{National Cycles [continued (3)]}[6th March 1988]

[Redbook5:38-39][19880306.0000b]{National Cycles [continued (3)]}[6th March 1988]

19880306. (a.m.?)

[continued]

Clearly, it is arguable that this* sort of analysis depends on arbitrary definitions. For example, the British empire is seen in a Bi-centennial cycle as a process of Ordination-Action etc; in the Millennial and Bi-millennial cycles it becomes a stage of Fragmentation-Revolution-Simplification. Two points have to be borne in mind: first, that Contra-rotation always operates to a greater or lesser degree** (i.e. the Outer Circle is echoed by an Inner Circle); and second, that a great deal depends on the length of perspective.

In the (relatively) short term, the British Empire in the 19^th Century may be seen as a process of organisation and conquest (outer action) of imperial territories and peoples; in the (relatively) long run, British Imperialism as a whole, from (say) 1600 to 2000, may appear more like the fragmentation of the populations and cultures of the British Isles into wide geographical areas, with accompanying political, economic and social revolutions, leading in the end to great simplification of the British national entity (which is where we are now – and there may be more to come).

*[See last previous entry.]

**{Probably a lesser degree in these cases!}

[continues]

[PostedBlogger30122017]