Benedict Anderson argues in Imagined Communities that nationalism is a modern phenomenon emerging only with the rise of print capitalism, shaping nations as imagined communities bound by shared language and culture. Ancient civilizations like Egypt or Rome were not nationalistic in this sense.
Anderson defines nationalism as a form of imagined community that depends on the creation of a shared identity, largely fostered through print capitalism. This invention enabled people to see themselves as part of a larger group despite never meeting most members. That was absent in ancient times.
Ancient civilizations operated differently. In Egypt, for example, the population did not feel a collective national identity. People shared religion and kinship, but attachment to the idea of an “Egyptian nation” did not exist. People recognized the Pharaoh’s authority and paid taxes or provided labor, but they did not identify themselves as nationals.
The situation in Rome is similar yet debated. Romans saw themselves as members of a polity tied to the emperor or republic. However, scholars hold that this lacked a shared national consciousness in modern terms. Loyalty was often to rulers, cities, or ethnic groups, not a nation.
- Ancient empires controlled territories but did not claim these lands as a homeland in a nationalist way.
- Their borders were fluid; control depended on military power, not on an emotional or cultural bond to the land.
Religious communities offer an interesting comparison. Some, like the Jewish community, created strong imagined bonds among members, partly resembling Anderson’s concept. The Jewish religion and culture sustained a community across time and space, and eventually, this evolved into a modern nationalist movement.
Other religious communities, including some political Islam movements, mix religious identity with political aims, illustrating complex blends that sometimes approach nationalism. However, most religious groups did not claim defined territory, an essential characteristic of modern nations. The Vatican State is a rare religious community that is also a nation-state territorially.
The transition from pre-modern political and religious communities to modern nation-states is heavily linked to the Treaty of Westphalia in 1648. The treaty reshaped Europe by establishing sovereign states where rulers determined official religion and governance.
This shift separated political authority from religious identity. It encouraged the development of territorial states where people began to relate to their country as a political unit rather than solely as members of religious or tribal groups.
The rise of print capitalism was crucial. It spread vernacular languages and standardized communication. Newspapers, books, and other print media created shared narratives and histories that people across a territory could access. This process forged a sense of national belonging.
From this perspective, nationalism is rooted in early modern European developments. Ancient civilizations did not manifest nationalism as Anderson defines it because their subjects related differently to power, territory, and identity.
| Aspect | Ancient Civilizations | Modern Nationalism |
|---|---|---|
| Attachment to a Nation | Absent | Strong emotionally shared identity |
| Political Authority | Centered on ruler (Pharaoh, Emperor) | Centered on a sovereign nation-state |
| Territorial Claims | Territory controlled but not claimed as homeland | Territory is central and fixed |
| Community Type | Subjects or religious groups | Imagined community via print |
In sum, ancient peoples were subjects of rulers rather than citizens of nations. They lacked the political, cultural, and technological conditions to form modern national identities. Anderson’s theory highlights that nationalism’s emergence depends on specific historical and material conditions unique to the early modern and modern era.
- Nationalism is a product of modernity and print capitalism, not ancient history.
- Ancient civilizations lacked a shared national consciousness.
- Loyalty was to rulers and local groups, not nations.
- Religious communities predate nationalism and sometimes echo imagined communities but differ fundamentally.
- Territorial sovereignty with citizen attachment emerged after Westphalia and print capitalism.
Were Ancient Civilizations Nationalistic? A Take on Benedict Anderson’s Imagined Communities
Benedict Anderson argues in Imagined Communities that nationalism only emerged with the rise of print capitalism. So, were ancient civilizations like Egypt or Rome nationalistic? In a word: no. At least, not in the way Anderson and most modern scholars define nationalism.
This topic stirs up fascinating questions. What *is* nationalism anyway? And can we project modern ideas of national identity back onto ancient times?
Defining Nationalism: Anderson’s Imagination and Its Limits
First, let’s clear up what Anderson means by nationalism. Unlike simply belonging to a political unit, nationalism involves a shared feeling of belonging to an imagined community. This community is held together by people envisioning themselves as part of a nation, despite not knowing everyone personally. This collective identity sprouted strongly alongside the rise of print capitalism in Europe — mass printing of books, newspapers, and pamphlets creating shared language and stories.
So, if a nation is an imagined community that emerges partly thanks to the spread of print media, can we really say ancient Egyptians or Romans fit that bill? Turns out, the answer is largely no.
Ancient Civilizations: Subjects, Not Citizens of a Nation
Think about ancient Egypt. Archaeologists and historians agree Egyptians did not feel like members of an “Egyptian nation.” They shared religion, customs, and family ties—but the main bond was loyalty to the Pharaoh. It wasn’t a feeling of brotherhood with all Egyptians, but an obedience to a ruler who demanded taxes and labor.
Similarly, the Roman Republic and later the Roman Empire were held together by law, military power, and allegiance to the Emperor, not by a shared national identity. Citizens knew their city-states or tribe better than a “Roman nation.” Territories were not fixed entities valued for themselves but lands controlled by the Emperor at given times.
Here’s a key difference: ancient peoples had common obligations to rulers. Modern nationalism hinges on a personal, emotional affinity to fellow citizens of the nation. This attachment didn’t exist then.
The Curious Case of Religious Communities
Anderson’s concept of imagined communities invites an interesting tangent: religious groups. Before nationalism, some religious communities behaved like imagined communities. For example, Jewish communities shared strong religious and cultural bonds, and crucially, they later formed a modern nation-state.
Political Islam is another example where religious identity blends with political goals—sometimes creating nationalist-like ambitions. Still, most ancient religious communities focused on spiritual belonging rather than territorial or political nationalism.
Territory and the Nation-State
One big part of nationalism today is claiming permanent, sacred territory. Countries tout borders as defining features of their identity. Ancient empires didn’t hold territory as a lasting asset. Instead, they ruled whatever lands their armies controlled. The land was a prize, not a homeland.
Compare this to religious communities that usually didn’t claim exclusive territories. An exception again: the Jewish people who maintain strong ties to a homeland, a precursor to modern nationalism.
When Did Nationalism Really Kick Off? The Modern Era’s Role
The rise of nationalism is usually pinned around the Treaty of Westphalia (1648), which reshaped Europe’s political and religious borders. Western rulers started emphasizing political sovereignty over religious unity. Suddenly, people began seeing themselves as members of political communities, not just subjects of the Church or local lords.
England’s break from the Catholic Church is a classic example. The king created the Church of England to bring religious and political authority into one fold, fostering a new national identity.
Then came the revolutionary wave in France, followed by Napoleon’s campaigns. These events showcased how modern mass armies and notions of popular sovereignty could unite people through nationalism. Up until this point, mobilizing millions under one identity was rare and costly.
State or Nation: Which Came First?
The debate still rides today. Did states create nations, or did nations push states into being? Some evidence shows states sometimes fostered nationalism to strengthen control. In other cases, groups grew national feelings independently, later demanding statehood.
Ancient civilizations, though organized states or empires, lacked the central ingredient nationalism requires: shared identity beyond the ruler-subject bond. They missed an imagined community uniting diverse populations into a nation.
So, Were Ancient Civilizations Nationalistic?
- According to Anderson’s modern definition, no. Ancient Egyptians, Romans, and Chinese kingdoms didn’t develop nationalism.
- They lacked citizen attachment to a nation; loyalty was personal to rulers not to a national identity.
- Territorial control was pragmatic, not a source of emotional national pride.
- Some religious communities functioned like imagined communities, but lacked the political and territorial features of modern nations.
- Nationalism arose with print capitalism, territorial sovereignty concepts post-Westphalia, and modern political developments.
Why Does This Matter Today?
Understanding what nationalism means helps us avoid confusing ancient allegiance with modern patriotism. It also helps explain modern conflicts where national identity drives politics, unlike the ancient world, where power and survival dominated.
Next time someone claims “Rome was nationalistic,” you’ll know to clarify: Rome was an empire, not a nation in the modern sense. It ruled diverse peoples through authority, not shared national identity.
Final Thoughts: Lessons from Imagined Communities
Nationalism is a surprisingly recent invention. It needs shared language, print media, territorial pride, and political authority intertwined with people’s identities. Ancient civilizations had none of these ingredients combined.
So, while Egypt and Rome built impressive empires, their citizens were not nationalistic today’s way. Nationalism emerged from new cultural and political forces centuries after those empires fell.
What other ancient concepts do we project modern meanings onto? Food for thought.
Was nationalism present in ancient civilizations like Egypt or Rome?
Ancient civilizations did not have nationalism as we know it. People were subjects of rulers, not members of a nation. They lacked a shared national identity or attachment to a nation-state.
Why does Benedict Anderson say nationalism emerged with print capitalism?
Print capitalism spread shared languages and ideas. It helped people imagine themselves as part of a nation. This was a new development absent in ancient times.
Did ancient empires control fixed territories like modern nations?
Ancient empires controlled lands through conquest and obedience to rulers. They did not claim territory as a core national right or identity.
Can religious communities in the past be considered nations?
Some religious groups might be seen as early imagined communities. However, they often lacked territorial claims, making them different from modern nations.
What made modern nations different from ancient empires?
Modern nations involve a shared sense of belonging among citizens. Ancient empires united people through obligations to rulers, not through national consciousness.
