427). The limitations of the steppe people -- for example, the Mongols -- was running into geographical conditions that they were not used to. India was sheltered from invasion by the Tibetan barrier (until a way to go around it was found). These examples show how the lay of the land influences history. His third key in describing geo-historical dynamics is the technological rivalry between land and sea. His often used term for this is "mobility of power." Mackinder contrasts land-power and sea-power. Land-power during the Columbian period means horses or camels such as those the Mongol hordes used for conquest. These are appropriate instruments for traversing the steppes and engaging in raids across relatively flat land. In contrast to this is sea-power: "Mobility upon the ocean is the natural rival of horse and camel mobility in the heart of the continent" (p. 432). Sea-power is crucial for the outlying areas away from the heartland such as coasts and waterways that lead to the ocean. These are the marginal areas. Mackinder uses this distinction to set up a powerful image of competition and clash, using a plethora of historical examples through the modern world and stretching back into the Old World where empires rose and fell depending on their ability to deal with technology in their geographical setting.

Given these preconditions, what is the pivot of history? It is the landmass of Russia. Mackinder sees Russia as the politically strategic location for the twentieth century. With prescience, he sees in the migration of the Russian peasantry southward and the organization of the Cossack nomads in Siberia a gathering force that is poised to become the next empire (p. 434). He writes, "Russia replaces the Mongol Empire" (p. 436). This idea is based on the acquisition and exploitation of railways and the resources these make possible. The significance of land-power grows with the invention of the steam locomotive and the building of trans-continental railways. Mackinder predicts the growth of rail networks that will drive the significance of...

"There have been and are here the conditions of a mobility of military and economic power of a far-reaching and yet limited character" (pp. 435-36). He believes that the tapping of these land-based resources would shift the balance of power away from the outlying margins and into the center of the hinge point (Russia), allowing it to expand outward.
Around this central pivot, he draws of picture of crescent-shaped marginal regions or a "marginal belt" whose geographical conditions are closer to sea than to heartland. This belt includes Europe, China, and India, and its outer/insular crescent encompasses the U.S., Australia, and Japan (p. 431). As a result of navigation, the Cape discovery, and the subsequent linkage of the oceans and water passages, European sea-power was able to challenge the land-based power of the nomads during the period of expansion (p. 433). This was augmented by the invention of steam ships. However, now in the current closed system, Mackinder seems to point back to another shift in power from sea to land in the pivot area, reversing power relations by once again subordinating sea to land.

From today's perspective, this article seems to have proven valid. It predicted such events as the rise of Russian power, the Cold War between the conflict of the pivot point (Soviet Union) and the marginal regions (U.S.), and Russian economic, military, and commercial dominance during the twentieth century. During WWII as well, there was indeed a struggle between the sea and land powers, moving from the margins inward. Its major limitation is in its failure to predict the development of airborne weapons and air-power which have altered the dynamics of geo-politics and may have lessened the influence of geography. Nonetheless, its analytical framework is valuable.

Works Cited

Mackinder, H.J. (1904). The Geographical Pivot of History. The Geographical Journal,…