bemedalled manliness, rarely in daily life. It was a romantic heritage by which the nation could live vicariously and thus it was fostered also to encourage re- cruiting.
What is striking in looking at frontiers all over the world and in a variety of ages is the universality of the military patterns and experiences. The naval pattern has much in common with that on land with its long, lonely precursor voyages of exploration, sometimes following in the unmarked tracks of fisher- men, in its concern with natural barriers, and in its reaction to pirates, those seaborne guerrillas. Long patrols showing the flag on distant stations were enli- vened by the weather and sometimes by visits ashore. And the forces employed were often small. On land the similarities are easier to emphasize for geography helped determine the nature and process of the frontier. Thus similar reactions to similar terrain can be observed back through history. The type of frontier - natu- ral, desert, nucleus, expansive, sieve, nucleus community, mural, and traditional boundary - determined the way the military perceived and behaved and only to a much lesser extent its equipment. Moreover in most cases the military was carry- ing out with minimum force policy made in the capital. If it was successful, the frontier faded into a civil province.
This hypothesis, namely that there are certain universal characteristics of military frontiers, will have served its purpose if it stimulates others to compare and contrast experiences to confirm or deny its validity.
Suggestions for Further Research
The big problem of the frontier has largely been that it has been seen by national experts as an exclusive experience and seen often only from their side. Little attempt has been made to compare and contrast the clashes between cul- tures in different areas. Even in the military field it is ironic that most compara- tive technical studies were not made until the lessons to be learned from them ceased to be applicable to the army whose officers made them. Thus there is plenty of room not only for studies of officers and regiments which served in various campaigns around the world, as in the British and French armies, but also for comparative works. One cannot help but be struck, in reading Graham Webster on the Roman legions on the frontiers, by the similarities with the more modern experiences of others, or even by the obvious likenesses with the Chi- nese experience. The field is open from tactics and equipment to strategy, grand strategy, and the use of military force to pacify, govern, develop and cultivate newly won areas. It is open for studies of the Army and later of the Air Force as, to paraphrase Admiral Sir Herbert Richmond, an instrument of imperial policy.
The relations between merchants, settlers, the military, and the natives if tackled from the point of social history could yield dividends, as could studies of