]	France 72,100[t]	Italy 41,814	Japan 25,393[u]	Spain19,556[v]

As India was actually British colony at the time, the British Empire had a larger GDP than China.

In some recent cases, the client state had the iconography an independent state, but the actual control lay with the hegemon. The Warsaw Pact duing the Cold War was an example of this, even though nominally independent, their rulers where chosen in Moscow and their military was subordinated to the Soviets. A similar system existed in World War Two for various states controlled by the Germans as well as Manchukuo controlled by the Japanese.

A very common arrangement in the past was to have a somewhat independent kingdom paying tribute to an empire. I judge these arrangements based upon the actual power relationships.

For example, Wallachia paid tribute to the Ottoman Empire from 1420’s on, but there were frequent refusals of tribute and wars with the Ottomans until the Ottormans finally consolidated control in 1715. On the other hand, the client states of the Roman Empire were fairly stable in their relationships.

Chinese empires usually had a system where kingdoms paid “tribute” and were given “gifts” on what was effectively a state-managed trade system. These kingdoms were clearly independent.

Sometimes different polities exert control over the same territory, both viewing each other as legitimate.

Federations are a common form of government today. The United States, Canada, Australia, Switzerland, India, Germany & the United Kingdom are all federations of a sort. (Notably, the Russian Federation is a unitary state, not a federation). In all these countries, the state/provincial government is fiscally significant and is not answerable to the national government. However, the national government maintains the major military forces and conducts foreign policy, so I consider the national government to be the real state.

Confederations exist as well. In a confederation, the main decision-making takes place at the level of the national government. Today’s example would be the EU, although past examples might include the Holy Roman Empire from 1254 to its end. As the main power is at the level of the members, I consider the members to be the real state.

In a hegemonic relationship, two polities have an unequal relationship with each other. Should the client state be considered a part of the hegemonic state.

There are number of tests I use to determine whether client state is considered indepedent or part of the hegemon.

1. Can the hegemon remove the ruler of the client state?
2. Does the client state maintain a distinct foreign policy?
3. Does the client state maintain a distinct administration?
4. Does the client state have its own military and if does can be called upon freely by the hegemon?
5. Does the hegemon collect taxes from the client state?

These tests are problematic in practice (you don’t know if you remove a ruler until you try) but they provide some guidance. In future posts, I will consider some specific cases.

I am following Geacron by starting in 3000 BCE and using control on January 1. This means that many historical events are not reflected until after the year where the occur.

The data goes to 2022. For more recent data search for the World Economic Outlook database.