Lifecycle of Nations and Countries (Expanded and Improved)

In one of my previous articles, I mentioned how Russia 200 years ago was like the US nowadays and how modern Russia is like Ottoman Empire was 200 years ago. I think this concept can be broadly applied to any country or a nation. Countries are born, grow, become mature, reach apex, the gradually age and eventually die, just like people and other creatures are. 

Country's lifecycle is of course much larger than that of a human, but it can still be measured in years, country years. There is a concept of dog age where each year of dog's life is equated with 5 years of human life. Dogs live 13 to 18 years, about right compared to humans' 60 to 90. For a country a 10 to 8 years of country life is equivalent of one year of human life. Countries last between 700 and 900 years. Some die earlier, but that is akin to human premature death from accident or a disease. However, no nation could continuously exist longer than that without major transformation.

Some might disagree and say that many nations count many thousand years as their history. To that I can argue that during such a long period of time these nations always experienced several major events that dramatically reshaped them. Such events are akin to a death of a previous nation and birth of its successor. Thus, in human term new iteration of a nation can be seen as a son of the previous one or another type of successor.

For example, modern Republic of Turkey in a young nation that just about to reach its teens. Yes, it is a successor and descendant of Ottoman State, but it is very different country. Mustafa Kemal founded a different nation in Ankara when Ottoman State and its Sultan and Caliph still existed and then fought a war against it until he won and expel the Sultan, ending the Ottoman State, like a child, whose birth kills its mother. Mustafa Kemal envisioned his Turkey as a different kind of country compared to the Ottoman State. United by Turkish nationalism and westernization instead of Islam and tradition, it had different government, army, culture, even language. Pretty much everything was new and different.

Similarly say England can be seen as having 3 different iterations. I would not call formation of UK to be such events as a lot of government was carried from the England. Instead, I would call End of War of the Roses as birth of modern English nation. War of the Roses killed off the entire original Royal family, leaving succession in the hands of relatively distant Henry Tudor who would not be even considered eligible at all under Plantagenet era rules. Norman-Plantagenet England can be considered father of modern England, but it was a very different kind of country compared to Tudor England. In contrast certain Tudor practices and tradition can still be seen in England nowadays. For example, Parliament became institutionalized as a deliberate assembly only during Tudor times. One can trace its history further back to Magna Carta and beyond, but back then it was only occasional irregular gathering of various people King wishes to consult on issues. Idea that such meeting has to be formalized, held regularly and used to govern came later, it emerged from Tudor reign. Similarly, a Saxon England can be seen as grandfather of modern England as it too was vastly different from Norman England that replaced it.

How country's life unfolds over the ages

Life of a country can be compared to that of a human. Country goes through the same stages of life. First 100 years can be considered formative years that are akin to childhood. Country mostly builds itself internally, creates and shapes key institutions, stabilizes borders, creates a sense of national identity as well as understanding of itself and its place in the world, national myth. 

I would be inclined to count chaotic times as part of country's early lifespan. People are born naked and screaming after all. So, in couple of decades or so time when it all stabilizes country is about 2 years old baby in human age.

That is followed by a teen year, where country tries to assert itself and claim its place in the world. That is often chaotic phase of change and going back and forth on different issues.

That in turn followed by young adulthood where country knows what it is doing and moves ahead to claim its place in the world.

Country reaches its peak power around 250 years in, 25 years old in human age. Country it is at max power and full of youthful energy. For sportsmen 25 to 35 years is peak of their ability. After that they are not as good as they used to be, it is the same for countries.

Next 100 years can be seen as a golden age of sorts where country enjoys fruits of its labors and revel in their glory.

That followed by a mid-life crisis where a coup or revolution changes the country from within. 350 in country age and 35 in human age.

Eventually a more sober and wise but also often aging and wary country emerges afterwards. They likely lost some land and power but are not completely helpless yet.

That period of gradual decline lasts for another 100 or 150 years, before country gets truly old and frail. Afterwards their continued existence is often dependent on some other nation's interest to preserve them for their own interests. While some countries can live longer, most live about as long as medieval Kings, 50 to 60 years old.

Sure, many humans live longer, some countries too, but geopolitics is dangerous world, and few nations could live in defenseless retirement solely on good will of its neighbors.

For example, Russia, that emerged out of Time of Troubles and Ivan the Terrible reign, had relatively calm and peaceful most of 17th century. The newborn country tried to understand itself and its place in the world. Few stable Tsars who ruled long time and stayed out of trouble.

That followed by a rule of energetic and maximalist eternal teen Peter I who energetically tried to shape the country into global empire with upsets mixed with victories. He was followed by a series of coups and incompetent rulers who nearly run country into the ground due to their lack of any idea of what they are doing. Despite that they did what they did with vigor and energy of youth.

Finally at around Catherine II time Russia emerged from turbulent teens and finally got to build that empire that Peter I envisioned. Just in 50 years' time Russia was defeater of Napoleon and pre-eminent power.

Times between 1814 and 1914 can be seen as Russian 19th century golden age.

That was followed by midlife crisis of October Revolution and subsequent communist phase.

Finally modern Russia is more than 100 years past revolution and is close 50 years old in human terms.

Since Russia is yet to live its terminal ages, I will switch to Ottomans instead. After their defeat in second Battle of Vienna and the Great Turkish war. Ottomans managed to live whole 219 years of declining ages. 

In 18th century their defeats were 50/50 mixed with victories. They were no longer invincible but were not defenseless either. They fought their wars themselves, won some of them, lost others, but could not be destroyed completely. They could not advance as far as they wished but Danube proved a good enough defensive barrier to stop their enemies, but Ottomans could not advance north of the river either.

In 19th century they however could not hold out on their own and only survived another 100 years because UK had vested interest in keeping them alive.

Ottoman state in turn begun its existence in 1300s. Once again for the first 100 years it did not do much as these were its formative years where it features took shape and developed. In 1400s Ottomans begun its expansion, by mid 1400s it made splashes by taking Constantinople and ending Byzantine Empire. A series of wars with Christians during this century were as turbulent as teen ages. These times however saw Ottomans grow into a superpower. By the time of first siege of Vienna in mid 1500s Ottomans reached its peak power. Again 25 years old in human terms.

That was followed by 100 to 150 years of Ottoman supremacy that ended with second siege of Vienna and subsequent loss in Great Turkish war. The following 18th century, as I outlined before, was time of mixed results and overall decline.

These are just examples. I can write similar stories for other countries out there as well. In general, I think this metaphorical way of looking at countries by comparing their lifespan to that of humans can give one a good insight into nature of nations and patterns of history. That will allow one to predict future and better understand reality and history. I hope more will see wisdom of my approach to countries and history.