ON POLITICAL BOUNDARIES. 247 



which results from a faihire to observe this condition I may refer to 

 the northern Itahan frontier. Here the main watershed has been inter- 

 mittently abandoned; valleys are crossed; local interests are divided; 

 racial and social affinities are disregarded ; mountain crests are traversed 

 with an air of readiness which betokens a nominal rather than an actual 

 boundary, and a permanent international grievance has been established 

 which this war may, or may not, set right. 



Failing a definite uplifted watershed, the ordinary divide between 

 the heads of minor affluents of a river basin is quite a useful alternative. 

 The advantages ai-e those of pemianence, definiteness, and economy, 

 added to a certain command in altitude which renders it important as a 

 military feature. It is seldom that a divide alters its position from the 

 action of natural causes : on the whole it may be regarded as a perma- 

 nent feature unlikely to be shifted or affected by the wear and tear of 

 nature's destructive forces; and it is definite and often unmistakably re- 

 cognisable without the aid of artificial landmarks, which cost money and 

 are perishable. Consequently, it is readily and quickly adapted to the 

 purpose of boundary making. Judging from the map of Europe, it 

 may be said that these advantages have not been overlooked in the past. 

 To a very great extent it is the divide between the rivers, and not the 

 rivers themselves, that have been adopted for international purposes. 

 Rivers, perhaps, rank next in value to mountain chains, and they 

 certainly play an important part in the great political partitioning of 

 the world. They are at least unmistakable and definite features re- 

 quiring little artificial assistance; and they do often serve the purpose 

 of a barrier. Indeed, it entirely depends on the conditions of environ- 

 ment whether a river makes a good boundary or a very bad one. 

 Where the surrounding country is a waste of trackless forest or of 

 wild upland, and where the river is confined to a nan-ow channel in 

 a rock-bound bed, it may be admirably adapted for a boundary. The 

 Oxus, from the plains of Badakshan to its glacier sources in the 

 Pamirs, forms a typical boundary of this nature; but where it leaves 

 the hills and, spreading into the plains, it changes its banks and its 

 channels, swallowing up acres of good alluvial soil here, pushing up 

 sandbanks and islands there, and laying out new islets or streamlets 

 which wander irresponsibly over the surface of the plains confusing the 

 issue as to what are its banks, it forms no boundary at all. Moreover, 

 where it is broad enough and deep enough to warrant navigation, it 

 has a tendency to lapse into the exclusive possession of the most 

 pushing nation. 



The Oxus of the plains from Charjui to Badakshan has become a 

 Russian highway. The Rhine, when indeed it formed a boundary, 

 was always claimed as ' our river ' by the Germans. Rival claims 

 for right of way and disputes about land or local irrigation claims are 

 far more likely to arise from the common possession of an intermediate 

 river than the friendly interchange of civilities and international 

 amenities. When the Germans shifted their boundary from the Rhine 

 to the Vosges Mountains they strengthened their own frontier greatly, 

 whilst incidentally they also strengthened that of France, as we have 

 every reason to know. The strength of the German frontier lies in 



