are good; abolish class and privilege and you automatically abolish injustice and evil. So argued Rousseau, so all the eighteenthcentury prophets of natural right. "You are as good as your betters, and your betters are no better than they should be. Sovereignty is everybody's and everybody is equal."

This teaching, though it may contradict the facts of life, is so near to the hopes of men, that men took it at once to heart. The Polish shlakta, whose indifference to the common good had made Poland the easy victim of the Prussian conspiracy against her, learned to think of the whole of Poland, even her peasantry, customs, and institutions, as the peer of her destroyers. The British colonies of North America effected their momentous revolution. The masses of France brought theirs to its epoch-making culmination. Under the inspiration of the democratic idea societies of men were acting collectively, autonomously, and with full consciousness of what they were doing, against dynasty, property, and authority, and all that these imply in

cwnership and command. The beneficiaries of these took natural alarm. Prussia, Austria, Russia, England also, combined against the people of France. But only to find that their armies melted away, that their subjects everywhere celebrated the coming of the French soldier as the coming of the liberator. The republican form of government followed the French army in fact, as trade follows the flag in militarycapitalistic fancy. Dynasts, anxious to maintain their prestige, found themselves compelled to defer to the free good-will of their subjects. Continental state-organization appeared to be getting turned downside up. The people were in fact becoming the sovereign.

That is, the people were not merely attaining to self-government. Nationhood, not nationality, consists of that. Nationality is a prior and a deeper thing. To say that peoples were realizing their nationality is to say that they were becoming conscious, in trying to respond to the call of the revolution, of what nature and habit and hope they and their neighbors were, and of how

these were expressed in language and tradition, in memory and custom, in all that makes up a community's cycle of life. The revolutionary call to Equality meant, for the daily life, the abolition of all the caste and property distinctions that the Russians have discarded to-day. The Revolution's call to Fraternity meant, for the daily life, comradeship on an equal basis with anyone with whom communication could be effectively held in truth with the neighbor near at hand, who speaks the same language and has the same background, who, by virtue of this sameness, understands. The Revolution's call to Liberty meant, first and foremost, the overthrow of the traditional oppressor at home, and the achievement there of self-government, the replacing of dynasty by commonwealth.

Had the new French nation continued to treat the peoples its armies set free as peers, as fellow-citizens, not as subjects; had Napoleon not once more restored piratical imperialism to the place from which the ideas of the Revolution had driven it, the ruling caste of Europe could never have

succeeded in duping their subjects into believing in the identity of their interests. and the community of their cause. Even so, their success depended on a concession to the principle that sovereignty rests in the people. For the call to resist Napoleon had to be made through an appeal to selfappreciation, through a propaganda, sometimes inspired, sometimes spontaneous, exhorting the various peoples of Europe to consider the excellence and dignity of their ancestries, their cults, their traditions, their histories, their ways of living, their arts, and particularly their languages. The most conspicuous continental instance of such a propaganda is the series of "Addresses to the German People" by the philosopher Fichte.

The outcome of this movement of ideas and events was nationality. As the doctrine that the people is the sovereign spread, it made them conscious of the quality of their life, their memories, and their institutions wherein consists their unity as a people. The need of resistance to a common foe deepened the sense of this unity, and ren

dered the elements which are its form objects more precious to be preserved than life itself. Among these elements a sovereign government is not to be found. A nationality is not a state, and may exist without any political separateness whatever, as do the Scotch and Welsh and Irish nationalities in England, or the Italian and French and German in Switzerland, or the Bohemian, Croat, Czech, and Serbian in Austria-Hungary, or the Ukrainian or Polish or Finnish in Russia, or the Jewish there and everywhere. A single nationality may be distributed among many states, as are the Jews and the Poles; many nationalities may compose one state, as Great Britain is composed, or Turkey, or Austria-Hungary. Nor, again, is a nationality a nation, for a nation is one or more nationalities possessed of political sovereignty forming a government resting on the active acquiescence of the governed, and animated by political purposes with regard to other nations, which it is free to carry out. Hungary is a nation; Bohemia is not; Austria-Hungary is not. England is a