Turner's "Frontier Hypothesis"

If we start from the "Western Expansion Movement" and explore the reasons for the rapid development of the West and its significance in American history, we can come to the conclusion that the more freedom farmers have, the more they will be affected by the residue of the agricultural rights system. The less oppression there is, the more secure their land will be as a whole, and the more severe the differentiation of farmers will be, the faster the farm entrepreneur class will be formed, and the faster the development of capitalism will be. Because the western frontier of the United States is a vast virgin land without any residual feudal oppression and constraints, immigrants can develop and utilize their land in a purely capitalist way, thereby establishing a unique economic model, or Said: "Western Development Model".

1

Why should we start our exploration work here with the "Westward Movement" instead of other "frontiers" such as what Turner said? ? This is based on the understanding that "frontier" is mainly a geographical (including physical geography, economic geography and human geography) concept; and the "Westward Movement" (Westward Movement) is a large-scale population migration movement. It involves both the west and the east, both geography and humanities, economics and politics, and goes far beyond the scope of geography. Therefore, starting from the "Westward Movement" allows us to see the West from different angles, materialistically and dialectically examine the significance of the "frontier" in American history, and avoid falling into the quagmire of metaphysical "geographical determinism." For this reason, we must start from Turner’s “frontier hypothesis”, and of course we cannot but mention Turner.

Frederick. J. Turner (1861-1932) was born in Portage, Wisconsin, USA. The village is located between the Fox and Wisconsin rivers and was once a must-have on the ancient fur trade route. The real development of Wisconsin began in the 1830s. In 1840, there were only 30,000 people in the territory. By 1860, exactly one generation had passed. In fact, even the spelling of the name "Wisconsin" was only unified by the territorial legislature in 1845. Before that, it had had several spellings: Meskousing, Miskonsing, Quisconsin, Wisconsin, etc. [1] It can be seen from this that when Turner was born, this place had just emerged from the "pioneer era" and had not even completely emerged from this era. As one historian described it, Portage at this time was "like a frontier village, tending an area where pioneers still mixed with Indians" [2]. This background and environment undoubtedly had a profound impact on Turner's future academic career.

Turner spent his college life at the University of Wisconsin

. In 1887, he received a master's degree from this university. After that, he went to the famous Johns Hopkins University to study for a doctorate, where he was taught by Herbert B. Adams. In 1890, after receiving his doctorate, he returned to his alma mater, the University of Wisconsin, where he engaged in teaching and research on frontier history until 1910. Later, for a long period of time (1910-1924), he applied to teach at Harvard. Turner's research work was not only affected by his living environment, but also dominated by his view of history. In 1891, Turner claimed in his first published article "The Meaning of History": "Every era must rewrite the history of the past according to the most dominant conditions at that time." [3]

< p>In 1893, he wrote the famous article "The Importance of the Frontier in American History", which was read out at the American Historical Association meeting in Chicago on July 12 of the same year.

In the article, Turner proposed the famous "frontier hypothesis." This hypothesis states: “Until now, the history of the United States can be said to a large extent to be the history of the colonization of the Great West. The existence of a free land area, its continuous shrinkage, and the westward advancement of American settlement, It can explain the development of the United States." [4] During his lifetime, Turner published no less than 47 books and articles, not including a large number of book reviews and newspaper articles, as well as tens of thousands of letters, notes and unpublished speeches. . Among the published works, the most important are the following four: "The Rise of the New West" (1906), "The Frontier in American History" (1920), and "The Significance of Region in American History" (1932) and "The United States, 1830-1850: The Country and Its Territories" (1935) [5]. However, all these books and articles are not more important than his famous paper because they all revolve around the "frontier hypothesis". Because of this, Charles A. Beard believed that Turner's paper proposing the "frontier hypothesis" "had a more far-reaching influence than any other article or book written on the subject" [6] .

While teaching at the University of Wisconsin and Harvard University, Turner has been teaching special courses on "Western History", thus cultivating generations of disciples and re-disciples.

These people later spread across the United States, engaged in teaching or research in many universities and institutions, and enthusiastically spread Turner's views on the "frontier hypothesis." The so-called "border school" was formed. Here, in addition to Turner himself, there are two scholars worth mentioning: one is Frederick Merk (1887-1977), who wrote a book on "Manifest Destiny" in his early years. In his later years, he wrote the massive "History of the Westward Expansion" (published in 1978). He was Turner's assistant and disciple; the other was Ray A. Billington (1903- 1972), he has authored "The Expansion to the West: A History of the American Frontier" (1949), "The Far Western Frontier: 1830-1860" and other books. He is a disciple of Merck (his book "The Expansion to the West" It is "dedicated to F. Merck"), who is also a disciple of Turner. These three scholars are from the same origin, but each has his or her own merits.

Turner takes "border" issues as his main research object. Although the issue of "region" was raised almost simultaneously with the former in his works, it was not until 30 years later that he began to systematize his "region" theory. Billington paid great attention to all the major themes of frontier history, but in his early work there seems to have been a greater emphasis on the role of "regional" issues in American history. The first few editions of his famous book "Expansion to the West: A History of the American Frontier" not only discussed the issue of "the emergence of regionalism" but also studied the "economics of regionalism" (7). Moreover, he pays great attention to the rigor of details when writing about big themes, which makes his discussions and expositions more in-depth and sophisticated, and is also quite different in style from Turner's descriptive writing style. Although Merck was Billington's teacher, his "History of the Westward Expansion" was published almost 30 years later than Billington's "Western Expansion". Therefore, it is possible for him to absorb the post-war research on frontier history by American scholars. Rich in results, his book is highly comprehensive and gives due importance to institutional history.

II

From the perspective of the development of American history, the proposal of Turner's "border hypothesis" required a lot of courage to "go against the trend", because at that time, in the American history The dominant one is the "institutional history school". This school uses the so-called European "germ tleery" to explain the origin of American institutions and culture. It believes that the early history of the United States is nothing more than the development of this "germ tleery" in the American environment. Factors and characteristics display a dismissive attitude. On the contrary, Turner believed that “only by turning our attention from the Atlantic coast to the Great West can we truly understand the history of the United States, and solemnly proposed the task of “seriously studying the frontier as a field of economics and history.” . His article "The Importance of the Frontier in American History" is a major effort to achieve this task.

Turner's "frontier hypothesis" has been debated among some scholars. He is often accused of going from one extreme to the other. This is certainly not unfounded. American democracy "comes from the American forest" (8) is an important basis for this. But in fact, Turner is not. Completely denying the European roots in American institutions and culture, because he said that the continuous westward advancement of the "frontier" only "means a gradual departure from European influence" [9], rather than fundamentally denying this influence. Scholars who have studied the history of American institutions in the past have paid "too much attention" to the problem of searching for Germanic roots, and "not enough" to the factors of the United States itself. He said that although the European way of life has "made its way into the continent," the United States has also "made its way into the continent." "Changed and developed" this way of life, and in turn influenced Europe. [10] At the same time, Turner did not believe that American institutions and culture were entirely produced by the West, because he was proposing the "frontier hypothesis." " he added two very important qualifiers to his argument: one is "up to our own day", which refers to the history of the United States before 1893 in time; the other is "up to our own day" "to a large extent" (in a large degree), rather than including all American history [11], thus leaving room for maneuver. If you read his relevant discussions carefully, especially his article "The Frontier in Importance in American History", it is not difficult to find that he also tried to avoid going from one extreme to the other, at least subjectively, when talking about "the different frontiers and the way they were advanced." When talking about the impact on the East and the Old World, he listed the following influences that he considered “relatively significant”: (1) “promoting the formation of a mixed national character of the American people”; (2) “reducing our understanding of British dependence"; (3) "The rise of nationalism and the evolution of the American political system"; (4) "Essentially important ideas emerged from the conditions of frontier life" (12). Turner has used " The words "promoted" and "reduced" are obviously intended to avoid absoluteizing these effects. This contradictory phenomenon in Turner's "frontier hypothesis" reflects the immaturity of this "hypothesis".

It should be said that no matter how different the views on Turner's "frontier hypothesis" are, this hypothesis contains a theme of great significance, which is the role of western colonization in the development of American history. .

Regarding this theme, Turner once gave a high-level summary with the phrase "the problem of the West is just a problem of American development" [13]. And in the famous paper that proposed the "border hypothesis", it was pointed out in a timely manner, and this hypothesis was put forward clearly to "explain the development of the United States" [14].

The author believes that no matter from which aspect, this theme can be established: First, from the perspective of the continuation of time, the advancement of immigrants to the west lasted for more than a hundred years. From the end of the 18th century to the end of the 19th century, it was the so-called "adult age" in American history, and it was the most important period in modern American history. In this sense, it can be said that most of the history of the United States in the 19th century was spent under the influence of "westward expansion"; secondly, from the perspective of spatial expansion, the advancement to the west involves from the Allegheny Mountains to the Pacific Ocean The entire area along the coast is equivalent to 7.5 times the area of ??the original 13 states of the United States; even if the Mississippi River is used as the boundary, the entire territory west of the Mississippi River exceeds 2.6 times the territory of the United States when the country was founded in 1783. The historic activities carried out by Americans in such a vast territory should certainly not be ignored by anyone interested in American history; third, from the perspective of administrative divisions, the westward advancement of the United States In the process, 31 new states (excluding Florida) were created. If Florida is included, the number would be 32 new states. Since three new states (Maine, Vermont, and West Virginia) were later divided into the original 13-state territory, the number of new states in the west was exactly twice the number of states in the east. Therefore, it can be said that without understanding the process of the formation of these new states, you cannot understand the history of today's United States and its development; fourth, from the perspective of economic development, due to the rare scale and speed of immigrants' development activities in the West , quickly promoted the development of all walks of life related to it, and became a powerful driving force for the United States to transform its economy from commercial capitalism to industrial capitalism, and ultimately realize industrialization. Even years after the U.S. government announced the end of the "frontier," this role is still vaguely visible in the development of American history. Among the above, the most basic one is of course the large-scale immigration movement. Territorial expansion can be seen as the geographical result of this movement, and the formation of new states can be seen as the social result of this movement. , and economic development is their comprehensive manifestation. In short, the colonization of the West played an inestimable role in the history of the United States. I think it is also the main reason why the "border issue" continues to flourish in the study of American history. Although the Turner "frontier school" has declined, it is certain that This theme should be a reasonable core in Turner's hypothesis.

On this topic, many people before or at the same time as Turner, such as Hegel in Germany, Adam Smith in England, A. Lolia and France's A. Tocqueville, have all been involved in it from different angles to varying degrees, but their discussions are often from a non-scientific standpoint. For example, A. Loria believes that in the history of the United States from the east to the west, records of social evolution can be found on every page, and further asserts: "Europe has wasted centuries of effort to find a key to unlock the mystery of history. It turns out that The key is in the United States, a country without history that brilliantly reveals the process of world history.” [15] In contrast, the founders of Marxism, Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels, did so more than once. In their books, articles and letters, they mentioned the American West and its "free land" issues, and scientifically revealed the theme of the role of western colonization in the development of American history. In a letter to Neil F. Danielson on November 25, 1878, when talking about the United States, which was "the object of greatest interest to economic researchers" at that time, Engels first wrote: "It will take hundreds of years in Britain to The changes that have been realized occurred here in only a few years." He then asked the scholars: "But the attention of researchers should not be on the older, Atlantic coast states, but on the comparative ones. New (Ohio is the most notable example) and latest (such as California) states.” [16] This not only raises the issue of the speed of U.S. economic and historical development, but also raises the relationship between the colonization of the West and the development of the U.S. economy. question. It can be seen that the theme raised by Turner in the "Frontier Hypothesis" is not groundless or meaningless, and its conclusion should be the opposite.

However, there is another dimension to the theme that Turner raises. Judging from the laws of modern economic development, an important trend and characteristic of the economic development of various countries is that in most countries (especially some big countries) there is a development process from the coast to the inland. This process is generally related to the development process from the coast to the inland. transformation from commercial capitalism to industrial capitalism. The reason for this historical phenomenon is that modern capitalism gradually grew up from commercial capitalism, and commercial capitalism generally first emerged in coastal and estuary areas.

There are two main reasons for this situation: First, in the era of commercial capitalism, and in all eras before that, the division of labor in society was mainly based on the natural division of labor, so the division of labor between nations often More developed than the domestic division of labor, foreign trade (especially maritime trade) occupies an important position in the economy; secondly, because “waterways have opened up a much wider market than land routes, the division of labor in various industries has always been Improvements naturally begin along the coast and along river mouths, and often spread to the interior after a long time." [17]

We can learn from Italy and Spain all these situations and trends. , the Netherlands, the United Kingdom and other countries, the United States is just another more prominent example. Therefore, the themes raised by Turner are worthy of attention from the perspective of world history research.

Three

In "The Frontier Hypothesis", although Turner raised a theme of great significance, he failed to find a way to correctly answer this question, so that The themes he raised were ultimately distorted and obscured by his methods, because he consciously or unconsciously fell into the quagmire of "geographical determinism", although he repeatedly denied that he was an "extreme environmentalist", claiming that "determination The factor is not one." [18] This raises a question: How did Turner fall into the quagmire of "geographical determinism"? This necessitates a brief examination of the basic categories he proposed. In order to "explain the development of the United States," Turner proposed two categories for himself: one is the so-called "frontier" concept, and the other is the so-called "section" concept, and regarded them as "American history". two of the most basic factors.” It was when Turner used these two categories to explain the development of the United States that he consciously or unconsciously fell into the quagmire of "geographical determinism" [19].

The question is not whether the concept of "frontier" can be used, but in what sense it should be used. Regarding the concept of "frontier", in the 1890 U.S. Census Report, it was defined as a settlement with a population density of two or more but less than six people per square mile. Obviously, "border" here is a concept of human geography, not just a purely economic geography concept, nor a purely physical geography concept. However, Turner believed that "no clear definition is needed" before using the concept of "frontier", which created the conditions for confusion in his use of this concept. Because of this, when Turner demonstrates the significance of the "frontier" in American history, he sometimes regards it as a smaller area than the "west", that is, he uses the "frontier" as a physical geography concept; sometimes he uses it as a smaller area than the "west". Dividing it into an "agricultural frontier", a "commercial frontier" or a "mining frontier" is to use "frontier" as an economic geography concept; sometimes it is also called the "intersection of barbarism and civilization" ”, that is, using “border” as a concept in human geography. When he uses "frontier" as a physical or economic geographical concept and attempts to use it to explain complex social, cultural and political phenomena, he inevitably falls into the quagmire of "geographical determinism."

Unlike the concept of "frontier", Turner did not endow his concept of "region" with multiple meanings, but simply used it to explain various complex historical and social phenomena. He used his "regional" theory to explain the reasons why Americans migrated westward, and regarded it as people's desire to "get rid of the dominance of some established classes", and the west was only regarded as "a refuge". "So"; he used his "regional" theory to explain the two-party system and its contradictions in the United States, and declared: "The results of both party congresses and congressional deliberations are exactly like inter-regional treaties" and predicted "conflicts of regional interests" It is likely to become more intense with the settlement of the population." He used his "regional" theory to explain the contradiction between the federal government and state rights, believing that this contradiction also "is caused by regions of different sizes." Because the United States is like a "potential federation of countries" similar to Europe; he used his "regional" theory to explain the history of the "Civil War" in the United States, and concluded that the "Civil War" in the United States was just the most intense and violent regional conflict. A tragic manifestation," it was determined in large part by the reality of two competing societies, North and South, pushing together into unoccupied lands in the West. Finally, he claimed: “The significance of region in American history is that it is a vague image of a European country.” [20] In other words, an American history is a history of struggles in various regions.

From a formal point of view, in Turner's "Frontier Hypothesis", "frontier" and "region" are different categories used to explain the development of the United States, but in fact there are connections between the two. A philosophy of "geographical determinism". This philosophy can be seen in the following logic he provides us: first, he believes that “frontier” and “region” are the “two most basic factors” in American history; second, he believes that frontier Inseparable from region, “borders are areas of activity”; thirdly, he believed that the characteristics of each region were “partly determined in the era when the geographical foundation was laid.” 〔21〕Here, the key lies in the formula "the frontier is a region of activity". Through this formula, he directly connected the driving force of American historical development with the region, which ultimately led to the determinism of geographical environment.

Turner once strenuously denied that he was an "extreme environmentalist," but he was so deep in the quagmire of "geographical determinism" that he had not yet pulled one foot out of the quagmire of "geographical determinism." Coming out, the other foot stepped into another quagmire consciously or unconsciously. This is because his denial or justification does not proceed from dialectical materialism, but from metaphysical pluralism. This point becomes clear just by reading the context of his statement on the subject. He said: "There is not one decisive factor. People are not completely dominated by climate, geography, soil or economic interests. The influence of their birth lineage, inherited ideals and spiritual factors often outweigh material interests. There is also personality Influence.” [22] In his view, climate, geography, economy and spirit, these factors have existed and acted side by side in history, and they do not have an origin and subordinate relationship. So when he denied that he was a "geographical environmental determinist", he exposed the flaw in his "pluralism". This is where his tragedy lies.

IV

Turner’s tragedy shows that in order to correctly explain the role and significance of the frontier in the development of American history, we must fundamentally abandon the methodology provided by Turner and adopt science methodology, which must rely on Marxist methodology. When we study the history of the American frontier, the reason why we should start with the "Western Expansion Movement" is because it facilitates us to use this scientific methodology.

We start with the "Westward Movement" not only because it is a complex that can be viewed from multiple angles, but also because it involves a fundamental principle of historical materialism. Marxism believes that the development of society is ultimately determined by the development of productive forces and production relations. When the distribution of the American labor force continues to change with the rise and expansion of the "Westward Expansion", it means that more and more "potential" productivity has become "actual" productivity, which means that production and New economic development, so accompanying the "Westward Expansion Movement", must be a large-scale economic development movement. This alone can explain the significance of the westward movement and the history of the frontier. Of course, additions and clarifications are needed.

Therefore, "border" is not only a physical or economic geographical concept, but also a human geographical concept. It will be based on the theory of man-land relationship and discuss the distribution, change and diffusion of various related humanistic phenomena, as well as the spatial structure of immigration activities. And on this basis, the relationship between the East and the West, politics and economy, and various industrial structures will be discussed to comprehensively elaborate on the significance of the frontier and the West in American history. The reason why we still use the concept of "frontier" is because we believe that the official definition of "frontier" by the U.S. Census Bureau itself is historical and basically reflects the process of Americans' westward advancement and colonization. There are still other historical rationality. As for the scope of our study, although the historical process is different for different regions, most places in the west have not yet gotten rid of the traces of the "pioneer era", or have just emerged from the "pioneer era" , that is, it generally falls within the scope of "border history". At this time, the western border mainly existed as an agricultural area that had been or was being developed, opposing the industrial north and the slave-owning south.

However, studying "frontier" and "west" as a separate object can not be restricted in time and space. Because, when transportation is not yet developed or not very developed, especially before the railway network is established, people's various economic activities and forms of communication are still restricted by geographical conditions to a large extent, and "West" and "frontier" will have greater uniqueness and individuality, and regional relations will have greater historical significance. When the transportation industry has become quite developed, especially after the national railway network was established, and with the final formation of the unified market in the United States, the unbalanced regional relations in the past were broken, and the unique regional issues in the past were It also began to lose its historical significance. Under such circumstances, studying the west or the frontier as a typical region would lose its historical basis, which determines the limited scope of this book's research. Of course, this does not mean that regional issues will no longer exist in the future, but they are regional issues under new conditions and their meanings are different.