One of the political principles of action in relation to external enemies at all times was the appeal: "Divide and conquer!" Who said these words, under what circumstances they originated and how their semantic load has changed over the centuries, we will now try to figure it out. We also consider those models of states that, roughly speaking, lend themselves to this statement, and try to track the historical course of events within their borders.
Where did these words come from and when did they appear
First, let’s try to delve into the very origin of the term “divide and conquer”. Who said it is thoroughly unknown, since the phrase in its purest form appeared in legal written sources only in the 19th century. She was present in a letter from the German author Heinrich Heine, where he indicates that this phrase was first uttered by the famous ruler of Macedonia, Philip, father of Alexander the Great. However, it is difficult to attribute this political principle to the Macedonian ruling elite of those distant times, since it took place in many other countries that existed in the ancient period. For example, according to the generally accepted version, historians believe that such a policy occupied a fundamental position in the politics of the Roman Empire, since the expression “divide et impera” in most sources sounds precisely in Latin. It is believed that this was the most common form of government of the Roman Senate, their creed in life.
Where is the birthplace of this term?
Since these words have become a kind of political stronghold for many powers that were on the earth map earlier, in our days, many nations copy them to the pages of their own history. Well, let’s consider another version about the belonging of the phrase “Divide and conquer”. Who said these words, the French know, or at least think they know. According to their version, it was King Louis XI in his lifetime (and he lived and reigned in the 15th century) who said: “Diviser pour regner”, which translates as “to divide in order to reign”.
However, in the 19th century, this phrase was also slightly remade by the French philosopher Pierre Joseph Proudhon, saying “Divide and Conquer” in Latin. He often mocked this term, arguing that by sharing, you would become rich, you would become a king, you would be able to conquer all people and laugh at justice.
Fairly paradoxical exception
It is important to know that according to all existing documentary sources, this political formulation cannot have ancient roots. “Divide and conquer” in Latin was first heard from the lips of the Frenchman Proudhon, and in all the documentation and laws relating to the period of the Roman Empire, such words are not found. The only thing that makes historians think that this information was simply lost is the full correspondence to these words of the policy of the ancient Senate itself. After all, it was the Roman Empire in those days that conquered states that were distinguished by separatist social aspects. It was these words, in their direct or slightly modified form, that lay at the basis of politics by all emperors and procurators of this powerful power.
The meaning and essence of this term in political science
If we talk about this statement exclusively at the level of theory, that is, describe the principle of its action, foundations and premises, then we can come to the following conclusion. The political principle of "divide and conquer" is a form of sovereign rule mainly in those countries that consist of various parts. These units, in turn, may differ from each other in the ethnic composition of the population, in culture and traditions, or even in origin (if the state consists of previously separately existing countries that were conquered by one). This policy says that to keep such a “colossus” under control is possible only by constantly maintaining conflicts between all existing parties in the state. It should also be noted that most often this tactic is secretive, that is, inciting and maintaining conflicts of a political and social level is conducted secretly. In a fraudulent manner, local authorities as well as the masses are involved in this.
What does “Divide and Conquer” mean in history?
By observing the events that took place during the period of the Roman Empire, you can most accurately track the principle of action of these words. The countries that obeyed this Latin ancient people often waged internecine wars; clashes of people from different cultural strata, different communities and cultures were observed in them. Among these, the most striking example is Egypt, which was completely subjugated by its northern sea neighbor. The Roman Empire annexed many territories to itself and in the Middle East. Almost the entire Eastern Mediterranean was at the full disposal of the procurators, and Roman culture, religion, customs and political system were added to their civil skirmishes and inconsistencies.
How this principle works today
According to modern political scientists, the ability to most powerfully and powerfully control large groups of people is precisely a theory that sounds like “Divide and conquer”. Who said that a large group can be defeated by a small group of people who are in charge of the state? That is, it is much easier to manage certain groups of people who, proving to each other their importance and superiority, will gradually exhaust their resources, therefore, will become weaker and weaker. Having established representatives of local authorities in each region (as the Romans once appointed procurators in their provinces), who are completely subordinate to the central government, it is much easier to keep everyone and everyone under control, without fearing an uprising.
A similar form of government - in a secret, however, form, is observed in many large countries of our globe.
How is our difficult world arranged ...
It should be noted that the rulers began to divide and rule since the inception of the state as such, and this phenomenon was observed in all regions of our world. It is safe to say that this tactic is a political, social and psychological stronghold, thanks to which not only exist, but also the largest states and empires of our world are developing. The principle of “divide and conquer” is most pronounced in those societies where three or more noble families, a large number of communities, each of which has its own history and traditions, compete with each other.
The most paradoxical is that the participants in this competition themselves agree with this statement. Since all of them are under the auspices of one single top, no one can become more priority and better in this endless cold struggle. And at the same time, the “common” power itself wins - the masses and representatives of local government will never rise up against it. They are too busy proving each other their significance and importance.
Take a closer look at each country, its regions and districts - and you will certainly find in all this a cultural split, over which one king wisely rules.